Arsilon

See Britain? Was that so hard?

We were making such progress there for a bit.

Hopefully the Brits will stop setting their port timers for times where there won't be any PvP then.

land in battles in and of themselves won't fundamentally change a lot of the broken mechanics. In the meantime nations/players/clans 'optimization' (bordering on abuse) of those mechanics to tilt gameplay in their favor (not an indictment since this is a competitive game and any advantage will be leveraged if possible) will continue to erode people's enjoyment of the game. Even when you lose it should still be fun (unless you are just a complete sore loser).

It's getting better but still several posts that don't have tags.

OK, we can close this thread now. The game is great. The mechanics are perfect. It's purely just coincidence that we see players getting bored and leaving or re-rolling from their current nation to some other nation since everything is perfect and fun. /rant Seriously, do you see no problems whatsoever with the way the game is being played right now by a good chunk of people? This isn't an issue of complaining about x or y. This isn't an issue of pointing at one nation or another or specific individuals or clans. Tell me you think what is happening right now on this server is a good thing and will not make another 50% of the population leave in another month.

PvP1 might be a good place to see what they have done differently to perhaps not lose as many people as we have. But they would have no perspective on what we have chosen to do collectively and how we have chosen to play here that might have led to it being more 'unfun' than other servers that have not seen as much of a drop off. Does anyone know if PvP1 has had issues keeping people? Perhaps they have given you see them coming over to our server all the time trying to recruit people over there. So perhaps the grass isn't any greener. Has anyone spoken to some of the folks that switched?

So USS switched to pirates so they could......fight pirates. And agree with previous, the war declaration thing seems a bit unnecessary. You're pirates for crissake.

You would need to think of a way for it not to be abused, ie 25 people showing up in cutters. You still want people to bring out meaningful ships but it shouldn't be 25v25 1st rates either.

Now this is an interesting idea. Perhaps you enter with your ship that puts you in queue for what ship you get to pick. If you lose your "proxy" ship, you lose your dura for the ship you brought. Come with a 1st rate you get first pick. Come with a basic cutter, you get last pick or perhaps shut out if there are more than 25 players? Then the Port battle fleet could be a more realistic mix of ships on both sides. Interesting idea, indeed.

I have operated under the assumption that the devs have said this is intended on being a PvP game first and foremost. I think the fact that there will be no subscription and the fact that the current server caps are relatively low in comparison to more mainstream MMO's is an accomodation to the fact that the target audience is indeed smaller. So therefore making PvP directed decisions isn't necessarily contrarary to their stated direction and those people here taking the more PvP centric point of view are not out of turn. Perhaps my charactarization earlier wasn't fair in questioning how appropriate having a 'grind' is as it is indeed true that it is probably impossible to eliminate in any scenario where there are ranks/levels involved. However two questions are probably more appropriate 1) Should there be a PvE grind or is there a way to enable a PvP centric one? Or at a minimum can the PvP centric one be just as viable as the PvE one? 2) What impact should levels really have on the game? While it certainly is reasonable that Level requirements allow you to drive different ships, is it reasonable that until you are Rank 8 and in a 3rd rate you can't participate in RvR? Does that put too steep of a hill to climb before you can participate in the primary point of the game?

There are several factors that might have swung that battle to a much different series of events (if not the outcome entirely). How many of those events need to be counted on before a "fun" battle where the brawl is on and an unfun one where the towers are mowed down and the battle is instantly over? What would have happened if our Victory captain wasn't afk and would have actually been able to bring it into battle? What would have happened if our other captains that were trying to sail from Vieques weren't already too late given the towers going down so quickly? What would have happened if our Cerberus captain didn't have a RL issue that caused him to have to punch out right at the beginning? What if France hadn't interpreted your initial moves as attempting to board the towers instead of driving by? Would that have caused a quicker turn to get a better cut off angle? There are so many factors here that might have changed the course of that battle but none of them really talk to the main point of how that specific mechanic affects the game. And it really only talks to a very specific instance of it at one point in time between 2 nations? What are the larger implications when applied to other nations (replace Britain and France with any two other nations in the game right now)? I'm sure there are a lot of other factors that impact it but the conversation at this point seems to be focused on 'the grind' and the implication it has on the overall BR Arms race between nations and what impact that has on a larger nation to roll over a smaller nation regardless of what else happens. If you want to discuss the merits of forcing PvE grind to be the cost of entry for PB level RvR is that a good thing? If you want to assume that the grind is indeed appropriate, what does that do to relative server balance when taking population differences into account?

