Next big patches: Real currency and Open world user interface update

[staun]

3 hours ago, Banished Privateer said:

There is 3 minutes joining timer before was 2 minutes. That's a reasonable thing. Missions in the safe zone close instantly. Why do you think that this is just for the hunters? Sometimes I am "hunted", I get away in battle and retagged again in OW... and again and again.

And each time you get a small advantage giving you a better chance to get away.

And how far do you traver in to minuts. Lets be honnest, open mission/combat it is a chance to attack a player that have no chance to know you where there. Yes I do it to. Always nice with a npc to help in the battle. I do know He can rather easy countet it by starting running the first 2 min. Dosent work always against Ai traders, But what the heck, attack an AI trader it is your own fault.

But it is fair enough you think game should be a bit easier for you. Think we all try to prompte game changes that are better for us self. I just think the escape game is fairly ballanced as it is now, with a small advantage for the guy, thats try to run after a fight. I belive it is easy enough as it is now.

[Macjimm]

4 hours ago, Banished Privateer said:

If someone can survive/win several fights, he should be able to get safely away. The battle starts at point X and always ends at the same point. You travel X distance in a battle, what happens to that? It doesn't matter? 

I always thought it was just NA magic.  It would be great if sailing in an instance affected the return to OW.

[Palatinose]

I don't have a problem with revenge fleets except for far away from any ports - solved by removing F11 coods. 

If they want to waste their time waiting 1,5h just to grief a single hunter - well let them. Banished you seem to be very concerned about losing your ships in unequal battles. It's part of the OW imo. Personally I find it truely boring and waiting more than 15 minutes is a pain to me. Patience is also a value. 

Read nation chats and they are full of the heroic killings of good PvPers. Though these guys always outnumber them at least 3:1. It's not heroic at all and still it's obviously worth telling the tale. Np with that.

[HachiRoku]

3 hours ago, Banished Privateer said:

but we never had a chance to test it.

We kind of did. Before the os speed was increased 2 min join timer was basically in visual range of battle. At least that is what was said at the time. 

[asuspiciousbear]

have you guys tried not hunting so close to enemy ports? thats just asking to be countered. If youre getting caught so close to enemy ports that half the nation has the chance to sit and wait for you thats entirely your fault. Adapt and find somewhere else to hunt, or bring friends. This isnt a mechanic fail this is operator error.

[Slim McSauce]

1 hour ago, asuspiciousbear said:

have you guys tried not hunting so close to enemy ports? thats just asking txao be countered. If youre getting caught so close to enemy ports that half the nation has the chance to sit and wait for you thats entirely your fault. Adapt and find somewhere else to hunt, or bring friends. This isnt a mechanic fail this is operator error.

there is no adapting away from what already needs to be adapted to. You're either getting fights or your not, we don't have the luxury to "hunt somewhere else" in this game

Edited April 24, 2018 by Slim McSauce

[Rebrall]

2 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

there is no adapting away from what already needs to be adapted to. You're either getting fights or your not, we don't have the luxury to "hunt somewhere else" in this game

Not with current population that’s for sure 

[Nelsons Barrel]

1 hour ago, asuspiciousbear said:

have you guys tried not hunting so close to enemy ports? thats just asking to be countered. If youre getting caught so close to enemy ports that half the nation has the chance to sit and wait for you thats entirely your fault. Adapt and find somewhere else to hunt, or bring friends. This isnt a mechanic fail this is operator error.

Did that, tried it. Sailed around the whole map, 2 real game days with just one trader battle. Not worth it. 

[Slim McSauce]

15 minutes ago, Rebrall said:

Not with current population that’s for sure 

or mechanics. patrols you're encouraged to hang out and find fights with willing participants, often finding decent battles in moderate time

OW fights happen where people can find other pvpers, that's safezones so you get a lot of ganks with it. Going anywhere else doesn't offer you any incentive, you're missing out on potential targets.

The solution is right above our heads, if you can cut the time to find pvp to like 30 minutes max people no longer have to scrape their nuts against the safezones to find battles.
Though I'm sure the devs already know about this, it's been a problem since day 1 of safezones, we never got the pvp incentives that were suppose to go with it so we DON'T rape and pillage the only place to run into other players

Edited April 24, 2018 by Slim McSauce

[The Marinadtor]

20 hours ago, admin said:

Please keep in mind that this is a game. 

Clan warehouse will act as a bank and will pay for all the ports. 
When we talk about the idea of the physical currency transporting need we only talk about the trading and pvp rewards. Once you get it to clan warehouse it will not require additional travel.

What is being discussed: We want to consider the possibility to remove the magic electronic wallet for battle rewards and marks and from trading. 
The interesting outcome from this feature would be actually increased PVP risks especially risks in hunting around capitals: Right now it is still safe to hunt around capitals. It does not feel like a raid; pvp players wins 2-3 battles sinks in the 4th one - but still keeps all the rewards. This feature might actually give some ability for the defenders to deny all rewards from the hunter by counter ganking him. which will bring the balance to the force universe

Also keep in mind that it is just an idea for discussion: Thus no need to get defensive and negative. Lets talk constructively about benefits and negatives of additional risk in pvp and trading. 

