Trade Wind "Speed Lanes" - Themed travel time reduction

[Tenet]

One complaint I hear very often from friends that play the game is that everything is taking too long. At the same time, the time factor works out great when the map is heavily populated and adds richness and a hardcore quality to the game. 

This idea is for an adjustable means of shrinking travel times in an adjustable fashion - that can be increased or reduced based on population size or other factors. 

Idea: "Trade Winds" are paths marked on the map and visible in the sea that accelerate the ship by a %0 to X in a particular fixed direction, as long as the ship stays on the path. 

- Trade Wind paths appear in parallel pairs - each one in a different direction, and nullify global wind, replacing with it's own pointing along the path

- The paths are straight and gradual, dissipating in bonus speed towards lands, but increasingly effective further away from towns. They can begin at some distance from the denser regions, and connect across larger bodies of water. 

- The % of speed up can depend on various factors for balance, for example, it can be adjusted based on the density of ships using the lane, or based on server population, if required for balance. 

- Ships on the path are possible to intercept - either by camping where the speed bonus is decreased, or timing joining the path within range, or special mechanic where blockading slows down nearby ships to normal. 

- The path can be shown via slightly adjusted color of sea affected. 

Important:

- There are two possible different implementations and related effects:

Option 1: Continental - the paths generally follow the outline of islands chains and continents - speeding up travel but keeping the scheme of the islands largely the same. 

Option 2: Cross-Sea - for example positioned between La Orchilla and La Mona, and between Tumbado and Calcasieu, etcetera. 

The first option will compress the map, but without interrupting its general flow. The second option will compress the map more, and create a different flow, perhaps giving more central locations an advantage. If Option 1 is used, the map won't need much rebalancing. If Option 2 is used, some resource locations may need to be reworked based on testing.

Objections Raised so far (to be edited):

- Capitals may become more increasingly vulnerable to sudden attacks, particularly in Option 2, which perhaps means that Capital hostility levels and defenses will need to be buffed as exception. 

FAG (to be edited):

I will create an illustration on a map if this idea gains following and a constructive discussion. 

Edited June 1, 2017 by Tenet

[Salty Dog.]

As a gamer I like the idea but as I programmer, I can see a world of problems.  Not sure how that code would work.

[Tenet]

20 minutes ago, Salty Dog PVP1 said:

As a gamer I like the idea but as I programmer, I can see a world of problems.  Not sure how that code would work.

I'm not one, but this is my attempt at the general idea:

- You have the code to draw lines and designate areas in the sea (at least in-match, if not in OW), so you can adapt that to delineate the location graphically and define it. 

- IF the location of the ship is on the path, THEN Ship_Vector is adjusted by automatic rudder equivalent to 20% of player control AND the speed gets a boost equivalent to BOOST ( Ship_Vector, Path_Vector ), a function that returns in % how much the ship's vector matches the path vector, the boost returns 0 if the vectors are closer to perpendicular. 

Elaboration:

- If you enter the path, it tries to keep you inside at 20% of equivalent of your rudder strength (so you can steer out, or go perpendicular and ignore it). 

- The closer to the path direction you are, the higher the BOOST in speed you get (if you steer out, you go back to normal speed). 

- The function of BOOST can also work depending on location on the path, ie, if it's a cross-sea path it can start slower, increase in impact, then decrease back to zero gradually. 

That's the basics at first glance - obviously IANAP and this requires professional thought. 

What would be the problems you foresee as a programmer? Specific examples would help me explore the idea. 

 

Edited June 1, 2017 by Tenet

[maturin]

Quote

- Trade Wind paths appear in parallel pairs - each one in a different direction, and nullify global wind, replacing with it's own pointing along the path

Only if they are called Los Angeles Freeway Winds, because that's what they are. Trade winds are an actual thing. https://www.windy.com/?17.057,-38.188,5

Also, I don't see the point of aiding AFK sailing specifically in an area where all the gankers will congregate.

[CaptVonGunn]

Be easier to just have set Trade Winds like on real life with some tweaks for gaming... It would also make some peoples choices interesting . Do you go for the faster trip and take the chance of more likely getting hit by hunters lurking along them?

Edited June 2, 2017 by CaptVonGunn

[Tenet]

35 minutes ago, maturin said:

Only if they are called Los Angeles Freeway Winds, because that's what they are. Trade winds are an actual thing. https://www.windy.com/?17.057,-38.188,5

Also, I don't see the point of aiding AFK sailing specifically in an area where all the gankers will congregate.

It's similar enough, as many things are in the game while being entirely unrealistic. The "theme" fits and the gameplay is hopefully improved. 

You seem to have only one counter argument so far against the gameplay - "AFK sailing":

If someone is willing to risk AFK sailing a lane that can be easily camped by enemies and intercepted, that's on them. Risk reward. 

[Tenet]

I wonder if any of the weekend warriors have an opinion on this suggestion? 

