Patch 10.2 - Changes to mission, crafting, ROE and other fixes

[manuva85]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

ah no .. teleport from BRS and alliances were purely player driven features (alliances by large clans and tp from brs by solo hunters who demanded the solution to revenge fleets). Just like the insta closed battles, just like many other features Just like the open world itself. Stop making up bs.  You just forgot. \this game is 80% player designed.

some of these things worked yet were abanfoned.. you had sweetpoint on masts 2 times already. you did clowned up and changed it for no reason though, we went through so many changes and always max min changes, hard to be angry on community that open development was a flop, and acting like mostly negative reviews dont exist.

If you cant take info that some part of gameplay might be flawed, but react as if i was atacking entire game and wanted only p-ersonal gains you got serious problems and probably shouldnt try developing games, or be a developer spokesman of forums..

Edited June 13, 2017 by manuva85

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, Hodo said:

A Snow with all 22guns on the sides, and the 4 on the bow and stern will only require 52men total.  2men per medium gun.

And you only have what 65 crew, doens't leave much for sailing and if you loose any.  Yah you might want to down gun them or your going to be reloading slow as hell.

[Remus]

6 minutes ago, admin said:

Actually no
Its the vocal minority who wants to nullify defense fleets, wants battles to close immediately,  want to win by insta demasting, want to solo pvp near enemy capital. 

They don't go together. I would like to severely curtail ... well, in my case it's rarely a defensive fleet as often as not I'm in a trader and, having made one successful escape I'd quite like to run under cover of darkness (or whatever). Defensive fleet, revenge attacks, griefing, call it what you will. Bad, bad, bad (but read on to final paragraph).

5 minute close timer was okay. 3 minute is probably better but I have no wish to see immediate close.

Demasting is a legitimate tactic but was probably OP before ... but so are repairs. It sounds like this patch has shifted it wildly the other way now. Personally I prefer this but I'm not sure its best for the game.

Solo PvP near enemy capitals is fine, but this is the one situation where you should fear enemy reinforcement. Perhaps there should be different battle entry or exit mechanisms within, say, 50km of a capital ... or perhaps within the county area (of the top of my head - I cannot think how far this extends). Not closing battles at all near capitals might be most appropriate.

[admin]

9 minutes ago, manuva85 said:

 

If you cant take info that some part of gameplay might be flawed, but react as if i was atacking entire game 

no you claimed that i have said a group of hardcore skilled solo players were whining. You basically claimed we insulted a group of players when we did not.. Why do you think your opinions will matter from now on. You did this before with other crap accusations even before release. People like you will never get heard. Change your style and we talk.

If you talk trash sometimes this just spoils all you say. Find a spokesman or whisper to tommy shelby and he will translate. 

Also just like you said it - having haters means you are doing something special

 

[Captain corn blower]

DEVS what's the chance on a one time perk reset I did not know it was not reset able . Yes you can for 54 pve marks but being a trader I don't have many . And the ones I have I need to buy Marines with to keep from getting my butt kicked on boarding or lower the reset Mark's down to like 10 or 20 if I have to go back to battle grinding that's affordable

[TommyShelby]

2 minutes ago, Hodo said:

I rarely take the side of the @admin  but you are wrong.  You yourself asked for shorted battle join timers, he added that with a decent number, 3min.. is it to long dont know, is it to short, not sure... we will find out.  

He increased the strength of masts, until we actually test them we dont know how much.  I doubt they are as bad as they once were.  

Hodo... 

As for timers, we tested 5 minutes, we tested 2 minutes. 
2 minutes = What you see is what you get RoE. 3 minutes isn't. 
I'll go ahead and say that i already know that 2 minutes timers are better

Mast thickness, we tested certain values already. The values put in place now are too high. 
Numbers dont lie and its easy to tell if something isn't right.

[Pada]

28 minutes ago, admin said:

I do not like demasting to be the only tactic choice for a skilled player.

What is wrong with having this kind of skill. Personally I worked hard to be really good at demasting and I only use it as a last way out or when someone try's to run away. And if you try to demast in a fleet fight this will hurt you more then the enemy because you have to go close and receive a shitload of hull damage. (Talking about the build pre wipe)

[Sureshot]

We don't want insta demasting, we want the each tactic to be balanced. Chain, hull and masts should all be tactics that are equally balanced that you can use and win with.

