Reinforcements update

[victor]

1 hour ago, Jim Broadreach said:

I woud say guys keep calm and let it get live and lets see how it works out.

After that complain.

Difficult task, since devs already stated in this very thread that this asset is the BEST solution for safe zones and no further increase in reinforcement will be possible (so - if ever - just a decrease).

This is not a test then, for them, but how things will be, no matter what

[Sir Texas Sir]

13 minutes ago, Jim Broadreach said:

The game needs some things to make it attractive for Casual Players. If it is a safe zone or Content with Content  i mean more variability how the missions are. 

Im not a fan of the safezones but many do like them. So it is for casual players who got a few hours a day. But i thinl they go a bit to far away out from the coast.

If you look at just about every MMO out there they have safe zones that is pretty much PvE only with only selective zones for PvP.  That is why they get numbers and they don't force players into the PvP zones.  Than again those aren't open world sandbox's either.  Even the open world sandbox's I have played had safe zones, newbie, capital like areas to them too.  People forget that the majority of our players lets say 90% of them are casual players, while we have the hard core PvP/RvR guys take up 9% and than you have the 1% Elitist that live by the sword and do nothing but OW PvP.  We need to be looking at how to keep those 90% happy and in game not the 1% or even the 9%.....a big question that still has not been addressed by the devs is, if 50% of your sales is from the NA than why isn't 50% of your player base from NA?  I could answer this very clearly and it's not a nice answer, but it is kinda the same problem with the casual players, we need more things to keep them in game and it's content and a safe zone for those that don't want PvP 100% of the time.

[Jim Beamreach]

32 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

If you look at just about every MMO out there they have safe zones that is pretty much PvE only with only selective zones for PvP.  That is why they get numbers and they don't force players into the PvP zones.  Than again those aren't open world sandbox's either.  Even the open world sandbox's I have played had safe zones, newbie, capital like areas to them too.  People forget that the majority of our players lets say 90% of them are casual players, while we have the hard core PvP/RvR guys take up 9% and than you have the 1% Elitist that live by the sword and do nothing but OW PvP.  We need to be looking at how to keep those 90% happy and in game not the 1% or even the 9%.....a big question that still has not been addressed by the devs is, if 50% of your sales is from the NA than why isn't 50% of your player base from NA?  I could answer this very clearly and it's not a nice answer, but it is kinda the same problem with the casual players, we need more things to keep them in game and it's content and a safe zone for those that don't want PvP 100% of the time.

I dont like it at all yes. 

But we shoud look how we get more players to the game. And dont shoud scare them away. If more players gets to the game and stay, then the numbers of players will over time rise up in the OW. Some will start to go Exploring and try to hunt in the OW. So but in the moment many players are scared of losing there ships the have fought or collectet the Ressources to get those Ships. Cause no rewards for them. 

Where many of the Elite-players startet with 5 dura ships and learnd how to sail and act in PvP, new players lose there Ships instant now. I think many forget about this. The time to build a ship is like in the old days. And now you need Repairs and Rum too.

So to all others stop complaining.

[jodgi]

11 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Do we want a game where you are emotionally invested, or......  Legends?

________________________

People have been arguing for  a long time that such and so is "dead", all the while people who want pvp come to the zones. Yesterday I even met someone who doesn't like the zones but he was tagging the traffic outside the zone.

________________________

I feel like stripping the title "hardcore-pvp'er" or "pure-pvp'er" from those who camp the capitals, with or without reinforcements. What true pvp'er would be content with those targets? 

[Nelsons Barrel]

47 minutes ago, Jim Broadreach said:

But we shoud look how we get more players to the game. And dont shoud scare them away. If more players gets to the game and stay, then the numbers of players will over time rise up in the OW.

Remember, when you build up a fish tank, you first set it up correctly, let it run for a month without fishes and then set them in in a working environment. Same for players in a MMO.

First fix all problems we have, then ask for players to join.

