RIP small nations

[Kloothommel]

Well, that patch just ruined a lot for smaller nations in size.  Anybody who feels the same?

[Ned Loe]

Explain plz.  what where when,

[Eishen]

IMO You are suffering the all too common in this forum disease of dramatization....

Can I suppose you refer to defender screening forces outnumbering attackers not allowing PB being initiated?

[Kloothommel]

15 minutes ago, Wind said:

Explain plz.  what where when,

I will.

13 minutes ago, Eishen said:

IMO You are suffering the all too common in this forum disease of dramatization....

Can I suppose you refer to defender screening forces outnumbering attackers not allowing PB being initiated?

Maybe and yes, amongst others.

I will give a short explanation to my feelings concerning the issues that give me this sinking feeling.

1. Indeed, attacks will get swarmed and diminished. I don't expect any port battles to happen, at least when  smaller nations attack.

2. The one mechanic that at least we Danes sometimes used (logout outside port) was murdered. I understand why, but that doen't result in port battles.

3. Tagging mechanics (br vs tag) are so stupid that a couple of surprises could tage a fleet of 4th rates. And with only a short entry window into the pb, ESPECIALLY with the zone control mechanics now in place smaller nations will have almost no chance to win as they will be detained too long. 

4. Rewarding screening will NOT help smaller nations. Especially since they would just get swarmed (if they have players to spare to screen outside) and killed, no rewards, just for the bigger nations. Hugely demotivating the smaller nation, preoviding less screeners etc.

5. With the notion of screening possibly impacting the PB smaller nations would be even more at a disadvantage.

6. Smaller nations also have smaller trans-european communities (US/AU timezone players) and ALSO cannot counter the numbers in those areas/timezones. look at the past coupe of US Pb's.

There is more, but I can't put these into words just now.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Kloothommel

[Eishen]

First of all:   I share your worries for offensive  PB being almost imposible to reach in the face of overwhelming odds

BUT...     on your points....

1. Indeed, attacks will get swarmed and diminished. I don't expect any port battles to happen, at least when  smaller nations attack.

2. The one mechanic that at least we Danes sometimes used (logout outside port) was murdered. I understand why, but that doen't result in port battles.

This may be a (debatable) design decision forcing alliances. the way around we were using (deconections) was at least not very elegant, and it forbided player to PLAY (  been myself for a whole day disconneted in front of an enemy port)  If we need balance we could resort to ticket entrance (a la Potbs)...I am sure many of you could remenber that option  being offered by the designers....and rejected as it eliminated screening actions..

 Another option  could be opening the PB to entrance x hours before the initiating time.... does not solve deconect time but allows some flexibility (and making more than 1 aprox try).

 

3. Tagging mechanics (br vs tag) are so stupid that a couple of surprises could tage a fleet of 4th rates. And with only a short entry window into the pb, ESPECIALLY with the zone control mechanics now in place smaller nations will have almost no chance to win as they will be detained too long. 

I share that tagging should be reworked (mostly for non PB related probelms), but this do not affect balance heavily.. is aweapon that can be used both ways

4. Rewarding screening will NOT help smaller nations. Especially since they would just get swarmed (if they have players to spare to screen outside) and killed, no rewards, just for the bigger nations. Hugely demotivating the smaller nation, preoviding less screeners etc.

Agree, Fully. Again a design decision must be done, artificial balance vs zerging

5. With the notion of screening possibly impacting the PB smaller nations would be even more at a disadvantage.

   Repeated imho

6. Smaller nations also have smaller trans-european communities (US/AU timezone players) and ALSO cannot counter the numbers in those areas/timezones. look at the past coupe of US Pb's.

   Not related..  heavily related to another hard decission to do....time windows/ different servers  vs empty port battles 

 

[Kloothommel]

Thanks, @Eishen, you at least get my worries.

 

I agree, point nr 6 doesn't pertain to the patch, but it is one of my worries.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Kloothommel

[Guest]

I quite liked the old flag system in regards to screening - it promoted heavy screening to kill the flag carrier, and gave a ~30 min leeway for PB entry (when you subtract the sheer travel time, so sometimes more, sometimes less), and as long as it got planted you bought yourself another ~20 mins more.

At the moment it's more to do with just getting enough BR just to tag the main fleet (which is a pretty small fleet), and then tagging them in combat without the slighest hope of killing anyone until they're delayed long enough for the PB to be over (~15 mins?), hence the abundant use of high-BR low-quality ships and fleets en masse - with good fights being the opposite of good screening. But at least if the attacking fleet gets in late, it only lost some time but still has a decent chance.

Wont the land in PBs exacerbate the problem even more with the victory conditions being worked on with or without an opposing fleet present? A mere 10-minute delay seems devastating if it means that the defending fleet is able to position itself to hold all the zones and accrue points before a single shot is fired, not to mention the travel time once the attacking fleet finally makes it in.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Guest

[admin]

50 minutes ago, Kloothommel said:

 

3. Tagging mechanics (br vs tag) are so stupid that a couple of surprises could tage a fleet of 4th rates. And with only a short entry window into the pb, ESPECIALLY with the zone control mechanics now in place smaller nations will have almost no chance to win as they will be detained too long. 

