War Supplied from 0 to 100

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Magnum said:

Very myopic of you - your Pirate alt has a very nice island that not only has ZERO free ports on it - it is just about as far out as Bermuda - AND IT IS FREAKING INVISIBLE ON THE MAP.

I don't have a pirate alt.. First off.. and secondly I didn't say that ONLY Bermuda should have a freetown adjacent to its region.. It should be every region that had a freetown.. 

 

And as fun as it is to see brits crying in droves it just makes me a bit annoyed.. The largest (by far!) playerbase crying, but really brits.. Where is the coordination? Where's the will to fight as a whole? The direction of the efforts?

 

And the PvP? I haven't had much quality PvP from the brits for a month or so.. I've fought pirates - GREAT PvP! reeaally fun, exciting and they really fight hard.. The dutch - well.. I haven't sought them out lately but the few battles I've had with them they were really good.. sank my damn rattlesnake in one.. But the brits.. It's just dissappointing really.. and then you cry about "hostility-bombs" on an island that is more than 2 hours sailing form DK/NG waters.. If u can't keep hold on your own damn island - take it as men and stop crying about it.. most of you has OP up there.. Most of you can make warsupplies.. Most of you could just do the same as the danes as soon as port hostility is available again..

 

Did I get around the part where I told you to stop crying, suck it up and take it as men?

[Magnum]

25 minutes ago, Archaos said:

So if you talk about using game mechanics, how would you feel if 25 Brits changed sides to Danish (which is within the allowed game rules) and entered the port battle in cutters and did their best to fight the British 1st rate fleet?

No exploit there is there?

seems like fun ....

[Corona Lisa]

This whole Bermuda region is just cancer for the game and should be removed completely.

Its just so far away from everything which makes it an incredible safe place for PvE.

Edited November 10, 2016 by JonSnowLetsGo

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Archaos said:

So if you talk about using game mechanics, how would you feel if 25 Brits changed sides to Danish (which is within the allowed game rules) and entered the port battle in cutters and did their best to fight the British 1st rate fleet?

No exploit there is there?

They wouldn't be allowed entry due to the priority placed on players who actually made the hostility (and earned hostility points).. But by all means do - waste your time.. Instead of making a coordinated strategy for both attack and defence.. Really - it's getting embarrasing to read through these crying comments about "dishonourable tactics", "exploits" (it's a mechanic - and it's working as intended, otherwise if it wasn't there all smaller factions would be depopulated by next month)..

[Archaos]

1 minute ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:

This whole Bermuda region is just cancer for the game and should be removed completely.

Bermuda may have its own issues, but that is not the current issue. The issue is that hostility can be instantly raised from 0 to 100% in basically zero time giving no chance for defenders to react. If it can be done in Bermuda then it can be done in any region.

[Corona Lisa]

1 minute ago, Archaos said:

Bermuda may have its own issues, but that is not the current issue. The issue is that hostility can be instantly raised from 0 to 100% in basically zero time giving no chance for defenders to react. If it can be done in Bermuda then it can be done in any region.

The Devs are already looking into it and this is an alpha btw.

 

What else do you want to hear?

Edited November 10, 2016 by JonSnowLetsGo

[Hethwill]

Just now, Archaos said:

If it can be done in Bermuda then it can be done in any region.

That seems a correct assessment of the situation.

As a test phase wouldn't we expect more nations other than the Danes to do it before it can be flagged as a major issue ?

[Archaos]

5 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

They wouldn't be allowed entry due to the priority placed on players who actually made the hostility (and earned hostility points).. But by all means do - waste your time.. Instead of making a coordinated strategy for both attack and defence.. Really - it's getting embarrasing to read through these crying comments about "dishonourable tactics", "exploits" (it's a mechanic - and it's working as intended, otherwise if it wasn't there all smaller factions would be depopulated by next month)..

And how many Danish players raised hostility apart from using War Supplies? I guess if every one of the captains of the Indiamen used their own then they would have some (not sure if using war supplies gives individual earned hostility points) Otherwise no others will have hostility points as they have not been in the area doing any missions.

And if you read my post you would see that I was not suggesting doing this, but pointing out how a flaw in the game mechanics could be used and people would be right to complain about it.

I keep hearing about these smaller nations but I have not seen any figures to prove them. Are you talking about numbers of active PvP'ers or players experienced in port battles or just players in general?

We are testing an Alpha game and it is right for people to point out poor game mechanics that could have an impact on the success of the final game, so using the excuse that its a game mechanic and working as intended is a bit moot.

[snowy2]

The argument for using war supplies seems to be that all hostility generation is PVE generated anyway, so may as well use a hostility bomb.

