Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Hethwill said:

That is not correct and can bring you a dozen multiplayer persistent war games, many based in history, others no so much that revolve around 24/7.

In your sentence ALL should be replace by MANY. Get your facts correct, not only the ones you play, which I must say seem to be more like arena type games than persistent wars in a big map.

Also Devs decided that for now it stays 2 servers and they are brainstorming options to have one server only. It might be that we stick with 2, but it might be we stick with 1.

For now I advise a timid start of a new career on PvP-2 for those than can't cope with CET&EET conquest times, so to accelerate the process of testing how it all works in 2 servers.

After all we should test it fully with the 2 servers. Who knows what comes down the road. Devs might even conjure a better solution.

I admits that I choose the wrong word. But a large part of MMO work with separate servers.

If a North America server is create for the end of the test we are going to be able to see how it could work.

It's important that a small balance of Nation's manpower is made. All US players cannot play in the same nation. 
Later it belongs to the players to manage it if they don't want to see the server disappear. 

Maybe Dev's could integrate somting which allow to balance more or less Nation's manpower. Maybe for upcoming players.

But if both servers work with enough players and Nation's manpower approximately equal. There is no reason that this system does not work. 
And it could become the solution which developers are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same way all French cannot play French nation and Spanish cannot play Spanish nation...etc...

It is important to balance aye. Alas we, players / community, forcing a crowbar into the seamless act.

I hope a lot of non eurocentric EU players join pvp2 alongside the US folk and leave you to it. If anything you'll be left for the rest of the testing with the same numbers PvP2 has now.

GL with that :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5.3.2017 at 9:33 PM, Hethwill said:

....

In your sentence ALL should be replace by MANY. Get your facts correct, not only the ones you play, which I must say seem to be more like arena type games than persistent wars in a big map.

.....

Hey Hethwill,

could you name a few? because I lack the experience of these kind of games. I only experienced the system Comeonche mentioned.
No, I dont want to argue about the merrits because I dont see any solutions coming out of these 5,6 ? threads regarding server timers and nightflips that would please everybody.

What I would like to add is an old marketing rule, which is "copy the things your competitors are doing well".

So if there are games running 24/7 without restrictions (I dont know any). How are they achieving this?

Edited by OlFson
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anarchy Online ? WW2 OL ? EVE ? Elite Dangerous ? Aces High ? Planetside ? Entropia Universe ? Even if there is only one it should be enough to take is as a inspiration. While many have evolved since I played them the experience for a long time was 24/7, log in at any time, do whatever had to be done.

How did they achieve it ? By letting the dogs of war reign loose and at large and let the community factions sort it out ?... Some have 2 factions, others have 3, others have as many as the community might want ?

IMO 3 points are nurturing this "community split"
1. Alliances. There's no point in being this or that faction anymore.... it is truly ridiculous the point we have reached. All for a opportunity to plaster a boasting screen on the forum. nothing else.


2. Regions. There are no limits to allied nations. Everything is accessible the same way. Looking to history even allies would ensure Trade Protective laws to ensure other nations didn't access everything. But nooooooo... don't you dare touch my cheese !!!!! I want it all.


3. No population meter for factions when creating new character. This is just a grain of salt in the entire plate.

 

So, solving number 1 - either revert the Alliance system to the old community made diplomacy - or- only 1 ally per nation and cannot be repeated in consecutive alliance cycle. And to hell with "wannabe kings and emperors and clan leaders that think they ARE the nation".

Solving number 2 - Allies can use the ports for outposts/ship naval base. No crafting, no buildings. Yes, allies can buy and sell stuff. They ain't smugglers heh.


Number 3, I like the undisclosed info but it provokes overpopulation.

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thx, havent played one of these games long enough to form an opinion.
One more point to add to your list.

Make conquering meaningful but not out of proportion as it is now according to a few statements I have read regarding regional bonuses and resources.
 

In the end, ppl will have to judge for themself if they can live with the solution presented to them or not.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OlFson said:

Thx, havent played one of these games long enough to form an opinion.
One more point to add to your list.

Make conquering meaningful but not out of proportion as it is now according to a few statements I have read regarding regional bonuses and resources.
 

In the end, ppl will have to judge for themself if they can live with the solution presented to them or not.

