Please Stop PB Log camping before it starts

[Kloothommel]

YOu are ignoring simple facts here. The Spanish, Danish, Swedish and French alliance has about the same amount of players as US, Dutch and Britain - your failure to pool those resources shoudn't be our problem - it is yours and it is yours to deal with!!! Throwing the Zerging aword around is very easy but never not even once have you actually been able to back that up!

In addition while I could udnerstand arguing that 25 vs. 25 would guarentee balance you simply fail to deliver ANY solution as to what the rest of the playerbase is supposed to do instead of boring their tits off!!!

Well, right now most are boring their tits off.

 

No PB chances = even more empty server.

[JollyRoger1516]

Well, right now most are boring their tits off.

 

No PB chances = even more empty server.

2 port battle chances every day for your nation alone + additional defenses + screening battles - those 2 battles per nation where done for people with complaints like yours! But it doesn't seem to be enough ever for you. No nation cancurrently zerg the other cause even if you push the hostility in a matter of 1-2 horus (that was you who successfully did that btw) it will all come to a crashing halt due to the port battles being limited. Now the main reason your antion is bored when doing 25vs 25 is because you ahve nothing that can be attacked. Once you get 5 regions you will wish to have less port battles as defenses and attacks are easily adding up! And that still doesn't change anything about the fact that you only provide fun for 25 people per nation and nobody else!

[Kloothommel]

2 port battle chances every day for your nation alone + additional defenses + screening battles - those 2 battles per nation where done for people with complaints like yours! But it doesn't seem to be enough ever for you. No nation cancurrently zerg the other cause even if you push the hostility in a matter of 1-2 horus (that was you who successfully did that btw) it will all come to a crashing halt due to the port battles being limited. Now the main reason your antion is bored when doing 25vs 25 is because you ahve nothing that can be attacked. Once you get 5 regions you will wish to have less port battles as defenses and attacks are easily adding up! And that still doesn't change anything about the fact that you only provide fun for 25 people per nation and nobody else!

 

User counts on the long term will show who is right.

[ajffighter86]

I guess we see 2 camps emerging. 

 

1: Open world all the way, ganking and zerging all the way.

2: instanced PB where your participation in aggrolevels decide your entrance, not howmany players you have in a nation.

 

Gues swhat is balanced and fair to nations that aren't the Brittish zerg. And guess who will proably speak against it, unless they see the bigger picture.

 

2) If that's what we're going to have, then hostility gain needs to be nerfed hard. Otherwise we're going to be kicking off port battles so fast that there will never be any time to get equal numbers in the fight. Which means the nations will just go around the map in circles trying to spark port battles where the enemy isn't, which eventually just leads to empty port battles.

 

I got 50 hostility points for attacking and boarding an AI trader snow. 50. That's nuts! I was expecting to get maybe 1 or 2 points, and to be honest I really wasn't trying to get any credit for hostility at all, I just needed a trader snow to haul goods at the time.

 

People are going to be accidentally sparking off port battles when all they want to do is raid ships.

[Salty Dog.]

So, apart from Bermuda, has there actually been any 25v25 PBs yet? It's been almost a week after all.

 

USA V Spain was a 25 v 25 first rate PB

[Kloothommel]

2) If that's what we're going to have, then hostility gain needs to be nerfed hard. Otherwise we're going to be kicking off port battles so fast that there will never be any time to get equal numbers in the fight. Which means the nations will just go around the map in circles trying to spark port battles where the enemy isn't, which eventually just leads to empty port battles.

 

I got 50 hostility points for attacking and boarding an AI trader snow. 50. That's nuts! I was expecting to get maybe 1 or 2 points, and to be honest I really wasn't trying to get any credit for hostility at all, I just needed a trader snow to haul goods at the time.

 

People are going to be accidentally sparking off port battles when all they want to do is raid ships.

It doesn't go that fast, trust me. And to migitate the aggro, controlling nation and its allies gains "peace" points just as fast.

And the total amont of points needed for 100% is far north of 50.000. (I had 2250 at bermuda, and I wasn't even that active.)

Just to put those 50 points into perspective.

[ajffighter86]

It doesn't go that fast, trust me. And to migitate the aggro, controlling nation and its allies gains "peace" points just as fast.

And the total amont of points needed for 100% is far north of 50.000. (I had 2250 at bermuda, and I wasn't even that active.)