Which brings full around back on topic again. How do we measure health of a nation and therefore of the server as a whole? Is it who has the biggest ships as some from Britain would suggest? What factors actaully matter the most and how can we encourage those? What game mechanics are needed to encourage those factors and discourage less "healthy" ones?

There was no attack. Go read again. Britain was used as an example to ask about whether or not focusing on the grind and the resulting impact on BR balance/PVP/PB's is a good for the game. Its a fair question and if you take yourself out of it, one that probably deserves some discussion.

This thread really has nothing to do with Sons of Britain. No one is complaining about the fact you've chosen to grind. No one is complaining you are rolling port battles at this point. This thread has nothing to do with you. What it has to do with is whether or not how various parties have chosen to play is healthy for the game in the long run. What this thread is about is whether or not the mechanics in game and how various nations/clans/individuals have chosen to use them is impacting their ability to maintain interest in the game and can encourage an environment of fun for players that have been around for a while as well as any new ones that come along. Somehow you think comments here are specific attacks on you and your clan when instead its people questioning whether the path you've chosen is in the long run best interest of the game. Instead of getting defensive and claiming that other people are too lazy to go grind so they can drive as big ships as you, the question really should be, was the grind fun? Do you think it would be fun for other people? Not that they should just suck it up and go do it. By doing it is that really what the game should be about? What does it mean for a new player joining the game now? What happens to a new player that wants to play Spain or Denmark? Is this the path that we should be encouraging or will we end up losing players faster than we can add them? Check your ego at the door for a second since this isn't about you. Its about play styles and game mechanics you may have chosen to use and therefore are an example that can be pointed to. But it really has nothing to do with you specifically or your clan.

It was, and still is my intention of keeping politics out of this thread and focusing instead on what is and is not healthy. What should be be able to learn as a server that will help the devs put the correct mehanics in game to encourage those things that make it healthy? In many ways I think what is now happening in Puerto Rico between the Brits/Swedes/French actually is a very healthy sign. All three nations have something to rally around and something to care about. We can nitpick on use of strategies and game imbalance etc that are also part of this but at its core, what is happening there is what I believe should be going on across that map and for some reason it isn't? Is it just because the French have a different mindset to this game and were able to really stoke the Pirate conflict into a 2 week free for all? You've said that it wasn't until the French entered the picture in Puerto Rico that things escalated. The Swedes were able to pull in their neighbor to the south to help them. Even looking at the Danish, they were able to get the aid of Britain in their cause. Why did DNN choose to re-roll before that alliance could actually work out? So is it just good use of diplomacy that has created a new fun spot for the involved parties? Is this the mechanic that is missing? Why is there not more of this going on across the map? What is keeping the US and Britain from going at it full on like everyone else thinks they should? The Spain situation is an interesting one since they are surrounding by Zerg's to either side. Should they have tried to work something out with the Dutch instead of fighting them? Was the Zerg mentality so overpowering that they were doomed from the start? (I have heard of some diplomatic shortcomings that may have set Spain down this course but I do not know if this is true and to what extent an escape would have been possible short of some implosion similar to what happened to the pirates?)

This is why I posted this. I'm really curious as to what factors will give players a sense of activity. Two things happen when it seems like things are dying. 1) Transfer nations (especially where the price is low to do so as it currently is). We are seeing a LOT of this. 2) People quitting the game outright. Division just came out, new patch has several people salty, the pirate implosion cause a lot of people to quit or leave the server, etc. So are the nations healthy or unhealthy and therefore is the game healthy or unhealthy and how can you measure it since what you can't measure you can't really fix.

