[Poll] Rename PVP Global Server to PVE

[Teutonic]

Time windows on ports can solve the majority of the stated problems.

You can still create hostility at any time, but if you do it far outside the time window then the port battle starts at the beginning of the window the next day.

As christendom said, it would be the same as it is now, there would just be a couple different timers. 

I want to attack a swede port? Well i need to attack it in EU primetime and that likely would not happen unless it is the weekend. If i am attacking on EU primetime then you get your max dudes and I have to get my dudes to plan to be on, making it perfect for you folks to defend your ports at the time you want.

While I am sure our communities would not cross often in terms of when we are active, I know of a lot of players who play at all times, if we were together under one server, these folks would be able to participate with or against you in pvp, econ, rvr, etc. It would be both more anioyable for them and it would be better for all of us as more people creates more content.

More people also creates a situation where people say "hey, people play this game, and it's fun, let me get my friends to try it out and play."

I keep seeing you guys complain that there aren't enough players, or that you're bored because you try to initiatie a port battle and the opponent decides not to join. Or "OW is dead." A merge, with implementation that satifies the ability to log off and not be nightflipped or lose something when you're not playing can remedy these other issues by having more people on at all times of the day.

I have even offered a number of times the option for PvE players to come to global or EU to help make a market or build ships. I tell them the offer would be that we "protect them within the space we own and if they lose a ship we replace it,). In return we wish for you to sell resources, materials, ships to us and if you so wish, to join us in a fight or two."

Edited October 19, 2017 by Teutonic

[Norfolk nChance]

14 minutes ago, rediii said:

I actually think there are 3 servers needed in NA

PVP US

PVP AS

PVP EU

Every server with limited pb times. But that will only be possible at launch with UI and translations

 

@rediii

Could all three servers (EU, US and HK) work on the ONE universe state, bringing the ping global average down?

If so…

When a clan is initially formed, example [ELITE] I’m asked no matter what NATION I choose what server local is the clan BASED.

I might be Hong Kong based, but the majority of the clan is UK so I’d choose the EU server. This then would be [ELITE] PB Defense Window TIMER like you guys have now. If I wanted to ATTACK a [HYDRA] PORT and they were US Based clan it would default to US time slot window. NEUTRALs default to your defense.

This way the aggressor pays up to attack you in your own preferred time zone.

It’s not a total solution and you can pick easy holes in it. But I doe’s give you a ONE state Universe PvP with limited PORT Battle Windowed Timers to your preference.

Otherwise, I’m out of ideas and might go build a Megathron Navy Issue ship instead…

 

Norfolk.

Ps see you guys Next week

 

[Corona Lisa]

3 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

Time windows on ports can solve tye majority of the stated problems.

You can still create hostility at any time, but if you do it far outside the time window then the port battle starts at the beginning of the window the next day.

As christendom said, it would be the same as it is now, there would just be a couple different timers. 

I want to attack a swede port? Well i need to attack it in EU primetime and that likely would not happen unless it is the weekend. If i am attacking on EU primetime then you get your max dudes and I have to get my dudes to plan to be on, making it perfect for you folks to defend your ports at the time you want.

While I am sure our communities would not cross often in terms of when we are active, I know of a lot of players who play at all times, if we were together under one server, these folks would be able to participate with or against you in pvp, econ, rvr, etc. It would be both more anioyable for them and it would be better for all of us as more people creates more content.

More people also creates absituation whete people say "hey, peopleml play this game, and it's fun, let me get my friends to try it out and play."

I keep seeing you guys complain that there aren't enough players, or that you're bored because you try to initiatie a port battle and the opponent decides not to join. Or "OW is dead." A merge, with implementation that satifies the ability to log off and not be nightflipped or lose something when you're not playing can remedy these other issues by having more people on at all times of the day.

I have even offered a number of times the option for PvE players to come to global or EU to help make a market or build ships. I tell them the offer would be that we "protect them within the space we own and if they lose a ship we replace it,). In return we wish for you to sell resources, materials, ships to us and if you so wish, to join us in a fight or two."

Lets be serious here and make it clear: All people on one server would be much better for the game. But it does not work for 2 reasons:

1. Not all can play on one server because of the geographical distance.

2. Too much griefing possible

 

You guys come with the same idea over and over, ignoring the problems of it. Your "idea" was tested already. We had different PB timers for individual ports. Sadly people in this game try to abuse everything to the maximum.

