PVP MARKS and PLAYER RETENTION

[Lovec1990]

17 minutes ago, Crow said:

So last night same thing.

3 long battles. Good fights. One side or the other escapes.

Players grumble about virtually no rewards.

We come across navy brig. Others feel they NEED to sink him.

I don't blame them but PvP system of rewards seems screwed and geared toward forcing players to play one way.

Solution would be pvp rewards for taking part  in PvP ( win, lose or draw)and taking captured ships back to port for extra admiralty pvp marks would add content and help solve this relentless, 

fight, sink, (whoever/whatever) and repeat.

The way the PVP reward system is it's fair to hunt whoever you can and capital hunting will continue and it's no fault of the players.

 

I agree if reward system would encourage fighting people will more likely fight even after loss and for winner best reward should be captured enemy ship

[Old Crusty]

90 minute battle today with no rewards. At least I didn’t lose my Wasa.

Players deserve to be rewarded for their efforts in PvP.

[Sir Loorkon]

Players should not be rewarded for „efforts“, they should be rewarded for success. The reward you get anyway is the fight itself, no matter if you win or loose. 

[Lovec1990]

1 minute ago, Sir Loorkon said:

Players should not be rewarded for „efforts“, they should be rewarded for success. The reward you get anyway is the fight itself, no matter if you win or loose. 

sadly whis why people avoid PvP becouse there is no point of doing it. How is gonna reward that is fight itself replace my ship?

[Urchin]

On 8/22/2018 at 10:17 PM, King of Crowns said:

you fell for the oldest trick in the book...……. the "this is my last ship" trick..... ships are dirt cheap and money grows in ports. for example. 2.8mil for a first rate. 2.8mil = 4missions  or one trade run. but I would wager that yall were fighting in 4th/5th rates which are worth less than 1 mil. never show mercy to a rear admiral. if they have been playing the game long enough to reach max rank and still haven't figured out the economy is broken as crap then your doing them a favor by sinking their last ship. you will force them to rethink how they are playing the game...which needs to happen. because they are doing it wrong.

Think of it from a new or casual players perspective instead of someone with thousands of hours and able to spend tens of hours a week playing with cartoon ships from a basement.

Edited August 26, 2018 by William Wade

[Sir Loorkon]

Hi Lovec1990, I dont think so. The point of fighting is the fight itself. Most Players avoid PvP because they do not want to loose a ship. This is also the reason why they will never learn it. A high percentage of the (low) serverpopulation is specialised in running or ganking. Sadly only very few players like a duell or a good (ballaced) fight. If you reward „efforts“, you could also reward people for playing the game. Why?

If you cannot sink your enemy in 1 1/2 hours or he gets out, you should use another ship config. 

If efforts will be rewarded, I would build cheap concrete bricks (with no chance of finishig a ship even driven by a monkey) and shoot some broadsides. Than I would await the PvP marks for my effort? NO

[Lovec1990]

1 minute ago, Sir Loorkon said:

Hi Lovec1990, I dont think so. The point of fighting is the fight itself. Most Players avoid PvP because they do not want to loose a ship. This is also the reason why they will never learn it. A high percentage of the (low) serverpopulation is specialised in running or ganking. Sadly only very few players like a duell or a good (ballaced) fight. If you reward „efforts“, you could also reward people for playing the game. Why?

If you cannot sink your enemy in 1 1/2 hours or he gets out, you should use another ship config. 

If efforts will be rewarded, I would build cheap concrete bricks (with no chance of finishig a ship even driven by a monkey) and shoot some broadsides. Than I would await the PvP marks for my effort? NO

Then how would you deal with this fear currently only solution is DLC ships ?

 

People need to enjoy PvP battles not avoid or be forced into them

[Sir Loorkon]

Hi Lovec1990, in my personal opinion I would nerv the shit out of this hopelessly OP DLC ships. I think those ships are killing the game in a long run. A DLC ship should never be as good as a crafted ship. It should have low or medium stats as a Wasa or a SC.

Most people will never enjoy PvP battles, no matter what you do. They do not want to loose ships so they will never learn PvP. 

[Lovec1990]

1 minute ago, Sir Loorkon said:

Hi Lovec1990, in my personal opinion I would nerv the shit out of this hopelessly OP DLC ships. I think those ships are killing the game in a long run. A DLC ship should never be as good as a crafted ship. It should have low or medium stats as a Wasa or a SC.

Most people will never enjoy PvP battles, no matter what you do. They do not want to loose ships so they will never learn PvP. 