[Jim Beamreach]

28 minutes ago, Nelsons Barrel said:

Remember, when you build up a fish tank, you first set it up correctly, let it run for a month without fishes and then set them in in a working environment. Same for players in a MMO.

First fix all problems we have, then ask for players to join.

I got a Seawater-Tank at home. Sure the problems must be fixed. But if a patch change the basics we need to see the game like the old basics never exists. Not for ship changes they must be seen seperated.

How was it with crew-costs many complained about but now nobody cares.

[Cpt Shadow]

All the bleating about pve and pvp etc ... wake up, yes its the pvp server but the game by its very nature has to include travel such as trading, which to me feels like pve ... if you want it a pure pvp server then scrap the shops, stop the trading and sell ships online and lets play 'world of warships'.   Its a total joke.   Look there is not a trader that sets out on a two hour sail from the gulf to the other side of the map that sets sail with the intention of pvp.. yet if they dont do that trip then maybe some pvp ships dont get built... so its part of the game to have pve aspects in it.

While im here, one other totally stupid issue is, you will be disconnected, do they really expect a trader to sit at the screen for hours on end doing nothing.... if you want pvp then make it pure pvp  ..... oh yeah forgot they tried that 'legends' .... how did that go?.... ermmmmm 

[Hethwill]

2 hours ago, victor said:

 

c'mon, give up with this RP things ... it's just a matter of number of players.

A MMO with 300 players is a so huge world simply will not work. And that is the risk we face with this new twist in game mechanics

RP has nothing to do with it. Actually and somehow this entire scenario is always about the SP vs the MP, unless we want to lie and convince ourselves that is "for the great common good!"... 

Funny that it reminds me of this

 

[jodgi]

50 minutes ago, Rickard said:

like I told your dev team for over 2 years now!!

You're part of a small and special (see what I did there?) club that has all the answers.

[Capt Jubal Early]

I'm abit confused why were changing the reinforcements? and not changing the mechanics behind the zone ? 

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest overall support of this idea.

[Palatinose]

4 hours ago, victor said:

...

Got an answer to everything right? Yes my comments' intention is to annoy. 

What's your problem with traders being capped/sunk? That they're defenseless? I mean, yeah they are. So it's their problem to get an escort/only load half to be fast enough/not sail afk. As many here demand hunters should hunt (and do some work for it) imo a traders job should be to secure the trade route. If I sail a trader, how can I complain if i get ganked? That's ridiculous. 

Aside the fact that I consider hunting traders as well as ganking noobs 1vs1 nearly as boring as trading, I just can't accept that I have to adapt consequently to mechanics that limit my playstyle being told it's for the sake of the game, while other people's style of playing is pushed and I see no balance at all.

This map is giant, why do all players limit themselves to the safezones? Well I'll be where there's most players. Why do people do PvE in front of their own capital? Who but noobs who don't know other places does that? That's so....Force me to search for prey. If you only stay on one place I'll gladly play the shark that soon can't feed anymore as he's saturated of all the fish just fallin into his maw. 

[Vile Executioner]

6 hours ago, victor said:

yes ... it is very likely that Redii will buy an alt in another nation in order to disguise himself in a Tbrig just to make you a surprise.

Get back to reality man ... most of the ones clapping at the nerf of safe zones will attack just national traders that go in and out capital cities

Wrong....I will attack you directly no matter what ship your in noob

[Sir William Hargood]

21 hours ago, admin said:

Captains, In one of the nearest patches green protected zones reinforcements will be changed. Instead of ships of the line local authorities will send veffels vessels that are appropriate to the attacker ship strength. 
For example: If 3 frigates rates attack a trader, 3 buffed reinforcement 5th rates will be sent as protection. 
Please adjust your trading routes or production accordingly, and spread this information to your nation's officers.

I absolutely love recent changes to battles in green zone never closing. Missions though are still safe and insta-close which is good. The change to the reinforcement vessels is in my opinion insignificant. Nations must learn to adapt and sail high value runs when you know you will be reinforced by the Nation. Or make better use of Teleport function as I do.