Solve this problem and we can merge:

Nation A from EU

Nation B from EU and NA

With your "solution" nation  A can only attack at 3 AM, means attacking is only possible on weekends, while the other nation can attack everyday if they want.

[Christendom]

1 hour ago, rediii said:

Writing on my phone since forum is broken for me in my pc network

Off topic, but when you do auto correct on your phone....does it try and change english words into German or is it smart enough to know what language you're trying to type in?

[Teutonic]

9 hours ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Solve this problem and we can merge:

Nation A from EU

Nation B from EU and NA

With your "solution" nation  A can only attack at 3 AM, means attacking is only possible on weekends, while the other nation can attack everyday if they want.

A nation may have both EU and NA players but currently a port is owned by the clan that takes it.

So i'll expand

 Nation A has Clan 1 from EU.

Nation B has Clan 2 and 3 from EU and NA respectively.

I can see two possible solutions that could possibly be worked on or discussed

1. When a clan in a nation takes a port they decide on the time window. If a clan in nation B takes the port, the port keeps the same time window unless the new owner pays a large sum to change it, lets say....50 million just to be crazy. The port must keep previous time window for a week.

Under this option 2 things happen. The first is that the group taking the port must be on at the defenders time. The second is that if the aggressor is successful in taking the port they must be able to hold it for a week before changing it to their slotted time (if they so wish to do so).

This allows the previous owner to wait the 3 day downtime and launch an attack to retake the port in the same primetime, allowing redemption. If the new owner is EU then they stay EU time, if the new owner is NA then they can change the window after having defended it a 2nd and 3rd time.

Or

2. Each individual port is allowed to pick a time window. If the owner wishes to change the window they must pay a large fee to change it. (Immediately after taking it as opposed to #1)

So again, defender stays in prime time, new owner can change the timer but must pay large fee.

The price to change the timer is completely up to debate and we can make it insane if we need to so that if a clan does change it, the previous owner realizes "ok they just spent x amount to secure it." 

Edited October 19, 2017 by Teutonic

[Christendom]

12 minutes ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Lets be serious here and make it clear: All people on one server would be much better for the game. But it does not work for 2 reasons:

1. Not all can play on one server because of the geographical distance.

2. Too much griefing possible

 

You guys come with the same idea over and over, ignoring the problems of it. Your "idea" was tested already. We had different PB timers for individual ports. Sadly people in this game try to abuse everything to the maximum.

Solve this problem and we can merge:

Nation A from EU

Nation B from EU and NA

With your "solution" nation  A can only attack at 3 AM, means attacking is only possible on weekends, while the other nation can attack everyday if they want.

Majority of the griefing was done with the flag mechanic.  Simply remove the mechanic and use the current system.  

Port A Unlocks between 17:00 - 22:00.  Raise hostility during that time period.  24/48 hours later there is a port battle.  
Port B Unlocks between 22:00 - 02:00.  Raise hostility during that time period.  24/48 hours later there is a port battle.

Conquer a port and in the port management window you have 3 options.  EU, US and Ocean time zones.  Each with a larger PB window than the old flag system.  

If you want to put a even better twist on it, divide the map up into regions or pockets of zones.  Zone A ports have a US timer, Zone B Western EU, Zone C Eastern EU, Zone D Oceanic.  If you conquer a port inside Zone B and change it to a different time zone the maintenance costs more per day.  Conquer the whole zone of ports with the exception of free towns and capitals and it will change the zone to whatever you want and change the cost of the maintenance, giving the nation sort of a mini map win mode.

Ideally clan alliances outside the nation (one can hope....) would help offset time zone coverage and force clans to work with each other.   

Sounds like a fun game to me.

[monk33y]

I'm in favour of one merged server but I also fail to see the reasoning behind the majority of active players (eu server) having to change the way we play to suit the minority of players (global server)..

We need one server... The old defender set attack windows worked for almost a year, why can't we have an updated version on this!!!!

Can't we get something like this;

4-5 hr port attack window set once a day.

Two 6 hr hostility generation windows.

Defender sets the windows.!!

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by monk33y

[monk33y]

We need something.... 

Unless your going to cry and threaten a boycott...... AGAIN... 

