TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Daguse said: So because you say your honorable all other players are going to be the same way? Fact is your recommendation allows for players to take ships well below their own with not reprisals! Did i state that? Nope. Did you make a comment pretending to know my playstyle and what it is i want? Yes. I've stated my opinion on the subject matter. I'm not against invisibility because hell, i can deal with longer invisibility timers. I'm just saying we've tested invisibility before and it didn't work out the way you think it will. (But sure, lets test it again as we are doing with so many other things!) And furthermore, i don't see why the "wolves" should be exposed more than the "sheep" when it comes to game mechanics. When the "Wolves" venture into enemy territory looking for PvP they are well aware that they might face overwhelming odds, have to run and maybe lose a ship. When the "Sheep" leave their home port they must feel 100% safe, and if it so happens that a "wolf" eats them, the "sheep" must have revenge served on a silver platter. In my head that is so wrong. Tis is a PvP game, no one should have revenge/ganks served on silver platters the way revenge fleets does. If they had to work for it the same way the "Wolves" do then it would be just fine and i think most of the complaints your hearing now would disappear. The people sailing their homewaters already have the advantage because they are close to friendly ports and most likely, friendly players. Funny thing; Most people i killed near their capitals didn't even notice me untill they were pulled into battle (And we are talking Rear-Admiral rank players). When i sail the OW i look around all the time, if i see an enemy group of ships that i think i can't deal with i will turn around and run. Most of the time i get away because i'm aware of my surroundings, the wind and so on. If only the "sheep" would be aware of their surroundings... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodo Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 23 minutes ago, TommyShelby said: Oh right, i forgot that is exactly how i play! I only attack low ranked players, traders and ships that are atleast 1 class lower than my own. Thanks for reminding me of my playstyle and what it is i want and don't want So explain what I do... A Lynx is the lowest of the ship classes aside from the Basic Cutter. Even the Cutter has more firepower. But I attack trader ships and some warships. I guess I am just the 1%... But there is no good solution that involves teleportation from battle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, Hodo said: So explain what I do... A Lynx is the lowest of the ship classes aside from the Basic Cutter. Even the Cutter has more firepower. But I attack trader ships and some warships. I guess I am just the 1%... But there is no good solution that involves teleportation from battle. What you do, and how you play, is your choice. I respect your way of playing the game but it doesn't mean i enjoy that type of gameplay. I also don't blame people for ganking, its part of the game. I don't blame people for revenge fleeting, i blame the mechanics allowing it. I think there is good solutions involving TP from battle. I doubt there is good solution including Invisibility (because we tested it before extensively and it didn't work..). However i'm willing to test anything that "might" solve it. (I'm not saying invisibility won't work, i'm just saying i doubt it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, Liquicity said: I never said that I like the current system? I said I had a lot of fun in OW PvP in enemy waters, as a response to your question. However what happens after it, the revenge fleet BS, is another topic. I know you said you didnt like promoting ow pvp in enemy waters. So again. Where to pvp? so what was the point of your last post? Any who, I'm all for pvp in any nationality waters. If I said otherwise please quote it as I'll adjust it right away. what I am for is balanced pvp where players attacking in enemy waters run a risk of reprisals but are not set apon by gank fleets. They should have a chance to flee and make it back to friendly waters but are not guaranteed too. ps I hate this damn iPhone, and thx for making my work day so fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfimp Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) But wasn't the problem with invisibility before that people would exploit it to attack directly from invisibility? We currently have invisibility followed by a "can't attack or be attacked" timer. One thought is to simply extend the duration of each - allowing a captain dropping out of a battle instance a chance of escaping a revenge fleet.... while not opening up an avenue for exploitation - either through the invisibility mechanic or through a "get out of jail free" teleport. That would be easy to test - just increase the timers we currently have for a week, and see what impact they have on revenge fleets. What about that idea? How would it be exploited, and wouldn't it be at least a step in the right direction on the revenge fleet issue? Edited June 28, 2017 by Benedict Ahhnold 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Benedict Ahhnold said: But wasn't the problem with invisibility before that people would exploit it to attack directly from invisibility? We currently have invisibility followed by a "can't attack or be attacked" timer. One thought is to simply extend the duration of each - allowing a captain dropping out of a battle instance a chance of escape a revenge fleet. While not opening up an avenue for exploitation - either through the invisibility