Rework the "hostility" system for PB

[Fenris]

The flags formerly used for an attack on enemy port were removed. It was said they will not come back,because of "abuse". In my opinion a huge mistake made,that needs to be reworked.

Current rising hostility system is an "announcing hostility". It makes no sense for nations to be in a war, and practically announce their coming to a region,which needs to be taken. 2 days before the port battle.Although we are playing war, who is telling the enemy 2 days before, that you coming after their valuable region????

There is no surprise,flexibility, dynamic, no possibility for trickery,there is no strategy in this current system. It is one arranged PB,announced 2 days before,so defender has all the time to set all possible resources.

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. Although there were possibilities (limit the flags,make them "expensive",set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB),whatever....

Nevertheless, when the Flag was bought,you had to sail out,you had to look for an enemy,you had to organise defence,screen,scout,fight,sink,respawn.There was  ACTION.

"Scheduled",announced attack on a region does not work. It is boring,predictable, and there is no fun in it.

A decision to take an enemy region, and its mechanic needs to be changed. It must be surprising,unpredictable,flexibel,dynamic, it must motivate players to sail again, to get out from ports.

Thanks for reading.

 

 

[monk33y]

The only way the new rvr system makes Any sense is if allies gets removed for short periods of time then reestablished 

2week no allies then a fresh vote for new allies that lasts for 3 weeks then 2 weeks of no allies and so on

[Fenris]

28 minutes ago, monk33y said:

The only way the new rvr system makes Any sense is if allies gets removed for short periods of time then reestablished 

2week no allies then a fresh vote for new allies that lasts for 3 weeks then 2 weeks of no allies and so on

This is about how PB takes place.Not about alliances.

[Fenris]

2 minutes ago, Borch said:

It's supposed to be predictable to give you full PB's. Hostility system is lacking atm only because its not yet finished. Add raids to the mix and it should be good. No point in wasting dev team resources to rework hostility, especially for what we already had and found it not working.

Only thing that it will cause its nations being currently in alliance abusing nations being out of alliance.

Why having full PB if defender has a huge bonus KNOWING that enemy is coming 2 days before? Thats not an action,thats ARCADE.

[monk33y]

When I saya time outside of alliances I ment all nation's at same time! 

We might as well remove pvp altogether with the current system as it's a stalemate anyway 

[Fenris]

18 minutes ago, monk33y said:

When I saya time outside of alliances I ment all nation's at same time! 

We might as well remove pvp altogether with the current system as it's a stalemate anyway 

post alliance thread elsewhere.otherwise you are spamming.

[Mighty_Alex]

1 hour ago, Fenris said:

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. 

You answered your own question. People have lives, no one is going to log in everyday to wait for an attack that might not even happen.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Fenris said:

The flags formerly used for an attack on enemy port were removed. It was said they will not come back,because of "abuse". In my opinion a huge mistake made,that needs to be reworked.

Current rising hostility system is an "announcing hostility". It makes no sense for nations to be in a war, and practically announce their coming to a region,which needs to be taken. 2 days before the port battle.Although we are playing war, who is telling the enemy 2 days before, that you coming after their valuable region????

There is no surprise,flexibility, dynamic, no possibility for trickery,there is no strategy in this current system. It is one arranged PB,announced 2 days before,so defender has all the time to set all possible resources.

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. Although there were possibilities (limit the flags,make them "expensive",set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB),whatever....

Nevertheless, when the Flag was bought,you had to sail out,you had to look for an enemy,you had to organise defence,screen,scout,fight,sink,respawn.There was  ACTION.

"Scheduled",announced attack on a region does not work. It is boring,predictable, and there is no fun in it.

A decision to take an enemy region, and its mechanic needs to be changed. It must be surprising,unpredictable,flexibel,dynamic, it must motivate players to sail again, to get out from ports.

Thanks for reading.

