Please Stop PB Log camping before it starts

[Magnum]

Wait - you know all you folks that think Danes (or anyone else) has a god given right to attack Bermuda just as if it is Tiberon - some ports are just plain harder to attack because of their location.

 

This is how it was in real life and it makes sense in the game. What good reason could you have for wanting every port to be just as easy as every other port to attack? You could just put them all on a drop down menu?

[Anolytic]

It was a fun port battle. We got PvP and we sank a lot of ships. Unfortunately some of our 1st and 2nd rates was denied entry to the PB, even after it should have been open to all, players with hostility points or in group with a player with over 2000 hostility points who also didn't get in. 
 
To what this topic is about:
The 46 hour time from a port battle is activated till it starts is an artificial wait to allow Port Battles to be defended and not empty like before. The screening action is what happens in the time when 100% hostility is reached. By the time the port battle starts the attacking force has already sailed up there and wrested control of the sea region from the defender in order to start the Port Battle. Any screening action that happens in the 46 hours after the port battle was activated is as much unrealistic and as much an "exploit" of game mechanics as logging out outside port (which has in fact been judged not an exploit). 
 
Some here say a port battle force wouldn't just materialise and jump into a port battle. But an attacking force also wouldn't wait 46 hours to launch the attack just to allow the defenders to teleport a.k.a magically materialise in a huge screening force because their actual screening fleet failed. If that's how people here want to argue this, then bring back the old Conquest Flags.
I never played POTBS, but whenever it was mentioned I always hated the idea of having a port battle lobby that people got teleported into from far away, but this discussion here seems to highlight that something like that would be exactly what we need. 
 
Screening conquest flags used to be a great part of the game. The drawback in the old system was that usually it didn't happen because most port battles were uncontested. We had that system, and it didn't work. Amongst other things it was too taxing on the dedicated RvR-players. They had fun until they got tired of it and left the game. Now, screening the Conquest flag has been replaced with screening against invading forces trying to raise hostility points. But people have not yet accepted this and are stuck in the old mindset. If you want screening of the port battle fleet back, we need to do something about the 46 hour preparation period that defenders get, AND we need to bring back the cooldown between outposts. Both of these things would hamper other parts of the gameplay significantly.

EDIT:

Wait - you know all you folks that think Danes (or anyone else) has a god given right to attack Bermuda just as if it is Tiberon - some ports are just plain harder to attack because of their location.
 
This is how it was in real life and it makes sense in the game. What good reason could you have for wanting every port to be just as easy as every other port to attack? You could just put them all on a drop down menu?

You think attacking Bermuda was EASY?

 

What you're saying is that attacking far away regions should be even more difficult - just because. But defending them should be as easy as defending - in your example - Tiburon. 

Edited October 25, 2016 by Anolytic

[Cmdr RideZ]

Danes have to sail hours there.  They have to take missions to be sure they have a way to create hostility.  Did you know that in the new system you can actually go in the same mission and destroy their fleet?  Or just find and sink em?  While you kill them all, well hostility decreases and they can never even start a Port Battle.  You have ports there, you can get more ships from those any time.  Danes have to sail hours to bring reinforcements.

 

You can also see from the map when someone has started to create hostility there.  So you actually know when there is someone, that you have to find and sink.  You have basically all the tools, all advantages.

 

I have understood that you are also more numerous, so you should be able to just zerg.  Hmm..  Actually... I have heard also that the D&N main fleet has pretty good players.  Can you actually even win them in OW PvP?  If you cannot, I understand that you want to have screening fleets, tag and waste their time in OW before they reach the port.

 

I would say, that who ever can win hostility at Bermuda, he definitely should have his change at port battle.  Even teleport there directly from some region.  As just creating enough hostility, that is a huge task to complete.  Well, it is a huge task to complete if someone is actually defending.

 

 

Hmm.. How you were even able to lose hostility there so fast?

 

A. Either it is too easy to create hostility, so that you cannot react.

B. Or you did more or less nothing to defend Bermuda?

 

?

[Magnum]

...

EDIT:

You think attacking Bermuda was EASY?

 

What you're saying is that attacking far away regions should be even more difficult - just because. But defending them should be as easy as defending - in your example - Tiburon. 

 

No - I'm saying that attacking Bermuda (and other far away ports) SHOULD be very hard - but why wouldn't the garrison at such a port be able to defend?

 

If the resources needed to play the game were all in one port then the defenders wouldn't need but one garrison - as it is most countries need several garrisons which is simulated by the teleport mechanic.

 

Areas near your home waters are easier to attack - so easy that you are steamrolling them - just don't expect the British Nation to always "give" you ports like we are those right near your home waters.

 

IOW - bringing the entire British nation together to join up and coordinate to defend Bermuda may not be in your long term interests - (Irony on) since you are such a poor defenseless group of farmers (Irony off).

[GrapeShot]

It's not an exploit; it's a design flaw.

No one is ever going to punish something so nebulous.

Luckily, it's a design flaw that's easy to fix:

No joining PBs for 5 minutes after logging in on the OW.

Gibberish. They are exploiting a design flaw. State that clearly and, in the time before the flaw is fixed, threaten bans for using the exploit.

This game has suffered numerous times from exploits being passively tolerated for too long.

[Magnum]

Danes have to sail hours there.  They have to take missions to be sure they have a way to create hostility.  Did you know that in the new system you can actually go in the same mission and destroy their fleet?  Or just find and sink em?  While you kill them all, well hostility decreases and they can never even start a Port Battle.  You have ports there, you can get more ships from those any time.  Danes have to sail hours to bring reinforcements.

 

You can also see from the map when someone has started to create hostility there.  So you actually know when there is someone, that you have to find and sink.  You have basically all the tools, all advantages.

 

I have understood that you are also more numerous, so you should be able to just zerg.  Hmm..  Actually... I have heard also that the D&N main fleet has pretty good players.  Can you actually even win them in OW PvP?  If you cannot, I understand that you want to have screening fleets, tag and waste their time in OW before they reach the port.

 

I would say, that who ever can win hostility at Bermuda, he definitely should have his change at port battle.  Even teleport there directly from some region.  As just creating enough hostility, that is a huge task to complete.  Well, it is a huge task to complete if someone is actually defending.

 

 

Hmm.. How you were even able to lose hostility there so fast?

 

A. Either it is too easy to create hostility, so that you cannot react.

B. Or you did more or less nothing to defend Bermuda?

 

?

 

Naive, you are - as Yoda would say.

 

The game was broken right after the patch and we couldn't do anything to lower hostility (or offset it) then after hostility was over 60% the glitch not allowing us to do missions there was fixed (too late).

 

Never ascribe to laziness - what can be accounted for by bad game mechanics ....

[Sir Max Magic]

There are no sensible solutions to this except for removal of safe logoff at sea (historical)

 

I think if your in a hostile region the game should not allow you to log out until you are in international waters. To stop the alt F4 players your ship should remain in game until it is in international waters or sunk.

I also think we should also address the post battle screen campers as well.

 

 

The above made comment sounds to me like a valid solution !! 

 

Ofc more experienced players like me have to think about possible exploits or workarounds 

[Grundgemunkey]

the game is same for everyone, that's true. But you cannot reasonably expect that people react in the same way when David exploits game mechanics against Goliath and when Goliath uses the same mechanics against David.

 

why not ...?    i can reasonably expect everyone to play the game as it is....the same rules for everyone

[Sir Max Magic]

So what you guys are say it is ok that the defender can TP to the outpost with the ship ready and join the port battle befor they can be tagged, when they also have the towers as help in port battle and know when and where the attacker fleet has to be (with the new tagging circle makeing it easy to drag alot of player into battle) but if the attacker have to sail more 2.5h and more and then logs of to have a chance to be near the port when it starts it is all evil and an exploit?

If the attacker can't join after logging in from Ow the same should be true for Players TP in and leaveing Port.

 

---> is NOT okay !!

 

In fact, you are right !!!   

 

 

I dont understand this "Teleportation" system of SHIPS (not people from one outpost to another !!) at all !!

 

In my view, even when you capture a NPC trader, you would have to bring it back to your desired port by just putting sailors on board and sail where you want it to have !!!

 

 

So pls get rid of ALL teleportation (defense AND offense)... Problem solved !! (again, not meaning the proting from one outpsot to the other^^)

[Kloothommel]

the game is same for everyone, that's true. But you cannot reasonably expect that people react in the same way when David exploits game mechanics against Goliath and when Goliath uses the same mechanics against David.

 

This.

