Limited economy slots - coming soon

[Cerebro]

16 minutes ago, admin said:

 

Its a combat game. To get something you have to fight for something. For too long we sat on two chairs. 

Yes u might think it is... but tell that to all the ppl who have fun trading and doing just abit of pvp.

U will miss those players when they are gone and u will have only 200 ppl playing.

[Rikk]

Signed up purely to respond to this.

As a very new player this seems to be a staggeringly bad move, I can't get into PB's as I'm new and have tiny ships so can never get a place in a PB that may be 40-60 mins away, I play for short periods as I have a life so again restricts me from PB's even if I could get in one.

My friends may have a base in one area, now I have to go MILES away to have any chance of getting a single building slot rather than work with the friends I may bring to the game.

No sorry, if this comes in the game will be removed till common sense prevails.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Rikk

[Mike the Mongel]

2 minutes ago, Cerebro said:

Yes u might think it is... but tell that to all the ppl who have fun trading and doing just abit of pvp.

U will miss those players when they are gone and u will have only 200 ppl playing.

and those 200 who also have the many ALTs who fill up PBs so they can do all the land grabbing will rule......hmmmm this idea DEVs is not so good

Edited March 16, 2017 by Mike the Mongel

[NavalActionPlayer]

How will the 'land' slots be divided up between players in the ports each nation currently has? As in on Day 1 this is implemented.

Edited March 16, 2017 by NavalActionPlayer

[Darayavahus]

4 minutes ago, admin said:

every participant of the victorious PB will receive a land grant. We just need to decide how to reward defence of un-landed esquires.. 

Few Problems:
1. There are lists of players created to organise PBs attacks, your idea will completely disorganise attacks as even newbie players will swarm battles in a need of materials,
2. You will limit creation of strategic materials like 'silver', 'gold', 'copper', 'compass wood', 'live oak' which will cause prices to sky-rocket, and some more organised groups could create complete monopoly of those materials. Not to mention Shipyards will need to be aquired aswell.

[Cerebro]

Next time a developer gets a bright idea when he/she is smoking weed on the toilet then dont let him/her out b4 he/she is sober again.

Have u looked at the comments that ppl make abouth this idea?

How many % can u see saying omg this is the best idea ever?

[Red Jack Walker]

Hmmm...interesting way to ruin the game for single players and small clans (c'mon we know that PBs are for big clans and require coordination). Have to say...I didn't see it coming...nice "coup de theatre"

[Taranis]

I like the idea - though i should point out that controlling resources would serve to cause inflation, not contain it.

[Corona Lisa]

Alts blocking slots gonna be a problem.

[Pad Seayew]

1 minute ago, TaranisPrime said:

I like the idea - though i should point out that controlling resources would serve to cause inflation, not contain it.

So you like inflation?   Or you mean you like the idea.........except for the fact of crippling ballooning inflation. 

[Guest]

ADMIN:...........every participant of the victorious PB will receive a land grant. We just need to decide how to reward defence of un-landed esquires..

YOU CANT DETERMINE WHO HELPED OR DEFENDED.............there are tons of screeners and people back at the main port guarding it - all of whom helped to make that PB win possible. There is no way for you to tell who deserves what.

[Taranis]

1 minute ago, Pad Seayew said:

So you like inflation?   Or you mean you like the idea.........except for the fact of crippling ballooning inflation. 

I like the idea of land grants and incentive mechanisms - though not necessarily the exclusion to resources that it may cause and the associated inflationary pressure that come there with.  The quality of this one announcement really depends on what else the devs intend to do.  You are right, ceteris paribus it would be awful - but I have hope that they are looking to correct other aspects of the economic system and that this implementation will be part of a greater set of changes.

Example: If you land grant players than then stop using the land grant - you are just locking out active players from getting resources they may need (particularly when some resources may yet remain scarce / limited to specific ports).

Example 2: The announcement speaks of 25 land slots per port.  Yet we know that presently a PB is over an entire region (ie: multiple ports).  Either this implies that PBs will be on a port by port basis (which I believe it does), or we will see mass shut out of non PB participants (which would kill the server population further - which would seem foolish)... 

[Red Jack Walker]

3 minutes ago, Headless Parrot said:

ADMIN:...........every participant of the victorious PB will receive a land grant. We just need to decide how to reward defence of un-landed esquires..

YOU CANT DETERMINE WHO HELPED OR DEFENDED.............there are tons of screeners and people back at the main port guarding it - all of whom helped to make that PB win possible. There is no way for you to tell who deserves what.

+1. That idea is deeply unwise, unfair and potentially catastrophic for player base....c'mon confess...it's April 1st already.

[Tac]

If this idea was a fork in the road we just chose to take the exclusive route leaving the inclusive one a distant memory.

The OW road seems to be narrowing and leading to destination PB , shame that because it's limited in its scope where OW has endless limitations for battle.

