PvP Event Feedback

[Sir Texas Sir]

23 minutes ago, Otto Kohl said:

LOL whos the third TOP nation ?

On PvP2 it's basically US, Brits, Pirates, and than Dutch pop wise.   Swede prob next and the poor french and Spain are the little unicorns.  But yah now US, Brits, and Dutch have a care-bear alliance.  Apparently our little clan has scared them. I mean we did send Brits down to one port with only 15-20 players.  This is why they are bitching about not being able to fight cause they have an alliance with each other so they can't fight no one but the Pirates.

[Sir Texas Sir]

On 12/21/2016 at 5:19 AM, Otto Kohl said:

Ah you play on PvP2.

Yah it's been pretty funny last night we matched them in a fair fight and beat them.  Than we telport back to home so they couldn't fight us any more.  They all ready had twice our numbers int eh PvP shallow events area and had more coming.  Why would we stay and keep fighting them until we sanked?   As soon as our clan guys left they jumped a solo player just to get points that was in the group.  I think we had some coms problem (that player refuses to us TS) as to why he didn't leave.  Them ganking him just shows why we don't fight fair.  They won't and well they want to fight in the PvP event than they should stop there stupid care bear alliance of the top three nations (not counting pirates) server pop.  If they want to do multi alliance take in some of the smaller nations to give them other ports to use and help them grow.  Pirates would  love to do this for the smaller nations, but we can't have alliances.  You don't have to go to war with each  other to do that, and than you can still fight each other.  They just want to have the alliance cause they can't beat us in port battles with our iron fleets even if they out number us so they have to bring more players and screen out side to keep us out.   Maybe if they stop bring junk ships to fights they would win too.   That goes for PvP events as i know many of them bring junk ships or junk mods on there ships cause they don't want to loose them.

 

Back on topic though any one know what the new event timers are?  Did they change any of the old ones with adding the 4th one?

[OneEyedSnake]

1 minute ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Maybe if they stop bring junk ships to fights they would win too.  

Come out and fight us dutch in the deep water, we fight fair, we use lineships, and i better not get an "oh we dont want to use our lineship" crap again. hahaha 

[Sir Texas Sir]

Oh look we have a PvP event for the next three hours but we can't do any port battles during this time on PvP2 and our prime time.  This is stupid.

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

 Just throwing an idea here: what would you think if escaping a battle while in event gives a small point malus. That way you denie a kill for the opponent but your reputation/ranking takes a small hit.

I've noticed more than often, players escape if they see they are not absolutly sure to win, not fighting seems to be the rule on pvp events, could forcing your opponent to escape be considered as a minor loss for him ?

(If you think that would help the gank side even more, maybe make it linked to a notion of balanced br ? Punishing those who deny a fight on equal term)

Edited December 26, 2016 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Liq]

was fun..

[Grundal]

I think you are lying.

[Tac]

1 hour ago, Liquicity said:

was fun..

Good odds sir,did you sink them all in a good time? 

[Yar Matey]

Ok, after trying the PvP event for the last time tonight, I have come to the conclusion that it is just dumb.  There is no real objective and you just sail around until you find a group, if the enemy group is bigger than yours, you get chased and maybe lose a ship.  If the enemy group is smaller than yours, you chase them and maybe sink a ship.  If you go out in big slow ships waiting for a good fight, the enemy brings overwhelming force and sinks you and your friend with ease.  0/10.  PvP event sucks.

 PvP events need objectives to complete kind of like port battles.  IDK devs, use your imagination and come up with some interesting objectives for the PvP events.  I find better PvP sailing around enemy capitals than this dumb event.  

How about an escort mission, one nation and its allies escort trade ships to a port, and the enemy nation tries to sink the trade ships before they get there.  That would be way more engaging than what you have now. Just throwing an idea out there may actually be fun, right now, this event is so dumb.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Yar Matey

[Blackjack Morgan]

On 12/7/2016 at 10:45 AM, admin said:

we all know that our EPIC world we created is too big for 100 people . Time to focus on fun!

 

Did the developing team change over the past 12 months or so? Because after reading through all your comments in this section you sound like you have done a complete 180 regarding ganking. Remember when you championed the 1.5 BR mechanic to discourage massive gank fleets? Now you are making it sound like hey it's all good you just need to bring more guys then the other people. I don't know maybe the whole gank or be ganked mentality is the predominant one. Sad thing is you have a damn fine Age of Sail combat game steadily reducing itself into a damn gankfest. You say in the quote your world is too big for the current low population and so trying to encourage pvp by bringing people into these concentrated zones....that's great but then it's just a fricking gankfest half the time. Look, I don't need a perfect 1v1 or even BR odds but 5:1 odds or more is NOT FUN. I'm just tired of 90% of the fights in this game not even really being fights, there not, they are shit. If you really can't think of any way to offer incentives for those outnumbered to fight or ways to discourage massive ganks I suggest trying to read some feedback from testers who have been offering ideas since you created the OW. 

