Archaos

Will there be a delay on joining and leaving the alliances, i.e. will a clan be able to become friendly a few minutes before a port battle and then be able to join the battle?

Can you look at some stage of expanding on this so it is not just a cash payment for maintenance. Bring in something like a port requiring so many supplies of various sorts per week. Utilize some of the trading goods, have a whole list for each port of items that are required each week to maintain the port (items that are not produced by the port). The owners can then set up buy contracts and let others fill the orders or fill them themselves. This will generate worthwhile work for traders and more traffic on the OW.

I agree with the un-capturable ports in areas around the capitals, but why exclude Sweden and Denmark? I understand you wish to have different difficult levels of play but a lot of people choose their nation based on their own nationality or background rather than the difficulty level. (this type of mechanic would work better in a fictional world that was not based on history). The main issue is that these smaller and difficult to play nations then start requesting game mechanics that allow them to play on a more even footing as the larger easier to play nations and that is what causes issues. For example a small nation cannot put out a large screening fleet so they request mechanics to allow them bypass the larger nation screeners and get into and even matched port battle. If we have difficult to play nations then do not provide mechanics to then start leveling the playing field.

I think the idea is too restrictive and it will mean most people will have to spend every weekend being up at unsociable hours as the port battles will happen then. It would be simpler for a War Company to just set a 3 hour window when they can be attacked. Encourage them to open it up more say to 6 hours by giving a bonus for longer attack windows. For attackers if they want to flip a port that is not in their prime time then they can arrange with their War Company to do it when they know enough members can be online even at a silly hour. Surely everyone can manage the odd out of hours PB, its just a case of arranging enough people around at that time now and again. This way no one can complain that they were forced to get up at a silly time to defend a port. If you choose not to attack ports out of your prime time then that is your choice. But if you set your windows at your prime time you should always be able to defend. This way if there are more players who regularly play at a certain time of day they should have more ports on that time and hence more ports to attack. Everyone is able to take part in RvR apart from the unfortunate ones who's prime time coincides with maintenance.

I would have no issue with the ship delivery system they had previously where you could send a ship without cargo to another outpost overnight, but I dont believe that alone will solve the problem of lack of PvP. Prior to the wipe ships could be teleported easily even before they brought in the tow to port feature and it was still difficult to find PvP. They had PvP areas with rewards and although I believe the large ship battles one was used a bit, it was difficult to find people in the smaller ships battle area. The problems go a lot deeper than the distances between ports in OW.

This highlights the problem even more. You went looking for battles and found a small one, then all of a sudden after the battle 10 ships appear in revenge. The question must be what were those 10 people doing before you attacked their countrymen? Were they just sitting in port? The game seems to favor people sitting around waiting for something to happen rather than give them good reason to go out and do something. I sometimes get the impression that a lot of people play NA while watching youtube or doing something else and only react when something happens in game, then moan how there is nothing to do and they are bored.

So how do you propose they make such a casual friendly game. Solo players at the moment have full freedom to go out and attack each other, trade and do what they want but yet there is not a whole lot of PvP. For the very casual player that is very short of time and does not have the time to seek PvP then the Legends game will probably suit them. For the OW game you need to have some complexity to make it work. They need to create front lines where the battles are fought, they need to give people a reason to own ports not just for colors on a map, they need to create meaningful trade to get merchants out on the seas etc. I know it seems frustrating and a case of 1 step forward and 2 back, but I think with discussing the mechanics like this before implementing it is the way to go, so we can have the arguments now and look to remove the exploits before it goes live.

The problem is not the OW sailing times it is knowing where to find PvP in such a big OW with a relatively small player base. I believe the solution is not to decrease OW sailing times but to find ways to get more people out to OW and create places where you know you will get PvP. At the moment that tends to be Nation Capital regions and thus you end up with the ganking of newbies etc. I personally like the big OW map where you can find quiet areas and are not guaranteed to bump into people in the middle of nowhere. It gives the feeling of actually being at sea, you can sail for ages seeing no one but you have to keep watch because someone could appear. The issue in such a world is how do you generate these PvP hot zones where people can go knowing that they will get PvP. I think the current proposals for War Companies will help as Companies will have to be more active in defending their ports especially if they bring in things like port supplies. I think some of the current failings in RvR is that PB's in most cases are really quite irrelevant as there is no real personal gain (apart from the battle enjoyment) from taking part in the battle, and once you have the port there is no real gain from keeping it, which has led to ports being traded back and forth. The control of resources has been nullified by alts so there is no reason to have a port for the supply of special woods etc. To make the RvR interesting there has to be some gain from holding ports, it has to be an income generator that means the owning Company does not have to spend time in PvE to generate money, they could even look at bringing back another currency like conquest marks for owners of ports (maybe now if more ports are available to be owned it wont be as bad as before). I really think the OW game should revolve around the RvR, for people who just want quick battles then the Legends game will be more appropriate. But by the same token the RvR game should encourage people who like the open world but do not want to engage in RvR and be part of a War Company to get involved some way by creating targets for sole raiders, creating opportunities for traders etc.

If a War Company do this then they open up the ports they own to attack with the other War Companies in the nation doing nothing. e.g. if a single War Company in the British nation caused trouble with Spain when the rest of the British clans had a non-aggression treaty then the Spanish War Companies would attack that War Companies ports and it would have no affect on the non-aggression treaty with the rest of the nation. It actually works out quite well in this case.

I dont see rouge clans being that much of an issue, clans of the same nation may have different agendas and different styles of play, but if they each own their own ports and run them the way they want how is this a problem for the nation. I can see allowing civil war creating more problems as then an outside nation can implant a War Company of alts in another nation with the goal of taking ports in a civil war and destabilizing the nation.