I strongly disagree; the PVE missions are generating at least some PVP. There have been several 25 v 25 fights around the windward islands. Hostility bombs generate none whatsoever.

The strength of this game lies in the combat.  Hostility bombs move the game further towards trading and crafting, the weakest aspect of the game in my opinion.  Also, saying Nation X would/wouldn't have done this or that Nation Y is crying about it is not helpful; we should be concentrating on whether this mechanic is good for the long term health of the game.

[Archaos]

15 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

That seems a correct assessment of the situation.

As a test phase wouldn't we expect more nations other than the Danes to do it before it can be flagged as a major issue ?

Why does it need to be done multiple times before it can be flagged as a major issue? There are many other issues in the game that once they are pointed out are patched straight away or people are warned not to do it. For example the warning about using alts to generate hostility, that did not need many people doing it for the Devs to point out that it was wrong.

[Anolytic]

4 minutes ago, snowy2 said:

Hostility bombs generate none whatsoever.

Hostility bombs generate Port Battles, the best PvP this game has to offer, events that players from all nations watch streams and recordings from. Epic fights, guaranteed 25v25 (barring bugs). And everyone knows exactly when they are going to happen and has the time to prepare.

There are far too few port battles at the moment.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Archaos said:

And how many Danish players raised hostility apart from using War Supplies? I guess if every one of the captains of the Indiamen used their own then they would have some (not sure if using war supplies gives individual earned hostility points) Otherwise no others will have hostility points as they have not been in the area doing any missions.

And if you read my post you would see that I was not suggesting doing this, but pointing out how a flaw in the game mechanics could be used and people would be right to complain about it.

I keep hearing about these smaller nations but I have not seen any figures to prove them. Are you talking about numbers of active PvP'ers or players experienced in port battles or just players in general?

We are testing an Alpha game and it is right for people to point out poor game mechanics that could have an impact on the success of the final game, so using the excuse that its a game mechanic and working as intended is a bit moot.

If u cared to read my first comment you would realise that I did concede that the hostility bombs should be limited.. I did also say that Bermuda (as every other region) should have a freetown added to it.. And using the game mechanics are kinda the reason why we play these EA games - if u find it problematic... buy your games when they are finished..

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Anolytic said:

Hostility bombs generate Port Battles, the best PvP this game has to offer, events that players from all nations watch streams and recordings from. Epic fights, guaranteed 25v25 (barring bugs). And everyone knows exactly when they are going to happen and has the time to prepare.

There are far too few port battles at the moment.

I disagree that PBs should be the best PvP the game has to offer.. But I agree there's far too few of them atm.. I hope the raiding mechanic will solve that issue..

[Jeheil]

So last week I got all salty with the various things I wasn't liking. However I have take stock and this is my current thinking.

• I don't believe it is good game design to allow a hostility bomb
• I have suggested a time lock, so X% of hostility can be generated by war supplies per Y hours (as per my OP and something like 25% per 4 hours or some such)
• I have no problem with Bermuda...it is (or should be) 'the hardest port to take' and would (should) require a REAL effort to take it.
• Last week I was REALLY SALTY with lots of BS....however....let us remember
  • IT IS TEST. So suggest improvements
  • Yes 'technically' you could mount an argument for exploit....but I would rather have it NOW in test...hated...loathed and changed by the Dev's than make it into final build.
  • So LETS GET ANGRY AT THE MECHANIC and NOT THE DANES (Same with Sweden taking a port from a nation they are not at war with...I have another post on that).
  • Lets get the Devs to fix the mechanic...not ban players...I dont like port logging...but its in development...and they shouldnt ban players for using code in the game....personally I dont like it...but we are testing...so lets be less precious about losing a battle

I am refocussing on HAVING FUN....and so what if the Danes used what is probably not 'end-game-mechanic' to create a port battle...lets fight the battle, win or lose have fun...and lets us spend our energy on suggesting better mechanics for Port Hostility (already a good post on that out there) and hostility.

So I won't (other than in jest) be pointing my fingers at other players 'exploiting' / 'testing' / 'using current mechanics' any more...instead...as I did with this POST (read the op) I will be advocating for BETTER game mechanics....and at the end of the day, if they leave the game full of mechanics I don't like...I can always play something else.

 

[Kloothommel]

On 10-11-2016 at 1:51 AM, Jeheil said:

I am refocussing on HAVING FUN....and so what if the Danes used what is probably not 'end-game-mechanic' to create a port battle...lets fight the battle, win or lose have fun...and lets us spend our energy on suggesting better mechanics for Port Hostility (already a good post on that out there) and hostility.