mechanic or through a "get out of jail free" teleport. That would be easy to test - just increase the timers we currently have for a week, and see what impact they have on revenge fleets. What about that idea? How would it be exploited, and wouldn't it be at least a step in the right direction on the revenge fleet issue? No. That was not the problem.. The problem is that people will sail in invisibility toward an enemy, then stay on his tail untill they could attack. Then gank the shit out of this poor peasant. And you can do that even with "dual invisibility" as Daguse called it, it just means you need a scout outside guiding you. You might not be spot on every time but it can still be done with an organized group. (I never experienced this issue, but tons of people complained about it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Benedict Ahhnold said: But wasn't the problem with invisibility before that people would exploit it to attack directly from invisibility? We currently have invisibility followed by a "can't attack or be attacked" timer. One thought is to simply extend the duration of each - allowing a captain dropping out of a battle instance a chance of escape a revenge fleet. While not opening up an avenue for exploitation - either through the invisibility mechanic or through a "get out of jail free" teleport. That would be easy to test - just increase the timers we currently have for a week, and see what impact they have on revenge fleets. What about that idea? How would it be exploited, and wouldn't it be at least a step in the right direction on the revenge fleet issue? That is what I'm for + increased speed while invisible and the inability to see other ships while invisible. What I don't get is why others are so against it! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Just now, TommyShelby said: No. That was not the problem.. The problem is that people will sail in invisibility toward an enemy, then stay on his tail untill they could attack. Then gank the shit out of this poor peasant. And you can do that even with "dual invisibility" as Daguse called it, it just means you need a scout outside guiding you. You might not be spot on every time but it can still be done with an organized group. (I never experienced this issue, but tons of people complained about it.) That is why they added the can't attack timer after invisibility. The problem has already been resolved it just may need tuning. And if not your solution to tp just helps the attacker escape with no reprisals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 Just now, Daguse said: That is why they added the can't attack timer after invisibility. The problem has already been resolved it just may need tuning. And if not your solution to tp just helps the attacker escape with no reprisals. We had that "cant attack timer" before when testing invisibility. It didn't solve the issue. But like i said, even though dozens of suggestions have been made that doesn't include invisibility and compromise between the "Wolves" and the "revenge fleets" lets just test invisibility again! I'm fine with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodo Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, Daguse said: That is what I'm for + increased speed while invisible and the inability to see other ships while invisible. What I don't get is why others are so against it! I see where others are coming from on it. They are complaining that the possibility of exploiting it to get from point to point faster. But that would just come down to removing the invisibility and speed boost from outlaw battles. While it seems cheesy but how many outlaw battles are going to face a revenge fleet? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, TommyShelby said: We had that "cant attack timer" before when testing invisibility. It didn't solve the issue. But like i said, even though dozens of suggestions have been made that doesn't include invisibility and compromise between the "Wolves" and the "revenge fleets" lets just test invisibility again! I'm fine with it Well the only solution that I've seen that's not TPing or invisibility is a random spawn location and I totally support testing it. I would be all for testing anything that is balanced and doesn't remove players from ow. so by all means what is your recommendation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, Hodo said: I see where others are coming from on it. They are complaining that the possibility of exploiting it to get from point to point faster. But that would just come down to removing the invisibility and speed boost from outlaw battles. While it seems cheesy but how many outlaw battles are going to face a revenge fleet? Works for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, Daguse said: Well the only solution that I've seen that's not TPing or invisibility is a random spawn location and I totally support testing it. I would be all for testing anything that is balanced and doesn't remove players from ow. so by all means what is your recommendation? Read through these 4 topics. You will find plenty of different suggestions. (Some includes invisibility some don't.) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyShelby Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, springby said: But that is long time and many patches ago, the game has evolved. Complain about the ship mechanics or suggest better battle-exit mechanics but please don't attempt to alter the nature, it is not possible. If you cared to read before joining the discussion you would realise that several suggestions have been made. They don't alter the nature of the game, they alter what happens after battles. But lets just say they do alter the nature of the game. Then i have 1 question for you, how did we get where we are now? Didn't we alter the nature of the game to get here? It's kinda silly that you think its okay to alter the nature of the game but at the same time you don't... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 9 minutes ago, TommyShelby said: Read through these 4 topics. You will find plenty of different suggestions. (Some includes invisibility some don't.) Will do. I have to say even though invisibility has been tested I wouldn't cross it off. We all know they love the knee jerk reactions. It's all about balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prater Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, springby said: Venturing around alone is always a bad idea. Its tactical and strategic. It isn't a bad idea, and if it is, then this isn't the Age of Sail. There is nothing tactical or strategic about revenge fleets. Call on your modern radio/instant messager that you need help at such and such a location, half your nation online shows up and puts a ring around the area. That isn't tactical, it isn't strategic, it isn't historical, it is arcadey, gamey, poor sportsmanship, can't take that you lost and can't take that you got out played. How revenge fleets work right now is akin to calling in a warping space fleet. It isn't Age of Sail. It isn't tall ships. It is a ship with a warp drive and modern telecommunications. Edited June 28, 2017 by Prater 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daguse Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 26 minutes ago, Prater said: It isn't a bad idea, and if it is, then this isn't the Age of Sail. There is nothing tactical or strategic about revenge fleets. Call on your modern radio/instant messager that you need help at such and such a location, half your nation online shows up and puts a ring around the area. That isn't tactical, it isn't strategic, it isn't historical, it is arcadey, gamey, poor sportsmanship, can't take that you lost and can't take that you got out played. How revenge fleets work right now is akin to calling in a warping space fleet. It isn't Age of Sail. It isn't tall ships. It is a ship with a warp drive and modern telecommunications. I agree, however with current mechanics, he is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrago Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 No suggestion seems to please everyone, so here's a new one... It would be often be a pain -- basically any time there's not combat -- but it would help with some ganking and revenge fleet issues: What about a "no wake" zone set around ports for some distance? All travel within that zone happens at real world speeds? I have a feeling we'd hate that even more but it would make the combat more realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkydog Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 ok- just one more idea about revenge fleets and leaving battle instances-- How about if the invisibility timer was tied to how long the battle had lasted? - If you get jumped in your home waters and know you are going to lose, you could surrender quickly and have your friends gank him because his invisibility would be very brief and his location known. - but then they would have to get there quickly too. - if it was a more even battle and lasted longer, the invisibility timer would be longer and the victors location more uncertain and possibly further away - giving him a fair chance to escape, make it to a Freeport or log off. i am sure somebody will think of an exploit? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrago Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 2 hours ago, Sparkydog said: ok- just one more idea about revenge fleets and leaving battle instances-- How about if the invisibility timer was tied to how long the battle had lasted? This might actually work as long as other ships were invisible to the invisible player. No sneaking up or regrouping while invisible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PG Monkey Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Your sailing in open world and come across enemy ships, you engage them and the battle lasts 40 minutes do you 1: wait around for the enemy reinforcements to show up at the battle location for 2 days 2: Sail to the nearest friendly port At the moment the first option is all we have 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkydog Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 2 hours ago, Farrago said: This might actually work as long as other ships were invisible to the invisible player. No sneaking up or regrouping while invisible. Maybe instead of invisibility you just stay in instance for a proportionate time and exit to OW in corresponding location? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farrago Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 1 hour ago, Sparkydog said: Maybe instead of invisibility you just stay in instance for a proportionate time and exit to OW in corresponding location? I'd love that solution but apparently that is a big technical challenge to the devs. (The spawning in OW to your location in battle.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodus Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Invisibility timer + 50% speed boost, that way you can get a headstart away from any revenge fleets while not giving free TP passes to gankers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldJeb Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Just remove battle and make a real open world and you will have a real PVP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts