Development plans for conquest mechanics (RVR)

[Wilson09]

Yeah, yeah. You are right Krakken.

Was tired reading all (reading all helps).

 

You arguments are good and valid.

Did not see all posts of you.

 

I admit "defeat" !

 

Just have a nice idea.

I will start a conquest parallel to the "tournament" of best players.

 

Whoever posts me his worst ever "defeat" will be granted GOLD carpenter teams by me.

Those screenshooting of "glorious victories vs. xy have been sickening me.

 

Only superstars around.

 

I admit I am "average" at NA, in any respect.

I am too old and wise !

 

“With age comes wisdom, but sometimes age comes alone.”

(Oscar Wilde)

Edited August 9, 2016 by Wilson09

[Bulwyf]

Where are people getting the "no ports" idea from. If your nation loses totally, then you are auto-allied to the conqueror power. So therefore you can use all their ports too...

 

Your only an ally for a forced period, and who seriously is going to support the nation that just conquered you. I certainly wouldn't and would do all that I could to hamper them, but thereafter you don't have any ports in your home area unless they are free ports which don't support industry.

 

Lets assume that you then ally with someone who opposes your original conqueror, you are then faced with either waiting for your factories to be recaptured or destroying them and trying to start over in allies ports which you could lose simply a change of alliance.

Edited August 9, 2016 by Bulwyf

[McHackou]

Step 1

Basic alliances that are coming this august we would like to share the plans and ideas for new improved RvR.

 

Step 2

Changes to port battles are briefly described in this post

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/14816-update-on-the-port-battle-set-up

 

Ports

Ports will change: Map will split into regions with regional capitals. 

Nations will conquer regions (not individual ports)

 

This will also help a lot in hostility generation and will open road for significant trading/supply/demand improvements, with proper regional goods distribution. 

 

Last draft of the counties/regions design

link to file http://imgur.com/wSjKF1G

 

 

Potential proposals for discussions. 

 

Capitals could become capturable. 

If nation have lost all the ports the last county (with capital) will open for capture. Losing the capital will force an alliance with the conquering nation.

 

Total victory should become possible (with the map reset afterwards)

If capitals become capturable this can lead to clear win conditions and map resets (seasons) with rewards for map victory. Current design is more real life with flowing changes of power (like in Eve), but maybe Battle Royale design is better. 

 

Freetowns

Some free towns will be repositioned (to be on the borders of regions)

 

Mission changes

Missions will always be generated to the nearest enemy region to promote pve players meeting each other in action (Irrelevant for the pve server).

 

 

Another blow for the casual gamers!

 

First of all, I like the idea with the ports and regions as well as dimplomacy. Repsoitioning of the freetowns is logical and ok too. As for the other points, I serioulsy have my doubts.....

 

Losing capitals and total victory....

is a nice thing, however if players lose all money, ships and upgrades they have worked for so hard, that will let a lot of players leave and, if known before buying, will let many casual players not buy that game!!  

 

So i think good idea to make it possible for nations to lose, but possessions and anchievements of the individual player have to be saved!!!

 

Mission changes.....

I think this is a bad idea... it makes it really hard for new players to start the game if bunches of highranking enemy gankers just wait for them to come out of mission, or even enter into the missions! There must be a "safe" chance for casual gamers and/or beginners to learn the ships mechanics and level up!!!!

 

My suggestion is e.g. to make missions close to starting grounds AND further into enemy direction, slightly increasing the rewards (gold as well as XP) the closer the misison one choses is to enemy terrritory! By this way all would be able to play the way they like it!!!

 

 

I like to stress out again what I have mentioned before..... any online game needs players to stay alive, lots of players. The hard core guys (and I am almost one, beeing Rear Admiral by now and spending a lot of time in the game) allone can NEVER keep a game alive! You need new people buying the game, so that money keeps flowing (as server cost, maintaining, further developing etc. keep running too)!!

 

The only way to keep many people playing and new people buying this game is to INCLUDE the casual gamers, gamers who play once or twice a week, or just an hour 3-4 days a week.... but to do so, the game must be kept playable for them too!

 

So imho:

 

- diffiyculties as mision only close to enemy nation - so gauranteed PvP

- too high costs (e.g. for crew)

- thing that almost FORCE you to join a clan

 

make it very hard for this casual gamers! So please don't overdue it!!!! There is a lot of great things for hard core gamers and still more to come i guess, so please make the casual gamers welcome, and the game worthwile for them too!!!!

