Archaos

Can the Devs please clarify exactly what will be transferred over and what will not when the server merge happens. I have read the forum posts and the message on the login screen but it is still unclear regarding some items. On the login screen it mentions opened skillbooks, what is an opened skill book? is this one that you have already learned? if so what about closed skillbooks that you were saving because they are needed in some recipe that you do not yet have all the parts for? What about permanent upgrades are they classed as assets? We also need a clear answer regarding how characters will be handled between servers, will the Global characters be lost and the XP be in the form of a redeemable on the new server, what if the character on the new server already has some xp, is the redeemable xp going to be in addition to that? What if the character on the new server is in a different nation, will they be allowed to change? What if you prefer the name of your character on the Global server but already have a character on the EU server with a different name, do you get to choose which name? These are all specific things that need to be clarified in advance to prevent arguments and disgruntled people once the merge has happened, and please let the Devs respond to these questions not other people with what they perceive has been said in the brief announcements.

The thing is the same argument could be used against the pure PvP environment of NAL. Here you have a game that is only PvP, you log on and within 5 minutes you can be in a battle against other players (and currently bots), yet the numbers playing are disappointing. Why is that if there are so many people interested only in PvP? Majority of the people you say PvE on the PvP server do so because it allows them to PvP when they want, but they also enjoy trading and crafting even though these are areas that are in desperate need of a revamp.

It was not perfect, there were already complaints from people that the PB window started too early for some people in the Western side of the EU timezone and went on too late for some people in the Eastern timezone. Maybe for your timezone or your playtime it was perfect, but there are more people than just you. Now people will be able to defend their ports at a time to suit themselves. That sounds more perfect to me.

They did say on release they were looking at an Asian server to cover the Oceania region. So if things start happening as you predict, then push the Devs to bring in a mechanic that restricts which clans can participate in each others port battles, make it more clan warfare like they originally planned when they were talking about introducing port ownership. If as in your example Clan A cannot defend for clan B then their only other option is to merge clans and have a single clan with multiple timezone members. If the maximum size of the clan was then limited a mixed timezone clan would then struggle to field their strongest team at any one timezone making them weaker. There are ways round the problem that you suggest without separating the server.

In the real world the defenders of a port would not be half way across the world or at work or sleep, they would be available 24/7 to defend a port. We do not really want to go down the route of reality in this case or you would need players to be on call 24/7 to defend and they wouldnt be able to hop from port to port doing other things while waiting to be attacked. The only fair way to get port battles that are contested is to allow the defenders set the time when they can be attacked. That way there is no complaint that the attackers worked it so the defender had no people online when the attack happened. The attacker always has the advantage that they know when they want to attack and they know that they will have sufficient numbers to carry out the attack. The defender is always reacting and this may be an issue with the possible instastart battles as they have to at short notice get the right ships and people to a port to defend against a prepared attack. The latency issue is always going to be a problem for some people, but that will apply wherever they place the server. If the game ever gets enough players regional servers could be viable.

I still do not see the problem, in fact I think it will help. Lots of people complain about Brits capturing empty ports only, well maybe the cost will become too prohibitive under the new system. The game needs a gold sink as it is currently too easy to make money. If you cannot afford to keep a port defended then you will lose it. From the figures in the other thread you linked it would cost Sweden just over 37 million to keep their ports on defence times to suit themselves. The nations that will really lose out are the nations that pick up the useless ports that are usually empty port battles even on the current EU server. It makes it more tactical forcing the carebear nations to come out and try and take the profitable ports. More players on the server will also bring more economy to the server which may start making some of the unprofitable ports profitable, especially if what they do works and attracts more players to the game in addition to the combined numbers from EU and Global server. If you do not want the cascade of PB's then do not set all your ports on exactly the same time (not sure at what intervals you can set your timers, but it is something that could be raised). I do not agree with the possible instant PB starts, but lets see how that works and if necessary it could be changed.