A DLC  ship should be balanced against crafted ships but not worse DLC 12pd frigates should be balanced with crafted 12 pd frigates.DLC ships will always be popular becouse of reward system we have now

[Sir Loorkon]

Hi Lovec1990, actually there is a interesting thread about the usefullness/uselessness of ships in this forum. It is very interesting that the DLC ships seemed to have crashed the whole ballance. Before the DLC ships, there where only a few things criticised, like tho OP Snow or the laOcean meta, but you could see nearly all types of ships in OW. Today most of the ships you see are Requies, Herks, Bellonas and laOceans or cheap shopships. A lag of diversity witch is problematic. So if the DLC ships will not get nerved stronger, all 6th and 5th rates will need a buff. Most 4th rates are allso nearly useless and 2nd rates are not recommended. So we will need a reballance buff of all ships exc. DLC ships or a hard nerv of the DLC ships to get the diversity back in  OW.

[Licinio Chiavari]

I cant not agree totally with @Crow

Yesterday I had a long (1h15+) and hard fought (both sides used reps on CD; I lost 2 masts, just to give an idea) duel Requin v Requin in front of KPR.

In the end I won. I got 5 PvP marks. The same prize I got from a lone trader brig insta-boarded for a total 5 mins battle.

I enjoyed pushing a bit to the limit the ship... but economically wise, it was wrong not speaking about the risk of losing my ship.

As noted by @William Wade very rich and skilled veterans can consider almost any loss "free" but for more casual players every loss (especially taking into account mods) it is not "free".

So in the end this situation could lead and is leading mid richness but smart players, missing plenty time for farming (or humanly bored of it) to... prey on any weak target that is giving the best gain/time+risk ratio.

[Licinio Chiavari]

21 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

A DLC  ship should be balanced against crafted ships but not worse DLC 12pd frigates should be balanced with crafted 12 pd frigates.DLC ships will always be popular becouse of reward system we have now

This is correct. Balanced with pros and cons.

People keeps complaining far more about Requin than Hercules not understanding that the latter is a far more balance breaker than the first.

From ingame economic perspecting, first and foremost DLC should be (even tradable) permits not full ship to allow even adding more without ruining completely crafting economy.

And ship should be balanced giving each one pros and cons and therefore a use.

[Lovec1990]

9 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

This is correct. Balanced with pros and cons.

People keeps complaining far more about Requin than Hercules not understanding that the latter is a far more balance breaker than the first.

From ingame economic perspecting, first and foremost DLC should be (even tradable) permits not full ship to allow even adding more without ruining completely crafting economy.

And ship should be balanced giving each one pros and cons and therefore a use.

Actualy this would break economy more DLC permit will not sell nearly as much as DLC ship would, second DLC permit ship would need too be good to be worth buying and that means ship performing alittle better than peers thus DLC permit owners will be able too craft better ship than non-DLC players could thus asking more gold for the ship and we will go again for pay too win and will be new meta everyone will want to sail her while DLC permit owners will be earning gold and non DLC crafters will cry here.

DLC note is better just ship needs too be balanced and have proper cooldown timers 

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

4 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

Actualy this would break economy more DLC permit will not sell nearly as much as DLC ship would, second DLC permit ship would need too be good to be worth buying and that means ship performing alittle better than peers thus DLC permit owners will be able too craft better ship than non-DLC players could thus asking more gold for the ship and we will go again for pay too win and will be new meta everyone will want to sail her while DLC permit owners will be earning gold and non DLC crafters will cry here.

DLC note is better just ship needs too be balanced and have proper cooldown timers 

 

I could agree from one perspective.

Still having the notes could lead that adding more (as a more than reasonable way to keep a cash flow for GameLabs... and so allowing us to keep playing) will completely destroy the game economy.

Moreover a fair old and successful game like EVE... has been always PayToGetInGameCash and worked well.

Matter is making DLC good (or particular) enough to keep selling them... but allowing all ingame content (so also these ships) available to DLC and not-DLC buyers.

And I stated elsewhere I was thinking a redeemable permit with a longer CD (like 48-96 hrs).

[Lovec1990]

2 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

I could agree from one perspective.

Still having the notes could lead that adding more (as a more than reasonable way to keep a cash flow for GameLabs... and so allowing us to keep playing) will completely destroy the game economy.

Moreover a fair old and successful game like EVE... has been always PayToGetInGameCash and worked well.

Matter is making DLC good (or particular) enough to keep selling them... but allowing all ingame content (so also these ships) available to DLC and not-DLC buyers.

And I stated elsewhere I was thinking a redeemable permit with a longer CD (like 48-96 hrs).

With DLC permit this would would induce P2W again.

as for ruing game economy what economy?