We have seen alot of recent battles in the green zone which are a throw back to the early days of OW. These are fantastic and a far cry from the experiments with insta-close gank battles before the green zone days. We see more large scale PVP battles in the green zones than ever before. This is great and fun and more in tune with how I see NA should be.  +100 Devs

[Hethwill]

3 minutes ago, Sir William Hargood said:

I absolutely love recent changes to battles in green zone never closing.

Excellent of you to point this out because, for too many players, it seems like this "small" detail was missed due to selective memory or fixation only on negativity.

And that makes a WORLD difference for the "safe zones" alone. And it was requested a LOT by a LOT of players, for the battles to be always open so they can be helped and helped their buddies. Rests to see if it is used.

+1

[Navalus Magnus]

7 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

Excellent of you to point this out because, for too many players, it seems like this "small" detail was missed due to selective memory or fixation only on negativity.

And that makes a WORLD difference for the "safe zones" alone. And it was requested a LOT by a LOT of players, for the battles to be always open so they can be helped and helped their buddies. Rests to see if it is used.

+1

Do you know if it‘s possible for late joiners of such safe zone battles to join right where the fighting ships are?

[Hethwill]

1 minute ago, Navalus Magnus said:

Do you know if it‘s possible for late joiners of such safe zone battles to join right where the fighting ships are?

They will join in the original areas. So depending on the battle flow until that moment they might be even closer.

[Navalus Magnus]

Just now, Hethwill said:

They will join in the original areas. So depending on the battle flow until that moment they might be even closer.

Wouldn‘t it be nice (and more realistic) to have late joiners get into the battle instances at set distances from the fight?

e.g.:

1. Everyone who joins right after the start of the battle timer needs to sail 5 minutes at 8 knots to reach the spot of the attacked ship.

2. The distance of joiners to the actual spot of the fight increases with the duration of a fight.

3. Maximum distance to the spot of the fight reached after the battle lasted 1 hour.

4. Maximum distance needs 30 Minutes of sailing 8 knots.

5. Late joiners should have the opportunity to leave the fight on the spot, if not in shooting range. This would prevent the need to endure boring waiting time if they realize, that they have no chance to reach the fight in time.

[Tac]

38 minutes ago, Wraith said:

I'm fine with that as long as names are voluntary. Hell, make national flags voluntary or perk based as well, but both should be revealed when spyglassed within five tagging radii.

Isn’t that just an xtra click for no consequence though?  What’s the difference between pressing a button to see a name or just seeing it anyway?

[_Alucard_]

Good news.

Reinforcements should only be available for flag capitan rank and bellow. If you are a comodore or a rear admiral and someone gets you into batlle, just deal with it. This is a PVP server

[Tac]

1 minute ago, Wraith said:

It's a compromise between not seeing at all (what we have now), and being able to see it far enough away that you can avoid a person (which, honestly, is a thing that the elite PvP'ers are blowing out of proportion since if they want to fight whoever they should surely do so regardless of whether they know the person or not, right?).

When I say "voluntary," I mean like the smuggler box.  You either advertise who you are all the time, or make it so people can only find out who you are when they're close enough that they likely could tag you in anyway. But what this accomplishes is being able to communicate on the OW, not having to needlessly pull friends/alts into battle and avoid stupidity and ignorance through better communication.

Tbh if you Aren,t in my nation your an enemy as far as Pvp goes , and alts are the children of Satan so for me it makes no consequence , I suppose if you have so many people you don’t want to fight because your friendly with so many other nations or people I guess I can see how it gets old quickly.

Still prefer the no name surprise tho , for me it won’t get old for me . 

[Sunleader]

22 hours ago, admin said:

Captains

In one of the nearest patches green protected zones reinforcements will be changed. 

Instead of ships of the line local authorities will send veffels vessels that are appropriate to the attacker ship strength. 
For example: If 3 frigates rates attack a trader, 3 buffed reinforcement 5th rates will be sent as protection. 