Just to put those 50 points into perspective.

 

Oh I'd be willing to test that. How fast do you suppose the Danes could respond to the current hostility gain rate if the Dutch and British decided to coordinate a round of Rear Admiral fleet missions in the Virgin Islands? You know it's just a matter of time before that happens.

 

The port battle would be sparked before the danes could even get back to St. Mary's, teleport to capital, and grab their other ships.

 

Basically that's what happened in Bermuda, he who strikes first triggers the port battle, and then you've got a problem because the period of 'raising hostility' prior to the actual port battle itself will be over and decided in a matter of a few hours during a workday. And let's be honest, no one, regardless of what nation they fight for, is really "proving" themselves worthy of the port battle by getting a group together and beating up robots as quickly as possible until hostility reaches 100%.  Meaning we're back to square one of the drawing board, because you have to fall back on your screening fleets on the day of the port battle, to stop the port battle from happening. Or, we just end up with port battles being scheduled so quickly that there's no point in trying to PVP during the hostility phase.

 

The system needs a complete overhaul.

Edited October 26, 2016 by ajffighter86

[Anolytic]

Basically that's what happened in Bermuda

That's definitely not what happened in Bermuda. Danes spent 3 days to raise hostility, most sailing up every day. There were at least 20 brits and allies up there doing missions, jumping missions or porthugging at the time that hostility reached 100%. We just had more players there, even though we had to sail all the way and couldn't teleport. And also we didn't have any ports to hide in while waiting for someone to report a mission to jump. 

[Jeheil]

 

 

Anolytic wants numbers 1 and 3

You guys want numbers 2 and 3

 

1 and 3 = New system

2 and 3 = Old system

 

Also 1 ~= 2

 

 

 

 

I actually want 1, 2 and 3 and look forward to a sexier 3.

[Jeheil]

It doesn't go that fast, trust me. And to migitate the aggro, controlling nation and its allies gains "peace" points just as fast.

And the total amont of points needed for 100% is far north of 50.000. (I had 2250 at bermuda, and I wasn't even that active.)

Just to put those 50 points into perspective.

 

Thats wrong according to the patch notes the following is used

 

10,000 points to flip a port.

 

200 for kill, 100 for assist, x2 for SOL.s x0.05 for AI.

 

France flipped Bridgetown in 2-3 hours yersteday despite having one of their 1st rate fleets obliterated in an OW battle. They also chose not to take missions (to prevent others joining and instead attacked AI fleets so the battle 'insta-closed'. (no complaints here).

 

At the moment hostilty is easier than it was on day one.

 

Initial Patch it was too easy, Next Patch it was impossibly hard (600 first rate fleet battles would tip it in 24 hours), Patch Three actually easier than Patch One (I have posted the maths elsewhere).

 

They are tweaking...and unless it snuck in last nights patch...its 2-2 hours work for 2 1st rate fleets to flip a county.

[Chimera]

That's definitely not what happened in Bermuda. Danes spent 3 days to raise hostility, most sailing up every day. There were at least 20 brits and allies up there doing missions, jumping missions or porthugging at the time that hostility reached 100%. We just had more players there, even though we had to sail all the way and couldn't teleport. And also we didn't have any ports to hide in while waiting for someone to report a mission to jump.

You raised 60% in the 2,5 hours we were busy with Spain. (And that was after the speed nerf)

We could probably schedule a PB next to your capital region at 4am in the morning if we really wanted in the matter of one short night shift.

And I don't think this is how it should work.

Edited October 27, 2016 by Chimera

[Guest]

Yes. GB vs. Spain 4th rate battle

 

USA V Spain was a 25 v 25 first rate PB

 

What was the end result of the GB vs Spain PB? I'm assuming that the Spaniards were on the defense. 

 

Already saw how the US one ended. 

Edited October 27, 2016 by Guest

[Grundgemunkey]

all  I can see happening is ..that once hostility is raised ..everyone will want to use the log on straight pb ...why would you not want to do this for every port battle .  so to counter it defenders will be patrolling around ports picking off first rates to stop them logging off at the PB entrance .... so this will mean you will have to sail into port at a time when the defender doesnt expect you ..  which will be either silly o clock in the middle of the night  or more than 24 hours before pb schedule ...

