Poll: Port battle limitations - formerly known as port battle diversity.

[Barbancourt]

16 hours ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Please keep in mind the 3 circle system doesnt work with a low amount of players.

In case we gonna get some low-number PBs (like 10vs10) you could consider deleting 1 circle for some ports

We've covered the circles in 3 v 4 PBs before.  It involves splitting up with some "strategery"

[Barbancourt]

8 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

What a disappointing PB. 

I dont want to play a PB like that. We really enjoy fully crowded PBs, at least, on the EU server. 3vs4 is more like an OW battle. 

PBs should be more special, and because of its singularity, more people will want to enjoy them.

Small battles, large battles - all good - why should they all be the same?  You can do a couple dozen of them in a week if you really wish to. 

 

[Liq]

On 18.10.2017 at 12:25 PM, Thonys said:

building in restrictions > ends up in people who can not join ...

There already is a game mechanic limiting it to 25 per side even though there often are way more captains outside the port ready to join action. So basically its not something completely new but a suggestion to adjust something, so that smaller clans can also get their slice of port battles.

[Thonys]

2 hours ago, Liq said:

There already is a game mechanic limiting it to 25 per side even though there often are way more captains outside the port ready to join action. So basically its not something completely new but a suggestion to adjust something, so that smaller clans can also get their slice of port battles.

wrong : well you have to see it in this context

2. Allow port owners reduce the BR limit (for money)

.building in restrictions > ends up in people who can not join ...

now you see it has nothing to do with 25 people joining a battle ,its a restriction and i do not see this as a big contribution to the player experience , just more restrictions 

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Thonys

[z4ys]

29 minutes ago, Thonys said:

wrong : well you have to see it in this context

2. Allow port owners reduce the BR limit (for money)

.building in restrictions > ends up in people who can not join ...

now you see it has nothing to do with 25 people joining a battle ,its a restriction and i do not see this as a big contribution to the player experience , just more restrictions 

 

Which clan can field 25 players right away? countable on one hand. Why is nobody challenging swedes? Because nobody has the numbers. We are down to a clanbased RvR therefore i like idea to make normal clans (with 10 to 15 people) competitive.

Reducing portbattle slots is needed to reanimate RvR in the long run.

 

Big clans can still let their limit at 25vs25 to play out their number advantage but they will recongize (when they love rvr because of doing rvr) smaller portbattles (by numbers) mean more portbattles.

Edited October 20, 2017 by z4ys

[monk33y]

I just wish the development team would enable port customization.

To upgrade the hp on towers, upgrade the gun... (giving longer range but with longer reload, or get the fort to fire chain etc)

I still feel that out port battles are missing an important feature, the docks... Every port battle should have a location where the dock is located. The dock should have a number of stationary ships (with working cannons), the number of ships and size of ship depends on 4th/1St rating. 

The attacking team should have the ability to destroy the forts and the docked ships to gain points. If the docked ships are captured then there should be a points bonus...

The defending team would need to hunt the mortor Brigg to protect the docked ships. Personally I'd add a dock with 3-4 ships. Two (traders) Indiaman and two warships (santi) would be a good ballance.

(if raiding every gets added in the future, having a dock would give a focal point to capturing materials/goods)

This would add another level of strategic gameplay to the port battles... 

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by monk33y

[la Touche-Treville]

On 10/17/2017 at 7:39 PM, Teutonic said:

 

 

I feel there should be 4 BR limits for Deep Water ports, and 2-3 for Shallow Water ships.

Capital ports - 10,000 BR

Deep Water (Heavy) - 7,500 BR

Deep Water (Medium) - 5,000 BR

Deep Water (Light) - 3,000 BR

Shallow Water Capital - 2,000 BR

Shallow Water (Medium/Light) - 1,000 BR

 

Generally though, maybe the BR limits should be more fluid? maybe they should be random numbers, with capital regions always being higher BR limits. As for the ability to lower the BR, i don't think lowering it by 50% is correct, it should be no more than 25%

Played around with the BR spreadsheet and came up with pretty similiar values. This should really introduce some nice new strategies!

[Klava Pupkina]

Я не буду голосовать, но ещё раз спрошу. Когда в игре появляется возможность атаки с последующим грабежом города?