 

Another point is that many wargames require a supply chain ( or simulation of ). meaning there can be no breaks in the conquered territory, therefore all territories must be adjacent to each other territories. Opponents strategy can be conducted to isolate systems/regions/cities/provinces.

A "overseas" expedition would be more costly in terms of preparation than simply sailing down the coast and attack the province next to it. Maybe hostility should reflect this ? Or may a War Fleet system as I proposed, led by leaders, organized by invites, need to be supplied before it can make out to sea.

But in the end... who cares about this... all that matters to many is that if they don't have to deal with people from around the world.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

...

But in the end... who cares about this... all that matters to many is that if they don't have to deal with people from around the world.

..

I believe that remark is due to the endless discussions here (I for myself have the habit to look for english speaking communities within a game rather than my native tongue, less nonsense in chat and voice com) .
I would like to interact with ppl all over the place. But not at the cost of my RL schedule. I believe this is the point that is really bothering the most.
Therefor I made the remark of meaningful but not out of proportion conquests.

If ppl would gain slight, but not gamebreaking advantages, nobody would care as much as they do now.
Same for losing your stuff (which is yet a mood point since a reset is coming anyway) but have to be considered for later. If it meant that you only lose part of it, not much complaining. Losing all your stuff would be realistic, but ppl are here to play a game.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

But in the end... who cares about this... all that matters to many is that if they don't have to deal with people from around the world.

To be fair, I think that people care a great deal about it, it's just that most of those ideas work perfectly fine in a normal scenario and then fall flat on their face as soon as they have also have to somehow span the timezone cleft. Trying to apply various competitive mechanics is pointless if there's no opposition, and the only ways to facilitate inter-timezone competition is indirectly, which is extremely dull (such as doing various activities just to fill up progress bar percentages à la Elite Dangerous).

It's a problem with the fundamentals, which is why I'm highly skeptical that it can ever be resolved amicably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

Let's absolutely not shuffle ourselves to other nations and sit tight. Let's absolutely not vote for another alliance and sit tight. Yes. It seems it cannot be solved as playerbase doesn't want to shift the status quo. That's all. :)

I find the Elite system fascinating as the universe is one Global universe, not two ! And even solo players affect it. war zones ( 3 minimum per planet ) instanced as many as possivle with 64 players plus AI and capital ships in a never stopping tug of war. But no, similar suggestions were made in the past and totally brought down by the same peers that are cheering for the split timezones.

I for one already created character in PvP-2 and leave the PvP.1 with one less GMT - EU player so you can have your arenas when you want how you want. That's how raw and bloody it can get when you split apart a community.

Solomon's Law.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing a humongous amounts of jumps to get to a warzone in ED was one of the most anti-climactic experiences I've ever had when finding out that all it was was just a hodgepodge array of AI ships spawning ad infinitum, and if lucky there'd might be a player among them (who got thoroughly pissed when I chose to target him instead of the AI, no less). Perhaps I just ended up going to an unpopulated one, might be time to give the game another shot to see what's changed.

Looks like the devs took the idea to heart with the raids though (AI ship defending while being progressively supplanted with player captains).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Custard said:

That's a very good idea.

Having a supply chain or some sort of connected controlled area to be able to use those resources/upgrades may help any group that doesn't want to align with the two current political groups and have a valid reason to exist.

 

 

 

 

To me a supply chain does not seem appropriate for this game.  It is appropriate for a continental conquest prior to airlift ability.  We only meet one of those two criteria.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is true Ribault, I agree.

But equipping a fleet to deploy overseas war - American Revolution / Cromwellian invasion of Santo Domingo & Jamaica - is not the same as equipping a mere crossing - 1812 Great Lakes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Aegir said:

Doing a humongous amounts of jumps to get to a warzone in ED was one of the most anti-climactic experiences I've ever had when finding out that all it was was just a hodgepodge array of AI ships spawning ad infinitum, and if lucky there'd might be a player among them (who got thoroughly pissed when I chose to target him instead of the AI, no less). Perhaps I just ended up going to an unpopulated one, might be time to give the game another shot to see what's changed.

Looks like the devs took the idea to heart with the raids though (AI ship defending while being progressively supplanted with player captains).

The instance system is unlike NA though. It relies on players and their groups to generate who's in what.