[Twig]

The PVP-event is everytime at the same location - or nearly around it. Please change the location from time to time. Right now its insane!

[Sir Max Magic]

On 6.1.2017 at 5:34 AM, Yar Matey said:

Ok, after trying the PvP event for the last time tonight, I have come to the conclusion that it is just dumb.  There is no real objective and you just sail around until you find a group, if the enemy group is bigger than yours, you get chased and maybe lose a ship.  If the enemy group is smaller than yours, you chase them and maybe sink a ship.  If you go out in big slow ships waiting for a good fight, the enemy brings overwhelming force and sinks you and your friend with ease.  0/10.  PvP event sucks.

 PvP events need objectives to complete kind of like port battles.  IDK devs, use your imagination and come up with some interesting objectives for the PvP events.  I find better PvP sailing around enemy capitals than this dumb event.  

How about an escort mission, one nation and its allies escort trade ships to a port, and the enemy nation tries to sink the trade ships before they get there.  That would be way more engaging than what you have now. Just throwing an idea out there may actually be fun, right now, this event is so dumb.

Why not introducing an ongoing battle with drop-in/drop-out system which never stops !?

Both sides can join in their respective circles as long as the other side has the upper hand up to some margin...

When people manages to escape, they can leave, repair their ship and join again...ofc there has to be a leaderboard which refelcts all damage done, same as in PvE missions

 

The only thing, we have to think about, is preventing the spawning of newly joined ships on top of the already fighting combatants

 

I think, an event which simulates a HUGE battle between opposing countries in which both are trying to get reinforcements in, is best way

[Angus McGregor]

1 hour ago, Twig said:

The PVP-event is everytime at the same location - or nearly around it. Please change the location from time to time. Right now its insane!

Seems odd that regional bonuses are meant to scatter players across the map, while these PvP events try to herd them to specific locations.

IMO the better PvP option would be to use region specific mini-zones as the mechanic to generate RvR hostility. Restrict RvR hostility mini-zones to 2 per nation that can only be triggered by topmost rank players (Rear Admiral, Kontreadmiral, Chef d'Escadre, etc...). Attackers join the instance, the zone is announced and hostility starts to ratchet up. Once defenders join, hostility is adjusted purely by ships defeated (sunk, capped, or forced to escape). Much more natural and spontaneous (aka fun).

The only thing, we have to think about, is preventing the spawning of newly joined ships on top of the already fighting combatants

THIS! +1000

Edited January 12, 2017 by Angus McGregor

[Sir Max Magic]

On 6.1.2017 at 6:29 AM, Blackjack Morgan said:

Did the developing team change over the past 12 months or so? Because after reading through all your comments in this section you sound like you have done a complete 180 regarding ganking. Remember when you championed the 1.5 BR mechanic to discourage massive gank fleets? Now you are making it sound like hey it's all good you just need to bring more guys then the other people. I don't know maybe the whole gank or be ganked mentality is the predominant one. Sad thing is you have a damn fine Age of Sail combat game steadily reducing itself into a damn gankfest. You say in the quote your world is too big for the current low population and so trying to encourage pvp by bringing people into these concentrated zones....that's great but then it's just a fricking gankfest half the time. Look, I don't need a perfect 1v1 or even BR odds but 5:1 odds or more is NOT FUN. I'm just tired of 90% of the fights in this game not even really being fights, there not, they are shit. If you really can't think of any way to offer incentives for those outnumbered to fight or ways to discourage massive ganks I suggest trying to read some feedback from testers who have been offering ideas since you created the OW. 

Cant agree more !!!

I want also fights which are atleast to some degree winnable by both sides...and not all the time this desperate running by one side and the grim will to keep the outgunned opponent in fight to DESTROY him on the other side !!!

 

There has to be better ways for fighting than always being outnumbered or far superior...

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, Twig said:

The PVP-event is everytime at the same location - or nearly around it. Please change the location from time to time. Right now its insane!

When they said they where going to go with 4 times a day over the 3 times I thought man that would be cool if they add in a new location too.  Like the MIDDLE OF THE GULF OF MEXICO.  That area is never used for the most part and there is so much area in it.

2 hours ago, Sir Max Magic said:

Why not introducing an ongoing battle with drop-in/drop-out system which never stops !?

Both sides can join in their respective circles as long as the other side has the upper hand up to some margin...