I am not sure how you are working your figures out but if you are going to have to pay 7.5 million a day to prevent ports getting flipped out of hours then you must as a clan own 75 ports. If a single clan owns that many ports then maybe it shouldnt be easy for them to defend all. So in that case it would be a good thing to allow other clans have some ports and prevent any one clan becoming too big. A single person can generate over a million in a couple of PvE battles, which would be enough for 10 ports. If a port is losing you money, why bother to defend it unless it has some strategic advantage for you. Let someone else take it and lose money, whichever way you look at it it should be the important ports that will always be defended and that is where the real end game RvR will occur.

This is what I am saying, if all players just set out to spoil others fun then there is no hope for the game. On Global server there were some well contested port battles even with no set timers, but the biggest problem was lack of population. These people could have chosen not to fight and done night/work flips but many did not.

What nightflips, you set your port defence times to your prime time, how can you be nightflipped then?

No, I think they are gambling that this might be a success and that it may go some way to getting people to return to the game, because at the end of the day if all you are going to have playing this game in the long term is 400-500 people then they may as well stop development and consign the game to the bin.

I have seen this argument against PB timers lots of times, but at the end of the day if everyone decides to use this tactic then all you will have are empty port battles and you can only blame the players for that not the game mechanics. As long as one side sets their PB's in their prime time and defends them and every port they capture is set to that time then they would eventually take over the map from people who just set PB's at times their enemy would struggle. Although I agree that misuse of defence timers should carry a penalty, how would you define misuse? If my clan had a PB defence and for some reason we could not get enough players together to defend, should the few that can make it show up and lose their ships or do you just let the port go without a fight? There may be some reasons why a port is given up uncontested that are nothing to do with the timer being set at a time you are unlikely to attack.

As others have said the only thing I am concerned with is the port battles that can start instantly once hostility is raised. It may have been better just to merge the servers with the port battle timers and the current 22 hour delay for battles to see how it works before introducing other changes. At least that way if it is a failure at least we would know if it was because the port battle timers was the issue or the instant port battles.

No I am not planning to sign up for France, but that does not mean others may not do it. I play British and have never been interested in jumping to another faction even if the Brits are on the back foot. Britain may be one of the most populous nations but that does not mean it has always been the easiest as it tends to have a greater percentage of newbies and multiple smaller clans rather than some of the so called smaller nations that have a couple of dedicated clans for the whole nation. Because of my work I tend to be more of a solo player even when in a clan, but if I was in a clan with friends who decided to move to another nation then I would consider any nation as okay.

Yes the end game is RvR and this will still be available, probably no less than you are getting right now on the EU server. If all the players currently on the EU server are so into the EU prime time port battles then you will still have a similar number so you will still have your opposition to fight in end game. The difference now is that there will be other clans setting battles that are outside your prime time and even if you cannot contest those ports because of your play time if there are enough EU clans someone will eventually capture that port and put it back on a EU timer suitable for you. Start looking at some of the more positive things, like more players on the server which will help the economy, more targets in OW which will hopefully lead to more PvP. If nothing else at least give it a chance if it is a complete failure then I am sure even people who love the idea of the merged server will be on here complaining and things will change again.

The negativity of some people is surprising. At least someone is trying to recruit players to make their nation/clan a success rather than just complain about the merge. People should at least give it a try and please do not say it has been tried before and failed because the same argument can be used to say the game was more successful when there was flags and port timers and there was regularly 1500 people on the server. To the OP, good luck in your search for players I hope you are successful.

You basically want the game to revolve around you rather than the playerbase in general. When you cannot play maybe they should shut down the servers??? I already explained how you can have RvR but you do not like that because some ports you might have to make a few arrangements to attack. It is a very narrow minded approach. Many people get to fixated on having to be present for every port battle, the fun is the port battles and PvP against other players and not the conquering of the whole map. If the whole map was conquerable by one clan it would be a very boring game. Just look at what is happening on PvP EU where from all accounts the Swedes are rampant, it gets to a stage where people will not face them and people quit the game. Personally I work in a job where I have to be away from home sometimes 3 to 4 weeks at a time and only have limited internet access at speeds only good enough for email if I am lucky. I learn to put the game behind me during these times and dont worry that I may come back to items locked out in various ports that have been captured. I just come back and see what I can do to have fun when I return.