 

 

Agreed.. The flag system for all its faults provided a lot more fun, flexibility and unpredictability.. ------ AND ------ A lot more PBs.. Atm it's dried up to the barest minimum..

[Vernon Merrill]

Near stalemate is the ideal condition for this game, IMO.   Taking a county SHOULD be a huge event and require weeks of preparation/effort.  Constant PB's of dubious quality were not as exciting and to use his word "arcade-y". I remember the days of map screens with so many Port changes you couldn't even read the map.  Ridiculous.  The whole point of seeing hostility rise on the map is that people SHOULD be using that to find PvP.  The problem is that you can generate enough hostility so quick by banging out a bunch of AI missions.  Therefore, there's really no point in defending other than showing up at the Port battle.  Hostility should take days/weeks, not hours to generate.  And there should be a minimum PvP requirement for generating a PB as well.  Unfortunately, people can be bothered to form giant Zerg fleets to try and win paint, but can't be bothered to defend counties. It's a bit whack. 

[Fenris]

5 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Near stalemate is the ideal condition for this game, IMO.   Taking a county SHOULD be a huge event and require weeks of preparation/effort.  Constant PB's of dubious quality were not as exciting and to use his word "arcade-y". I remember the days of map screens with so many Port changes you couldn't even read the map.  Ridiculous.  The whole point of seeing hostility rise on the map is that people SHOULD be using that to find PvP.  The problem is that you can generate enough hostility so quick by banging out a bunch of AI missions.  Therefore, there's really no point in defending other than showing up at the Port battle.  Hostility should take days/weeks, not hours to generate.  And there should be a minimum PvP requirement for generating a PB as well.  Unfortunately, people can be bothered to form giant Zerg fleets to try and win paint, but can't be bothered to defend counties. It's a bit whack. 

Well then if you need announced PB,make a lobby system out of it.Why sailing at all?

Thats why the thread. Single ports can not be taken anymore.AND thats why the suggestion to limit "flags" or whatever you may call em,or make them expensive.I dont know how to avoid abuse.Thats the whole point of this thread.

Make hostilities dynamic and surprising without,or, with minimum possibility of abuse.

You are talking about past when you think of"ports changing owner,couldnt read the map". Nations do not need worthless regions anymore,just about to make more red,blue,yellow dots on the map.

Thats the whole point.

[Tac]

1 hour ago, Fenris said:

The flags formerly used for an attack on enemy port were removed. It was said they will not come back,because of "abuse". In my opinion a huge mistake made,that needs to be reworked.

Current rising hostility system is an "announcing hostility". It makes no sense for nations to be in a war, and practically announce their coming to a region,which needs to be taken. 2 days before the port battle.Although we are playing war, who is telling the enemy 2 days before, that you coming after their valuable region????

There is no surprise,flexibility, dynamic, no possibility for trickery,there is no strategy in this current system. It is one arranged PB,announced 2 days before,so defender has all the time to set all possible resources.

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. Although there were possibilities (limit the flags,make them "expensive",set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB),whatever....

Nevertheless, when the Flag was bought,you had to sail out,you had to look for an enemy,you had to organise defence,screen,scout,fight,sink,respawn.There was  ACTION.

"Scheduled",announced attack on a region does not work. It is boring,predictable, and there is no fun in it.

A decision to take an enemy region, and its mechanic needs to be changed. It must be surprising,unpredictable,flexibel,dynamic, it must motivate players to sail again, to get out from ports.

Thanks for reading.

 

 

Well I remember endless nights defending pampatar against the French with the flag pulled in the last minute and no attack, day after day.

If a 2 day notice with a PB isn t ACTION then I wouldn 't call a week of being sat in a port for 2 hours every night ACTION . 

That sir is pissing your life away. 

[Fenris]

2 minutes ago, Tac said:

Well I remember endless nights defending pampatar against the French with the flag pulled in the last minute and no attack, day after day.

If a 2 day notice with a PB isn t ACTION then I wouldn 't call a week of being sat in a port for 2 hours every night ACTION . 

