Small battles are set up badly

[Fast]

Im fan of pvp. I have done many small battles and I haven't lost one yet.

In this thread I will explain how and some of the problems.

 

-Less and less people are queueing up. It's easy to see why.

 

- There are no rewards for risking ship  === exp and gold is horrible. My best score was 4 kills and few assists, which rewarded me with horrible 320exp. This was after the patch that increased pvp exp.

http://imgur.com/a/2kIF9

^ Best battle so far. Everyone sunk and I almost lost dura as well. However In most of battles people just flee to not lose dura which makes rewards even waaay worse.

In same amount of time I could have gotten 1000-2000exp from grinding AI fleets, which present waaay smaller risk

 

-Most of ships are cutters, because risking a good ship isn't worth it! Also shooting cutters is frustrating. However, I have always taken my biggest ship, because >

 

-Biggers ships are overpowered. I know decrewing is very effective against bigger ships. For example a single cutter can completely disable renomee, just by hogging her back. However this can be easily countered if teammates protect each others rear ends. 

This leaves smaller ships in very bad position. Side armors of bigger ships can't be taken out without substantial risks and back armor isn't enough to sink. 

Today I had 3 ships facing my Trincomalee. Brig, Suprise and cutter. My teammate was a Pickle. By the time they got 30% off my side armor (on 1 side), I had got all 3 sinking. Suprise and Brig managed to escape. I got 100 exp xD

 

My suggestion is

Further increase pvp rewards 

Fix br balancing.

Exp rewards should be lifted from 0.5 to at least 2.0

There should be reward from ships that fleed the battle. (For example assist for everyone)

There should be reward for winning team. For example 2x rewards + greater chance of obtaining mats and upgrades.

Queuable battles not bound to 1 server. (Not sure if possible at this time)

 

This way queueable battles could be as profittable as AI Fleet, with risk of losing durability.

The only problem I see is that all the all the grind could be done from the port, which could make other areas desolated, same as what happened in wow. Few entrances to queuable battles could be set on high seas, which would encourage more sociable experience within and outside a nation...

Edited February 14, 2016 by Fast

[Pugwis]

Best battle so far. Everyone sunk and I almost lost dura as well. However In most of battles people just flee to not lose dura which makes rewards even waaay worse.

In same amount of time I could have gotten 1000-2000exp from grinding AI fleets, which present waaay smaller risk

 

But they can't flee without losing a dura, they can't escape, except at the end of 1:30 hour, if they cross the white line they sank after 5 minutes.

Now it is 30 minutes wich i think it's a bad idea.

Once you enter a small battle the only way to save your dura is (was) to win basically, or delay the battle.

So there is absolutely no point in running instead of fighting, but peoples probably learn this after they lost 1 dura and never try a small battle again.

Now with the 30 minutes timer it is no longer fun to play small battle because peoples just avoid fighting for 30 minutes, the question is; why would they enter a battle if they don't want to risk 1 dura, the worst thing is that even the player using free ships like basic cutter, try to run away.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Pugwis

[Reki]

There is to many cutters. Today i enter small battle and forces balance was 2 frigs vs 8 cutters+ mercury.

It is rly horrible tuning, because cutters doesn't risk anything. I got 19 k gold for that fight and 200 exp + grey pellew, which i sold for more 12 k. Its pretty ok, if i say that my sunked ship was captured and i bought only green pump for it. But still i didn't expect cutters horde. Nothing to wonder, ppl doesn't want to play small battles on normal ships vs this basic-orks. Sorry for my words, but  can't call them with different name 

[Fast]

But they can't flee without losing a dura, they can't escape, except at the end of 1:30 hour, if they cross the white line they sank after 5 minutes.

Now it is 30 minutes wich i think it's a bad idea.

Once you enter a small battle the only way to save your dura is (was) to win basically, or delay the battle.

So there is absolutely no point in running instead of fighting, but peoples probably learn this after they lost 1 dura and never try a small battle again.

Now with the 30 minutes timer it is no longer fun to play small battle because peoples just avoid fighting for 30 minutes, the question is; why would they enter a battle if they don't want to risk 1 dura, the worst thing is that even the player using free ships like basic cutter, try to run away.

You can leave after 30min without losing dura. Which I don't find to be too good. Stall for 30 min, Leave, ??? Profit?

 

There is to many cutters. Today i enter small battle and forces balance was 2 frigs vs 8 cutters+ mercury.

It is rly horrible tuning, because cutters doesn't risk anything. I got 19 k gold for that fight and 200 exp + grey pellew, which i sold for more 12 k. Its pretty ok, if i say that my sunked ship was captured and i bought only green pump for it. But still i didn't expect cutters horde. Nothing to wonder, ppl doesn't want to play small battles on normal ships vs this basic-orks. Sorry for my words, but  can't call them with different name 

True. 

[JookySeaCaptain]

They need to just remove durability loss from the small and large battles. This would encourage people to use bigger ships, not run away, and to experiment with new ships and tactics. People always counter this proposal by saying something about risk. Here is my take on that. In the Open World and Admiralty Missions you can lose durability if you sink. However, the risk there is far far less than in the arranged PVP battles. First of all, the Missions are already stacked in your favor, and second, you can more easily flee those scenarios. In the PvP battles, however, you know going in that at least 50% of the people involved are going to die. That is a hugely disproportionate risk. The risk either needs to be removed, or the rewards need to be greatly enhanced. If people continue to flee when there is no durability loss, then count those who escaped as killed for XP/ Gold rewards. 

[Fast]

The risk either needs to be removed, or the rewards need to be greatly enhanced.

I agree. I'd rather have rewards enhanced tho.

[Reki]

They need to just remove durability loss from the small and large battles. 

 

Nope, they should not. We need captains in sea, not in skirmish.

[Aetrion]

Nope, they should not. We need captains in sea, not in skirmish.

 

If removing durability loss would make skirmishes more popular than open world fights it stands to reason that removing durability loss from everything would make the whole game more popular.

[The MetaBaron]

If your incentive for PvP is XP and or Gold then I think you may be playing the wrong game.

 

Realistically battles did not end with every ship sinking, ships are precious (if anything people are much more reckless in game) you do not want yours to sink even with durabitliy. Many engagements would actually play out in the bigger sense, as you tried to chase down a ship. Can you honestly tell me the inferior force in a battle would always stay and fight to the death?

[Fast]

If game encourages variability in game modes, people are less likely to get bored of the grind