This here is the problem you face, you appear to only want Poilsh players in your clan. I understand that it makes it easier when people speak the same language to work together and people with the same cultural background tend to stick together, but using the same argument is why the British, US and Pirate nations will always tend to have higher populations than some of the smaller nations. If people wish to remain insular then there is no way the game can adjust to make it work.

You say that as if there will only be attackable ports with timers set outside your prime time, there are many ports owned by clans which will have the same prime time as you, so you can attack them, and for particular ports you want that are not in your prime time your clan can arrange some time when people are available now and again to attack even if it is outside your prime time and once you capture it you swing it back to your prime time giving them the same difficulty to try and get it back.

You seem very one sided with this argument. On one hand you say you cannot attack the US and AUS/NZ clan ports because the timers are not in your prime time, but then you say that these same people can easily take your ports in your prime time and once taken switch them to their own prime time. It works both ways if they can take the time to attack you in your prime time then you can find the time to attack them in their prime time. It is the same difficulty for everyone and not an advantage to any particular timezone.

Well please provide it.

I have given you examples of how just providing more loot is not a solution and you just dismiss it without giving any reason how providing more or better loot would improve it. Just saying that you need unique thinking is not an answer, tell us how improved loot would improve the game and stop people getting bored? Like anything in life if something becomes too easy to get it becomes worthless and if it is too hard to get people give up on trying to get it, there is a balance to be achieved with loot so it has value.

I do not see how better loot will improve things or bring people back to the game. If there is better loot in PvE people will just grind it till they have so much of it it becomes worthless and if it is better loot in PvP, people will complain that it gives an advantage to PvP players creating an even bigger gap and a barrier to new people entering PvP (unless it is items like paints or items that do not improve performance). But even with loot like paints, once they are regular drops people will farm them till they have so many and then they are back to square one saying they are bored. Before the wipe when they had the PvE and PvP challenges I used to regularly place in the PvE challenge top ten and I had so many paints and ship notes I was giving them away. I guess what kept me playing that was attempting to improve the timing, but even then it eventually got boring as they kept the opposition the same so once you worked out the tactics and right setup it was wash rinse and repeat, which became quite boring. In the current game it is easy to farm skill books by hitting NPC fleets inside the safe zone, it just becomes a matter of luck to get the rarer ones. I currently still do this a lot as I am grinding up slots on various ships, but once I have the slots unlocked I am sure it will lose its attraction. So basically I do not think more loot will fix things, what the game needs is to generate some form of accomplishment from the actions you do. If you are a PvE'er and you do missions or hit OW traders or fleets that should have some effect on the world in general rather than just being a method to farm xp and gold. If you are a PvP'er your PvP battle should affect the world to a greater extent than PvE to reflect the greater risk. Even if you are a trader, doing a trade run should have some effect other than just making you gold. In short make people believe their actions are affecting the world to some degree rather than just a farm to generate wealth and amass goodies.

Problem is they cannot just remove bots the way the game currently is, even if the population was much larger due to what I highlighted in the post above.

The problem with the current matchmaking system is that it will always require bots to make up the numbers. At the moment the players who have raced ahead are struggling to find human opponents at their level, and eventually as more people level up through the ships it is the starter players who will struggle to find human opponents as not many players will want to drop down to cutters and brigs to play with them. There may be a sweet spot in the frigates where you will find enough people to compete against, but the reality is that they need to allow players set up their own battles, so you can go into a lobby and see the battles that people have set up and decide if you want to join or not.

I think you misunderstand the alt abuse I am referring to. What I am saying is that they would use 2 alts or one alt and a friend. The alt is in the nation that has the safe zone and he goes out in a trader, he gets attacked by the other alt or raiders friend and then calls reinforcements, the friend or second alt then kites the reinforcements for the full battle time keeping them tied up while the raider operates freely inside the safe zone. It becomes so safe they even know when the reinforcements will become available again.