Forum PvP aside and not to get confused with the political situation, I'm really curious as to the relative health of each nation, especially with all the re-rolling going on at this time and the back and forth we are seeing - Pirates to France - Pirates to Dutch - Pirates to Britain - Danish to Pirate - Danish to Britain - Britain to Danish - US to Pirate On the surface it seems: Pirates: have imploded but have staged a recent comeback to re-establish a foothold back in the Bahamas. How much of this is resulting from galvanizing those that have chosen to remain after the mass transfers? How much of this is small groups of people from other nations re-rolling to help them out? How many of those people switched only temporarily and will switch back once the dust settles again? Rumors that other nations are rerolling (perhaps only temporarily) to reestablish the Bahamas as a buffer zone between Britain and the US on that front. The Pirates were extremely fractured as a nation but seem to be re-establishing some level of unity in purpose. Hard to gauge their actual numbers since no formal guild or guild coalition seems to be the anchor at this time. Coming out of a period that I would say they were very unhealthy but definitely appear to be on the mend. We will see if this is just a blip or if they can sustain current level of activity and are thus truly healthy as a nation again. Swedes: Very small nation with one 'anchor' guild [bORK] with perhaps 20-30 players at peak times at reasonably high ranks/ship levels. Spread is very top loaded, eg 4th/5th rate and higher. Very unified in purpose in maintaining presence around their capital. Primary conflict with the Danish (see Danish note) and now Britain as their proxy. Being supported by the French. Overall I would say they are healthy but are still so small that that could tip either way very quickly depending on circumstances and whether the current conflict expands and the full British zerg focuses attention on them. French: Smaller nation but with recent Pirate transfers probably operating with 35-55 players at peak times but with much broader spread of rank/ship levels. Probably most close to a Bell Curve with a few second rates at the top end and the vast majority still in the 5th rate levels. After the pirate implosion, conflict seemingly resolved as their focus has shifted back to the Bahamas. New hostilities related to the Swedish/Denmark conflict where Britain supporting the Danes (see next point) and the French supporting Sweden. Minor skirmishes in Louisiana with the US isolated to very small number of individuals and only 1 clan from each nation really putting any notable effort. Coming back from having only 1 port in their home area (not counting Louisiana) to push the pirates out, morale is very high and the nation is seemingly very unified. Question remains as to where focus will turn now that pirate threat is eliminated. Will the US try and wipe them out of Louisiana area to make them focus on their eastern holdings? Will the British push east and expand that conflict to a full blown war? With perceived Dutch/British coalition building (see Dutch note). France as a nation was relatively healthy given their limited numbers in their complete focus on the pirate war. With that focus now shifting can they sustain that level of coordination with now larger numbers (albeit not significantly larger)? What will that do to overall health of France as a nation? They were able to hold off the pirate zerg, but can they hold off the even larger British one should they choose to expand the current conflict further? Dutch: Very quiet but small, yet growing nation with recent addition of pirate transfer guild. Mostly fighting against Spain in South America but now recently making some moves to push into the British/US theaters, ie Yucatan and Hispaniola. Lack of British response to ports within their borders suggest coordination to allow the Dutch to help them push North into US territory. Dutch have been on very good terms with the French throughout the pirate conflict. One of the major clans at center of pirate war transferred Dutch. Will those ill feelings carry over and tarnish the Dutch/French relationship? Will the Dutch use their new holdings in Hispaniola to push North or will they instead push east towards Sweden/France creating a two fronts for them? Are they large enough, even with recent Pirate transfers to maintain conflict on two fronts? While quiet and still one of the smaller nations, they seem to be relatively healthy as a nation. Their numbers continue to grow with recent pirate transfers and they seem to be more active of late in leveraging their map position to become more of a potential player on the macro-conquest stage. British: Seemingly very fractured in overall goals but probably the most healthy nation in terms of activity level albeit seemingly very schizophrenic. Western Brits continue to probe against the US (with new Dutch partners?) Eastern Brits seemingly want to push into the Lesser Antilles with their now holding Puerto Rico and escalating conflict with the Swedes and French. As a nation they are large enough to manage multiple fronts and this seems inevitable as there seems to be very limited unity across the large number of clans on goals/purpose. Question remains whether Britain or US is the largest zerg on the server at this time -- recent events suggest it may very well be Britain even though conventional thinking continues to give the US with that title perhaps undeservedly. Spanish: Very small nation. Very minimal activity level. Hard to really get a feel for how many. Lack of data points would suggest they are very unhealthy as a nation but that could be by design and they are just trying to stay under the radar. Danish: Very small with extremely split core population by timezone. 2 primary guilds [DNN] and [CN]. [DNN] recently transferred to British leaving CN which appears to be a Chinese guild operating in early morning US time. [CN] does not seem to communicate a lot perhaps due to language barrier? A lot of other movement going on currently several players seemingly moving back and forth between British and Danish. Was this just to help facilitate the move by DNN to Britain or is there more going on here? Overall seemingly a very unhealthy nation at the moment. US: The perceived juggernaut of the server in total population. However all appearances suggest the US is even more fractured than Britain is with a very large contingent either content or just left with no other perceived choice but to PvE. No where as active as their population would suggest they should be in the Conquest game. Is this because they aren't truly as large as everyone thinks they are? Do the actions of a small number of very active and very large guilds leave the impression they are more healthy as a nation than they really are? Its really hard to tell what is truly going on in the US for me as I am way on the other side of the map and don't have as many data points to go from. I would argue that the US is probably more unhealthy than they are healthy at this point. These are just my thoughts and observations for whatever its worth. But the main point is how do you really measure 'health'? I figured this might be an interesting topic to throw around as keeping multiple nations healthy despite differences in overall population and map position will be critical to whether this game can succeed in the long run. How can you measure health of the various nations and therefore health of the server as a whole? Total Population? Average 'Active' Population at Primetime (assuming there is a true primetime since people are from all over the world) Ratio of PvE to PvP? # of Port Battles per day? # of PB fleets capable of fielding concurrently? Average PB Fleet BR? % Unity? Average Player Rank? If we had to score the relative health of each nation how would we do so? Please discuss as this more than anything will dictate whether this game can succeed.