Right now your nation forces the server to play only by your rules!!! Yet your not open to playing by globals rules.... Ironic, don't you think my friend.

Edited October 19, 2017 by monk33y

[monk33y]

Just now, rediii said:

What are you even talking about?

Sweden doesn't set rules for anyone. You blame us for winning too many battles?

 

In the last few weeks, iv learnt that when a Sverige is talking only lies come out..

We won't attack that port. (we give you our word, you can trust us)

#FEW HOURS LATER#

Sverige have generated a port battle at said port....

I think you've done that to every nation on eu at least 3-4 times....

(had no intention on getting into an argument over this but I'm up for one now)

[Christendom]

4 minutes ago, monk33y said:

In the last few weeks, iv learnt that when a Sverige is talking only lies come out..

We won't attack that port. (we give you our word, you can trust us)

#FEW HOURS LATER#

Sverige have generated a port battle at said port....

I think you've done that to every nation on eu at least 3-4 times....

(had no intention on getting into an argument over this but I'm up for one now)

Say it ain't so....not those fair play, for the "good" of the server Swedes!

[monk33y]

Just now, Christendom said:

Say it ain't so....not those fair play, for the "good" of the server Swedes!

It's funny how players only want the game to be played in a manner that only benefits them. Our history has shown us that a few players will through toys out of pram and threaten boycotts if the status-quo is messed with.

We need a solution that gives a single server....

Naval action must develop and grow up, I think the players should too

(incoming sweed abuse spotted on horizon)

[Christendom]

Just now, monk33y said:

It's funny how players only want the game to be played in a manner that only benefits them. Our history has shown us that a few players will through toys out of pram and threaten boycotts if the status-quo is messed with.

We need a solution that gives a single server....

Naval action must develop and grow up, I think the players should too

(incoming sweed abuse spotted on horizon)

The problem is that this particular player base of the game has in a sense....gotten everything they've wanted by the Dev community.  They threaten quitting, boycotting....everything possible to ruin the experience of the game for everyone else....and they get their way.  To make the game healthier, this needs to stop.  We're being held hostage by children with outrageous demands.  The devs constantly have to fix and tweak the game to deal with these bad hombres and thus progress is slow.  

Put everyone on one server until launch and say go have fun while we build/finish the game.  Once it launches we can split up by region.

[Christendom]

3 minutes ago, rediii said:

Well whats THE sugesstion then?

porttimers are shit and timezones on the map are shit either.

I think the real issue here is you're scared of competition.  You haven't been properly challenged since you guys broke apart the Western Alliance.  Go figure...  

We're needed on the EU server to bring balance to the force.  

Edited October 19, 2017 by Christendom

[monk33y]

Just now, rediii said:

that few hours was atleast a week or something like that lol

However, just take it back or something ... like ... actually play the game?

But yeah you guys are right actually. Sweden forces the server to play the game and to pvp. hello kittying swedes.

I dont actually care if you think im a liar monkey ^^

Well whats THE sugesstion then?

porttimers are shit and timezones on the map are shit either.

Reddii I understand it's confusing but THE EUROPEAN SERVER HAS PORT BATTLES TIMERS NOW!!!

If timers are so bad remove them!! Oh wait you don't want that either...

Make your mind up...

Give me strength!!!

[monk33y]

If you want server wide timers why don't we open up the gulf of Mexico to usa timezones... No1 of eu uses that area anyway!!!

[Christendom]

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

Portbattles are limited on Global server too btw you just have a bigger window

There is no limit on PBs over on Global other than server downtime.  

2 minutes ago, rediii said:

Old US was actually pretty bad

Luckily the majority of the Western Alliance fleets were mixed.  Is there even 1 major Western clan around that was a big factor in the Alliance anymore?  I don't think so.  Most of ZERG quit and you absorbed the leftovers of 7up.    

 

[Christendom]

2 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Guys, your biggest contribution to your alliance was your ability to do nightflips when you want. I wouldnt call it competition.

Our fleets were mixed during the daytime.  I myself was in most of the battles trying to board rediii.  

[monk33y]

If we opened up the gulf of Mexico from controy, past Salam along the coast to texas area, over the top of the gulf, down the backside of Florida to West end.

So all those ports had no timer restrictions on them. Remove the French non capturable zone. 

