Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sign in to follow this  
admin

Rules of engagement changes discussion.

Recommended Posts

I'm not totally sure i got this right but here's my question to the BR thingy as well as wind's suggestion:

 

With this rule of locking reinforcements, doesn't that still alow for example 7 surprises to jump a lone santi and therefore denying him any support? because they dont meet his BR

Edited by SteelSandwich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for the case or ramming or FF, I think the punishment should fit the crime.  So if you ram one or two ppl in a single day (real time), then maybe nothing happens.  If you ram/FF 3-4 ships in one day, maybe you become a pirate until you go an entire day without ramming or shooting anyone from your former faction.  Let's be honest, back in the pvp hey day where you had 20v20, ramming allies could happen quite often by accident where you might of had little choice because a moth ball of ships all converged on a single area.  Plus I think their is a big different between 'love taps' and 'grinding' vs an all out ram that breaks your bow spirit.

 

Obviously this would open up a meta for members of your former nation to shoot you without consequence if you still want back in, but consider it retribution for your mistakes.  You commit the crime, you do the time.

 

Also no one answered what is blocking, how it would be detected, and why it should even be punished?

 

Plus an important question, how to determine who is the rammer and who is the rammee?  Is it who puts their bow spirit into the other person's ship first?  If two players ram their bows into each other is it no one's fault then?  

Edited by Booyaah
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not totally sure i got this right but here's my question to the BR thingy as well as wind's suggestion:

With this rule of locking reinforcements, doesn't that still alow for example 7 surprises to jump a lone santi and therefore denying him any support? because they dont meet his BR

I'd be quite surprised if 7 surprises had a combined battle rating that was less than a third of a santi's which is what they'd need to be to lock out any reinforcements on the santi's side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that if players are grouped together and are within visual range of each other, they should be looked at as a fleet with there grouped BR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or he can just log out at the post battle result screen, ending the stalk elegantly.

 

Of course, but I suspect that may go away as an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Battles are now going to close 10 mins after the start. In current game time 10 mins is 12 hours of real time and we believe this is enough to finish the battle (1 full day). This time can be tuned going forward. Bots will continue to enter battles as they see fit if they believe the player needs help. 

 

    You can get from Oranjestad to Road town an approximately 80 mile trip a Trinc in less than eight minutes in less than totally ideal winds (40 degrees off of broad ending on beam) in less than or approximately eight minutes. With the addition of a BR system the uber-gank will not be as easily done but the ability to organize a coordinated gank over an extreme distance still seems like a bit too easy to pull off in the world of light speed communication w/ only a 10 minute close time. The higher the timer the more lee-way you give and less coordination required to piss in someones corn flakes in force; there feels like a lack of separation between the use of high numbers being a strategic weapon that can cover more ground rather than a concentrated rape-n-gank force able to relocate to and join far off battles. Perhaps a five minute timer?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proposing an idea. Reinforcement system based on ship strength. Could be something that is already in the game.

 

Strength value is - ship guns+damage+armor etc

 

What do you think?

 

I think this is one piece of it but perhaps there should be some adjustment for a disparity in the total number of ships also.  It's one thing to fight off a couple of horse flies but quite another to face a nest of yellow jackets.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is one piece of it but perhaps there should be some adjustment for a disparity in the total number of ships also.  It's one thing to fight off a couple of horse flies but quite another to face a nest of yellow jackets.

 

What are you trying to say, that you can't take 25 players in Lynxes in your Surprise? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

look good for me

Bbut i have to propose some thing for pirates side only let pirates to enter in every battel like spain and brit to for a 3 side in the battel but not to reenforce one side. I dont think pirates in the past will never chose any side and still all the time enemy for any nation.

 

Just think about that it will be so nice to see some fight disturbe by a littel pirates group trying to sink some of the big ship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of pirates running around the OS together, and then hitting each other to avoid fighting other nations needs to be solved for sure.  I hope this patch will allow that issue to be solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But allowing nations to join in on pirate side is also problematic (e.g. nation reinforcing pirates fighting a neutral player) and hopefully won't be allowed . Perhaps Pirate v. Pirate battle can always have an open, empty neutral side to reinforce.

Allowing any nation to reinforce any nation as proposed sounds like a recipe for chaos, confusion and frustration, but if it is first step on the road to formal alliance system, then that is understandable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is this is just the quickest, most basic, dirty implementation using the current technology and interface they already have.  I'm guessing they will build out their tech later so it's like 1v1v1 or 1v1v1v1 instead of just 1v1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is this is just the quickest, most basic, dirty implementation using the current technology and interface they already have.  I'm guessing they will build out their tech later so it's like 1v1v1 or 1v1v1v1 instead of just 1v1...

 

Battles never had 3 sides in history. Having 3 sides (free for all) is a recipe for a mess.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But allowing nations to join in on pirate side is also problematic (e.g. nation reinforcing pirates fighting a neutral player) and hopefully won't be allowed . Perhaps Pirate v. Pirate battle can always have an open, empty neutral side to reinforce.

Allowing any nation to reinforce any nation as proposed sounds like a recipe for chaos, confusion and frustration, but if it is first step on the road to formal alliance system, then that is understandable.

 

In the Battle of New Orleans Andrew Jackson operated with the pirate Jean Lafitte, so it is not without precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Or he can just log out at the post battle result screen, ending the stalk elegantly.