Please adjust your trading routes or production accordingly, and spread this information to your nation's officers. 
 

 

22 hours ago, admin said:

Lets be honest
2 buffed first rates was = overkill
1 buffed ship of a similar class = perfect protection

 

 

21 hours ago, admin said:

Captains who are upset about 2 buffed first rates not appearing from thin air should just let it go.
We tried no protection and absolute protection and will settle on the best option.
2 rates was an overkill and while we are preparing tutorial patch for release it will be good to tune some numbers that are long overdue. 

There will be no more increases in protection on the Caribbean server in the future. This is a closed door now. 

 

OK.

OoooooK.

 

Mate.

I will be a bit Rude here. But I ask you to Calmly Read the Post out. As I will be giving you an Honest Opinion.

 

1.

I would ask you not to Run Threats like this.

Most PvE Players are gone anyways. So it wont be the staggering 50% loss this time.

But I am fairly Sure there will still be a Considerable Loss.

And when the few Traders that are Left. Leave as well. The RPKs will Follow soon as they Run out of Targets.

And when Players Leave in large Numbers. You will likely break down again and Add back Protection.

 

2.

I dont think anyone Questions that 2 First Rates was Overkill.

But you are now going Overkill into the other Direction.

1 Ship of Equal Class is nowhere close to Perfect Protection.

1 NPC of Equal Class is a Joke that any halfwat Decent Player can easily Ignore while Killing the Trader and then Leisurely Kill afterwards.

I used NPC Escorts a few Times. And 3 with Upgrades Equipped Frigates will not even Stop 2 Player Raiders of Equal Class.

Not because they lack Combat Power. But because the Maneuvering AI is so Horrible. That the AI will simply not really bother the Raiders.

The Raiders will be able to Simply Ignore the Raiders for most of the Time. Kill the Trader. And then either Escape or Kill the Escorts.

And even if they are Buffed. Just 1 Enemy of Equal Class will be no Challenge to most Raiders.

 

3.

This Change is Incredible Counter Productive and does not Solve the Problem at all because it does hit the entirely Wrong part of the Population.

The Common Complained from PvPers is that these Reinforcements are abused by PvPers to protect their Ports.

But PvP Squads. That actually Fight back and from the get go had a Fighting Chance.

Will still be nearly Impossible to Beat with these Reinforcements they get on top of their own Combat Strength.

However.

New Players and Traders which have no Combat Capabilitys will have no use here. In a Fight they get Killed too Fast for the Reinforcements to have any Effect.

And when they Run away the NPC Reinforcements will simply not be Maneuvering Good enough to Serve as any Protection to them.

In short. This Change will not Solve the Problem of PvPers using the Safezone as Hiding Spots at all.

But will completely Remove Newbe and Trader Protection. Resulting in an even worse Player Retention than we already got anyways.

 

4.

This Change is not well tought out at all.

In Fact this Change is a complete Failure.

Because with 1 Equal Ship as Reinforcement. This means that a Single Attacker that Attacks another Player for an Honest Duel.

Will be Fighting 2 vs 1.

Meanwhile the 6 Guys Ganking Squad that Massacres a New Player will be Fighting 7 vs 6.  And thus be barely at any Disadvantage.

 

 

 

 

 

In Total. Let me tell you this.

If I was a Ganker.

I would get 2-3 Friends.

1-2 Would use Fast Frigates

2 Would use Heavy Armored Ships of the Line

The Frigates will Swiftly Rush in to make sure that the New Player doesnt need to Suffer too long. 

While the 2 Ships of the Line will Dispose of the NPC Reinforcements. Which will be 2 Ships of the Line and 1-2 Frigates.

A Heavy Armored Ship of the Line will easily Dispose of pretty much any Equal NPC Ship. And the Frigates even if they are Buffed will not really Change the Numbers.

And the New Player or Trader will be Easy Prey for the 2 Frigates.

 

 

Long Story Short.

This Change Promotes Ganking Squads.

This Change Removes all Trader and Newbe Protection.