When people manages to escape, they can leave, repair their ship and join again...ofc there has to be a leaderboard which refelcts all damage done, same as in PvE missions

 

The only thing, we have to think about, is preventing the spawning of newly joined ships on top of the already fighting combatants

 

I think, an event which simulates a HUGE battle between opposing countries in which both are trying to get reinforcements in, is best way

As long as it's not an arena style lobby fighting I can see them doing a hot zone some where in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico.  Make it an for ever open battle for 2 hours that any one can join and return to join.  The longer you last the more points you rack up with the kills and damage.  Who ever has the most points at the end of the event gets the rewards.  Though the problem is they don't have a system to do more than 2 way battles so folks would have to pick sides.  Though if the system did say like a random pick to fill up numers on either side so that one time you might be on team a and the next time your on team b and nations/allaince don't mean crap that would prob work too.

On 1/5/2017 at 11:29 PM, Blackjack Morgan said:

Did the developing team change over the past 12 months or so?

If you read a bit further you will find out that was a very bad attempted at an sarcastic joke.....you know dry humor and all.

[Yar Matey]

2 hours ago, Sir Max Magic said:

Why not introducing an ongoing battle with drop-in/drop-out system which never stops !?

Both sides can join in their respective circles as long as the other side has the upper hand up to some margin...

When people manages to escape, they can leave, repair their ship and join again...ofc there has to be a leaderboard which refelcts all damage done, same as in PvE missions

 

The only thing, we have to think about, is preventing the spawning of newly joined ships on top of the already fighting combatants

 

I think, an event which simulates a HUGE battle between opposing countries in which both are trying to get reinforcements in, is best way

While I like the idea, I am not sure how this would play out in practice.  I think it will just end up being the same gankfest we have now.  One side will have more firepower and/or more players and the battle will still be lopsided. 

I know I keep repeating myself like a broken record,but objective based pvp is what is really needed.  In port battles, the objective is to protect/capture the area.  Or protect/capture or destroy the towers.  This is what is missing from these events and is desperately needed.  We need PvP convoy missions.  We need blockades and raiding ports.  Destroy the fortress type missions.

I envision a game world where I log in and I open my map and a random PvP event shows up on that map for my nation and my allied nations and we just sail to that location and there is an instance waiting to start which cannot until there is a minimum BR on both sides with a limited BR difference between the 2 opposing teams, and then our battle starts and we have some objective to complete to win; it could be anything really.  Here are some examples:

1)  Maintain a blockade or destroy the blockading ships

2)  escort the trade ships trying to get into port or destroy the trade ships trying to get into port (npc trade ships)

3)  Destroy the enemy forts or protect the friendly forts 

4)  Destroy the trade ship (player controlled) protect the trade ship. 

This way we get different types of missions where we start seeing different ships with different roles to play.  Frigates and maybe a few line ships for trader escort missions (NPC traders).  Mortar brigs and line ships for destroy the fort missions.  Line ships for blockade missions.  small shallow water ships for protect the player controlled trade ship. 

These objectives are important because it adds meaning and purpose to the events.  Without objectives PvP will always become chase or be chased.  With objectives, it does not matter of your ship is going to get sunk, whats important is making sure that trader ship gets to port or that mortar brig doesnt get sunk or captured because we need him to destroy the tower, ect.. so we win.  

Be honest, doesn't this sound like a lot of fun? 

These ideas can further be extended as a mechanism to generate hostility.  But for now, we need something other than sail around aimlessly in open world looking for enemy ships to fight.  3/4ths of the time, I don't find anything at all, and I just wasted an hour sailing around aimlessly, or the enemy ships are smaller, so they just run away, or the enemy ships are bigger so we run away. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Yar Matey

[Angus McGregor]

40 minutes ago, Yar Matey said:

Without objectives PvP will always become chase or be chased.  With objectives, it does not matter of your ship is going to get sunk, whats important is making sure that trader ship gets to port so we win.  

Exactly! All these activities need to be grounded in an actual game objective. NA desperately needs a plot line that drives everything in an easily understood narrative. Without it, NA will continue to just be a collection of 'events' that really aren't very satisfying.

[Neverdead Ned]

I find great irony in the fact that we need PvP events on PvP servers.  Often our developers like to defend some in game design by saying it reflects the realism of the time.  When in history were there ever scheduled daily PvP events in the Caribbean?  On PvP servers where fighting should be the norm, why do we need special events?  If you really feel that they are necessary then give them some purpose and context.

[Yar Matey]

2 hours ago, Neverdead Ned said:

I find great irony in the fact that we need PvP events on PvP servers.  Often our developers like to defend some in game design by saying it reflects the realism of the time.  When in history were there ever scheduled daily PvP events in the Caribbean?  On PvP servers where fighting should be the norm, why do we need special events?  If you really feel that they are necessary then give them some purpose and context.

PvP events should be tied to player triggers like when we had flags to try and take a port over.  When we log in to play NA with our group of friends and we say in Teamspeak:

Player 1:  "hey what do you guys want to do today?"

