Patch 11.0: New ships, Unity 5, Improved clan based conquest, and many other changes.

[Lannes]

TAXATION

I am the only player in my Clan. About a dozen players have left the Clan. No one has been playing for months. I have only just returned a week or so ago. The Creator of the Clan hasn't been seen since June and hasn't played for a year.

So, where do the taxes go? Taxes seem a silly development and do nothing for the playability of the game.

PROGRESS

A little progress has been made. I noticed my FPS has gone up from 30-40, to 50-70+. Also, AI ships on the high seas give some rewards for sinking. Excellent.

Unfortunately, missions have become worse and there are no rewards for fighting a battle. Very strange. The restriction to ships of the same rate is unecessary, in my view.

And, ships still have only one durability. No one except a very good player would risk a pvp under that condition. So, more work to do to get those 2,000 naval wargamers back. I live in hope.

[Takumi El risitas]

6 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

Because after maintenance all hostility drops to 100%, so to remove frustration of players that grinded ports to 100% and didn't get PB. Also to prevent PvE players using missions to farm gold and combat marks. You can jump to Wasa and do shallow hostility mission on in 1st rate kill 10 Aggies and earn 1.2m gold and 150 combat marks.

oke

[Quineloe]

@adminhow is maintenance of ports calculated exactly? we're paying over 400k for one of our ports every day... (Philipsburg)

Edited September 18, 2017 by Quineloe

[Quineloe]

yeah, it's beyond silly. There goes any ambition we had to make 2-3 key ports pay for all the unprofitable ones. Map win now clearly will go to the nation that has the most PVE grinding going to pay for ports no one can use.

Why are all the AI traders that are docking at our ports not paying taxes btw?

[Bubba Smith]

Are Port battles coming to PvE, just wondering when?  

[admin]

1 hour ago, Quineloe said:

@adminhow is maintenance of ports calculated exactly? we're paying over 400k for one of our ports every day... (Philipsburg)

We mentioned it before and i think during tax discussions.
Maintenance = % of tax collected but not less than 100k. I think the number is 30%. The more tax you collect the more support you need for that. Taxmen, military, defence, administration.

Additional services is based  on maintenance cost - the richer the city the more support services cost. 

Philipsburg made 1.3 mln i think. Why you are unhappy with the 900k profit per day?

[admin]

18 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

Also, why are you creating so much bureaucracy? Tax from the tax. 30% and if we add any bonus it gets 50% and if we apply all bonuses then it becomes 70% maintenance cost from taxes income. 

I think it should apply as % increase not a + bonus. And its not tax of a tax. To collect taxes you need a lot of people. This costs money. the higher the tax the bigger the bureaucracy. 

[admin]

24 minutes ago, Peter Goldman said:

There are many ports that have 0 gold income. Spanish nation had all ports unprofitable! Only the last day Key West made 270k, so 170k profit. AI should be taxed too.

 

0 income is a result of 0 trade. If people traded in that port - profit would be higher. Some ports are useless like coastal fishing villages. Conquest will circle around profitable ports just like the real life.
 

regarding ai
Market trade is fully player driven; AI does not participate actively in the market trade, thus there is no base to tax, as we don't tax the same transaction twice and all transactions are already taxed once. All buy purchases from players or ai are taxed from the buyer, all sell transactions to players or to ai are taxed on the seller.  

[Teutonic]

Does the tax lower if the next day the tax income is lower?

So for example - 1.3 million tax income in philipsburg yesterday results in 300k tax. If philipsburg's tax income goes below the previous tax maintenance threshold (300k) does the maintemance go down again?

[SS Minnow]

Here is some feedback I have on the patch:

1. You are on the right track!  The game is more fun now and close to well balanced all around...congrats!
2. Setting the map neutral and letting us choose our ports was a great idea.  The starting region protected to solve all the player startup problems works.
3. Hostility system is close to ideal and I think you should implement better notification of hostility status via the combat channel or other means.  It might be a bit quick only needing 4 missions completed but that weaves in with guarding and only taking ports your clan wants.  Perhaps 5 missions idk.
4. Payout from combat might be a bit high as profits from trading goods seems minor in comparison.  I think the combat payout need a small cut.
5. Its great to be able to afford rebuilding ships if you lose them compared to prior patch.  This will increase the PVP participation for sure.
6. The modules are now more affordable but you still need that rare book to drop in order to make an elite permanent upgrade...seems like you got that right.  Rare resources like cartahena tar need to be accessible somehow by other nations that don't own the port.  There isn't an international trade mechanic so that leaves me with buying an alt acct. or trying to contact an enemy nation to arrange some kind of trade somewhere...lol.  Maybe there should be more rare resources for more rare upgrades in more locations so the few we have are not so easily monopolized.
7. Slots are more reasonable now...but may to reasonable.  I think I can open 5 slots on all ships now in about 6 months instead of 3 years.
8. The masts seem a bit thin on some light frigates.  That's a hard scale to balance..gl.
9. The most minor ship collision results in lost bow spree, rigging shock and even crew shock.  Think that is over the top, let us ram a bit more.  In fact is there a plan for a ramming bow figure?
10. Port battles instances...I guess fix the floating buildings
11. Ship AI is better now but I notice some path-finding issues when trying to sail around a sharp cornered shoreline to get around.  Jagged shorelines probably always be a problem for the AI.   At most ports, the towers and forts could be located more strategically than they are.  Many players have commented on the lack of neutral port defenders compared to the missions.
12. The new port tax and maintenance system is working pretty well for a first try.  Many of us thought it would be very costly to maintain but not to bad if you only take a dozen ports or less per clan.  Somewhat balanced to the number of outposts you can have.  I think if you cut the combat payout it might we might have to be more frugal with our port maintenance spending also.  Some ports will never pay good but are needed to have a contiguous national holding near the starting regions.  It was called "clan wars" and got us all flustered that taxation and port control would divide the nations, but that is not the case at all.  Adding in the 20% to building production was a good way to promote national wealth.   National help will always be needed to defend homeland area ports and take enemy ports, so clans understand that it trumps the minor tax benefit some clans might be getting from a good trading port.  So I don't see it as clan wars at all.