That sir is pissing your life away. 

Make a suggestion of improving that old system.read the whole post.

Because the old system had to be IMPROVED,not REMOVED.

Now we are carebearing in home waters,doing nothing.

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by Fenris

[monk33y]

Are you serious how does the access to allies and therefore the amount of players available to partake in the port battle not relevant???  you may really want to look up the number of other posts on port battles and raids and incorporate there ideas into this?

[Fenris]

9 minutes ago, Borch said:

Thats why, we need raids to actually take place of PB's. Conquest should actually be slow and you should work hard for it and PB's should be a rare thing but a big nations event.

Raids would be happening without the defender knowing.

Big nations event? Conquest should be  self explanatory in this game...LOL.

[monk33y]

Im guessing you mean something like this( taken from my early suggestion topic)

2) alliances to be adjusted on a by monthly timescale and directly controlled by the data available to our development team.

3) raid port battles to help influence rvr and pvp.. 

Point 2, iv already stated this but I feel that the current alliance system benefits the big nations and hinders the smaller one. Once any nations population goes above say 50% of total server population that nation looses access to the allie system. Instead gets to pick an nuteral allie to use ports But looses the nuteral allie as reinforcement in port battles. You can fight on there behalf.

When a nation's population hits 35% it can only have 1 allie and 1 nuteral allie.

This idea will help other smaller population nations ballance the port battle coverage.

Point 3, open up raids to help push hostility creating more rvr. All region's in game have 1 capital and 3-5 smaller ports. These smaller ports have become almost pointless bystanders, opening these ports up a raid portbattle brings back some importance.

Each sub port in each region has a certain 12 hr raid window (for all timezones) once a raid is declared a 24hour set up window starts (showing all  in the server where it will be taking place). The raid takes place as a standard tower port battle (less Dev work) if the port battle is won the winners claim access to the port along with the regions owner for a limited timescale for example 48hrs. Any raided port automatically grants the raiding nation 25% hostility buff (that cannot be lowered while raided port stands). 

This system will help ports to be contested and generate rvr and pvp.

Simple restrictions can be placed on raiding for example only three or four regions can be raided at anytime by any one nation. Any amount of nations 

the currant system for rvr requires extra features like the bold above!

[Fenris]

3 minutes ago, Borch said:

I believe that the new system should be improved and not removed.

Ya man, I remember 10 big nation events during flag mechanic era and 7 during war supplies. Self explanatory... LOL

The new system can not be improved when the ENEMY KNOWS that you are attacking the region.

No surprise,no flexibility, no dynamics.

Atm i dont have to do nothing but open an outpost in the port where the attacker/defender spawns. Either you get a slot in a PB,or go screen. Thats what you like?

Is that really what you want?

 

[monk33y]

Are you serious!!  When in this timeframe did a nation not know an attack was taking place? As it took months if not years to get a nation's assets into place? 

What we need is to use currant features we already have to generate more content! 

As Raiding above!

We have the old non land in battle pb system. Why not use that for the sub ports in a region! We know timers are in the game sivwhy not user that?

[Fenris]

25 minutes ago, monk33y said:

Are you serious!!  When in this timeframe did a nation not know an attack was taking place? As it took months if not years to get a nation's assets into place? 

What we need is to use currant features we already have to generate more content! 

As Raiding above!

We have the old non land in battle pb system. Why not use that for the sub ports in a region! We know timers are in the game sivwhy not user that?

Gonna answer you only this time because i am ignoring you.

Before the new system you had a chance for surprise.Now you dont.

You announce to attack 2 days before with this new system.That is the only problem.Now stop talking about RAIDS.

RAIDS can not help in CONQUEST, it can be a tool,to generate more PvP, nothing more. RAIDS can not help taking a region without being seen 2 DAYS BEFORE PB.

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by Fenris

[monk33y]

Can you read!