And some of us just don't want "insta revenge fleets" (in my opinion even worse) because the games mechanics give you no chance of escaping. That is what is infuriating, it's impossible to escape. Just give us some means of escaping, that is all we are asking for. Give us a chance to escape.

[dumpert]

28 minutes ago, admin said:

баффну пожалуй еще и хп

лично у меня никогда не было достаточно прямых рук, чтобы играть через мачты. так что - бафай.

[admin]

6 minutes ago, Hodo said:

This is the issue.  The amount of money that is made within a few minutes of the capital port, mostly in that region or the adjacent regions is an issue.   

Now that those regions are starting to get flooded with goods people have started to log off instead of traveling further away.   Why?  Because they have already made millions why bother for more.

 

the best trade now is to craft repairs and rum and sell them to NPCs in freetowns

[jodgi]

23 minutes ago, admin said:

Actually no
Its the vocal minority who wants to nullify defense fleets, wants battles to close immediately,  want to win by insta demasting, want to solo pvp near enemy capital. 

please, no. Not like this. Don't demonize... or moronize us like this.

I've never seen anyone trying to nullify players defending an area... if they're there. It's those that show up twenty minutes later multiplied with OW time compression we want to burn with fire.

There's been a broad concensus for the last 18 months that 2 min timers is the optimal compromise for the inherent challenge the OW vs. instance time break creates.

I've seen some posters asking for a hull bashing based meta, but I've never seen people asking for insta win demasting. We want balance between choices.

Maybe some of us have wanted solo pvp near enemy capitals since that's where we know we can find targets, forgive us but we've been through some pvp dry spells. Going solo close to enemy capitals should be punished, we accept that.

Don't straw man us, pretty please!

 

[TommyShelby]

5 minutes ago, jodgi said:

Going solo close to enemy capitals should be punished, we accept that.

But should we really be forced to face "Home defense fleets" (Even though these "Home defense fleets" tend to show up nowhere near their "home waters")? 

Aren't we taking a big enough risk just by going close to enemy capitals and heavily populated waters? Why should the chance of us being ganked be higher than it is for everyone else on the OW? 
I don't understand this.

[Sureshot]

I can't see how people can defend revenge fleets. If they exist and actually have to catch you in the open world to sink you that is fine I can live with that. But what I can't live with is having absolutely no way to escape, how can that be ok?

It always strikes me as odd when PvP players go out and look for PvP, you know the thing you are supposed to do on a PvP server? They are the bad ones for creating PvP. They always get the most flak. While players who teleport half the map to punish people for PvPing get nothing said about them, it's completely fine somehow. They can somehow be a home defense fleet even though they weren't there to defend it.

[Remus]

1 hour ago, admin said:

the best trade now is to craft repairs and rum and sell them to NPCs in freetowns

I can think of a few better trades than this, but you are sowing the seeds of something useful here. But it needs tweaks.:

1. This isn't a very good trade:
   
2. There's a lot of variation. The top end of hull and rig repair 'sell' prices is pretty decent, but I woudln't bother selling to NPCs at the bottom end of the free town list. Perhaps you should set standard prices for all free towns
3. Where 'sell' prices are high, buy prices are ... well, outrageous would be overstating it, but look at that 1979 at Bonacca. Standard buy prices would be good too.
4. Rum is underpriced The best I can sell it for is 68, but I'd want at least 100 before I'd consider it worth making, especially with such low outputs from those sugar forests.

Edit: I've posted later in this thread on this, and in doing so have refined my stance.

• You need to keep the price drop to 1 to guard against people farming it.
• When Sell drops to 1 you need to keep Buy price high to prevent an obvious exploit (which is doubtless why you do it).
• For useful items like repairs, reduce the differential between standard sell and standard buy price to something like 10%
• Standardise prices, at least in free towns, so you don't get the variations seen here. or at least reduce the price range seen
• Set prices a little lower (perhaps 10%-20% lower) than what players typically charge other players for player-made goods like guns and ships. Repair sales to NPCs are guaranteed wheareas ship and gun sales to players are not. Less risk, less reward.
• Don't let the AI remove port stocks of repairs. Depletion should only be through players buying them.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Remus

[Fellvred]

The lower mast buff was certainly needed as demasting was the only viable tactic a lot of the time.

