Please Stop PB Log camping before it starts

[Hethwill]

Timer to join the PBs has to be increased then or else no one will arrive in time to a PB.

[Angus McGregor]

Wow - what a lot of 'debate'.

 

After awhile it got redundant and at times petty and childish. I stopped reading individual posts and just started scanning for the follow up to this...

We have some interesting solutions but some of them are too drastic to post today - need detailed description but its already too late here.  ))) 

3-5 login timer will not help if port battle entry is 10-30 mins like right now. When we tried short port battle entry timers long time ago they usually created more problems. 

 

But the solution exist

remind me on monday please)) 

 

...there never was a follow up. As far as I know the original point of contention is still true. Players can log out right on the doorstep of a future PB port and then spawn in and enter the PB without any possibility of prevention.

 

Now today over on the "Port Battle Conduct" thread there was...

 

all captains should calm down and stop blaming and shaming. 

Until solutions are found nothing will change - because currently the only way to stop logging off at sea is to remove it completely that will affect the majority of players.

 

Please proceed to this topic started by esteemed captain Jeheil to propose and discuss the solutions

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/16997-please-stop-pb-log-camping-before-it-starts

 

 

...and I still cannot understand the resistance from admin over the idea of a simple 3 minute login timer that prevents joining a PB during that interval. It's easy, it's effective and works both ways.  

 

Again, it's as simple as announcing that there will be a week long trial of this method commencing such-and-such date and let us test it.

[Powderhorn]

To a point, I disagree with that.  The colonies were already in a state of rebellion at that point.  This is more like if someone dropped a bunch of guns on a moderately OK place and suddenly they were like, "Hey, why not rebel?!"

 

However, if these "war supplies" instead became "regiments of infantry" that'd be a different story.  And, interestingly, you could do that by including in the cost 1000 sailors and X amount of time to drill them as infantry.  That could open up future interesting possibilities down the road, as well.

[Atreides]

Every national capital has a green zone, to any enemy player this zone is red.  This is already coded in.

 

Every regional capital should have the same zone that has certain attributes that can be coded, instead of RED zone it is some other colour, like YELLOW or ORANGE here are some suggestions:

 

1.  If zone is a "YELLOW" zone for you logging out is impossible (this will probably not work due to game crashing, or loss of internet)

 

2.  If zone is "YELLOW" for you, logging in starts a modified JOIN BATTLE countdown of 5 minutes.  You can be tagged and attacked, you can tag and attack, but may not join a battle in progress (such as a port battle) until the 5 minute mark.

 

3.  I am sure others will have other suggestions.

 

Port battles have a 46 hour time of preparation, as it currently stands an attacking fleet can run the risk at low population time to sneak into regional capital port entrance and then activate their time machine module to bypass all PVP and port defenses to INSTA-JOIN.  While I agree with the admin that logging out "AT SEA" is a necessary game mechanic. Logging out at the dock of an enemy regional capitol needs to involve an increased risk.  If my internet disconnects due to local storms while I am just outside La Habana or Fort Royal I fully expect at log in to be in a very dangerous place.  Currently that risk is -0- to log inside the most well defended harbor of the map at that time.  You can use your TARDIS to render all screeners and port defenses moot.

 

Thank you

[Nash]

or something simple, you cant log out when you are in conflict zone. If you disconnect/logout/quit in battle screen/ alt F4 there, you get teleport to nearest friendly port outside of the region. But if you sail out of that region zone, you can log out like normal.  

[pellasgos]

If you want to keep this system for the creation of port battle events then would like to suggest to the developers that a good idea to solve this problem would be the creation of a  safe zone specifically designed for the port battles.

 

I am talking about a zone similar to the ones we have in front of each capital but this time for a different scope.

 

10-15 or even 30 minutes before the battle starts a safe zone should be created.

 

This zone should be 2-3 minutes of sailing from its border towards the port.

 

A good idea would be to color the area of that zone or make it visible to a corner of our screen like you do it with the safe zones outside the capitals its up to you to decide what is better.

 

A player who will spawn inside the zone automatically should be forbidden from joining the port battle.The player would gain the right to get into the port battle only if he gets out of the zone and come back in or simply being outside the zone when that zone is activated.

