Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

New ROE discussion

Recommended Posts

Please listen carefully folks:

 

The new system WILL NOT allow a single ship to attack a fleet and get a one on one.  Attacking a fleet as a smaller fleet (or a single ship) will put the entire fleet into your instance with you.  There will be no choosing.  Admin has stated that the new fleet reduction system will only come into effect if you are attacked by a superior force.

 

 

 

Henry, that isn't what people are saying.  They aren't saying the single ship is the attacker but the defender.

 

If the defender is an elite group and they are outnumbered, all they have to do is slightly split up to where they are outside of each other's rings and drop sails.  The attacker comes up.  They are forced to 1v1 each member of the elite group.  There is no way around it unless the attacker has smaller ships, and that may or may not make a difference depending on the skills of both groups.  As long as the defenders have enough repairs, they can essentially have enough 1v1s to hold off the attackers, or until reinforcements can arrive.

 

If anyone thinks that Leviathan, Chustler, and several other members of TDA cannot hold off a large group like this 1v1 for awhile until 15 members of TDA can respond, they are sorely mistaken.  The attacker, if they are not an elite group, will be forced to 1v1 or withdraw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about if yhe attackers force is more then double your BR you dont lose a durability and the prize pool for the attackers is divded among the numbers (low pay off)

Problem solved

Lol. Admin has stated he wants even fights, well if its 2 frigates vs 2 frigates i can assure you with 70% confidence one of those 2 sides runs from the battle regardless of balance. In a battle of 1 merc, 1 consti 1 frigate vs 1 brig 1 consti 1 frigate, the force with the brig will flee. How do i know this? Because ive seen it with my own eyes many times lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry, that isn't what people are saying.  They aren't saying the single ship is the attacker but the defender.

 

If the defender is an elite group and they are outnumbered, all they have to do is slightly split up to where they are outside of each other's rings and drop sails.  The attacker comes up.  They are forced to 1v1 each member of the elite group.  There is no way around it unless the attacker has smaller ships, and that may or may not make a difference depending on the skills of both groups.  As long as the defenders have enough repairs, they can essentially have enough 1v1s to hold off the attackers, or until reinforcements can arrive.

 

If anyone thinks that Leviathan, Chustler, and several other members of TDA cannot hold off a large group like this 1v1 for awhile until 15 members of TDA can respond, they are sorely mistaken.  The attacker, if they are not an elite group, will be forced to 1v1 or withdraw.

 

Prater - what you have described as Lots of 1v1, is I think the idea ......

 

------

 

As far as waiting for reinforcements .....

 

Wouldn't the reinforcements have to be within the ten minute circle to join?

 

And if THAT becomes an issue a slight tweek could fix it - just lock the instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure why we just don't use the EVE online system with a "safe galactic core" where people are relatively safe from pvp and can go about their trading and pve activities.  As you travel away from it the safety steadily declines until you hit the real lawless seas.  This is where your fleets of players will bravely group up and attempt to stake their territory.

 

Honestly let ganking happen out there, the players will be their own law, just give them the ports to capture and control and alliances and fleets will happen on their own, just like Eve.  I am not a fan of artificial restrictions, or instances.  Nothing takes me out of a game worse than instances.  I have gotten over the mechanics of entering a fight in this game, but making a point based system to rule people in certain ships out of a fight absolutely kills my enthusiasm.  Where will the heart stopping encounters come from if everything is force balanced.   It kills emotional, engaging gameplay.

 

Also I have not been a fan of hiring NPC ships either.  Let the players make fleets, keep the robots to PvE or authority "police fleets" tracking and aggroing on pirate players causing trouble in or near the safe zone.

Edited by BikeMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure why we just don't use the EVE online system with a "safe galactic core" where people are relatively safe from pvp and can go about their trading and pve activities.  As you travel away from it the safety steadily declines until you hit the real lawless seas.  This is where your fleets of players will bravely group up and attempt to stake their territory.

 

Honestly let ganking happen out there, the players will be their own law, just give them the ports to capture and control and alliances and fleets will happen on their own, just like Eve.  I am not a fan of artificial restrictions, or instances.  Nothing takes me out of a game worse than instances.  I have gotten over the mechanics of entering a fight in this game, but making a point based system to rule people in certain ships out of a fight absolutely kills my enthusiasm.  Where will the heart stopping encounters come from if everything is force balanced.   It kills emotional, engaging gameplay.