[NOT OFFICIAL FRENCH POSITION] Well if we are using the starting map as the structure for our dialogue, great. Why not zoom out your map to show Haiti. Give the French all of Haiti back and you can Role Play in the Antilles while the French and Swedish join the rest of your countryman in fighting the US.

The new system is good. The higher end ships should not be as common as they are. Seeing fleets made up of 25 rate ships is absurd to the extent they are trying to keep any semblence of realism. There should be multiple ships with different roles in fleets This mechanism provides a way to accomplish that - you could argue they didn't go far enough.

I would ask you which Danes asked for that help and where are they now? There has been so much rerolling back and forth between the Danes and Brits lately it's hard to know who is who (and if rumor has it most of the Danes that were left rerolled pirate this weekend too).

Rumor also has it that half the Danish population rerolled pirate.

The following statement is mine and mine alone and in no way is meant to be the official position of France or Sweden. That being said, from what I have seen here, I think the terms have been pretty clear. Let the Swedish and Danish figure out what ports will belong to whom amongst themselves on the island of Puerto Rico the Virgin Islands, etc. Britain to stay west of La Mona, keep her fleets west of La Mona preferably by sending her fleets to fight the US. France and her allies might even willing to help you in that endeavor. [EDIT] I guess I should have quoted Safark's post since this was in response to him in particular.

Whether you like it or not, you are part of Britain. You can't dictate international politics when the clan operating in the same waters as you are not willing to abide by the same terms as you. You may say what TCF wants and does is different. But your are 50 feet away from another British player that wants and does something different. There is no way for the splash of the cannon balls in the water to hit them and not you.

Yeah, the 10K+ BR fleet you took Guayama and Pasaje still with plenty of screeners left outside with is no match for the godly US. Please. Go sell it somewhere else.