 

leads to several problems   possibility of being unable to play the game for 24 hours before a port battle ...if there are say 4 port battles in a day that's 100 players not playing

 

what happens if  the attacking force only manages to get say 15 ships in position and decide they dont have enough to risk attacking the port ...if they call off the attack they have to extract their ships ...may have to wait another 24 hours to do this safely ...so you could end up having over 100 players our of the game for 48 hours

 

maybe this is how the devs want to raise cash ...

 

I cant play because im logged off in my first rate outside port x for the next 36 hours ....i know i will buy an alt ....then it will be ship 1 logged off outside port x for another 24 hrs ... but my alt is logged off outside port y for another pb 12 hours after that ...i know i will buy a 3rd account  and on and on in the end another pay to win game

 

ps

 

since the patch Ive been in two port battles both were undefended    

Edited October 27, 2016 by Grundgemunkey

[Chimera]

What was the end result of the GB vs Spain PB? I'm assuming that the Spaniards were on the defense. 

 

Already saw how the US one ended. 

Brits took the port sinking 10 4th rates and 1 Trinc loosing no ships.

[JollyRoger1516]

That's definitely not what happened in Bermuda. Danes spent 3 days to raise hostility, most sailing up every day. There were at least 20 brits and allies up there doing missions, jumping missions or porthugging at the time that hostility reached 100%. We just had more players there, even though we had to sail all the way and couldn't teleport. And also we didn't have any ports to hide in while waiting for someone to report a mission to jump. 

Yes it took you 3 days - BUT we reset the numbers every day so in the end it only took you half a day for 40% and then suddenly 60% in 2-3 hours. Now I'm not complaining about your activity but this gives absolutely no nation with mroe then 3 regions a chance of defense! (this would mean nobody can go to sleep anymore and you of all people should be most worried about it as we could just send the Australians to hit you during your sleep times. We can't ask people to forgo their sleep. I seriously think that a threat level should eb raised over the coruse of min 3 days and with a back and forth take a whole week or fail. It could even be couppled with if the threat level gets brought back to 0% from 50% (adjsut to reasonable numbers) the region is locked for a week to stop people being tied up in a single region all the time and finally no change occuring(I am actually not too sure about this myself as we already ahve to move around way too much).

[Magnum]

My god Danes/Rats - the Dev's have already given you a friggin SECRET island, only ONE area to defend and a 5 nation coalition against a 3 nation one and STILL - you complain about being "David" and how the British "Zerg" you.

 

Talk about "playing the REF"

 

Grow some - and realize "not all ports will be laid at your feet".

[Anolytic]

My god Danes/Rats - the Dev's have already given you a friggin SECRET island, only ONE area to defend and a 5 nation coalition against a 3 nation one and STILL - you complain about being "David" and how the British "Zerg" you.

 

Talk about "playing the REF"

 

Grow some - and realize "not all ports will be laid at your feet".

You did not capture Bermuda. There is no reason why a region should be uncaptureable (except capital region). If you loose Bermuda, capture it back. I have advocated certain regions, like Bermuda, being easier to flip, because of the rare resource and the effort just to get there. If you want it then protect it. And I don't give a rat's arse about Bermuda Cedar, but I am pretty proud that we managed to get enough courageous players to cooperate about raising hostility in Bermuda, and we would have captured the port if we were 25v25. Most importantly we highlighted some flaws in the game mechanics.

And I don't raise the issue about British zerg very often. Sometimes it is a valid point for mechanics balancing, most times it is not. In this case it has nothing to do with anything.

 

 

Yes it took you 3 days - BUT we reset the numbers every day so in the end it only took you half a day for 40% and then suddenly 60% in 2-3 hours. Now I'm not complaining about your activity but this gives absolutely no nation with mroe then 3 regions a chance of defense! (this would mean nobody can go to sleep anymore and you of all people should be most worried about it as we could just send the Australians to hit you during your sleep times. We can't ask people to forgo their sleep. I seriously think that a threat level should eb raised over the coruse of min 3 days and with a back and forth take a whole week or fail. It could even be couppled with if the threat level gets brought back to 0% from 50% (adjsut to reasonable numbers) the region is locked for a week to stop people being tied up in a single region all the time and finally no change occuring(I am actually not too sure about this myself as we already ahve to move around way too much).

You did not reset the numbers every day. After the first day they did not go all the way down again. But you still had many hours warning that we were coming. If you're not there actively, how do you expect to defend it? 