I will not vote, but I'll ask again. When in the game appears the possibility of an attack with the subsequent robbery of the city?

Edited October 20, 2017 by Klava Pupkina

[Thonys]

9 minutes ago, Klava Pupkina said:

Я не буду  голосовать, но ещё раз спрошу. Когда в игре появится возможность атаки с последующим грабежом горда?

translate:

I will not vote, but I'll ask again. When will the game have the possibility of an attack with the subsequent robbery of the pride?

[Grundgemunkey]

It sounds like a cool idea ... but its all too complicated  I dont think it will work ..

allowing clans /port owners to reduce size will make it elitist ....and negate the need for a nation to work together and help defend another clans port  within nation

limiting BR again will cause problems ... will cause too many arguments who sails what ship etc etc ..

theres a romantic notion among some players that it would be great to see a port battle with a few 1st rate in it and a handfull of 2nd a nd 3rd rates then figates and smaller buzzing around ... we can have that now if we want .. why doesnt it happen ..because the meta is you have the biggest ships you can get ... theres even a meta within  that ....your ship has to be a certain build . no one wants a fir /fir santi in battle with them 

so all in all a cool idea .... but I dont want to turn up in a l ocean .. only to be told i cant enter because .. 1 the defenders have set the port battle at a 5 ship limit and we have 25 players  that want to attack ... 2, you can join but all the first rate slots have been filled .. you should have brought a 4th rate .. you dont have one here ..you have already used your 1 daily tp .too bad ..

again the whole premise is that we have all day to sit around doing nothing but playing NA planning who needs to have what ship and where ..

the game should be about getting the maximum amount of players to have maximum fun .... all I see in these proposals are limitations that will piss people off

 

 

 

 

 

[Grundgemunkey]

3 hours ago, Liq said:

There already is a game mechanic limiting it to 25 per side even though there often are way more captains outside the port ready to join action. So basically its not something completely new but a suggestion to adjust something, so that smaller clans can also get their slice of port battles.

nothing stopping smaller clans joining port battles now .. the mechanic that allows only 25 v 25 means some people miss out ..and are pissed off ..... a mechanic that only allows a say 5 v5 port battle pisses an extra 40 players off

[Slim McSauce]

25v25 is a performance limitation, its the only reason we don't get huge 50v50 PBs.

Idk why we'd ever want to limit numbers even more. For one small clans can work together to take a port so why should you be able to force a 5v5 for a port.

Another thing is if your clan can only field 5 or 10 guys for a PB maybe your clan isn't ready for National RVR. There should be smaller objectives for small clans, but keep the big PBs for big clans and allies.

If anything we should be working on making PBs not bigger, not smaller.

[Barbancourt]

4 minutes ago, Slim Jimmerson said:

Another thing is if your clan can only field 5 or 10 guys for a PB maybe your clan isn't ready for National RVR. There should be smaller objectives for small clans, but keep the big PBs for big clans and allies.

What "smaller objectives" are there if all the battles are the same huge 25v25 size?  You've got nations that can't get 10 together right now.  My entire NA experience since the wipe I've only been in ONE (1) almost 25v25 contested PB, otherwise the number on our side has been a lot smaller than that even way back in mid-summer when there were a lot more players. 

 

[Slim McSauce]

18 minutes ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

What "smaller objectives" are there if all the battles are the same huge 25v25 size?  You've got nations that can't get 10 together right now.  My entire NA experience since the wipe I've only been in ONE (1) almost 25v25 contested PB, otherwise the number on our side has been a lot smaller than that even way back in mid-summer when there were a lot more players. 

 

Idk, raids or area control or blockaids or something. Also clan v clan

[Liq]

2 hours ago, Grundgemunkey said:

nothing stopping smaller clans joining port battles now .. the mechanic that allows only 25 v 25 means some people miss out ..and are pissed off ..... a mechanic that only allows a say 5 v5 port battle pisses an extra 40 players off

Not ALL pbs have to be 10 v 10 - some great wars between smaller clans could happen in their pbs - and let the "big" rvr forces have their fun in 25 v 25

[Stepp636]

Like the last pb between poland and denmark.