 

Also I have not been a fan of hiring NPC ships either.  Let the players make fleets, keep the robots to PvE or authority "police fleets" tracking and aggroing on pirate players causing trouble in or near the safe zone.

 

Well sure, the English Channel was relatively safe for British shipping, but not so much for French. If you offer the Dev's 1 million US (just a small fraction of what is invested in EVE) perhaps they could speed up the development of Europe for us. :)

 

I would pitch in another $40!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Honestly let ganking happen out there, the players will be their own law, just give them the ports to capture and control and alliances and fleets will happen on their own, just like Eve.  I am not a fan of artificial restrictions, or instances.  Nothing takes me out of a game worse than instances.  I have gotten over the mechanics of entering a fight in this game, but making a point based system to rule people in certain ships out of a fight absolutely kills my enthusiasm.  Where will the heart stopping encounters come from if everything is force balanced.   It kills emotional, engaging gameplay."

 

 

Amen Sir:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well sure, the English Channel was relatively safe for British shipping, but not so much for French. If you offer the Dev's 1 million US (just a small fraction of what is invested in EVE) perhaps they could speed up the development of Europe for us. :)

 

I would pitch in another $40!

 

I have been promoting and supporting the game and will continue to do so.  I just think some compromise has to be made to the hard line "sticking absolutely to how it was in history" for the sake of the game being enjoyable.  Make up a fictional treaty for all I care, where a safe zone exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where will the heart stopping encounters come from if everything is force balanced. 

 

From not knowing opponents' skills before combat, that is not from the involved ships but from the enemy players ; i.e. not "everything" will be balanced : skills won't in the next RoE.

And you'll always be able to attack stronger fleets...

Edited by LeBoiteux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be said, for all the people who want perfectly balanced battles, might i suggest tetris multiplayer?

 

Each player gets the same block, so its fair, and the player chooses where to place them! The excitement is real! :)

They really managed to balance PVP in that game! Tetris is love, tetris is life!

 

EDIT: Tetris also has no gangkers!!!

Edited by SteelSandwich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TLDR the whole thread but this is probably the worst idea I have ever come across from the devs for this game.  This is dragging us back to arcade style battles. The current mechanic isn't totally broken, it is pretty much spot on, it just needs a tweak, having got rid of those ridiculous AI Fleets. 

 

How to tweak it....reduce the timer for secondary entry into the battle from 10 to 5 minutes. 

 

Smaller and therefore generally faster and more manoueverable ships shouldn't get tagged into battle in the first place unless they want to. Once in then give the smaller force a "Can Leave" option until 2 minutes into the battle if the imbalance in BR is greater than 2:1 and they do not fire a shot and are at least 500 yards from the nearest enemy ship. If any of those conditions are not met then they have to stay and fight or exit by the existing mechanism.

 

This idea works because....generally a smaller fleet/vessel will be trying to avoid the tag in the first place and will therefore probably start the battle at least 500 yards away, they should be fast enough to maintain that for the few seconds it takes them to decide to go. So they get away...scot free, maybe wearing just the scars of a hastily fired broadside at range.

 

If during the course of the first 5 minutes of the battle a secondary fleet enters which takes the BR ratio over the 2:1 then the 2 minute "Can Leave" timers start for the smaller force, conditions as above.

 

Gentlemen...this way madness lies....and no sense of consequence for the unwary and inept.....  this also gives a great opportunity for griefers....Lord Preserve Us!!

 

Yours Aye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the new system starts,  what is with the 10 minutes limit? If one small ship stop/attack me,  can his friends join the battle later? And what is a group of ships?  Only who is in the attack circle, or who join after some minutes. I hope for more and more even battles.  For me,  this is a game and not realistic age of sails simulator, because that it will never be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been promoting and supporting the game and will continue to do so.  I just think some compromise has to be made to the hard line "sticking absolutely to how it was in history" for the sake of the game being enjoyable.  Make up a fictional treaty for all I care, where a safe zone exists.