And there is no reason why anyone should hold any region by default. If they are easy to flip, then let's flip them back and forth and have lots of good port battles and hostility raising PvP in between. 

Regions that you do not care enough about to have an active presence in should be easy to attack. If you always react after the fact then you have missed the point. People have talked about regions deteriorating if not maintained and actively used by their possessor before, let's bring that discussion back.

 

And you keep talking about the Australians like they're some not-so-secret weapon you have that could break the game for us. If that is true, then please bring them out now while we're in Alpha. Break the game NOW, so that the devs have time to address it. Danes are testing the limits of the game, you're just making threats. 

[Batman]

So, how to fix the australians?

[Kloothommel]

Aussie server?

[Chimera]

On day one it was hardly possible to reduce hostility because you couldn't take missions and all you could was wait around for enemy ships to come to the region.

I wouldn't mind a free port in 30 minute sailing distance to the region cause right now it is indeed very tideous to sail there to raise hostility. A lobby system is just the wrong way to fix it.

I like ideas better were the joining area gets larger or something making screening more difficult rather then just get rid of it. I think skilgan proposed something like this.

[Anolytic]

On day one it was hardly possible to reduce hostility because you couldn't take missions and all you could was wait around for enemy ships to come to the region.

On day one there was also no AI fleets coming to Bermuda before 2 am when everyone had logged off. So the problem affected us a lot since Brits got 2 days warning to know that we were up there and come up to defend and even when you had had plenty of time to start defending and were there in numbers we managed to get the region to 100% hostility.

I wouldn't mind a free port in 30 minute sailing distance to the region cause right now it is indeed very tideous to sail there to raise hostility. A lobby system is just the wrong way to fix it.

I like ideas better were the joining area gets larger or something making screening more difficult rather then just get rid of it. I think skilgan proposed something like this.

I do think it would take away from the game if there was a freeport right there. However I tend to agree that a much larger join area that would also be drawn far away from the port entrance (about half a square on the coordinates grid maybe, and in a straight line out from the pier/dock of the harbour) is a better solution than a lobby. Make it also possible to enter the port battle 1 or 2 hours before the battle starts and it would basically make PB entry from login moot and I think it would fix current conquest. It would avoid the gameyness of everybody teleporting into the PB and allow screening of the actual port battle to still be possible without effectively sabotaging every port battle with no effort.

[Chijohnaok]

In reference to the Danish hostility generation and conquest of Georgia it was said in another thread that "as far as i know the hostility generation itself took at least a week and took a lot of effort for both sides.".

To the best of my understanding, the Danes and other nations did run hostility up for many days, but every day the United States and its allies ran anti-hostility misssions to counter it, bring the hostility down to zero % by end of day(server maintenance). Then one day the hostility was at 4%, and then suddenly within a short period (30 minutes or so I am told) it went from 4% to 100%. This was quite likely done with a massive "WAR supplies bomb". The US & it's allies quickly attempted to counter this and run hostility down (War Combat missions, dropping war supplies, but nothing had any impact.

The dropping of a massive War Supplies bomb like that was within the allowed game mechanic, I get that. But to seemingly drive the hostility level from 4% to 100% in such a short time would seem to be stretching the intended (at least in my opinion) purpose of War Supplies. Perhaps the solution would be limit the maximum contribution towards hostility of War Supplies in a given period (maybe 30% for a given 24 hour (real life) period). That way, War Supplies, in combination with PVP combat & War Orders missions could contribute towards reaching a 100% hostility level, but not be able to do it in such a manner as was seen in Georgia.

[Kloothommel]

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

[Hethwill]

While the PvP / Missions are somewhat visible the War Supplies ruse is under the veil, somewhat like arms being smuggled into the territory. Kind of reminds the French influx of arms and cash to the 13 colonies in one big go.

[GT1]

I think this is being abused by players/nations too much. Logging off right outside an enery port and then logging in when one of their spies tells them there's a target. The map shows regional areas please stop the logging off in these areas. This will also stop a nation logging off before a port battle and the logging on stopping the defending nation from attending the port battle and the screeners from protecting the port battle.

There maybe finer issues to this machanic but believe this will be better. I'm sure any enemy in history excepted going to an energy port meant you meant hostile intentions and knew it was either fight or run not log off and become essentially immune to attack.

On lighter note. Good work on the updates. Like the delivery missions and making gold ships rarer due to hard to aquire materials.