 

I have seen many good (online)games die, just because they went "too crazy" for normal, casual gamers!

 

I love this game, don't let it share that fate!!!!

Edited August 12, 2016 by McHackou

[Wilson09]

Developers must find a way to win the game without annihilating completely the enemy. Many players would leave the game and would not give it another chance if their nation disappeared.

 

I doubt that there will ever be ANY nation being annihilated.

Why? Alliances and other reasons....

It is super hard to close down on capital and then take it.

 

I doubt it will happen.

 

It is too simplistic to assume:

7 vs. 1 (or 5 vs. 2) (1 out)

6 vs.  1 (2 out)

and so on and finally have a show-down

1 vs. 1

 

There are too many variables in this game.

 

Test it !

Edited August 12, 2016 by Wilson09

[Skully]

Losing capitals and total victory....

is a nice thing, however if players lose all money, ships and upgrades they have worked for so hard, that will let a lot of players leave and, if known before buying, will let many casual players not buy that game!!

You will not lose anything if you lose your Capital.

Everybody will lose everything if one Nation / Alliance wins the season...

(Hehe, so what should we prevent at all cost?)

[Sir Ballard / oo7]

Not sure if it could be done by the Devs but,

      if one nation were to be eliminated...have it automatically join the lowest (active) population, and so on and so-forth as each nation crumbles.

That way its a (level as can be) playing field right to the end 1v1.

Then do a reset once victory has been claimed.

[Mrdoomed]

What if when a nation is defeated it " respawns" a capital and 1 other port somewhere on the map. Completely random so all factions have equal chance of losing a port but maybe higher % the more population you have.

This way the game wouldn't necessarily end and the map would never be stagnant. Factions would die and come back in a better spot maybe and start over.

Just a thought.

[KrakkenSmacken]

What if when a nation is defeated it " respawns" a capital and 1 other port somewhere on the map. Completely random so all factions have equal chance of losing a port but maybe higher % the more population you have.

This way the game wouldn't necessarily end and the map would never be stagnant. Factions would die and come back in a better spot maybe and start over.

Just a thought.

 

 

 I've seen the pirates come back from just a single port before smuggling to dominate PvP2 due to perserverance and lack of effective leadership in the enemy factions. With smuggling, all you really NEED is one port to keep going.

 

So fallen capital turns immediately to a "Free Port" on capture.

 

Nation gets new Capital in a previously "Free Port" in another area of the map, selected by vote by the defeated nation prior to losing the capital, votes start when last non-capital port falls. 

 

This port stays "Free" for one week and serves double duty as the nations capital for new players, and free port while other players scramble to remove assets. This can be used as a base to try to secure towns around it.

 

Since Free ports can't have resource buildings, the things at risk to other players already set up in the free port is outposts and ship yards.  If it's a shipyard, well that was a choice as you could easily shipyard in your capital, and the lost shipyards could be converted to $$$ the same way that they did for the server merge.

 

That said, I still prefer an uncommon but possible win condition scenario, but with a whole nation moving to the other side of the map from where they were just pushed out of would definitely mix the pot and change the dynamic of the game in a big way.

Funny, I find this new system to be perfect....

 

If people don't like that they got conquered then perhaps they should go rogue and become a pirate till the reset.   That is what historically happened with some people.  They didn't like that peace broke out so they went pirate.  

 

 

It isn't a big deal in a game where their WILL be map resets. 

 

Problem with "go rogue and become a pirate till the reset" being the only option after conquest is that eventually the pirates will red-rover the whole map.

Edited August 12, 2016 by KrakkenSmacken

[Tonnerre de Brest]

Most war games I have played would end up with a reset of some sort. There would be a goal to achieve announced by the host, then once the goal is met, the map resets and another goal is put forth. However in the context of a multi nation world, I'm not sure what that would look like.

 

I have played french for a while and the stagnation derived from the annihilation of france pushed a lot of players to leave to other countries. A reset when there was only the capital left might have help them stay. France is slowly coming back to life but it took some of us to bargain for ports to be taken back and this was not without difficulty. I myself gave up recently and moved to another faction.

 

Reward the winners just like in real life loosing countries have paid huge sums as tribute. In this case you could simulate that by giving out some upgrade or special flag, moneys or ship in redeemable area. Once celebration is over just reset the map.