This Change does Not at all touch the Problem of PvP Players using the Safezones to Protect their Harbors.

This Change will result in a Loss of Players and Reduce the Playerbase further.

 

 

Greetz Sun

 

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by Sunleader

[Vile Executioner]

1 hour ago, Navalus Magnus said:

Do you know if it‘s possible for late joiners of such safe zone battles to join right where the fighting ships are?

If you have an idea of where they are yes. This is how the old outlaw mechanic was, pay attention to where they joined if you can see it or ask the person fighting where it is N S E or W

[Guest]

Simple question:

Why is players leaving? - My answer: Due to expectations not being met.

What expectations do players have of a game that is set in the age of sail?

Here's my guesses:

- Piracy, raiding, patroling. Is this possible in the current iteration of the game? - No because all trade, crafting etc converge on a few select spots (good thing - generates points of access that can be blocked - just like in the age of sails) and these points of convergence is protected by safezones which effectively rules out solohunting, solopatroling and makes the entire game a singularly clanbased RvR game that is flawed since RvR doesn't have any discernible meaning to it. In short - expectations are not fulfilled.

- trading, should be with risk - atm you can make millions a day without losing a ship.. I made 20 million on a full day of trading a few days ago - sure we loose an indiaman from time to time, but the profits from trading more than makes up for it. Got no indiaman? - cap an LGV in the safezone, ez piecy.. Why does gold have no value? - because it's too easy to get and has no risk/reward system.

- Balance - what player other than the most masochistic would take an inferior ship to a PvP battle with an enemy he knows to be experienced, in full knowledge that the opponent has a better ship, better knowledge slots, better upgrades and more experience? - I'd argue he can live with the fact that the opponent is more experienced.. It will still feel like a fair contest. I'd argue that he can live with the fact that the opponent might have unlocked some knowledge slots that he hasn't.. I'd argue that NO player will take an inferior ship, with inferior upgrades to a fight he inherently feel is unfair.

 

Players talk about "ganks" when in reality they speak about imbalances. It's NOT a hello kittying gank when 7 battles 25 and the 7 win on better coordination, better tactics and better ships. It's an imbalance to the gamemechanics.

Players talk about "ganking" traders like it's a bad thing. First off - I'm the richest player on the server, leader of the richest clan on the server and I have traders out in all nations making gold. I have never complained about losing a ship - I might complain about the moronic AI, but that's mostly in the stupid combat missions - losing a ship is part of the game. Losing gold should be part of the game - why? - because otherwise neither has any value and the game becomes meaningless.. Why trade if the gold doesn't matter? why make a ship if you never loose it? and in the end: why play a game that has no sense of meaning? - Gank the hello kittying traders, make clans drop ports due to attrition warfare OR make them actually patrol and protect their traders.

Make solohunting a thing again.

Make the players expectations to a game set in the world of sails be fulfilled. What do we have atm? - nothing resembling a game.

[Tac]

30 minutes ago, Wraith said:

For you and me that work just fine, but for others it's a huge barrier.  I know that for some players it actually deters them from PvP rather than encourages it, since fear of the unknown is a more powerful motivator than fear of the known. The, "what if that's an elite PvP'er!!1! RUN," type of thing discourages from people running out to snag a player that they otherwise might have a good fight with, etc.

 Not saying that isn’t true ( I mean it’s unprovable) but I just find that sort of timidness so hard to believe .

[Archaos]

36 minutes ago, Lars Kjaer said:

Simple question:

Why is players leaving? - My answer: Due to expectations not being met.

What expectations do players have of a game that is set in the age of sail?