 

Sorry, no I didn't mean you personally offer the Dev's 1 million - I meant the player base as a whole - I appreciate everyone and anyone who has participated in making "my fav game" better - even Raatha whom I only rarely agree with.

 

We are passionate about what we see as "our game" and want it to be the coolest thing since "asteroids" - so sometimes communicating gets "scratchy".

 

-----

 

It's all good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah this is not such a good suggestion in my opinion, I came to play this game because of its realism as well of all its other features. I think the majority of people who want to play this game as more of a realistic game will hate it if this is implemented, I know I will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is a great idea.

 

It will serve as a training brace to help the players er, testers walk without the effects of the Polio er, Ganking infection to drag them down so much.

 

Perhaps, as they learn to love the 1v1, 1v2, 2v1 battles that come about with less fear of being ganked in a 7v1 etc. ------  the clamor will die down, as it did about instances as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am open to testing anything that comes along, but of all the ideas and opinions I have seen in this thread, the OP is among my least favorite ideas to try out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is a great idea.

 

It will serve as a training brace to help the players er, testers walk without the effects of the Polio er, Ganking infection to drag them down so much.

 

Perhaps, as they learn to love the 1v1, 1v2, 2v1 battles that come about with less fear of being ganked in a 7v1 etc. ------  the clamor will die down, as it did about instances as a whole.

 

 

I wish there was a head scratching emote.  This certainly won't hurt us and I think we can live with it.  But even in 1 to 1.5 odds, I'm ok with that.  3 veterans vs 4 players, we still have a decent chance.  Because numbers will be relatively even, it means that many fights will be a bloodbath.  Just means we will lose more ships, which might stimulate the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was a head scratching emote.  This certainly won't hurt us and I think we can live with it.  But even in 1 to 1.5 odds, I'm ok with that.  3 veterans vs 4 players, we still have a decent chance.  Because numbers will be relatively even, it means that many fights will be a bloodbath.  Just means we will lose more ships, which might stimulate the economy.

 

Here you go .... headscratching1.jpg

Is that why larger groups attack smaller groups - to avoid bloodbaths? I guess it sort of makes sense: if the blood is all the other guys = life is good.

 

(now you got me scratching my head, since there is no real blood here).

 

If fights are turning into too much of bloodbaths, perhaps someone can suggest again a decent surrender mode.

 

For example if I was in a Brig and faced you in a Privateer and Leviathan in a yacht - if I couldn't run I might just surrender and save us all some time, even though I had twice the BR as you two, I could be pretty sure of the outcome.

 

(that is just an example - in reality I would prolly give it a try)

 

So nothing is cast in stone, except no larger groups getting into instances with ridiculously smaller groups.

 

I think .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Ampaholic, generally you engage with higher numbers and better chances to win fights.

 

BTW since you liek to google every definition, heres the one that will matter the most.

 

'Definition - What does Sandbox mean?
A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.

A sandbox game is also known as an open-world or free-roaming game.'
 
Now I understand limits will be put in place, but I really don't think combat is an area that should be limited, except from saving servers due to stress etc.
 
Also if you bring up the rules that stop hackers again I will pull my hair out, thats a different set of rules which occur in almost every game.
 
I think the thing thats getting at me the most is that this game was advertised as a Sandbox, in which we can do what we want, leveling the playing field at all is against that and changing the game massivley for me, I like arena games, for 1 or 2 hours a week, the rest I will play EVE and other MilSim's as I liek the freedom of doing what I want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes Ampaholic, generally you engage with higher numbers and better chances to win fights.

 

BTW since you liek to google every definition, heres the one that will matter the most.

 

'Definition - What does Sandbox mean?
A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.

A sandbox game is also known as an open-world or free-roaming game.'

 
Now I understand limits will be put in place, but I really don't think combat is an area that should be limited, except from saving servers due to stress etc.
 
Also if you bring up the rules that stop hackers again I will pull my hair out, thats a different set of rules which occur in almost every game.
 
I think the thing thats getting at me the most is that this game was advertised as a Sandbox, in which we can do what we want, leveling the playing field at all is against that and changing the game massivley for me, I like arena games, for 1 or 2 hours a week, the rest I will play EVE and other MilSim's as I liek the freedom of doing what I want.