So I won't (other than in jest) be pointing my fingers at other players 'exploiting' / 'testing' / 'using current mechanics' any more...instead...as I did with this POST (read the op) I will be advocating for BETTER game mechanics....and at the end of the day, if they leave the game full of mechanics I don't like...I can always play something else.

 

Hear, hear!

 

Edited March 11, 2017 by Kloothommel

[snowy2]

1 minute ago, Anolytic said:

Hostility bombs generate Port Battles, the best PvP this game has to offer, events that players from all nations watch streams and recordings from. Epic fights, guaranteed 25v25 (barring bugs). And everyone knows exactly when they are going to happen and has the time to prepare.

There are far too few port battles at the moment.

I fully agree,  port battles are my favorite part of the game.  However, I personally think we should aim for open world PvP as the major driving factor in hostility generation.

[Archaos]

13 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

Hostility bombs generate Port Battles, the best PvP this game has to offer, events that players from all nations watch streams and recordings from. Epic fights, guaranteed 25v25 (barring bugs). And everyone knows exactly when they are going to happen and has the time to prepare.

There are far too few port battles at the moment.

Problem with this coupled with the logging out at port entrance leads to a situation where you may as well schedule all ports for a port battle in rotation and do away with screen fleets but set up a lobby where people can enter the port battle. Hey you know what I may as well go and play world of warships!!

I do agree that there are too few port battles and something needs to be done to increase the number of battles, but hostility bombs is not the answer.

edit: The current system is going to generate a small elite of port battle players that turn up at every port battle and neither side will be able to afford to field inexperienced players.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Archaos

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Jeheil said:

So last week I got all salty with the various things I wasn't liking. However I have take stock and this is my current thinking.

• I don't believe it is good game design to allow a hostility bomb
• I have suggested a time lock, so X% of hostility can be generated by war supplies per Y hours (as per my OP and something like 25% per 4 hours or some such)
• I have no problem with Bermuda...it is (or should be) 'the hardest port to take' and would (should) require a REAL effort to take it.
• Last week I was REALLY SALTY with lots of BS....however....let us remember
  • IT IS TEST. So suggest improvements
  • Yes 'technically' you could mount an argument for exploit....but I would rather have it NOW in test...hated...loathed and changed by the Dev's than make it into final build.
  • So LETS GET ANGRY AT THE MECHANIC and NOT THE DANES (Same with Sweden taking a port from a nation they are not at war with...I have another post on that).
  • Lets get the Devs to fix the mechanic...not ban players...I dont like port logging...but its in development...and they shouldnt ban players for using code in the game....personally I dont like it...but we are testing...so lets be less precious about losing a battle

I am refocussing on HAVING FUN....and so what if the Danes used what is probably not 'end-game-mechanic' to create a port battle...lets fight the battle, win or lose have fun...and lets us spend our energy on suggesting better mechanics for Port Hostility (already a good post on that out there) and hostility.

So I won't (other than in jest) be pointing my fingers at other players 'exploiting' / 'testing' / 'using current mechanics' any more...instead...as I did with this POST (read the op) I will be advocating for BETTER game mechanics....and at the end of the day, if they leave the game full of mechanics I don't like...I can always play something else.

 

Why should Bermuda be more difficult to take than any other region?

[Augustus Charles Hobart H]

i have been advocating a cap for as long as a knew it was possible to war supply bomb a port.  It brings us back to conquest flags and allows time control that will result in some players getting cranky if its done in "non euro friendly times" and it WILL be.  if done in a county with low activity or in an off time it cant be countered as by the time you know its happening its too late to stop it.

The problem is the hostility system as is not generating PvP.  In my time in the windward's i have spent 5 or 6 times the amount of time in PvE or looking for PvP as in PvP.  When we get word that french are active in the area we sail out and look for them, the result is always the same, they spot us and log off in results screen or they run if they can get away.  Good policy as it protects them from losing points but not fun at all.  Eventually we get bored and go grind PvE rather then waiting for fleets that are logged off anyway.  In the end we drive the counter down but at the cost of another night of boredom and frustration, and that's whats killing the game for me.  It's not cheating or exploiting its that right now the system is not fun.  

[Archaos]

4 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

Why should Bermuda be more difficult to take than any other region?

It should be more difficult due to its remoteness.

I believe the Devs also indicated that once land was in port battles there were going to be other ports that would be difficult to capture because of their geography. I for one like this idea of different port battle scenarios rather than the stock battlefield we have at the moment. 

Okay, I play on the British side and we currently have Bermuda so I may be a bit biased, but I think I would still be the same even if Bermuda did not start out as British.