[Arctander]

I have not read ask the replies, and I'm sure it it's a contentious discussion, but it sounds like a terrible idea to me. The game already has almost nothing to stem the slippery slope mechanic, and this new idea will only make that worse. A huge mistake IMO, and something which is enormously limiting to anyone who does want to just be a part of a horde.

[KrakkenSmacken]

I have not read ask the replies, and I'm sure it it's a contentious discussion, but it sounds like a terrible idea to me. The game already has almost nothing to stem the slippery slope mechanic, and this new idea will only make that worse. A huge mistake IMO, and something which is enormously limiting to anyone who does want to just be a part of a horde.

There has to be a balance between slippery slope, and perpetual comeback.  The problem is that pretty much all perpetual comeback mechanics have been disparaged as "unrealistic".  Such things as increasing tax rates for winning teams etc, have all been put forward and either shot at by community members, or not brought up again by Admin when discussing the issues, so at this point I can only assume that the majority of the focus is on the winning experience rather than keeping losing players interested.

 

I know both sides of the experience in this game.  Having been a pirate on PvP2 since before the time we were knocked back to our capital, to the current sweep and clear we are doing of the US.  Winning is much more fun, and continues to pull disgruntled players to the pirate nation in a "red rover" sort of way.

 

I think that accepting the natural behavior of players to move to "winning" teams has to be understood, and re-sets planned for.  

 

I do think however at the very least the a perpetual comeback mechanic, where it is harder to raise hostility in an active port based on outpost and building construction.  This would both be "realistic", that the last vestiges of a nation would be the hardest to route, and would go a long way to both create a perpetual comeback as enemy nations that are spread out too thin, would have ports that could be knocked over with a harsh wind and a musket.

 

But they really do need to plan for how resets will work, even if it is uncommon, because people being what they are, sooner or later it is probably going to be needed.  Better to plan for it an make it part of the game, than have to scramble to sort it all out when suddenly the whole server is a single nation.

[Mighty_Alex]

I think the defeated side should be allowed to choose their new nation. Some wil prefer to join their conquerors, some will choose a neutral side but most people will choose a nation, that is still fighting those who defeated them. In this case the winning side's numbers won't inflate each time they wipe a nation from the map. What the devs proposed is completely unbalanced. Besides, how are they going to force people to fight along with their former enemy?

[Skully]

I think the defeated side should be allowed to choose their new nation. Some wil prefer to join their conquerors, some will choose a neutral side but most people will choose a nation, that is still fighting those who defeated them. In this case the winning side's numbers won't inflate each time they wipe a nation from the map. What the devs proposed is completely unbalanced. Besides, how are they going to force people to fight along with their former enemy?

Just an idea:

If you are clanless, you can be invited into any Clan regardless of Nation. A lot of us have seen D4mi4n jump Nations and Clans alike and cursed him for it. So consequences are already in place. Even further if a Clan can be called to account for their actions in Parliament.

For a Clan it can only be achieved by being allied to the enough Clans to have a majority of voting power within the accepting Nation. The actual edict will then be a formality filed by any diplomat. Note that having two Nations allied would mean the edicts could be filed freely, but still won't result in automatic acceptance.

It's all about options. You don't need to fight within the conquering Nation, but it might be the easiest path back to getting a new Capital region. Same can be said going through Independent/Pirates path.

Maybe you'll only stick together on Clan level within different Factions and declare the new Capital when folks will least expect it with surprising allies.

It all depends on what kind of mechanic can realistically be put in place.

[Septimius Severus]

I think the current system is good, but what about vassalisation or a protectorate for conquered countries?

[Loco Bandito]

What happens when a new player joins the game and their nation isn't there?

[Anolytic]

This topic has been very focused on the total victory and capital conquest issues, even though these are just suggestions that the devs say they are considering and might not even be included features. I wanted to ask a question about how capturing regions is actually going to be handled:

When you create a PvP-zone I assume that zone is for the entire region. And once a PvP-zone is successful enough all of the ports in that region will be open for Port Battles. But since the conquest flags are going to be done away with, without that attackers will not have a way like before to select a port they are going for, so is this then going to mean that 24 hours after a PvP-zone is «won» all the ports in that region are open for attack for say 2 hours and then close again? And then they reopen again after another 24 hours? So a nation can choose to divide their forces and try to attack every port in a region at the same time (except probably the regional capital), or they concentrate their forces on taking one port after another.