 

Edited October 25, 2016 by Kloothommel

[ajffighter86]

post removed by author, getting bogged down off topic again

Edited October 25, 2016 by ajffighter86

[Guest]

What if you couldn't dock up ships in regional capitals?

 

When we had the flag system the defensive fronts would usually have their fleets set up in strategic ports and the PB targeted was uncertain, making both defensive and offensive scouting and screening viable - it felt far more dynamic. With the current system, the defensive force is 100% guaranteed to field a 25-man PB fleet at zero risk and minimal effort because it's just sitting in the port - hell, they can even multiply their playercount by screening and then switching to PB ships. The only thing that offensive screening can achieve right now is to counter defensive screening.

 

I reckon it would make for far more interesting scenarios when both fleets will vie for control of the area outside the PB, both fleets run the risk of being intercepted (send in the B team into the PB!), and greater range of tactics (what if the attackers ignore screening at the port and just try to hold down nearby ports instead?). And while the defenders still retain an advantage with having friendly ports closer than the nearest enemy/free port, it's not as glaringly one-sided as it currently is.

Edited October 25, 2016 by Guest

[Anolytic]

You guys are all conflating this new port battle system with the old one. There are no more flags. Screening and interception is now what happens during the time it takes to raise hostility to 100%. Once 100% hostility is reached, there is an artificial 46 hour waiting time for the port battle to happen, simply to make a defended port battle more likely. It is not intended to give the defender time to prevent the port battle from even happening. If they want to do that they need to prevent the invader from taking control of the regional waters by gaining 100% hostility.

 

No - I'm saying that attacking Bermuda (and other far away ports) SHOULD be very hard - but why wouldn't the garrison at such a port be able to defend?

Attacking Bermuda was and is very hard. It required a long sail to be done several times and a lot of coordination of a large number of players. That is what we did to raise hostility to 100%. Defenders had every advantage then as well. That is how we won the right to have a port battle. However a flaw in the current game mechanics allows a defender to sabotage the port battle by preventing the attacking fleet from even making it there. That is what needs to be addressed. If you want big screening action then come face us once you see hostility raising in an area. Once you lost the screening action there are no backsies. 

 

And btw no port garrisons 30-40 1st rates plus supporting fleet, so that argument is moot. 

If you wish to argue this technically, then defenders shouldn't be able to put 1st rates in ports that are under attack or to teleport in or logoff inside the waters of that region. Since 1st rates generally wasn't able to sail into port and dock up, they were anchored outside and the crew shipped to shore in smaller boats. The defending 1st rate fleet could then be harassed just as much as the attacking fleet.

 

You are asking for special treatment. That we have to fight twice (or even three times) to win a region. First we have to fight to win dominance in a region's waters - which is when screening and interception should happen in order to stop an invader from gaining dominance. Then you want to be able to have another opportunity to screen, but this time with a 46 hour warning - because any sensible invader would allow you 46 hours to call in reinforcements after they beat your actual screening forces, instead of attacking as soon as they were ready.

 

 

Gibberish. They are exploiting a design flaw. State that clearly and, in the time before the flaw is fixed, threaten bans for using the exploit.

This game has suffered numerous times from exploits being passively tolerated for too long.

This is not something that is "passively tolerated". Devs have clearly stated that it is not an exploit. That does not mean however that it is a good part of the game. It is a workaround to a bad mechanic, and until the mechanic is replaced the workaround is legit (but still boring).

 

 

Naive, you are - as Yoda would say.

 

The game was broken right after the patch and we couldn't do anything to lower hostility (or offset it) then after hostility was over 60% the glitch not allowing us to do missions there was fixed (too late).

That bug saved the brits from the port battle being activated the first day.

[victor]

why not ...?    i can reasonably expect everyone to play the game as it is....the same rules for everyone

 

if you do not understand, well ... you do not understand. It's self explaining.

[Cmdr RideZ]

Naive, you are - as Yoda would say.

 

The game was broken right after the patch and we couldn't do anything to lower hostility (or offset it) then after hostility was over 60% the glitch not allowing us to do missions there was fixed (too late).

 

Never ascribe to laziness - what can be accounted for by bad game mechanics ....

Serious you are...

 

I believe this feature should be at least delayed.  Check a bit longer how things develop.