The thing that worries me is that PvP is still seen as a reward after players/clans have eaten the things they might not like (PvE, trading etc). Are there any plans to make full time PvP viable (in smaller ships) for the average player? I know PvP is already a nice stream of income and marks for experienced players (I haven't lost anything larger than a cutter yet :p) but why shouldn't a player be able to have decent battles without having to farm the same PvE battle for hours if their brig is sunk?

Perhaps you can look at making 6th/7th rates cheaper (and easier) to build, maybe not needing shipyards etc? 

[jodgi]

1 minute ago, TommyShelby said:

But should we really be forced to face "Home defense fleets" (Even though these "Home defense fleets" tend to show up nowhere near their "home waters")? 

Aren't we taking a big enough risk just by going close to enemy capitals and heavily populated waters? Why should the chance of us being ganked be higher than it is for everyone else on the OW? 
I don't understand this.

I wish that everything was decided by who was within visual range where and when the tag happened.

You know I don't like revenge fleets hyperdriving to a known battle teleport gate. Why? Because it makes smart players stay away from pvp.

It's 17 months since Doran put up his "BROKEN ARROW" post. 

[shaeberle84]

30 minutes ago, admin said:

the best trade now is to craft repairs and rum and sell them to NPCs in freetowns

And why the heck should you encourage something like this??? 

[jodgi]

Just now, shaeberle84 said:

And why the heck should you encourage something like this??? 

Hey! He's actually throwing a bone to the wolves. You no like?

[Captain corn blower]

34 minutes ago, admin said:

the best trade now is to craft repairs and rum and sell them to NPCs in freetowns

All the better to have XP bonuses for long travel over three days too far ports and PVE marks for delivery missions long travel I'm all for that I travel from in one day from one to the map to the other twice the sell for higher prices such is the game 

[Captain corn blower]

1 hour ago, Hodo said:

He gave out 50 PVE marks a week or so ago.

That is true , i play pve and mostly trade in I don't have millions , I'm working on that. I am saving Mark I have it would be nice more affordable ,you don't make as we know pve marks trading 50 is a lot for a reset I can see if you can make that in one admiralty or to admiralty Mission battle orders as we know you don't get anything for delivery orders I'm just saying it would be nice

 

 

[Remus]

19 minutes ago, shaeberle84 said:

And why the heck should you encourage something like this??? 

Don't get alarmed. It is - or could be - quite a good game mechanic.

We want players to use their crafting capacity (building slots and labour hours) to make useful things for other players. We also want to be able to restock with repairs at free towns. Now here's a mechanic that serves both purposes. Selling to NPCs doesn't make the goods disappear, instead it makes them available to other players. (Note to @admin: I don't know if the AI removes repairs from shops like consumed trade goods; if it does, please stop it)

Right now, purchase prices in free town shops are too erratic and the NPC mark up is way too high, but I'd happily see free towns buy hull repairs at 1000 (say) and sell at 1100. If one FT gets overstocked it can lower its purchase price to 1 same as now, but keep the sale price 1100 to guard against an obvious exploit.

1000 may be a little high. It's probably best for fixed price sales to NPCs to give lower rewards than player to player sales via sell contracts where you have no guarantee of finding a buyerl. 800 may be a better price for something that costs 488 to make and takes 5.5 LH.

[Captain corn blower]

12 minutes ago, Hodo said:

In Charleston SC PVPGlobal, PVE marks were going for 1500 ea last night, there was over 120 of them there.  

I'm on pve server it's no going to help me unless there's a way that I don't know a lot of things are getting by still not sure of I wish I could get hold of them thanks for the info

[Pagan Pete]

Trader guns should have a reload and accuracy penally applied because: History.
Trade ships were run as cheaply as possible… without having food that was good enough to even keep the crew alive! Armed traders carried little powere, because it was expensive. And because powder was expensive, the crew was hardly ever drilled in the firing of the cannons.

 

Giving traders naval quality gunnery is… unbalancing.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Pagan Pete

[maturin]

Quote

I would say the penalty should be on the reloading.  

Traverse limits and speed would also make sense, increasing in proportion with speed penalties from cargo.

[Captain corn blower]

So what you're saying is take away all the defenses of a Traders again so you can go seal clubbing on use I remember most military ships back then or heavily Laden with cannonballs powder and supplies for long stays at sea then couldn't run down most of their Quarry , that's also why you had Lookouts who scan the rise and looking for sales so that mean the traitor or pirate if it was an unfriendly shaped sail you would run the

Edited June 13, 2017 by Captain corn blower