[Jack Jones]

So for me. I don't join clans and I like solo pvp I'm stuffed. No building. No crafting. The big clans will control all money. The big clans will control all resources.  The big clans will control who does what. This will kill the game, dead. 

 

No more do what you WANT  and play how you Like?...really.

 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Blue Tooth

[Hethwill]

For sake of completion this is the original thread

 

[Cerebro]

Quistion:

• Why did u chose to f... over the players who play the game for the love of trading and crafting ans a small amount of pvp?
• Why are u forcing ppl to do PB?
• Why kill OW hunting traders?
• Did u ask new players if they like to have only basic cutters becouse they cant get other ships since the market is controlled by a few big clans?

[z4ys]

NA goes hardcore portbattle sim. I managed my expectations that OW will never get love. But this .... that isn't sandbox anymore that is Pb career mode.

 

[Grundal]

I think there is more to come tomorrow that will tie this all up.   I think we should all wait for the tie in.  

Devs keep up the hard work.  If your vision is for PB game then that is your vision and solo players that craft and the such will have to see IF and HOW they will fit in. 

[Elric]

I fear the impact of inactive players controlling the majority of the resources, and the nation can't do anything about it.  How do you propose to counter the inactive player issue?

[fox2run]

Madness. This game is going down the drain. I want refund!

[Tiedemann]

I'm in a RvR clan in one of the smallest nations ingame. My main goal when I play is to either schedule or join a PB, so for me this would be epic! We will be rewarded for our hard work and struggles, more of our nations lazy players will be motivated to join RvR and as mentioned earlier it will encourage players in overcrowded nations to join smaller nations.

If you get "land rights" by conquering a region and also by defending the region, it should be possible for all to get land rights. The brits will have the pirates help them farm land rights this way, so I don't understand why they are crying.. But if it's only given to players who are in the original successful attack, then wow this just became hard core! 

If this is combined or intended to be implemented after 1 durability ships and it is possible to capture all AI ships sailing around, the where is the harm in testing it..

I just want to point out that no clan owns a PB. If you have hostility points, you are seriously guaranteed to enter. If you bring the correct ship rate, pay attention to team chat and follow commands then it's perfect. If allied players want you to join their ts you have a choice. If a random player would do all this and join the danish ts, that player would be offered a clan invite after that port battle..

Edited March 16, 2017 by Tiedemann

[van Veen]

In summary, joining port battles will be a prerequisite for land ownership in this game. There will be monopolies and they will be jeliously defended. There will be arrangements like: let the enemy take that port now, it's ok. When we re-capture, all resouces will be ours. Let's get organized and kick out all the others.

If you have too many on your server, and if you like to have a bunch of 25 people per nation controlling all resources on each server, it's a good idea actually.

If you want players to have fun in the game even if they do not join port battles, it's the worst idea ever.

[James Cornelius]

2 hours ago, admin said:

Hello Captains. 

Some of you might remember "such is a lord" topic

To make conquest bear more importance on release the number of buildings slots in port will be limited. This means that the city governor will be able to only allocate  25 land plots for construction of mines, manufactures and shipyards. This means only 25 Captains can own something in the city. (number is arbitrary and currently is equal to the number of port battle winners)

The system will work like this. 

1. Once you conquer the port you will receive land grants from the new governor in all cities in that region.
2. These land grants  will be required to build buildings in the cities 
3. If the port is captured by an enemy nation - enemy nation will of course takeover the land and destroy your buildings. 
4. To be able to build anything in this city you will have to recapture it. 
5. Those who don't need buildings can of course sell those land grants to adventurous businessmen. 
6. If you win the port battle alone you will get all the permits to yourself.

This system main goals are

• Control resource supply to avoid inflation in the future
• Provide huge incentive to conquer and participate in conquest

(ps. that's why night flips are no longer viable and tolerable)

This will destroy the ability of the casual players to maintain any semblance of self-sufficiency. All it will do is reward the core group who already always do these things of things.

[Sir Texas Sir]

5 minutes ago, ElricTheTwo said:

I fear the impact of inactive players controlling the majority of the resources, and the nation can't do anything about it.  How do you propose to counter the inactive player issue?

Yah this was a problem we had on POTBS and Governors going inactive for a port.  The best way to flip the issue was to let it get captured and than recaptured it back to make it fresh.

4 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

@admin

A thought, what if:

Instead to give land marks only to the port winners, you give them to all the players of that nation.

For balance issues: You give more to the port winners (4x) and screneers (2x) and just 1 to all nationals. So people will get encouraged in participating in the RvR, because all of them get those marks WHEN the nation wins the pb.

I think that would be way to many land grants.  Remember they said ports.   So folks that don't want to build in that port will be able to give/sale there grants to others.  As long as there is a means for folks to do so and there is no true cap on production in port. I would prefer to see those grants work in any port that your nation owns.  Though I see this as a way to reward those that do the hard work.  I also assume that there will be some ports that others can produce in with no limitations.