[Richard Whitby]

All ship and damage models, everything in the game so far was planed as realistic as possible...
And this is just not it.
Wind wont stop on open sea to go a completly different direction. I would accept something in the way of the global ocean conveyor belt, but then again, you would need a whole world map instead of just the carribean.

[Tenet]

22 hours ago, Richard Whitby said:

All ship and damage models, everything in the game so far was planed as realistic as possible...
And this is just not it.

Wind won't stop on open sea to go a completely different direction. I would accept something in the way of the global ocean conveyor belt, but then again, you would need a whole world map instead of just the carribean.

Many parts of the game are either entirely unrealistic, or shifted towards the arcade, to promote gameplay fun.

Crafting a ship takes 0 seconds despite taking months and years. Moving between outposts. Replacing entire masts mid-combat. Repairing hull. Reviving disabled crew members with Rum. The instanced nature of battles and BR.  

Further items that were changed for gameplay fun - the time flow in battle vs. the reload of cannons. We have very fast days in battle instances, not corresponding to the reloads, that are also faster than historical. 

There's a Balance between Gameplay and Realism, and the Map Size / Travel Times in the game are still hugely tilted towards time-waste, counted in hours. 

We can fish for salt, but Trade Winds, modified to improve and fit the gameplay, are unacceptable?

Does anyone have a Gameplay based counter argument?

Edited June 5, 2017 by Tenet

[maturin]

Quote

We can fish for salt, but Trade Winds, modified to improve and fit the gameplay, are unacceptable?

In for a penny, in for a pound of stupid is not an argument either.

No one ever asked me whether fishing for seasalt was a good idea, or I would have told them it wasn't.

The gameplay problem is that travel lanes are just a honeypot for gank victims.

[Tenet]

2 hours ago, maturin said:

The gameplay problem is that travel lanes are just a honeypot for gank victims.

This also makes them a honeypot for gankers, targeted by escorts and anti-gank parties.

Looks like you are saying the idea will promote PvP in the open world map. That's the goal. 

[Richard Whitby]

4 hours ago, Tenet said:

Looks like you are saying the idea will promote PvP in the open world map. That's the goal. 

So that's the reason your idea wouldn't work.. 

PvP and ganking would take placer where it always took.

Why should I use a route where I am attacked 100% as a trader?

Edited June 5, 2017 by Richard Whitby

[Tenet]

7 hours ago, Richard Whitby said:

So that's the reason your idea wouldn't work.. 

PvP and ganking would take placer where it always took.

Why should I use a route where I am attacked 100% as a trader?

If you were smart you would hire an Escort, bring the Fighters in your Clan that benefit from the increased trade. 

Right now Escorting a trader is a huge waste of time because it's often an hour of time investment with no guarantee of any action or necessity. It's only ever done near Capitals by people who already patrol for PvP, but never extends out too far. 

If my idea reduced the time commitment by a significant amount, and increased the probability of action, it would actually attract PvP / Fighting captains to support their Nation's traders as the game designers clearly intended. 

I doubt the probability of attack would be 100% as you claim, but if it were, that would be good for those looking for a Fight to defend their Nation. 

If you lack Escort, you can choose to avoid the faster but more risky travel and stick to a slower but less popular route. 

It's a win-win for everyone.

 

[Richard Whitby]

We're doing escorts in my clan anyway.. 

Maybe not on all routes but on those that are important to us.

And we have fun thinking about what route to take and what could be ahead of us.

But none of us complains about traveling time.

Maybe it's because most of us love the fact this is a sailing game and don't want it to me more arcade than it is anyway...

But I see that certain players probably want

[Tenet]

1 hour ago, Richard Whitby said:

We're doing escorts in my clan anyway.. Maybe not on all routes but on those that are important to us.And we have fun thinking about what route to take and what could be ahead of us. But none of us complains about traveling time.

Maybe it's because most of us love the fact this is a sailing game and don't want it to me more arcade than it is anyway...

This is the structure of the game's player base:

Players that Consider buying Naval Action on Steam > Owners of a Naval Action Account > Players that Stopped Playing the Game (much bigger than) >>> Players Still Playing the Game > Players that actually like the long travel times. 

You do understand that you are in the minority of the minority, and the problem is with other people not liking the semi-afk activity of long distance travel? Particularly people coming into this game from other open-world titles? 

The other point of disagreement, the real one, is that you claim this is a "sailing game". I'm sorry, but it isn't, and that's partly the problem. This is a Naval (happening on the Seas) Action (Conflict, Fighting) game. 

There are no Sailing features in the Open World. You do not control your sails. You do not get forced to adjust them or deal with the typical sailing hazards described in all the Captain logs and Book series many of us read. 

The Sailing is boring and tedious. It's the Action - the successful Trade, the close tough Fight,  that most people crave.

Yes, we don't want a WoT/CoD clone arcade, we want the open world experience, but we could damn well do with a bit less of the travel time and a bit more of the chasing, running and shooting. 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Tenet