Would this not give non eu players 25+ ports to fight over on a single server....

One server two playerbases able to mix 

Players on global keep saying global is too spread out.... And let's be honest who uses the gulf on the eu server.... To keep the server abit less predictable one or two ports in each section of the map could be set to no restrictions on pb. So players can still interact...

Simple solution guys... Very simple

Edited October 19, 2017 by monk33y

[Farrago]

2 hours ago, Teutonic said:

A nation may have both EU and NA players but currently a port is owned by the clan that takes it.

So i'll expand

 Nation A has Clan 1 from EU.

Nation B has Clan 2 and 3 from EU and NA respectively.

I can see two possible solutions that could possibly be worked on or discussed

1. When a clan in a nation takes a port they decide on the time window. If a clan in nation B takes the port, the port keeps the same time window unless the new owner pays a large sum to change it, lets say....50 million just to be crazy. The port must keep previous time window for a week.

Under this option 2 things happen. The first is that the group taking the port must be on at the defenders time. The second is that if the aggressor is successful in taking the port they must be able to hold it for a week before changing it to their slotted time (if they so wish to do so).

This allows the previous owner to wait the 3 day downtime and launch an attack to retake the port in the same primetime, allowing redemption. If the new owner is EU then they stay EU time, if the new owner is NA then they can change the window after having defended it a 2nd and 3rd time.

Or

2. Each individual port is allowed to pick a time window. If the owner wishes to change the window they must pay a large fee to change it. (Immediately afyer taking it as opposed to #1)

So again, defender stays in primetime, new owner can change the timer but must pay large fee.

The price to change the timer is completely up to debate and we can make it insane if we need to so that if a clan does change it, the previous owner realizes "ok they just spent x amount to secure it." 

One of the better ideas I've seen IF a server merge were to happen.

But then, my belief is no server merge will save the game, only finishing it and it being a good game will. If that happens, I foresee a no timer server far outgrowing one with limits.

[Teutonic]

6 hours ago, Farrago said:

One of the better ideas I've seen IF a server merge were to happen.

But then, my belief is no server merge will save the game, only finishing it and it being a good game will. If that happens, I foresee a no timer server far outgrowing one with limits.

Finishing the game would be nice.

In fact, if battle rating limits for port battles and clan alliances were to be added in the next patch I could convince a large group to come back and play the game again, essentially reviving a nation on the global server.

I just hope other players have groups like that that can equally be excited to come back if those changes were added.

In a ideal situation - yes I'd rather revive the game than combine servers (assuming the revived game would lead to a large increase of players) but as I have said elsewhere, if the game is grade A awesome - but the population is low, people don't come back. The number is more important to a lot of people than the game....at least from what I have learned of those who decide to stop playing.

Edited October 19, 2017 by Teutonic

[CaptainCaveMan]

23 hours ago, rediii said:

I was suggesting merging pve global with pve server and pve server mechanics. I think a poll would be in favor with this

So...we merge PvE Server with PvP Global...to address the lack of PvP on the Global server...this move will result in the reduction of one server and the population on the Global server will not go up as the PvE players will leave the game.  The other option of merging the PvP servers is out of the question because of latency issues from different geographic locations and there are apparently two differing types of PvP styles...  So what is wrong with leaving it as it stands???  You are still not going to get the PvP that you are looking for...as it stands right not those that want PvP have two server choices...anything else and you will further denigrate the server populations.  Unfortunate but this the current trend.

[CaptainCaveMan]

12 hours ago, rediii said:

pve global.

I cant describe that even more.

there are things known as fun in a distant universe.

 

you even quoted me describing it. I dunno if I get trolled right now

There is NO PvE Global...it is PVP GLOBAL

[Corona Lisa]

7 minutes ago, CaptainCaveMan said:

There is NO PvE Global...it is PVP GLOBAL

Maybe not for long anymore mate, the vote looks different...

 

 

@mod this can be closed btw, we got enough votes

Edited October 20, 2017 by Jon Snow lets go

[CaptainCaveMan]

So the name change will actually accomplish...........................What?

[Jean Ribault]

7 minutes ago, Jon Snow lets go said:

Maybe not for long anymore mate, the vote looks different...

 

The vote is invalid.  A valid vote requires a representative sample.  63 votes is not representative.