Never had any issues and I did my share of viper cold runs in big battles. Actually the trade system during the war period is solid. Can run the gauntlet and provided the needed goods. So good gameplay for trader and smugglers, helping one side or the other while players can stay on the approaches trying to draw them into interception.

And ofc then you have the war zones, from low intensity to high intensity.

And it can last for a long time in some high stakes systems and people battle it out in combat or by shipping urgent cargo. In the end one of the sides always prevails.

And it runs 24/7 at the same time across open and solo and everything counts, so I decidedly can say the system is solid for any player, no one is split. No one is left out.

Only down is what you say, you can have issues when instanced and drop into a odd one, but the actions you make there count. And the AI now is way more kind because...well... people asked to be toned down. They were very challenging.

Back to Naval Action, sorry for the off topic.

With Raids what the AI provides is action. Pure and simple. Maybe see it like Epic Events. Risky and rewards to the risk they are, depending on the clues you make out of the port resources to raid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supply chain makes perfect sense on this game, afterall national endeavours into this region took years to plan and fiance. 

It would be good for this new points system to allow players to band together say at least 100 paying a crazy sum of money etc to set up national sponsored outposts using captured regions which the sole purpose of launching raiding party's like the old flag system, as I'm hoping raids can get launched from the capital or sponsored outposts to make raiding more unique 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, monk33y said:

Supply chain makes perfect sense on this game, afterall national endeavours into this region took years to plan and fiance. 

It would be good for this new points system to allow players to band together say at least 100 paying a crazy sum of money etc to set up national sponsored outposts using captured regions which the sole purpose of launching raiding party's like the old flag system, as I'm hoping raids can get launched from the capital or sponsored outposts to make raiding more unique 

Naval Bases and War Fleets, aye.

I still hope to see regional capitals as Naval Bases, the power center of the region and being used only for creation of War Fleets or docks for ships.

The other towns of a region are the civilian and buildings centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7.3.2017 at 11:54 AM, Crowley said:

God, do I despise you people.

 

Alliances are never going to change.

Same feelings about you .Only for 1 reason.

If the US would play against you, you would think the same as we do about nightflips.

So stop pretending here. The true hypocrits are exactly like you. Just giving an opposition,without being concerned about anything else.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think PVP2 should move to PVP1.  There are plenty of Australians whom play this game and love to play the British.    Wow!  a United States/British war?  who would think such a thing,  after all they speak common English.  

I also have stated that empty port battles (defending) should fill up with NPCs of various ships with players in a list at the Port but that is an entirely different topic.  Would be fun to command maybe 2-24 npc's in a port battle against 25 good players with the forts firing.  That would be fun.  

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EL LOCO said:

I personally think PVP2 should move to PVP1.  There are plenty of Australians whom play this game and love to play the British.    Wow!  a United States/British war?  who would think such a thing,  after all they speak common English.  

I also have stated that empty port battles (defending) should fill up with NPCs of various ships with players in a list at the Port but that is an entirely different topic.  Would be fun to command maybe 2-24 npc's in a port battle against 25 good players with the forts firing.  That would be fun.  

 

 

 

 

I agree, its pretty much absurd at this point to have 2 servers.  One pretty much dead and one barely holding on.  The general opinion on your side of the alliance feels that this is a bad idea because the dominant nations over PVP2 are Brit/US/Dutch and those players would naturally choose the same nation here, making the alliances very lopsided.  This is frankly a short sighted and selfish view of things.  Regardless of what nation players from PVP2 would hypothetically join, MORE players on this server would only ever be a good thing.  

For example if the US time zone players got kicked off PVP1 and I had to swap over to PVP2 I'd pick one of the lesser populated nations to help balance things.  I doubt I'd be a lone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2017 at 6:13 PM, Jean Ribault said:

Quote your server, captain, cuz you don't hear any complaining on PVP2 (from FR).

The funny thing you think the PvP2 with it's smaller pop would be the one that complains the most about night flips.  No it's the EU server with the largest population and mixture of folks from all over the world.   

2 hours ago, EL LOCO said:

I personally think PVP2 should move to PVP1.  There are plenty of Australians whom play this game and love to play the British.    Wow!  a United States/British war?  who would think such a thing,  after all they speak common English.  