Here's my guesses:

- Piracy, raiding, patroling. Is this possible in the current iteration of the game? - No because all trade, crafting etc converge on a few select spots (good thing - generates points of access that can be blocked - just like in the age of sails) and these points of convergence is protected by safezones which effectively rules out solohunting, solopatroling and makes the entire game a singularly clanbased RvR game that is flawed since RvR doesn't have any discernible meaning to it. In short - expectations are not fulfilled. When you do a trade run from somewhere like Cartagena to KPR majority of the run is in OW and you are open to attack. Only the last 5% of the run is in the safe zone so how does the safe zone prevent the trader being intercepted? It appears that the raiders want the point of convergence so small that there is no chance of avoiding the raiders, basically they want to sit in the bay right outside KPR and wait for people to arrive. The only problem I know with the trade runs and the safe zones is the ability to tow to port when you get within range of a safe zone port. This is a known issue and the Admin actually suggested that people could use it in one thread. This is what needs fixing, not the safe zones, you should never be able to teleport half way across the map with cargo in your hold.

- trading, should be with risk - atm you can make millions a day without losing a ship.. I made 20 million on a full day of trading a few days ago - sure we loose an indiaman from time to time, but the profits from trading more than makes up for it. Got no indiaman? - cap an LGV in the safezone, ez piecy.. Why does gold have no value? - because it's too easy to get and has no risk/reward system. Trading does come with risk, but that risk becomes a balance, if there is very little chance of getting to your destination then it is not worth doing. Losing the odd trader is not a problem but when you lose 70 or 80% of the time it is just not worth it. Its not trading gold alone that destroys the gold value as it is easier to make gold from doing missions and fighting AI. You say cap an LGV in the safe zone, but that will not be so easy now as you can get jumped in the safe zone when attacking AI.

- Balance - what player other than the most masochistic would take an inferior ship to a PvP battle with an enemy he knows to be experienced, in full knowledge that the opponent has a better ship, better knowledge slots, better upgrades and more experience? - I'd argue he can live with the fact that the opponent is more experienced.. It will still feel like a fair contest. I'd argue that he can live with the fact that the opponent might have unlocked some knowledge slots that he hasn't.. I'd argue that NO player will take an inferior ship, with inferior upgrades to a fight he inherently feel is unfair. If this is correct then it is more reason to allow players safely PvE to farm their upgrades. I personally have been trying to get some of the recommended upgrades and skill books for PvP, but so far the important components elude me and in the time trying to get these I have unlocked all slots on 1st rates and quite a few other vessels fighting against AI, so the issue here would be making some of these upgrades more available so at least a person does not feel they are on an inferior ship.

 

Players talk about "ganks" when in reality they speak about imbalances. It's NOT a hello kittying gank when 7 battles 25 and the 7 win on better coordination, better tactics and better ships. It's an imbalance to the gamemechanics. 7v25 can still be called a gank if the 7 players know the 25 opposition have no chance of defeating them because they are organised, have the right ships, are all on comms and know the 25 players they will be facing are a PUG with little organisation and wrong ships. Otherwise why would any 7 players take the chance of facing 25?

Players talk about "ganking" traders like it's a bad thing. First off - I'm the richest player on the server, leader of the richest clan on the server and I have traders out in all nations making gold. I have never complained about losing a ship - I might complain about the moronic AI, but that's mostly in the stupid combat missions - losing a ship is part of the game. Losing gold should be part of the game - why? - because otherwise neither has any value and the game becomes meaningless.. Why trade if the gold doesn't matter? why make a ship if you never loose it? and in the end: why play a game that has no sense of meaning? - Gank the hello kittying traders, make clans drop ports due to attrition warfare OR make them actually patrol and protect their traders. I see very few complaints about people losing traders, most realise the risk when they go out on a trade run, if they get intercepted by a hunter they are most likely going to lose at least 1 ship. The complaints arise when the hunters cajole the devs into reducing protections in the safe zones which allows the hunters have an easy time by just camping right outside the destination port rather than them having to hunt in OW.

Make solohunting a thing again. The way to make solo hunting a thing again is to give more reasons for people to be out in the OW rather than bring in changes that concentrate most of the action into the so called safe zones. This current change will not enhance solo hunting, all it will do is generate more 7v25 ganks.

Make the players expectations to a game set in the world of sails be fulfilled. What do we have atm? - nothing resembling a game.

My responses in red.