 

 

The simple fact is Harry - we all want to have fun in this "sandbox", but for everyone's fun factor - some of us might have to check our more aggressively bloodthirsty tendencies at the door.

 

Like your definition states "minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer" ------ it just doesn't say "no character limitations" - sorry, I don't read that in it.

 

I get that you like to load up and run amok, and devil take the hindmost, I really think if you give it a chance you will be OK in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do think you need to restructure\realign the world in some fashion.  I don't think there's a bandaid fix for the situation as it stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say hit them where it hurts!! The wallet!!!

Extreme BR differences with the higher number being the attacker gets rewarded with NEGATIVE xp and gold. Now if the lower number attacks the higher number... He deserves the thumping he gets!!

I truly believe that will at least slow the griefing type ganking going on. Nobody wants to lose in those departments for sure.

Example: 3 Connie's (BR of 500 each) attack a lynx (BR 50) that's a 1500 to 50 BR spread. Penalty in gold of the difference = 1450.

Penalty in xp say at 10% =145.

Those penalties for each of the aggressors.

Ganking is part of this game and EVERYONE has done it!! Attack trader brigs? You're a ganker! I'm also not against the higher level ships attacking lower level unless its extreme, ie: Connie attacking lynx and pickles is no good, Connie attacking brigs and snows, im ok with... Reasonable two tier spreads are fine by me! But even that is situational at times. What if missions in the future require those extremes??? Like hunting pirates. If those pirates are in little ships and you're in a Connie, are you not going to kill them even though its the mission? You're going to disobey orders?? How would that affect your "honor" score? You just let the enemy go??? It gets sticky!!!

Honor points? One mans honor is another's stupidity. If there are 123 people online then there are 123 different ideas of what is and what isn't honorable. Placing an arbitrary limit or list of required actions to meet a certain level of "Honor" will limit much of the freedom and wiggle room needed to act and succeed. Sometimes you got to get a little dirty to win. You can't legislate honor. You either have it or not.

Edited by Diceman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I will be fine in the end, but the game will not, this mechanic appeals to casual players, it was stated by the devs that they wouldn't do this (Prater quoted it in another thread I am not sure how to quote it here) casual players are great, and I understand not everyone can game as much as some of us, I am not one of the guys who hates casuals, but if you start to base your game around the casuals, who will only be here for 2 years max, the game will die.

 

MMO games only last if the hardcore fans are interested, if not it becomes a arcade game in which you need to spam one out every 1-2 years to keep the series alive. I know that this is only the first stage of the process I am talking about, but this option is on that road to terrible MMO games, and the response this thread has got proves that.

 

I still don't see how ganking is an issue, I think the topic should be basedaround Seal clubbing, not ganking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they had the proposed changes the default for everywhere, and had zones of high risk elsewhere, I think this would be a decent solution.  In high risk zones anything goes.

 

Make these types of areas high risk areas:

 

1.  Area right around pirate ports (50km)

2.  Open ocean with no port around for 200+km

3.  Clan ports (if clans can have ports) can set the security around their ports.  This might be good or bad.  Low risk zones would encourage traders to come to their ports and trade.  High risk zones would keep traders away but allow clans to police the area around their ports to how they see fit.

 

 

You would have to have something let you know you are in this type of zone.

 

 

Probably a terrible idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dev's have already proven that - what is allowed to be done (by the mechanics of the game) ----- WILL be done (at least by some).

 

They proved that with stackable mods, and hiring fleets - some went over the edge and around the bend on both.

 

Some didn't - it's the same with "ganking" most don't do it, or do it modestly (not Trinco v Lynx) - but some will always do it over the edge and around the bend.

 

------

 

So ---- the only solution if you don't want ganking - is to limit it mechanically.

 

------

 

The argument left is "do you want ganking?" ---- If you want big groups fighting smaller groups, be the smaller group and go out and attack the bigger group, you'll see no protection involved.

 

 

I like your idea Prater. Perhaps the Dev's could be persuaded to relax the anti-gank mechanic in some areas?

 

 

with a warning of course ... 2827c2af00000578-3061625-image-a-10-1430

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

×