This is why they should tie in the flag system with the hostility system. Hostility in a region should be a certain level before a flag can be pulled. That way you get warning that something is brewing if hostility starts rising. The only issue would be making it so hostility couldnt be raised too quickly.

Even if they dont have them now, if it is if benefit to them it will happen.

This is why I advocate a system where only the nations capital region is a Non-PvP zone for people to start out. All other ports and regions start out neutral for War Companies to capture in the name of their nation.

It all depends on how they eventually finalize the War companies and hoe the port battles work. If anyone from the nation can screen then it will be difficult for a smaller sized war company to capture a port, if on the other hand all the members of that small war company had max level alts in the nation of the War Company they want to attack it would be easier for them to do it as a civil war as they could not be screened out. To put in in figures a 25 man War Company from Denmark wants to attack a 25 man British War Company port, if other members of the British nation can screen then they have little chance of making it into the battle, but if the 25 Danes had British alt War Company they could attack the same port without being screened and get a 25v25 battle, where the skill of the original 25 Danes would be what counts. Just trying to foresee some possible issues that will depend on how they implement War Companies.

Which makes the system of War Company civil wars open to abuse. All you have to do is create a clan of alts in a nation, supply them with ships from your main character and they can go take a port with no chance of being screened out, then set a time suitable for their mains to attack an empty port.

The way I see it developing is that even if the bigger nation has 6 war companies a smaller nation with maybe a single strong war company equal in size to the largest one in the big nation can still take their ports. This of course would be dependent on the attackers and defenders and screeners for a port battle being limited to the war companies involved. So the smaller nation does not have to face the 6 combined War Companies of the larger nation but the War Company they choose to attack, thus leveling the playing field a bit. There would of course have to be some limits as to how many attacks a single War Company could possibly have against it at a time (this could be scaled to the number of ports they own). If this is coupled with differing PB sizes for different ports, even smaller War Companies would become viable. The secret is making it difficult for a single large War Company to control everything, and I posted my thoughts on how to achieve that earlier. I personally dont like the idea of civil war and same nation War Companies taking ports from each other, I think that can lead to alt War Companies being formed solely for this purpose as there will be no way to screen out someone from the same nation entering a port battle. Remember not all alts are low level.

I see your assumption now but I am not sure who can use the port outside the War Company. e.g. Danish War Company captures a port in Haiti that was originally French, can French still enter that port? I understand from your point of view that the War Company is not really Danish and could be a mixture of nationalities, but how do they then react towards french traders still using that port? My assumptions are based more on the hope that they dont just go with the center map up for grabs but go instead for National capital regions being non-PvP zones and everything else up for grabs in the name of your nation. Thus still fulfilling historical conquest by nations, just that it is done by War Companies not national navies. I guess we will see which way they decide to go with it.

I think you should be able to see the size so you know what size force you can expect.

I see your point and maybe I am still missing something, but if you have mixed nationality War Corporations then whose flag flies over the port and who can access the port from outside the War Corporation? I sort of view it the way the Devs originally announced that nations will give charters to clans to go capture and run ports. To put that into role play "The European nations embroiled in war in Europe can no longer support the colonies, and thus grant charters to private enterprises to expand in the name of the Crown,/Emperor/Majesty etc." It gives us an alternative history timeline and still keeps nations involved as theoretically all War Clan ports come under the jurisdiction of the nation the War Company belongs to. This may go some way to appeasing the history buffs.

On the subject of tax and upkeep of ports maybe they could introduce a system where the port generates income through taxes for the owner but also requires upkeep, but the upkeep is in the form of certain supplies to the port. So many supplies per week would be required to support the port depending on the size of the port. e.g. Port A requires 100,000 grain, 10,000 stone, 200 gold coins, 300 silver coins 5,000 Rum (just figures from top of my head, would need to be worked out properly) etc per week. These figures are posted for each town at the start of the week with a running total through the week. The owning clan could purchase these items elsewhere and transport them themselves or they could post supply orders to be filled by other players. If they set the order too low them people will not be bothered to fill them. If at the end of the week the supply is not completed then there is a penalty for the port e.g. part of garrison deserts due to not being fed or paid so one fort becomes unmanned, or production drops. This would generate trade runs between ports and more targets in OW.

I'm not sure I like the plan for the new conquest regions I would prefer something more like below that I posted in another thread. I think the nation capital regions should be non-PvP zones to allow new players the safety to learn the game, missions in these areas only give xp and gold for the first few ranks after which you can still do missions up to any rank but get no XP, gold or loot, it would be purely for training purposes. e.g. someone sailing a first rate for the first time dosent want to risk losing it in PvP so they can train in missions in safe area. The importance of National capitals to trade and resources would need to be reduced. All other ports and regions should be capturable. Ports should have different levels that have different BR requirements to attack so small War Clans can have chance to get some smaller unimportant ports. There should be a bonus if a single War Clan owns all ports in a region, maybe something like increased production rates or less port upkeep costs. Only players from the War Clans involved in the port battle can screen and participate in the port battle.

Personally I dislike the idea of multiple clans in one War Company as I think it can lead to too many differences. But if people are willing to risk that then fair enough, I would hopefully join a War Company that was just a single clan.

The map will reset when this goes live. You will not lose assets, they will either be transferred or you will get them as redeemable's, it has not been decided yet how it will happen.

I really feel that these rules need to remain in the proposal as otherwise all you will get is a mass influx of people into one War Company just before a port battle, and once done they will promptly leave.

Would work if you had a huge population, but the main reason people want the current servers to merge is to try and get a bigger population on one server. Bringing in another map will spread the population out even more. If each server had 2500 people on regularly then there would be no calls for a server merge.