That's all I got for now - Minnow.

Edited September 18, 2017 by SS Minnow

[admin]

24 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

Does the tax lower if the next day the tax income is lower?

So for example - 1.3 million tax income in philipsburg yesterday results in 300k tax. If philipsburg's tax income goes below the previous tax maintenance threshold (300k) does the maintemance go down again?

daily tax = daily maintenance 

so if tax falls = maintenance falls too but not lower than 100k as every city has some minimal government

[BetaVape]

Firstly i think we should wait for conquest to ramp up before making and major changes. Things seem very balanced at the moment.

Wasa for CM is a good thing and needs to be kept. The main reason is to give nations that have been pushed back to their starting area a way to get back up and conquer with a fleet that can compete in PB.

The port tax issue isnt so clear to me. I think the idea is to make owning ports a gold sink not to create hundreds of millions for owning clans. Perhaps part of the resource building collection cost can go to owning clan if the current gold sink is too much. However im seeing some ports are money printing machines which can easily cover holding less profitable ports.

[CaptVonGunn]

@admin any idea when we will get the 3 boxes back open on the LGV and Indiaman? Or at least make them Sailing XP to open and give us all 5

[John Cavanaugh]

9 hours ago, Demsity said:

That is not what I´m referring to here.

Ill give you an example.

I´m out hunting in my surprise alone. I spot a lonely indiaman doing some trade away from the capital. I start to follow him and slowly catch up.
 

After a while I´m in a position to tag him and he appears to be far enough away from the capital. The battle starts. He is in the reinforcement zone and presses the Support button. Suddenly two 1st rates appear and blast me to pieces. 

Does this sound fun to you? or fair?

All I want is an indication of some sorts that the enemy will get reinforcement. It can be in the tag message if so needed.

Be thankful they aren't CONCORDs. If you want to hunt in capitol waters, spec for high DPS and tagging speed - e.g. A light build Indef with carros and reload mods. Those Santis spawn 500m out IIRC- plenty of time to kill an Indiaman at point blank and pull a runner

[EL LOCO]

Just checked back into game. Really?  how to alienate more players.  Wow.     Sad.

[Sir Texas Sir]

On 9/11/2017 at 3:59 AM, admin said:

Update 18th September

Patch update message (main post updated too)

Hotfixes done over last week (including today)

• Cities set as neutral by clans will have their own unique marker
• Cities set as neutral by clans allow outpost construction and place contracts
• Port battle attack limit set as 3 per enemy nation (it was temporary remove during last weekend to give some more freedom). Previous limit of total 3 port battles was too small. 
• Production bonuses now work both on trading resources (more trading resources spawn in the city) and on production in buildings (more volume can be mined or grown) 

Other fixes

• Hostility quests disappear from the list of available if your nation has already set 3 port battles for one enemy nation. 
• Teleport is allowed to free towns
• Forged papers allow usage in free towns and neutral towns
• Nation descriptions and difficulty levels added player creation description.
   

Good update, but question on this I tested it out after getting stuck in port last night.  Ok I can enter no problem, set out outpost, set contracts, trade ships between owner nation and my main.  Every thing works good except no teleportation in and out of the port. Is it meant to be this way?  Kind what the point of setting up an outpost in another nation port if you can't teleport in and out for trade?   You will still have to set up an out post some where else to take a ship in and out of that port and risk travel in those waters.  We have teleportation in free ports which I think should be left none teleport but than why shouldn't we be allowed to teleport into a port set used by all too?

Well did find a problem.  So I had this problem last night.  Got my ships back and tried to leave.  Can't leave the port with the combat ship error again.

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Sir Texas Sir

[admin]

8 hours ago, Peter Goldman said:

So all these traders carrying goods sailing back and forth have no purpose? I noticed that... What a pity. They sail from A and B, back and forth without any reason, without any purpose. They don't sell anything, don't buy anything... Just a place holder and target for attacking. Nothing more, nothing less.

thats not what i meant. stop inferring things
They bring goods to stores and take goods from store but they don't trade on market (meaning they are not buying and selling from other npcs) its a player driven economy now. Only players can initiate market transactions and only market transactions are taxed thus due to tax is taken only once - NPCs don't have to be taxed. They are haulers not traders. 