Or am I wrong? How is the conquest of a region planned to work, and how will you avoid rushing/zerging within that isolated part of the mechanic while maintaining variability of strategy. I've kind of grown fond of the flags and believe they could still be useful to some extent (not least to make conquest expensive) except they need to be ruled by different principles.

And have I understood it correctly that region conquest is going to be win everything or loose everything (that if you don’t take all ports of a region within say 4 days (or whatever) you loose any ports in that region that you did conquer back to the defending nation)?

[KrakkenSmacken]

With changes to the pirate faction so they are no longer able to conquer ports, or act like mercenaries with black flags.  It would be a punishment and a viable option for those who don't want to fall in with their new conquering heroes.

 

Citation needed.

 

Who said pirates would no longer be able to conquer ports? Admin made a rather spirited defense of pirates capturing ports ages ago by pointing to historical records and facts about just how powerful the historical pirate nations were. Tens of thousands of marines and total control of many major ports if I recall correctly. Bottom line, pirates NOT being able to capture ports is as equally ridiculous as thinking every pirate was like Jack Sparrow.

 

All the bitching and moaning about pirates being OP because of two simple mechanics is mostly sour grapes.  The irony is that pirates tend to be more cohesive and better managed than the nations, probably because almost nobody goes into piracy thinking they can stroke their epeen by being the leader of the pirates, simply because pirates have already basically told authority to go pound sand. 

 

 Nationals, however unwise the plan to be king of the US is, still see that as something they can aspire to. When they fail then look around for someone to blame besides their own inadequacies, and have us dirty pirates leering at them through unbrushed teeth. (Though the brits seem to have the same dental hygiene problems in general.)

 

So far the only thing I have seen that pirates won't be able to do is have allies,which is a major dis-advantage as no allies can enter the same battle instance with them to bolster numbers, and everyone else is always basically an enemy.

 

So on pirates not being able to take ports, Citation needed because the map above sure still seems to have pirate ports.

 

EDIT: Ahh here is at least a bit of it anyway.

 

ps. Henry Morgan captured how many .. 14 towns? If i was him i would leave all those towns including Havana for myself. And fight the brits like the founding fathers.

 

 

 

Nations should eliminate piracy not by voting, but by fighting.

Crush their ports, drive them before you, capture their resources, and hear lamentations of their leaders in chat.

Voting is a more modern mechanic. In the age of sail you could settle a dispute just by sticking the sword in the enemy's eye.

Capture all pirate ports and they will sail brigs and cerberuses, as you cannot craft from Mortimer town only

 

Edited August 15, 2016 by KrakkenSmacken

[Strugelwits]

Mission changes

Missions will always be generated to the nearest enemy region to promote pve players meeting each other in action (Irrelevant for the pve server).

 

I like it.

[Sir Texas Sir]

If ports are going to be reset and changed shouldn't we get a heads up to pull our econs out of ports and such?  Or is there going to be a redeem for all your stuff in ports that will change and you no longer own after the patch?

[KrakkenSmacken]

If ports are going to be reset and changed shouldn't we get a heads up to pull our econs out of ports and such?  Or is there going to be a redeem for all your stuff in ports that will change and you no longer own after the patch?

Nothing official yet, but if they run it like they did the EU merger, all assets get turned into redeemable items, and all buildings get turned into cash.

[KrakkenSmacken]

I will say it again because clearly there is an overall focus on the win/reset dynamic that is mentioned only as a *possibility* in the OP. I strongly urge the devs to not go down this route. If what you truly want to accomplish is a dynamic, evolving, player-driven world then a win/reset dynamic will never accomplish this.  It destroys any immersion. It removes the need for relationship building and community that can arise from the ups and downs in a MMO with RvR mechanics.  

 

 

Because the current model with no win conditions has does such a great job of building community.

 

</sarc>

 

(See US PvP2 for example of near total social collapse.)

 

MMO and RvR resets have little to nothing to do with relationship building and community, as long as they are well defined and understood.  

 

The only real social collapse the Pirates have had was due to the ambiguity of the server merge, (many left months ago en mass, many did not, community divided and split), and the US collapse could be find a source in the battle royal model that let them fragment and in-fight due to multiple goals. The exact same thing that happened to the pirates just before the complete push back to mort. (Pirates split into north/south factions, then south went french looking for a fight.)