 

this can be fixed - current ratio is 5x. It can be reduced. In reality 3 frigates would never attack a lineship fleet and will only shadow it in the visibility distance. 

[Vernon Merrill]

Kloot, isnt this why alliances exist?  Just asking your opinion on it, seriously.

[Kloothommel]

Just now, Vernon Merrill said:

Kloot, isnt this why alliances exist?  Just asking your opinion on it, seriously.

With alliances falling out left and right due to bugs, plus activity levels and defense being insanely easy doesn't help. 

The fact that even though we mustered the whole 4-nation alliance multiple times AND STILL run into a brick wall of screening, tagging and running fleets in pb's has demotivated many. If you look at the attack/defense ratios the past couple of weeks/month you see we have been on the offensive most of the time. But every time we hit the same wall. Logging out under the flags, even though a doubtful tactic at best, was one of our few chances to get an actual PB going. Otherwise we were screened to death/delay every time. The PB is one of the few ways to measure quality of playerfleets, not the quantity of the screeners. But with that being short of impossible to even trigger in a way that is practical (warsupplies) and the 1-2 punch of the new US playerbase night attack campaign where pp are planned in the middle of EU player nights doesn't help as well.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, admin said:

this can be fixed - current ratio is 5x. It can be reduced. In reality 3 frigates would never attack a lineship fleet and will only shadow it in the visibility distance. 

That's the thing though, the last two times I screened I was part of the group that snagged the main fleet, without the slightest hope of killing or really delaying any of them, but rather to simply sit at maximum distance and keep them tagged for a few minutes because there's not nearly enough time for any of them to kill you before it's too late. The ratio isnt so much a problem as the time loss - being dragged into combat for 15 minutes is miniscule in NA terms, but so far it has determined whether an entire PB has been won or lost. If it was longer, there'd be time to deal with the screening fleet that attacked you and dissuades having one that is so small that it wont survive long enough.

Can't we just have something like, say, you have 30-40 mins to enter the PB before it's automatically lost, the battle wont start until X BR (say, half) has entered for the attacking side?

[Kloothommel]

Just now, sruPL said:

I agree with tagging BR. Most big ships, 1-4th rates got their BR reduced by a lot! It makes much easy for a few stupid frigates tag a fleet of 4th rates.

 

When it comes to logging out in front of port, why not go further? Let's make Port Battle Lobby in friendly ports. You don't have to sail and risk, just join PB in lobby just like "Small Battle" *sarcasm*

 

You have allies. French, Swedes, Spanish... Some pirates maybe. Why not ask them for help? Instead of asking for help, very often you play solo as nation without allies. We Brits cooperate with Dutch and US all the time.

 

Actually what I would love to see is 2v2v2 situation in this game, would be more dynamic, but the current player base does not allow it.

I really cannot tell if you are troling or not. Are you so blind for the concerns of your opponents?

The small battles lobby doen't cut it. it is meaningless pvp. The pb has a purpose and a consequence. And being defeated by sheer numbers as opposed to real skill is just very demotivating.

[Kloothommel]

1 minute ago, sruPL said:

Why do you call me a troll? I tell you, don't go solo to Port Battles. Ask French, Spanish and Swedes and even some Pirates to screen for you. Is it too hard? Maybe they are too lazy to come screening?

This is why I can't tell if you are trolling or not. 

The brick wall we have been hitting has demotivated many. And we do ask and try to coordinate. But as you can imagine it is a bit thougher with the multiple smaller nations vs 2 1/2 bigger.nations.

[Ned Loe]

Admin, please read 2 last posts and consider a hot fix. 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/311310/discussions/1/154644045361178744/

[Jeheil]

This would be the same 'small' nations that launched 7 simultaneous attacks on the big nations...and got all their ships into all of the port battles bar one....is this the small nations you talk of ?

[Kloothommel]

6 minutes ago, Jeheil said:

This would be the same 'small' nations that launched 7 simultaneous attacks on the big nations...and got all their ships into all of the port battles bar one....is this the small nations you talk of ?

And howmany ports did we take? That was with our maximum. Our hail mary pass. So howmany do you really think are left to do this?

[Vernon Merrill]

14 minutes ago, Wind said:

Admin, please read 2 last posts and consider a hot fix. 

http://steamcommunity.com/app/311310/discussions/1/154644045361178744/

 

Perhaps this is what they had in mind instead of everyone taking a giant bath-tub (1st rate) into the PB?....   A mixed fleet COULD have chased down those Endy's that probably raced to the circles?

 

I'm not sure one event gives us enough data points to warrant changes yet....

Edited December 21, 2016 by Vernon Merrill

[Jeheil]

1 minute ago, Kloothommel said:

And howmany ports did we take? That was with our maximum. Our hail mary pass. So howmany do you really think are left to do this?