15v15 and I'm sure they had fun on both sides. 

[Corona Lisa]

18 minutes ago, Liq said:

Not ALL pbs have to be 10 v 10 - some great wars between smaller clans could happen in their pbs - and let the "big" rvr forces have their fun in 25 v 25

Do u think 3 circle system works in 10vs10?

[Grundgemunkey]

51 minutes ago, Liq said:

Not ALL pbs have to be 10 v 10 - some great wars between smaller clans could happen in their pbs - and let the "big" rvr forces have their fun in 25 v 25

completely agree there have been some great smaller port battles ..but by limiting the numbers by game mechanics .you could also limit the smaller clans who currently team up together for a 25 v 25 .. ie they are not needed by other clans anymore .. its very rare to have a 1 clan port battle fleet ... and clans need the co operation of other clans to help fight these port battles

imo the 25 v 25 mixed clan port battle  is far better than letting a small say 10 captain clan isolate themselves and just fight their own battles because they can limit the attackers to the numbers in their clan who want to fight .

anything that limits numbers is a step backwards for  the game .... the game cannot afford with current player levels to exclude anyone by game mechanics  the devs should be trying for more inclusive changes that help more  players enjoy the game and partake  .. not let players decide who does and who doesnt get to play

been locked out of a port battle as either a defender or attacker  because the clan that owns the port only has 5 players available to defend isnt the way to go

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Grundgemunkey

[Teutonic]

Adding a  Battle Rating limit does not limit numbers in a battle, it limits the amount of high BR ships.

Now yes, if the port owner's so wish, they could have 10 1st rates instead of 25 varied ships in a fleet and yes that would ultimately limit players from joining on their side, but the game is not forcing less players, it is a player choice to do so.

Clan A decides to only bring 10 1st (6,000 - 6,500 br) rates, Clan B has decided to bring a 25 ship strong varied fleet to combat the 10, comprised of 2nds, 3rds, 4th, and 5ths (roughly equally 6,500 br for the sake of the example). 

In this example if Clan A was all the nation had to bring in the current setup then why even bother fight 25 1st rates with only 10? I firmly believe that adding a BR limit to ports will allow clans and nations that have population below the "25 man threshold" the ability to take part and enjoy the RvR portion of this game.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Teutonic

[Slim McSauce]

13 minutes ago, rediii said:

This is a OW battle for example created by 2 circle roe (which would be even better now btw for these kind of battles)

Imagine so many ships on both sides without a soundbug or delayed graphics of cannonballs ... would be a truly epic engagement

how can we do this right now?! DEVS!

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, rediii said:

 

20 fps before the battle has even started and while looking away from the action says enough

If wishes were fishes we'd all cast nets.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Guest

[la Touche-Treville]

Let me also make clear that adding a BR limit to PBs requires having a roster feature for organizing who participates in the battle.

Owner of the roster?

Selected by player grade(s) in clan attacking or defending. 

Mechanics? Plenty of options here, I can imagine a waiting list where players register the ship they want to play (Ship characteristics show up when hovering mouse over), PB leader then validates the players with their ships and can request those in waiitng room to change ship if he/she (haven't come across any girls playing this game which is a shame really) doesn't have the compo they are looking for.

List is locked as soon as battle timer starts so this would also force clan members to be disciplined and show up in advance

Not rocket science really but essential to avoid players screwing up the PB by entering in wrong ship.

 

[Liq]

1 hour ago, Grundgemunkey said:

anything that limits numbers is a step backwards for  the game ....

So youd want the devs to remove the 25 v 25 cap (if it was possible) so anyone who is at the PB can join? 50 v 25 etc.?

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Liq said:

So youd want the devs to remove the 25 v 25 cap (if it was possible) so anyone who is at the PB can join? 50 v 25 etc.?

more like 37 v 37

Edited October 20, 2017 by Slim Jimmerson

[Grundgemunkey]

Just now, Liq said:

So youd want the devs to remove the 25 v 25 cap (if it was possible) so anyone who is at the PB can join? 50 v 25 etc.?

not thought about it but with current player base size and the fact that not all port battles are full at the moment 25 v 25 is adequate ,,increasing the port battle size is prefferable to reducing it ...