[Augustus Charles Hobart H]

14 minutes ago, Archaos said:

Problem with this coupled with the logging out at port entrance leads to a situation where you may as well schedule all ports for a port battle in rotation and do away with screen fleets but set up a lobby where people can enter the port battle. Hey you know what I may as well go and play world of warships!!

I do agree that there are too few port battles and something needs to be done to increase the number of battles, but hostility bombs is not the answer.

edit: The current system is going to generate a small elite of port battle players that turn up at every port battle and neither side will be able to afford to field inexperienced players.

The problem is not that you might as well go play world of warships, the problem is that's content for only 50 people max, and its always the same 50, no Danes in Bermuda means no players there fighting them, and thus no one around to spot the war supply coming in.  They will have the same problem holding it.  No screening fleets means no content for the people who cant join the port battle.  Hesitantly Bermuda should just be pulled from the map its not doing anything but dividing the community, Same with live oak only being available in 2 ports, as it stands a non live oak fleet cant contend with a live oak on in a PB, Alts aside, and to be fair most of the live oak farms are probably on alts.  It can still lead to a downward spiral for a nation if they cant get enough materials to make a 1st rate fleet.

[Anolytic]

Before people say making a hostility bomb is too easy they should try making one themselves. It seems easy when you make the calculations on paper. So far only Danes have been determined enough to generate port battles we have taken the challenge to create the so-called "hostility bombs". Everyone else keeps telling us it's easy, but why are nobody doing it then?

[Archaos]

2 minutes ago, Augustus Charles Hobart H said:

The problem is not that you might as well go play world of warships, the problem is that's content for only 50 people max, and its always the same 50, no Danes in Bermuda means no players there fighting them, and thus no one around to spot the war supply coming in.  They will have the same problem holding it.  No screening fleets means no content for the people who cant join the port battle.  Hesitantly Bermuda should just be pulled from the map its not doing anything but dividing the community, Same with live oak only being available in 2 ports, as it stands a non live oak fleet cant contend with a live oak on in a PB, Alts aside, and to be fair most of the live oak farms are probably on alts.  It can still lead to a downward spiral for a nation if they cant get enough materials to make a 1st rate fleet.

Bermuda is not the problem, the only reason that it is an issue is that it is the only supply of Bermuda Cedar, which is the same thing you allude to with regard to live oak. The same tactic was used to generate hostility in Georgia because of the live oak supply.

There are many comments about how this tactic is used to create port battles because they enjoy that aspect of the game, but isint it strange that the first target was the live oak and the next the Bermuda Cedar regions. Seems a lot of effort and a long way to sail just to get a port battle!!

They also claim to want even port battles 25 v 25, yet they want to restrict one side from their supply of materials to make port battle ships!! That does not seem like they want a fair fight.

I totally agree that the current game with content for only the 50 people in the port battles and you will find more and more the same faces in these battles to the exclusion of others. Currently I would say that the Danes with their allies have the more experienced port battle players which already gives them an advantage, and good for them to have the better tactics to be able to win these battles but to just go direct for port battles without other PvP is the wrong way to go.

[Archaos]

4 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

Before people say making a hostility bomb is too easy they should try making one themselves. It seems easy when you make the calculations on paper. So far only Danes have been determined enough to generate port battles we have taken the challenge to create the so-called "hostility bombs". Everyone else keeps telling us it's easy, but why are nobody doing it then?

Others have made them ready to counter hostility raising (not sure if that can actually be done) but with the insta bomb there is no counter, hence why I personally thing it is a broken mechanic.

[Augustus Charles Hobart H]

Just now, Archaos said:

Bermuda is not the problem, the only reason that it is an issue is that it is the only supply of Bermuda Cedar, which is the same thing you allude to with regard to live oak. The same tactic was used to generate hostility in Georgia because of the live oak supply.

There are many comments about how this tactic is used to create port battles because they enjoy that aspect of the game, but isint it strange that the first target was the live oak and the next the Bermuda Cedar regions. Seems a lot of effort and a long way to sail just to get a port battle!!

They also claim to want even port battles 25 v 25, yet they want to restrict one side from their supply of materials to make port battle ships!! That does not seem like they want a fair fight.

I totally agree that the current game with content for only the 50 people in the port battles and you will find more and more the same faces in these battles to the exclusion of others. Currently I would say that the Danes with their allies have the more experienced port battle players which already gives them an advantage, and good for them to have the better tactics to be able to win these battles but to just go direct for port battles without other PvP is the wrong way to go.

its not about being fair, its about winning, i would do the same to them.  They targeted areas that make it hard for there enemies to fight back and put the economic strain on us.  Better to argue that they attacked the weakest nation in the game right now (USA) wail being some of the strongest proponents of national balancing then to act like its some kind of conspiracy XD