Your small. But can field enough ships to fight in them all. THEY JUST FIXED THE REASON YOU GOT DEFEATED INSIDE EVERYONE OF THEM !!

The kite and tower hug. Used by every savvy defender, be they Brit, Spanish, French or Taiwanese.

They just changed the bit that stopped you in the PB. I suspect you don't like the fact you have to SAIL there. WOWS.

[DeRuyter]

3 minutes ago, Jeheil said:

This would be the same 'small' nations that launched 7 simultaneous attacks on the big nations...and got all their ships into all of the port battles bar one....is this the small nations you talk of ?

Exactly. Every time I go to a PB I see several "small" nations acting together to screen out the "large" attacking nation. Last weekend at Las Cayes the "large" nations of US and Britain attacked the French port and who was there screening for the French - Danes and Swedes. So your small nations alliances seem to be working. BTW - large nations lost that battle.

I do agree that it should not be too easy to deter main battle fleet of lineships particularly with 3-4 small frigates. As admin noted a small group of frigates would just scout and watch the fleet - not attack it.

 

[Kloothommel]

3 minutes ago, Jeheil said:

Your small. But can field enough ships to fight in them all. THEY JUST FIXED THE REASON YOU GOT DEFEATED INSIDE EVERYONE OF THEM !!

The kite and tower hug. Used by every savvy defender, be they Brit, Spanish, French or Taiwanese.

They just changed the bit that stopped you in the PB. I suspect you don't like the fact you have to SAIL there. WOWS.

And now all def needs to do is rush the cap zones, as they already start with one. This has been proven today already. And on top, we can't get in now. Mark my words. 

 

And the WOWS agruement? Really? You have fallen low, @Jeheil.

I don't mind sailing. I sailed to Bermuda often.. I hate sailing for nothing because the screening is too easy.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Kloothommel

[Jeheil]

3 minutes ago, Kloothommel said:

And now all def needs to do is rush the cap zones, as they already start with one. This has been proven today already. And on top, we can't get in now. Mark my words. 

 

And the WOWS agruement? Really? You have fallen low, @Jeheil.

I don't mind sailing. I sailed to Bermuda often.. I hate sailing for nothing because the screening is too easy.

I have to jump to get to 'low' Kloot.

I haven't fought a battle yet, Lets see how they are inside, will take a few to iron out the meta and then lets see how much fun they are or aren't.

And I really would like to know how raids fit in etc.

If you can win in 40 mins without sinking a ship and just sailing into circles then its obviously pants.

I expect they will tune and our pixel ports will fall or be untakeable. But if they come up with a cool PB experience the hurrah. Up until now its vanilla and easy to defend...to easy. It should be 60/40 in favour of defender, its probably closer to 80/20. Simple fix is no timer...but who wants a 5 hour port battle (cough...I do).

[Archaos]

36 minutes ago, Kloothommel said:

This is why I can't tell if you are trolling or not. 

The brick wall we have been hitting has demotivated many. And we do ask and try to coordinate. But as you can imagine it is a bit thougher with the multiple smaller nations vs 2 1/2 bigger.nations.

You say that the brick wall you are hitting is demotivating, but put the shoe on the other foot and think how you would feel if you could field twice as many ships as your opponent but kept losing ports because half your players are not able to take part.

I can understand why you like the PB's as the numbers are equal and hopefully with the new changes it will give the side with better tactics more chance of winning, but I do think that you should not exclude a huge portion of the playerbase because the happen to play for a bigger nation.

I think we should work on better mechanics so screening battles are important and can prevent port battle if successful, but allow the attackers to continue to the port if they win the screening. The team that can field larger numbers should always have the advantage, but things like not allowing respawn and re-entering the battle or sailing from defending port could be considered.

[Kloothommel]

@Archaos, I kinda agree on some, but strongly disagree wth other of your points.

I agree, respawning from port makes screening ridiculously easy for the defender. Combine that with large numers and it's unwinnable.

larger numbers issue: I disagree. The larger populated nations shouldn't win by defacto because they have more players. That would just result in small nations remaining small because of the demotivating zerg fleets stacked against you time after time again.

And even if your nation is 3x the size, you are bound to run out of opponents beacause there aren't any left on the other side to place against them.

[Eishen]

3 minutes ago, Archaos said:

 ...how you would feel if you could field twice as many ships as your opponent but kept losing ports ...

I would feel sad ...as that would mean that in equal numbers my side is the worst. 

Balance mechanics does not exclude players from playing, as bigger nations can effectively attack more ports at same time, and raise hostility at a faster pace.

PB limited to 25 players is a balance tool, but if you cannot reach the battle it is useless... and with tha batttletime being known with so much time it can really be made imposible

[admin]

The best design is making fun the correct strategy to win.
For example - someone might design a card for magic the gathering where beating your head against the wall wins until you bleed gives you a win. Its the rule, but its not fun. 

Thus
Logging off is not fun, being smashed is also not fun, raising hostility through pve is not fun. These things need to be addressed and changed before release (we call such unnecessary friction).  Sitting in BR screen or while logged off are one of such things.