Player 2:  "Hey I know, lets go form a blockade against (insert port name here)" 

Player 3:  "We could go raid (insert port name here)?"

Player 1:  "Nah lets go form a blockade at (insert port name here)."

Players decide that's a good idea to go blockade (insert port name here), so they get a bunch of players in allied nations to go sail over to the port and everyone in game gets a message saying "(insert nation here) has formed a blockade against (insert port name here)".  Enemy nation forms a fleet of players to go over and smash the blockade and a big port battle type battle ensues.  If the blockaders win the battle, then the port generates no resources for 24 hours and get a paint and ship chest, oh and a module upgrade.  If the nation that owns the port with its allies win, they get a paint chest, ship chest, and a module upgrade. 

Unfortunately, the server pop is too low for this to generate good pvp, so right now, pvp events need to be driven in one location the way the devs are doing it now.  When server pop picks up, we can switch to a player trigger to give us PvP content and then tie it to hostility to trigger port battles. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Yar Matey

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, Yar Matey said:

PvP events should be tied to player triggers like when we had flags to try and take a port over.  When we log in to play NA with our group of friends and we say in Teamspeak:

Player 1:  "hey what do you guys want to do today?"

Player 2:  "Hey I know, lets go form a blockade against (insert port name here)" 

Player 3:  "We could go raid (insert port name here)?"

Player 1:  "Nah lets go form a blockade at (insert port name here)."

Players decide that's a good idea to go blockade (insert port name here), so they get a bunch of players in allied nations to go sail over to the port and everyone in game gets a message saying "(insert nation here) has formed a blockade against (insert port name here)".  Enemy nation forms a fleet of players to go over and smash the blockade and a big port battle type battle ensues.  If the blockaders win the battle, then the port generates no resources for 24 hours and get a paint and ship chest, oh and a module upgrade.  If the nation that owns the port with its allies win, they get a paint chest, ship chest, and a module upgrade. 

Unfortunately, the server pop is too low for this to generate good pvp, so right now, pvp events need to be driven in one location the way the devs are doing it now.  When server pop picks up, we can switch to a player trigger to give us PvP content and then tie it to hostility to trigger port battles. 

This was kinda what I thought they where going with the Fleet Hostility missions, but than they brought them from being open from 15 mins to 5 mins so it's like winning the lotto to find one still open to join and stop.  Than they add in the return to friendly port so you can't even catch them on the way out to do another.  Cause if they know your hunting them they will just return to friendly port.   There is hardly any way to know where they are grinding up the missions so it's like finding a needle in a hay stack.  It seems they are pushing more and more in favor of the PvE guys than the PvP guys.  

The PvP events are nice, but I got board of them cause they are gank fest in the deep water and we can get some better fair fights now cause of smaller pop on PvP2 and getting more folks on board with the concept, but we shouldn't be only PvPing in these zones only.  We should be doing it out side regions as we grind them up and get ready for war.  Well that is if nations will ever go to war with any one other than Pirates.  

Epic events should be epic too.  When they where droping those treasure events I though a cool concept would be to do the epic events, with treasure ships in them.  You have to capture the traders and get there cargo to win the missions.  It's not just escapeing with it cause you have all the escorts firing at your ship and the ones you captured too and you better bring a big enough group or your prize will just get sunk.  Since this would be a PvE event it would work on all the servers.  Without being some silly arena game you click on and join.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Sir Texas Sir

[Angus McGregor]

3 hours ago, Yar Matey said:

Unfortunately, the server pop is too low for this to generate good pvp, so right now, pvp events need to be driven in one location the way the devs are doing it now.  When server pop picks up, we can switch to a player trigger to give us PvP content and then tie it to hostility to trigger port battles. 

I see no reason why this couldn't work right now. Yes - there would be whinging about it happening at "off-hours" for different hemispheres but people just need to cowboy up and realize that's the nature of a global MMO game.

[van der Clam]

So if location is changed regularly, then how enjoyable and active will the events be when for 2-3 days straight it is in areas where no one has a port? Keeping it in 2 areas regularly, it affords everyone the exact same opportunity to use only 2 ports for the events, and they are all afforded the same opportunity to get to the event or gank it just the same. I believe that is cowboying up.

[Angus McGregor]

Sorry @van der Decken, I think you misunderstood. I wasn't criticizing the fact that the current PvP events are in just 2 locations.

I didn't quote everything YM said but I was asserting that I thought his idea of globally announced, player triggered PvP events for blockades or raids against ports could work on the current PvP1 server population. I've suggested the same myself. It may not draw captains of all nations like the daily events do. But it would help the hostility system make sense in being PvP based instead of being PvE missions against NPC pirates.