[Anolytic]

David has no more right to exploit than Goliath. The issue here is that the port battles system is not fully developed. It was meant to get rid of empty port battles, but because it is now possible to ignore screening and sabotage the port battle instead port battles will either continue to be empty, or workarounds will have to be found. Until devs have time to fix it. I hope they do, because logging off outside port is crappy for all sides.

[Wesreidau]

I HAVE A SOLUTION.

 

You are free to log out at sea, but when you log back in, you are several kilometers from where you logged out in a random direction. "Drifted with the tide" as it were. Thus, we may have a large clan log out at the gates of a port battle, however when they log in they will be scattered to the winds. Their solution is to log out somewhere to sea and log in where they'll have time and concealment to regroup into their battle order, then sail in just as if they'd left from a normal port.

 

Hey look, someone figured out the solution to all sorts of log-in shenanigans on page seven and everyone is now arguing if log-in shenanigans makes it somehow "fair" since 25 can beat 100.

 

I'd love to hear what's wrong with my proposal. I really would. Not "something would get exploited", not "you'll log in on dry land because the devs won't think to check that", a specific problem. If you hit log out, sit two minutes perfectly still, log out, and log back in randomly bounced in another direction a few kilometers... so what? You could have just sailed there in two minutes without being a completely vulnerable static target for two minutes. And since you don't know which direction you're going, you're more likely to be farther from where you want to be than closer. The only possible way to gain is to teleport back in and be a few kilometers upwind, the odds of which are about one in six. Otherwise you could have gone further faster by tacking. Or you spawn in on the wrong side of land, which itself can be prevented by just making sure no land is between your spawn and where you logged out. 

 

And what, you log out and back in before the two minutes are up, hoping to randomly pop out away from a pursuer? You log back in exactly where you were, same as currently. Its only after your ship is removed from the open world that your position is scrambled.

 

What does everyone want? A chance to screen, and a chance to attack distant ports without hours of sailing. This solution neatly allows both.

 

Our Bermuda scenario could have played out with French, Spanish, Swedish and Danish ships all logging out at specific grid coordinates over the horizon from Bermuda, logging back in at a synchronized time, assembling their battlegroups from the few kilometer scattering from the log-in effect, and then sailing a wave of screeners to sweep the British patrols into assorted small battles before the SOL line launched the port battle. 

 

But until we agree something needs to be done about PB camping, I'm going to say this.

 

If you think PB login camping is a perfectly fair thing to do, keep doing it.

 

If you think PB login camping is a dirty underhanded trick, abuse the hell out of it until its against the rules. The moment its against the rules, stop.

 

When a British 1st rate fleet pops up behind an allied Spanish, Danish, French and Swedish blockade and screen, negating two days of pleading for reinforcements among four nation's clans and snatching a cheap victory from under a hundred vigilant eyes, we'll see what's fair.

What does everyone want? A chance to screen, and a chance to attack distant ports without hours of sailing. This solution neatly allows both.

[JollyRoger1516]

Those numbers are incorrect.

quality statement mate - first you invent numbers then you proclaim anything else as wrong - might as well talk with a wall - I' d have a more sensible discussion there.

If my numbers are wrong - how did we end up killing so many ships outside if they all don't actually exist?! Again PLEASE devs release some numbers so this bullshit of inventing numbers to look like a 25 player nation ends...

 

Quite honestly the bullshit simply doesn't stop on these forums...

I personally will no longer stand against people usign any kind of 'legal exploit' and I want to see how 'David' think s about them when 'Goliath' uses them - fair game for everybody. Either nobody gets the cookie or all of us - deal with it!

Edited October 25, 2016 by JollyRoger1516

[IndianaGeoff]

I HAVE A SOLUTION.

You are free to log out at sea, but when you log back in, you are several kilometers from where you logged out in a random direction. "Drifted with the tide" as it were. Thus, we may have a large clan log out at the gates of a port battle, however when they log in they will be scattered to the winds. Their solution is to log out somewhere to sea and log in where they'll have time and concealment to regroup into their battle order, then sail in just as if they'd left from a normal port.

This solves a lot of problems. I agree. A hard log puts you out to sea, safe but not close to the action.

[Jeheil]

Being outside is the most glorious out of all of it.

 

BERMUDA 10/24/16:

 

52 players in a mixed battle of 5th through 1st rates in a battle instance outside of a port, while inside, 40 or so players were chasing each other in a shrinking circle until time ran out  It's a shame that the battle is determined by what happens inside. The battle in the bay with the real forts and fireships sounds a lot more interesting to me.