I also have stated that empty port battles (defending) should fill up with NPCs of various ships with players in a list at the Port but that is an entirely different topic.  Would be fun to command maybe 2-24 npc's in a port battle against 25 good players with the forts firing.  That would be fun.  

If ping doesn't matter than why don't ya'll come to PvP2.  The problem is the location of the servers physically.   What they need to do and this includes PvE server too.  Is find a location that has the best over all ping for the EU/US/SEA/AU players and have a server there.  Right not Germany is not the best location for that as it pretty much kills many of the SEA/AU and even US players that are on the West Coast. I'm sorry I'm not going to settle for 130-160 ping over my current 40-60 cause you want to keep your 20 ping.   It needs to be moved to a better location globally and than merge all three servers into one.   Than folks can stop bitching.  Once the population gets bigger than they can bring out more than one server like they have in the past.  Though to rightfully do this they need to wipe every one and let us start a new since folks on both servers have way to crap they are tied to. This will allow them to bring in the new ship mechanics, get people on a fair playing ground for econ and last allow folks to roll new nations since they are no longer tied to the the one they have been in.  This should allow a better server balance as a whole.  Even if this means we get all our stuff as a redeemable, but we need to be able to let every one start over with no alliances and getting to pick new nations.

12 minutes ago, Christendom said:

I agree, its pretty much absurd at this point to have 2 servers.  One pretty much dead and one barely holding on.  The general opinion on your side of the alliance feels that this is a bad idea because the dominant nations over PVP2 are Brit/US/Dutch and those players would naturally choose the same nation here, making the alliances very lopsided.  This is frankly a short sighted and selfish view of things.  Regardless of what nation players from PVP2 would hypothetically join, MORE players on this server would only ever be a good thing.  

For example if the US time zone players got kicked off PVP1 and I had to swap over to PVP2 I'd pick one of the lesser populated nations to help balance things.  I doubt I'd be a lone.

We aren't dead yet, but notice lately our numbers been going up cause we are doing things to perk up the server life, while ya'll numbers are going down.  EIther way they need to fix the port battle lock out times so that US players can play them in there prime times.  This would be better for both servers.   If ya'll stop chasing off the other nations players that aren't EU you will prob get more players too.  From my times over on PvP1 I have found many of the none US/English speaking nations are very rude to any one that isn't EU.   This is why you can't fill these port battle slots. 

My mind set of night flips.   When there is a war, pick any that your nation has been in over the past several hundred years.  Did we all stop and say, "Hay don't attack us on this day or night.  Cause we have to be at work and can't fight back?"   No they attacked when it was best for that nation to do the most damage in the fight.   Many small countries did a lot of damage to large ones cause they didn't follow the same rules as others.   When we do modern warfare do we not do night raids/strikes?   What happens if you attack a fort before new troops get there?   You don't know when some one is going to attack, the only thing you can do is counter attack later.  So loose the region and than gain it back.  That is war.  That is how it happens in real life.  If any of ya'll are combat veterans you would know this.  They don't wait until every one is ready and free to attack each other.  You do it when you can.  You do know what surprise attacks are right?  Exactly.....so stop your bitching and when you get the port off cool down attack back.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 servers, one for cry babies who want the devs to constantly spoon feed them everything they want, and one for the rest who can deal with whatever comes their way. One for those who have no imagination no innovation and must have access to every resource all the time and must have a totally balanced equal playing field to play on otherwise they throw their toys out the pram and cry for their mum or  the Devs to come and do something, and one  for those that can accept the ups and downs the good times and the bad times a nation can go through in a constantly evolving world.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Fletch67 said:

2 servers, one for cry babies who want the devs to constantly spoon feed them everything they want, and one for the rest who can deal with whatever comes their way. One for those who have no imagination no innovation and must have access to every resource all the time and must have a totally balanced equal playing field to play on otherwise they throw their toys out the pram and cry for their mum or  the Devs to come and do something, and one  for those that can accept the ups and downs the good times and the bad times a nation can go through in a constantly evolving world.

I thought that was what made the PvE and PvP servers different.  Though lately I been feeling like we are actually on PvE2 not PvP2 cause of folks that like.  Really if you don't want war, RvR and conflict go play on the PvE server folks.

Edited by Sir Texas Sir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...