Any raided port automatically grants the raiding nation 25% hostility buff (that cannot be lowered while raided port stands). 

its an idea!!!! Look forward not back!!

Before you had to sail the flag to the port it wasn't instant genius the defender used to stack ships in port! Flags was broken I know as a pirate we used to push the system as hard as we could!

So what you want is world of naval action warships?

Edited December 29, 2016 by monk33y

[Fenris]

1 hour ago, Tac said:

Well I remember endless nights defending pampatar against the French with the flag pulled in the last minute and no attack, day after day.

If a 2 day notice with a PB isn t ACTION then I wouldn 't call a week of being sat in a port for 2 hours every night ACTION . 

That sir is pissing your life away. 

I have stated already that old system was not perfect.Everybody knows that.

But this one is worse.

[monk33y]

I don't dis agree with you. But the Dev's have said we will not be going back to flags. So new ideas have to use the current features! 

[Corona Lisa]

 

See, the current system sucks because they have to tweak hostility mechanics. If they do this right we have more PBs (every day 1 PB would be ideal imo) and a lot of PvP to increase hostility. 

So you have always full PBs, and even if there is none you know where to find PvP due to hostilitygeneration.

Tell me how you can accomplish that with the flag system pls.

 

3 hours ago, Fenris said:

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. Although there were possibilities (limit the flags,make them "expensive",set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB),whatever....

• limit the flags,make them "expensive -> it just means that most of the time you buy a flag when you are sure that the enemy cant defend. It makes it even worse.
• set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB) -> no solution

 

[Fenris]

2 minutes ago, JonSnowLetsGo said:

 

See, the current system sucks because they have to tweak hostility mechanics. If they do this right we have more PBs (every day 1 PB would be ideal imo) and a lot of PvP to increase hostility. 

So you have always full PBs, and even if there is none you know where to find PvP due to hostilitygeneration.

Tell me how you can accomplish that with the flag system pls.

 

• limit the flags,make them "expensive -> it just means that most of the time you buy a flag when you are sure that the enemy cant defend. It makes it even worse.
• set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB) -> no solution

 

I do not know dude.

I dont have ready to go solution, i am comparing earlier and now.

Yeah well,even now a certain nation schedules the PB,when the most Euros are in bed...Should also be prohibited.

For the moment i think that the CONQUEST is not really as it should be.

Once again.."ANNOUNCING" PB 2 days earlier is boring,predictable and its killing the game.(with few other things which are off topic)

[Elric]

44 minutes ago, Fenris said:

I have stated already that old system was not perfect.Everybody knows that.

But this one is worse.

I must admit, I do like the cool down idea with the new PB system - it sure stops people from pulling PB flags and not showing up.

I do think the current hostility percentage climbs too rapidly.  With the combination of war supplies and 4-5 people running 200XP fleet missions, it only takes a few hours to raise hostility to 100%.  I'd like to see it take a minimum 2-3 days of concerted effort to raise hostility to 100%.

[Chijohnaok]

3 hours ago, Fenris said:

 

I know the flags were not perfect. I know there was a lot of "abuse" and mascerade in the old system, and lot of "meaningless" empty PBs. Although there were possibilities (limit the flags,make them "expensive",set a minimum on BR(HIGH) needed to start PB),whatever....

 

 

How "expensive" is expensive?

It's my understanding that there are some (or even many) players that have 25 million, or 50 million, or even hundreds of millions in gold.  

 

As for the minimum BR(HIGH), what should the minimum BR be?

On the PvP 1 server it is fairly common to be able to field a full 25 ship fleet for a PB. And while I rarely play on PvP 2 anyone, I am given to understand that finding even a dozen players for one side in a PB is not exactly a common thing (for those that play PvP 2 regularly please feel free to chime in).  If you set a "High BR" minimum of say 15-20 ships, and the nations on PvP 2 are rarely able to meet that minimum, then I guess they will rarely ever have any PB's.