 

And say what you want about numbers and boo hoo bigger fleets, guys, but if the battle had been determined by what happened outside, the Danes would have Bermuda now.

 

The defense of Bermuda and indeed Bridgetown were won outside the PB (now given the brits rather unco defence it could have been LOST inside the PB) however screening is not only as important..with the new system it is MORE important and it should be.

 

The hostility generation is the setup and as our borders close upon each other and the strategic ports become more obvious to all, hostility generation I hope, will become a real tug-of-war with alot more PvP involved. This would be a fantastic outcome for the game. Meaningful 24hr PvP.

 

Then getting to the port I believe, when we get to truly contested borders will be where the MOST fun and co-ordination takes place. You will need scouts, screen fleetS not just one possible two, co-ordination with your allies will be vital.

 

The PB is the final step, it is of course important, but as far as fun is concerned, PB's are A LOT less fun than open water 50 ship skrimishes. 

[soljah]

nice try brits

[Kloothommel]

The PB is the final step, it is of course important, but as far as fun is concerned, PB's are A LOT less fun than open water 50 ship skrimishes. 

 

I enjoy the PB most. Balanced 25 vs 25, skill vs skill, not number heavy. A clear measure of the best 25 players facing eachother.

[Jeheil]

I have to say that Anolytic raises a very interesting point with :

 

"You guys are all conflating this new port battle system with the old one. There are no more flags. Screening and interception is now what happens during the time it takes to raise hostility to 100%. Once 100% hostility is reached, there is an artificial 46 hour waiting time for the port battle to happen, simply to make a defended port battle more likely. It is not intended to give the defender time to prevent the port battle from even happening. If they want to do that they need to prevent the invader from taking control of the regional waters by gaining 100% hostility."

 

Now this is not my perspective, however I could be wrong and I don't know the dev's intentions or of course what changes we will see with Raids, New Port Battle Mechanics etc.

 

So fundamentally I see taking a port in 3 steps

 

1) Hostility tug of war to 100% (and today we are yet to see this be hotly contested...and the balance of hostility generation needs some lovin)

2) The logistical exercise of landing a fleet (screen, timing, getting the fleet in), now to me this is a huge aspect of Naval Warfare (lots of pre-engagement history here)

3) The finishing blow, the port battle itself (which we all know will be mechanically reinvented soon).

 

Now from Anolytics perspective and he is someone I hold in high regard in both skill and opinion (so I am not critisizing it) he sees the process being more simply a 2 step process

(basically step 1 leads directly to step 3). 

 

Now depending on how the Dev's (and we as a player base) feel dictates the importance or not of the OP.

[Daniboy3000]

Why do we have Port Battles, when in the end it is all about who can dump more ships infront of a port. We might aswell then just meet there, count our numbers and declare the winner...

Screening used to enable more then 25 people to help with PBs, now with the hostility system everyone has the chance to help, he just has to look on the map. We have been raising hostility at Bermuda since Thursday till Saturday, so there had been plenty of time to react.

[Chimera]

Why do we have Port Battles, when in the end it is all about who can dump more ships infront of a port. We might aswell then just meet there, count our numbers and declare the winner...

Screening used to enable more then 25 people to help with PBs, now with the hostility system everyone has the chance to help, he just has to look on the map. We have been raising hostility at Bermuda since Thursday till Saturday, so there had been plenty of time to react.

 

this is simply not how the game works.

screening is the art of getting the right ships in the right battle. and counter screening the art to do the opposite.

a single ships can draw in 49 screeners if the screen overpersues (even though this is an extrem example)

 

but seriously. you dont need equal numbers at all to counter a screen. all you need is a good working counter screen. arriving at the PB spot 30 seconds before it opens is not how the region is won. i assume fighting will be needed way before the scheduled battle and that is a good thing.

 

while i understand anolytics argument that the preliminary fighting is done via raising and reducing hostility i disagree here. Taking away one phase of the game (1 Hostility / 2 screen & Counterscreen / 3 PB) reduced the game to two components that are totally seperated from one and another. you could go as far as saying after hostility is raised go to an arena style game where you can just enter the Battle from your capital via the "large battle" mechanic. we need the open world mechanics to expand and not to be deminished. 

I understand that some would enjoy it but I wouldnt want to go back to the sea trial arena style combat mechanics