[Skully]

9 hours ago, admin said:

All buy purchases from players or ai are taxed from the buyer, all sell transactions to players or to ai are taxed on the seller.

A 20% overhead per transaction. This is how you kill a market.

Hmm, I should have named it "No more transaction costs!".

[qw569😳]

Let's imagine that @admin owns a Kemps Bay (shallow). The enemy take hostility missions and enter on the 2nd and 1st rates.

Now question.

How do you think is there any chance that @admin will destroy enemies in hostility mission?

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by qw569

[admin]

19 minutes ago, Skully said:

A 20% overhead per transaction. This is how you kill a market.

No

Most trading goods provide 4x margins which covers taxes and makes you 380% profit. But some cities (which provide trading resources are already untaxed and make you a little bit more.
the normal trading resources are player driven we have no control and have no desire to have control over player demand/supply or margins. We only dampen shocks. The rest is in player hands. If player chose to set prices with less than 10% difference its up to them.  

I think what you are seeing is that we have made some ports very important for trading (buying and selling) and some only for buying to promote trading centers. Previously you could sell anything anywhere at profit (which was silly and stupid) now you have to find the buying city and supply it. Players who think a little bit will soon find out amazing profit making opportunities in trading.

[BetaVape]

Is it intentional that upgrading a Stone Mine from lvl2 to lvl3 doesnt increase amount produced (200)?

[admin]

1 hour ago, BetaVape said:

Is it intentional that upgrading a Stone Mine from lvl2 to lvl3 doesnt increase amount produced (200)?

its a bug- reviewing

[admin]

2 hours ago, qw569 said:

Let's imagine that @admin owns a Kemps Bay (shallow). The enemy take hostility missions and enter on the 2nd and 1st rates.

Now question.

How do you think is there any chance that @admin will destroy enemies in hostility mission?

  Reveal hidden contents

thats definitely wrong - will review
update - i thought the city is generating line ships, that is not happening

the location has deep waters around and as hostility missions allow all types of ships this is by design. The city has deep water areas around the city; thus a group of players can blockade in lineships bringing them from the narrow passages to the east or west.

[Skully]

1 hour ago, admin said:

the normal trading resources are player driven we have no control and have no desire to have control over player demand/supply or margins. We only dampen shocks. The rest is in player hands. If player chose to set prices with less than 10% difference its up to them.  

Say I am an Iron miner and I wish to break even and not even care about labor hours. So I craft 1 Iron Ore at $60. Putting it on the market costs me 10% contract cost, so I put it up at $66.

Say I am a trader I come to an Iron port and I buy up the Iron for $66. (Or there is no Iron and I want the cheapest possible, so I offer $66 on contract.) I dutifully pay also the 10% tax. The Iron has now cost me $73. I sail my Iron to a crafters port and for the sake of argument I don't need any profit, so I offer up the Iron for $80.

Say I am a crafter and I spotted the cheapest Iron available at $80. I would also need Coal which luckily has come in at the cheapest, namely $40.
I can now craft up my Iron Ingots at $99 / p. Ah yes, I do need to sell them covering all cost, so that would be an offer of $109.

Alternatively I can be a member of the Free Empire and trade on its market. Now we don't keep hour rate at 0, but suppose we did, then that piece of Iron Ingot would be $68.

And this compounds up all the way into ship prices.

Which market suffered? The public one, which caters the casuals and solos? Or the private one, which caters the veterans?

PS. The The Definitive Pricing Guide September 1817 takes this compounding effect into account.

 

[admin]

11 hours ago, rediii said:

we are still making enough + money I don't know why you complain.

Tax is set at 4% for a reason. We are one of the highest earning clans on the server. Give me and the others some trust please   As soon as people realize trading and crafting is important and is less expensive in other cities than gustavia they will move and place contracts etc.

We are not unhappy. But from your calculation I think there is something wrong in the calculation maybe. Right now current tax pf philiipsburg is at 624771 and current cost is at 312385. That means 50% cost with 20% labor hour decrease activated.

Could it be that cost allways calculates with 10% tax? Because we have set it on 4%

If I calculate with 10% tax we would have made 1,6mln tax (and its still hours to go until maintenance) If I take 30% of that im at ~500k tax

 

So I guess lowering the taxes do not lower the costs. Is that wanted?

the system is not final and of course might need updates and tuning. 
But lowering taxes will lower costs the next day. 

the idea (system) was this

City can grow big or stay small.

1. Growing city can provide more tax but as a result costs will go up too (more bureaucracy) 
2. Thus the maintenance cost = % of tax but not less than 100k
3. additionally clans can increase production and reduce labor hours in the city by increasing maintenance which is calculated based on maintenance (cost is not fixed). If they are more interested in labor hours or more resource production (a lot of members craft in the city) they might decide to accept heavier costs. If they don't want more maintenance they should just lower taxes and enjoy all benefits of the city at lower price (but with lower income from the city). 

Some things might need tuning as i said above