 

 

Problem solved...the screeners and the attackers should be able to make plans in advance in order to capture a port.Coordination ,timing,numbers,quality ,skills, all will be on the table...

 

Its a shame that more than 150+  players didn't have the opportunity to engage each other in screening battles...and only 50 players had fun...and that ones were the ones inside the port and the ones who spawned next to it...ridiculous in my opinion.

 

I strongly urge you to listen to this proposal because the game is not going well and its not even released yet,if you are going to kill the hardcore community of this game...who do you expect to come and play or even trust you in your future developments...just saying...

 

You clearly mentioned in your previous patch notes that capture of a port should be the whole nations efforts....well where was that effort last night??? If you want to ignore my suggestion do it...but it would be a big mistake for the game.

 

I wish the devs team to realize the potential of such an idea and try to implement it.

 

cu later o7 captains

[Thonys]

Good idea pelasgos

simply sad

10 -30 minutes before a port battle will rise to actual battle..you can not spawn close to the pb harbor...... from without a battle or a closed game or battle screen,and if you did ....you..

 

and others are automatically spawned at a distance of 5 minutes away from the entrance of the port battle

 

therefore you have to sail..... and have to participate in the game mechanics

 

this works only of cause when a p b is active...

Edited November 5, 2016 by Thonys

[Count Maurice Benyovszky]

I can tell you a quick fix guys.

Don't allow logging off in enemy regions. (those circles that indicates them)*

That's it, problem solved.

Also, what where you expecting from Danes Russian players?

Fair play is the last thing that comes to my mind.

* - unless you're a smuggler

Edited November 5, 2016 by Count Maurice Benyovszky

[Augustus Charles Hobart H]

Call it D-Day, or some other massive invasion.

Will you say the same if it is done to you in an off time to retake the port?  The war supply bomb is totally outside the spirit of the system.  The idea is to promote pvp in the open world.  War supply allow you to go from 0-100 before the other side has a chance to react and to control exactly when the battle will be.  I can tell you that if this is permitted it will be used to place battles in off times in peoples home ports.  The problem with the system right now is risk vs reward favors PvE and evasion.

 

Getting no points for sinking allies of a nation in their waters is broken

 

- example

the Spanish don't care about Trinidad but the swedes have been defending it, we get no points for sinking the swedes but hey can take missions to drive down hostility.  So they get to participate in the system but points/time its a loss for us to hunt them instead of trying to out PvE them.

 

 And this is part of the problem everyone throws PvE at each other because the AI is easy to kill, you just take low lvl missions and kill small boats because the reward for a frigate and a cutter is the same and you can sink 3-4 in the time it takes to sink a first rate.  The only PvP this system is leading to is mission camping, and i hope we can all agree that that is not a fun system.

I can tell you a quick fix guys.

Don't allow logging off in enemy regions. (those circles that indicates them)*

That's it, problem solved.

Also, what where you expecting from Danes Russian players?

Fair play is the last thing that comes to my mind.

* - unless you're a smuggler

 

not helpful, we are trying to make a game not rehash the red scare.  Your hardly going to get constructive input if you open with Danes are a bunch of cheating Russians 

Edited November 5, 2016 by Augustus Charles Hobart H

[Count Maurice Benyovszky]

Who said they are cheating? I didn't.

Also they didn't use any exploit. They were just unfair, it's all there is.

My idea not helpful? Why? It's the perfect solution that will stop twats from logging off in front of enemy ports.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Count Maurice Benyovszky

[Augustus Charles Hobart H]

are there more ways to read what should you expect from Russians? 

I can tell you a quick fix guys.

Don't allow logging off in enemy regions. (those circles that indicates them)*

That's it, problem solved.

Also, what where you expecting from Danes Russian players?

Fair play is the last thing that comes to my mind.

* - unless you're a smuggler

 

If you make them not able to log off in the circle you also need to add to the pre-battle timer.  Right now its hard enough to win with 1.5 hours, screening to run out the clock will get old really fast as soon is it starts costing you battles.   I want screening to be in the game,because right now the port battle content is providing game play for about 30 British and dutch and 30 Danes/Spanish (example, I have fought in every British port battle sense reset).  This is because with 48 hours warning any nation can use their A team to fight any battle.  There is no reason to use a fleet other then the Danes to defend or attack a port if your only goal is to win.  Its undeniably effective but it means less content for the other 90% of the player-base.  And all the shit talk that I'm sure the Spanish have gotten for the Danes defending their last 2 port battles aside, in the long run is this good for the Spanish players and their fun?  The game is already struggling to provide PvP content for the players it has port battles involve at most 50 people if you get rid of screens.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Augustus Charles Hobart H

[Atreides]

Not being able to log off in enemy waters is not feasible. What if you disconnect? Auto lose your ship? Would turn into an F11 nightmare.

We have to look at this from a task standpoint as well. We are cooperatively developing this game with the developers. My best suggestion is the 5 minute countdown to JOIN BATTLE inside enemy regional capital harbour after log in.

[Lord Vicious]

Danes went cheap way with warsupply becouse in 4 days they lost 5 first and 20+ 2nd + countless ships to SORRY around savannah, they even sent spain then france tryng to negotiate for them for stop us doing that

 

+whatever they lost to usa-brits, that made for them impossible farm aggression.

 

 

I found both system idiotic

 

forcing ppl to do pve for cause a pb

or carebear with some trader ship for archieve the same.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Lord Vicious

[Thonys]

It's not all about you Lady Teak.

 

I respect what the Danes did kudos to them as long as it doesn't become a permanent part of the game I believe we will all be happier.

dont worry we all know now..... how it works...

 

this will be the only way its is going to be ..........for the next months to come.....believe me

[Guest]

Hotfix was deployed today

• Allies now generate hostility if sank in port waters (first reported by Plak and Jeheil)
• Weights and recipe adjusted for War supplies

 

Just in case someone missed it, the war supplies and allied hostility issues have already been addressed.

[Magnum]

I noticed that right after The Danes did their War Supply Bomb of Georgia - the weight of War Supplies was Quadrupled.

 

I applaud such a "timely" fix (ish) to this issue - and I don't at all suspect it being done before the allied forces could exploit it in return as something "fishy".

Edited November 5, 2016 by Magnum

[Kloothommel]

I noticed that right after The Danes did their War Supply Bomb of Georgia - the weight of War Supplies was Quadrupled.

 

I applaud such a "timely" fix (ish) to this issue - and I don't at all suspect it being done before the allied forces could exploit it in return as something "fishy".

Now you are just being paranoid. 

 

If it hadn't been fixed you would still say the devs are against you. Because the whole world is.

[Guest]

I noticed that right after The Danes did their War Supply Bomb of Georgia - the weight of War Supplies was Quadrupled.

 

I applaud such a "timely" fix (ish) to this issue - and I don't at all suspect it being done before the allied forces could exploit it in return as something "fishy".

 

Seriously? You could've applied that argument to a whole lot of fixes in the last few months. Should people have ranted that the devs are partial because they increased deadman chest sizes after the event was held in US/GB waters? Or that they only spoke out against alts buying flags after its use at Port Antonio?

 

If anything, that they responded so fast is to their credit. Sure, it's frustrating at times, but how bad of a game would we be playing if bad designs and exploits were left in the game just so that everyone can have a fair go at using 'em?

[Magnum]

Seriously? You could've applied that argument to a whole lot of fixes in the last few months. Should people have ranted that the devs are partial because they increased deadman chest sizes after the event was held in US/GB waters? Or that they only spoke out against alts buying flags after its use at Port Antonio?

 

If anything, that they responded so fast is to their credit. Sure, it's frustrating at times, but how bad of a game would we be playing if bad designs and exploits were left in the game just so that everyone can have a fair go at using 'em?

 

Wow, I thought I said I DIDN"T think it was fishy - yet you want to tell me how I REALLY feel. Thanks Obama

[Angus McGregor]

I noticed that right after The Danes did their War Supply Bomb of Georgia - the weight of War Supplies was Quadrupled.

 

I applaud such a "timely" fix (ish) to this issue - and I don't at all suspect it being done before the allied forces could exploit it in return as something "fishy".

Hmmm - your wording along with the quoted highlighting of the words "timely" and "fishy" led me to the same conclusion. That you were being sarcastic.

 

Frankly - I still think that's exactly what you were doing and now you're just trolling.

[Johny Reb]

If the war supplies remain a problem, then the next step is to remove the ability to ship them to a free port. Make the nation sail them all the way there. If someone spots a convoy of trader's sailing up the coast there is time to make a response and attempt capture.

 

I'm still unsure how to solve the logging in front of port issue. The automatic response is to not allow it in the protected zone but what I wonder is if that will prevent any nation from flipping a port. The defenders merely have to place their fleet outside of the port, wait for the enemy to spawn on the horizon and go out and meet them. So, wouldn't that mean that only nations that can field multiple 25 man groups could ever win and could a small nation ever have a chance of capturing a port? Port Battles become, not contests of 25 v 25 but 100 v 100 which is fine if we have the population for that kind of activity but do we have that right now?

 

Btw, does anyone know what happens if no one enters the Port Battle? Does it expire or stay open indefinately?

[Anolytic]

Btw, does anyone know what happens if no one enters the Port Battle? Does it expire or stay open indefinately?

If no attacker enters for 5 minutes the PB is lost automatically. Last I checked the defender could trigger the win by having one captain leave after 5 minutes.

 

You are also right about no port being possible to flip at the moment without attackers taking measures to guarantee a timely entrance to the PB. And it isn't even about numbers. Even if a small nation with only 30 captains available decided to go for screening, they could easily ensure that a large nation/coalition with 150 players engaged had no chance of taking a port. The defender can go with grey ships and tag a larger force into battle multiple times to delay their entry. Each time they die they can respawn and go out to screen again or enter the port battle with 25 1st rates after the attacker has already lost 30 minutes of the port battle and has no chance to win.

 

The whole system surrounding screening, counterscreening and port battle entry is broken currently by the new ROE and the 46 hour port battle countdown in combination. That is clearly why devs are allowing the "tactic" we are discussing here until a fix can be implemented. Nobody is saying this "tactic" is good for the game, and as a Danmark-Norge player I hope that this gets fixed soon and we can reintroduce some form of screening action outside that doesn't guarantee 100% victory to the defender. 

[Magnum]

The entire idea of port battles perhaps should be rethunk. Why do they need to be 25v25? They could be 25 1v1 battles instead with an attacker required to win 15 to flip the port.

 

You guys SAY you want PvP yet all I see in this game are clusterf74k battles and ganks - neither of which strike me as "PvP".

[Angus McGregor]

I'm still unsure how to solve the logging in front of port issue. The automatic response is to not allow it in the protected zone but what I wonder is if that will prevent any nation from flipping a port. The defenders merely have to place their fleet outside of the port, wait for the enemy to spawn on the horizon and go out and meet them. So, wouldn't that mean that only nations that can field multiple 25 man groups could ever win and could a small nation ever have a chance of capturing a port?

Correct me if I'm wrong about the following scenario for the doorstep spawning with a 5min login PB lockout timer. I'm not a big PvP'er and never been near a PB so I'm not up on all the nuances.

• Attackers start spawning in on doorstep - can't enter PB yet cuz of 5min timer.
• How many attackers spawn in simultaneously is a strategic decision.
• Screeners start drawing them into battle (in BR limited groups??) in 30 second intervals.
• If those battles are less than 5min long (unlikely), the login timer should be terminated for surviving attackers.
• When those battles end any surviving attackers should then be able to enter the PB, or counter remaining screeners. This choice is non trivial.
• This continues until 25 attacking ships are in the PB or there are no more attackers to spawn in.

Is there a flaw in this thinking? If yes - please explain.

[Wesreidau]

A lockout timer is a good start. I don't understand why I can log in, have a "cannot join battles for X" timer, yet apparently I could instantly join a port battle instance.

 

The second thing to add is log-in drift. When you log in, your ship has moved a few kilometers from where you logged out. This removes your ability to pre-position on top of a port battle or ambush site, without inhibiting your ability to log out wherever and whenever you need to from the open world.

 

Oh hell, here's the thread for it. http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/17089-solution-to-all-log-out-log-in-ow-abuses/

 

That alone solves it.