 

What is needed is a way for "tribes" to plan for and work towards what happens to them at the reset.

 

I strongly urge the developers to go exactly down that route, planned win conditions and known reset parameters, just like any other conquest game.

Edited August 16, 2016 by KrakkenSmacken

[angriff]

The first problem with these port timers is that you cant play this game when you want to you have to do it when someone else wants too.  

The second problem is you have a two hour window and you have to set them in two hour increments.  This means that prime time US Central is split in Two.    I can play a port set from 7 to 9 my time or 9 to 11 mytime.  The latter time is almost a no play time since the flag can be taken out as late as 11 pm and not planted until 12 pm.  That means the battle might not be over until 2 AM.  A NON PLAYABLE TIME IF YOU WORK!!!!     If you use the former time of 7 to 9 then it is a little better but holds the play open until 9 pm central with the time for the flag for planting at 10 pm well the battle goes to midnight so nobody is there.  If you place it earlier then your are not able to defend or attack because you are at Frigging Work to make money to pay for whatever crap they want to sell eventually in this game! 

 

The only suggestion is to get rid of the timer settings and limit flags based on players of the faction online.  If the faction has less then 2 players playing you cannot pull a flag.  If the faction has 10 players then two flags can be pulled.  This limits the daily toll on towns and insures that there are players playing that can create an opposition and a fun game time.  Players should be able to play the game when they are online PERIOD.   

 

Don't use the friggin PVP is fun anytime ruse.  There is value in this game around ports and port defense.  There is value in plantations, mines and if you are country that is not allowed to play or have ways to make money cheaply in plantaions then the game is CRAP and will die a horrible death.  I would hate to see such a nicely programmed game in the visuals to die because the Devs cannot figure out how to run a international server based game.. 

 

GO LOOK AT WWII ONLINE that has been online for over 15 years!!!

 

Suggestion PS. .at least change the timer setting to 1 hour increment settings.

Edited August 17, 2016 by Henry d'Esterre Darby
Removed disrespectful content.

[Vernon Merrill]

Dude, have you even read the OP of this thread. Flags and timers are going away. Stop raging.

[Skully]

Port battle time slots are not going away, but will no longer be dictated by a fixed time slot.

Once hostility level reaches 100% port battle is automatically set up in 48 hours

Yes, this might be a problem, if so then it needs refinement.

First and foremost PBs will not be the holy grail anymore (if they ever where). Rather a "small" closure of the continous ongoing struggle to increase hostility.

Region capture being the grander step. Capital region and Capital capture next steps. Until finally getting to end of season (wipe).

I personally expect that folks do not want to lose assets via the wipe, so most will try their utmost to prevent. But if it is not a real problem (similar to Capital capture) then we can not expect to see true effort from players to prevent such an outcome.

On the other hand, if the community majority wants a season to end, then the game will provide that option.

[KrakkenSmacken]

Port battle time slots are not going away, but will no longer be dictated by a fixed time slot.

Yes, this might be a problem, if so then it needs refinement.

First and foremost PBs will not be the holy grail anymore (if they ever where). Rather a "small" closure of the continous ongoing struggle to increase hostility.

Region capture being the grander step. Capital region and Capital capture next steps. Until finally getting to end of season (wipe).

I personally expect that folks do not want to lose assets via the wipe, so most will try their utmost to prevent. But if it is not a real problem (similar to Capital capture) then we can not expect to see true effort from players to prevent such an outcome.

On the other hand, if the community majority wants a season to end, then the game will provide that option.

 

 

Also not stated is what is actually lost in a wipe.  There may be no good reason, in fact there are probably allot of very good reasons, why assets other than ports and building will simply be itemized and passed on to the next season.

 

Think of it like LoL. Phase one is leveling 0-30, then comes phase 2 rune collection.  Phase three is competing in ranked.  Every game you enter you are always the best character you can be, level 30, and your rune set.

 

Seasons in ranked will alter the ranked value, but they never require a loss of champions or runes.  very game you enter you are always the best character you can be, level 30, and your rune set. 

 

 A well balanced skill based model works when everyone is assumed to have access to all assets, and makes specific choices about what type of asset to work with. 

 

So I think the wipe would and should be limited to a simple port reset, and possibly resource stockpiles. Once people know what passes on and what does not, the days/weeks leading up to a reset, people will simply invest heavily in what survives in preparation for the wipe.