 

Is it possible to put a timer on this Admin? So that people will be "kicked" out of the post battle result screen?

 

No - just no - some of us cannot play nonstop like YOU do and we need a few reasonable places to log out for real life.

 

WTF is with some of you guys wanting everyone else to be "unwilling" partners for you duels - I don't play this (expletive deleted) game just to be content for YOU against my will.

 

I play this game to have something to do and I want that something to be something I WANT to do. If you want to play me - you have to allow me time to pee and grab a beer from time to time ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Battles never had 3 sides in history. Having 3 sides (free for all) is a recipe for a mess.

 

Whats wrong with a little Mexican standoff?

mexican-standoff-758.png

 

Honestly though, I thought all nations were at war with each other.  How is that not 1vN?  Having FFA you could still do alliances, just shoot at the ships that are flying the flag of the nation you don't like more, then proceed down the line or you can let them go.  All it really does is put the final decision in the hands of the players instead of being artificially forced by the game.  

 

Should a nation be forced to honor a temporary alliance of convenience against a superior force that would crush them both if they were separate?  I'm pretty sure had the English won the war of 1812 and taken most of the lands, that the Indians would have turned around and fought them too.  Might make for an interesting meta...choose your own destiny.  I dunno, just throwing that out there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How mexican standoff works is described best in the Tarantino movie "Reservoir Dogs". The sneaky one is always a winner. 

3 way battles will encourage waiting and hiding and will change dynamics where last one and sneakiest one wins, this is not the behavior we want to motivate and encourage.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to play exclusively pirates

 

But i see a big problem with pirates with this kind of re enforcement mechanics 

 

let say im a bad pirates and i enter a battle spain vs brit so actually in what i read from you i can join en reenforce one side ok but if i start shotting on the guys what im suppose to help " because i a troller "? 

 

there is no way to punish me because im already a pirates. this is why i invite you to make battle in a 3 ways .

 

Or if you dont want that just dont let pirates have the abbility to help a another nation.  

 

But in the same time this is a nerf and you will limit the gameplay for pirates ones again

 

thx for reading just think about that !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pirates and Neutrals should not be able of enter in battles I think. Only in battles with pirates or Neutrals respectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping this simple:

 

1. We need short battle timers 5mins so there is a point in the battle where we can be safe to judge the situation properly. 

 

2. Are you serious that 3x battlerating is the max? So fighting 5vs15 is what you think will make ppl fight more? 

 

3. With the npc's... how will you ever be able to claim your prize and leave when there's constant streams of npc's pouring into your battle. That means that when im out, attacking a surprise in my trinc, i will have a 7 ship brigfleet entering my battle? Sounds awesome. 

 

4. We need a testing room asap.

 

5. The issue still remains:  There will ever only be fights if the numbers are so large that noone can even come close to estimating who will win. In EVERY OTHER SITUATION one side will just run away.  And even more so since it's so easy to destroy masts and high lee kiting is back. That's not fights!

 

6. Please remove the brig fleets, they seem to serve no purpose gameplaywise, they are just annoying and prevent proper teamplay on the os. The most heard sentences in our ts might be "oh shit!... what happened? ... got tagged again! ... by what? ... fucking brigfleet! ... ok, when will you be here? ... 5minutes later!" It is so annoying! If we now get those brigfleets join our other battles .... arrr that's going to be infuriating!

 

7. Dear devs, do you want us to play the game how it is, or play the game how we want it to be? Because to be honest, noone wants to play it how it is right now!

Edited by Puchu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

battle rating is not numbers of vessels Puchu. Each vessel has a battle rating, a value that represents it's combat strength. So to choose random numbers out of the air to build an example, a cutter may have a battle rating of 2, a Navy Brig might have a battle rating of 5 and a Surprise might have a battle rating of 10. so in my made up example, a single NB shouldn't fight more than 2 and a half cutters, whereas a Surprise cannot attack a single cutter but could face anywhere between 2 and 15 of them. A little extreme example and one based on made up numbers, but I hope that gives you the rough idea :)

 

I would also disagree quite strongly with your last point. I really enjoy the game as it stands, and trust the devs to listen to us whilst keeping their vision for the game intact.

Edited by Hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the brig fleets either, I see no purpose for them - or the ones that say Cerbrus and when you look closer there are three trincos hidden inside - shouldn't the biggest ship lead the fleet, and be the "headliner"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just joined a battle with 5 on my team and 6 on the opposing team. I was the smallest ship - so I decided to sniper the other sides Super Frigates, after two broadsides I caught a Constitution on fire and it burned to the waterline and sank. I fired 18 or 20 more broadsides at other Frigates (high percent of hits) and I ended with only 69 XP.

 

WTH - sinking a Constitution should by itself be worth 69 XP (or more) - I don't think anyone else shot at it after it was burning well (couldn't tell for sure) but hey, cumon man .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the brig fleets either, I see no purpose for them - or the ones that say Cerbrus and when you look closer there are three trincos hidden inside - shouldn't the biggest ship lead the fleet, and be the "headliner"?

 

And just for clarification, I think when ppl mention brig fleets we are talking about ships under 6th rate, anything where a Cerberus is the highest level ship.  I wouldn't mind seeing more small const/trinc/surprise mini fleets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×