Besides if my theory about Constitution Refit is correct it could shine diffrent light on DLC ships

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

9 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

With DLC permit this would would induce P2W again.

as for ruing game economy what economy?

Besides if my theory about Constitution Refit is correct it could shine diffrent light on DLC ships

Please note, mate, I wrote making DLC ship "good or particular" (the latter could be rightfully the xebec or, looking at the past, the Gunboat). I did not write "OP".

A general rebalance of all ships (AND NERFING THE DAMN MODS) is REQUIRED imo.

[Lovec1990]

Just now, Licinio Chiavari said:

Please note, mate, I wrote making DLC ship "good or particular" (the latter could be rightfully the xebec or, looking at the past, the Gunboat). I did not write "OP".

A general rebalance of all ships (AND NERFING THE DAMN MODS) is REQUIRED imo.

Here i tottaly agree.

Still DLC note is better option compared to DLC permit

[Jim Beamreach]

2 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Please note, mate, I wrote making DLC ship "good or particular" (the latter could be rightfully the xebec or, looking at the past, the Gunboat). I did not write "OP".

A general rebalance of all ships (AND NERFING THE DAMN MODS) is REQUIRED imo.

Yeah, the Mods are one thing that brings unbalance. The next is Mods stacking like on Requin Crewspace + Light-Ham + Hams gives her over 300 crew there shoud be a massiv moral sink if the Crew sit there like in a Sadin-Can.

What i also dont like is the Woodfitting for Ships cause ships like Renomee that where in the old Days mostly used to hold the enemy in Battle until the Brawl Ships get in range are now getting more useless cause we can build Steampowerd Bellonas and stuff if we use special woodfittins + mods. Ships shoud be only get a slight difference from there main Stats by using different woods but not like it is now.

Lets say we coud only use 4 typs of wood for every Ship, 2 for Frames and 2 for Planking and both where not much different too each other. 

[jodgi]

On 8/22/2018 at 12:17 PM, Fenris said:

We have enough PVP in game even with 500 online.

What does "enough PVP" mean?

[Licinio Chiavari]

4 minutes ago, Jim Beamreach said:

Lets say we coud only use 4 typs of wood for every Ship, 2 for Frames and 2 for Planking and both where not much different too each other. 

Not bad... especially considering that at the moment 99% of PvP ships are all the same:

teak/teak, teak/WO and a few fir/fir. LO/WO for PBs. End of wood use.

[Lovec1990]

8 minutes ago, Jim Beamreach said:

Yeah, the Mods are one thing that brings unbalance. The next is Mods stacking like on Requin Crewspace + Light-Ham + Hams gives her over 300 crew there shoud be a massiv moral sink if the Crew sit there like in a Sadin-Can.

What i also dont like is the Woodfitting for Ships cause ships like Renomee that where in the old Days mostly used to hold the enemy in Battle until the Brawl Ships get in range are now getting more useless cause we can build Steampowerd Bellonas and stuff if we use special woodfittins + mods. Ships shoud be only get a slight difference from there main Stats by using different woods but not like it is now.

Lets say we coud only use 4 typs of wood for every Ship, 2 for Frames and 2 for Planking and both where not much different too each other. 

Well if we could using real woods ships had it could lead too issues with balance for example Constitution may be only one using LO/WO 

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

Well if we could using real woods ships had it could lead too issues with balance for example Constitution may be only one using LO/WO 

Nothing bans from getting inspired by reality, and than tweak it for sake of playability and in game balance.

[Fenris]

19 minutes ago, jodgi said:

What does "enough PVP" mean?

Enough PVP means there is no need for silly suggestions trying to generate "more PVP".

[jodgi]

4 hours ago, Fenris said:

there is no need for silly suggestions trying to generate "more PVP".

What about good suggestions trying to generate more pvp?

I'm not happy with neither quantity nor quality regarding pvp in OW.

[Licinio Chiavari]

7 minutes ago, jodgi said:

What about good suggestions trying to generate more pvp?

I'm not happy with neither quantity nor quality regarding pvp in OW.

IMHO:

Quality (aside having to define it) in any PvP sandbox ends in a lot of ganking and counter ganking.

Quantity is first a population issue... and "accessability" to PvP issue: in the end there's no point to sail around on a sub par ship with limited experience. Even finding a single enemy, a single rich veteran will win. So or you have cash to get a good ship properly fitted, or you'll end fastly raped.

The two issues are strictly bound. The less access to PVP, the less people trying, the less quantity... Aside people never getting experience.

And dont make me reading "DLC ships are free crap": for a decent pvp ship the real cost are mods, not the ship herself.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Licinio Chiavari