 

I say do it like Elite: Dangerous, you can only collect the price money of a bounty or whatever when you get to port(maybe you will have to do it in the admiralty so only safe national ports work for it?) but keep the "magic" wallet since merchant banking was very prevalent in the western world since the 12th century(the reason there are no templar knights today is because a french king robbed them and declared them satans worshipers to steal the gold they had from their merchant banking system). This will make PVP more risk/rewarding, you can't go suiciding into a capital area and then just sink while still maintaining realism of how merchatilism was conducted.

[admin]

16 hours ago, Fenris said:

PVP/RVR :

Physical coins, as stated, would be interesting in the short term...Gank the raiders!!! Yaaay!!Revenge!!!!!!💣💥

Nobody though, would like to lose his hard earned coins, after having a hard fight. This would kill PVP/RVR.

 

indeed
thats a main concern - that despite being fun in the short term it will be a heavy burden long term - reducing your desire to go into deep raiding. 

[The Marinadtor]

27 minutes ago, The Marinadtor said:

I say do it like Elite: Dangerous, you can only collect the price money of a bounty or whatever when you get to port(maybe you will have to do it in the admiralty so only safe national ports work for it?) but keep the "magic" wallet since merchant banking was very prevalent in the western world since the 12th century(the reason there are no templar knights today is because a french king robbed them and declared them satans worshipers to steal the gold they had from their merchant banking system). This will make PVP more risk/rewarding, you can't go suiciding into a capital area and then just sink while still maintaining realism of how merchatilism was conducted.

To add to this, I think the games use of fees and taxes already is a good enough abstraction of how the merchant banking system would cost you some money to use, while rewarding the facilitators of it(the controllers of the ports in this case).

[staun]

33 minutes ago, admin said:

indeed
thats a main concern - that despite being fun in the short term it will be a heavy burden long term - reducing your desire to go into deep raiding. 

Yeah there is a risk to the game. If money as thought it would get implementer, the reward(profit), will be lower, so trader will stop trading, if the profit gets to low.

No trading no money for upkeeps on ports. So RvR will die.

PvP will risk lose there hard earned money. So they will be more scared, to sail out.

But still I think it goes in line with the spirit, that you try to get in to this game. It is hardcore and skillbased. Those willing to take the risk get rewarded. So as said earlier, I think it only can go to slow implementing it.

[Slim McSauce]

1 minute ago, staun said:

Yeah there is a risk to the game. If money as thought it would get implementer, the reward(profit), will be lower, so trader will stop trading, if the profit gets to low.

No trading no money for upkeeps on ports. So RvR will die.

PvP will risk lose there hard earned money. So they will be more scared, to sail out.

But still I think it goes in line with the spirit, that you try to get in to this game. It is hardcore and skillbased. Those willing to take the risk get rewarded. So as said earlier, I think it only can go to slow implementing it.

you don't know that's how it's gonna play. Just because you carry your wallet doesn't mean money is worth less, probably more. 
depends on PVE rewards, if they're too much then yeah people won't bother trafficking money. If they're well balanced then it will be well worth carrying your bank over to valuable ports.

[staun]

8 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

you don't know that's how it's gonna play. Just because you carry your wallet doesn't mean money is worth less, probably more. 
depends on PVE rewards, if they're too much then yeah people won't bother trafficking money. If they're well balanced then it will be well worth carrying your bank over to valuable ports.

My point is when ever there is a change, there is a risk. It can be good ore bad. Could this be bad, maybe. But we are here to test, so lets give it a try. In my opinion it lifts the game to another level.  

Think it will be great fun for all.

Edit: I just think it should go both way, no need to keep protect the PvP players. They can handle it, no doubt in my mind.

Edited April 24, 2018 by staun

[The Marinadtor]

3 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

you don't know that's how it's gonna play. Just because you carry your wallet doesn't mean money is worth less, probably more. 
depends on PVE rewards, if they're too much then yeah people won't bother trafficking money. If they're well balanced then it will be well worth carrying your bank over to valuable ports.

This may be true, but it would go so far against realism. Even the romans used debt notes and notes of ownership that where  tied to a person so as to not having to transport wast sums of gold when they where buying mansions or land. The transportation of money has always been an important task, but I think it it something that happens on such a small scale that it is outside the scope of this game, the same way we don't have nobility, royalty, real craftsmen, shoemakers, tanners, bakers or clothes that you wear and so on.  The transportation of money is just something that is abstracted to "the AI does it when we are not looking". Maybe if you wanted to add the transportation of money in the game, make it so that AI fleets do it and the port owners profit from taxes and fees get a hit if they don't protect them, but don't make an ahistorical unrealistic implementation where everyone always carries around huge sums of money for trading when in reality this would not happen, unless maybe you where doing some shady under the table deals.

[Angus MacDuff]

11 hours ago, No name, no flag said:

That's what I'd like to know. Sometimes you sail a long way in a battle and it be very realistic if that distance wasn't lost. Maybe the game should calculate the distance travelled from the point of entry and then give invisibility for the time period necessary to make up that distance in the OW. This would allow players who put in the effort to have a better chance of avoiding contact after leaving the instance.

There is nothing realistic in a bunch of ships waiting outside of the exact location of a battle instance, and then having an enemy ship falling into their laps.  The idea that you get invisibility and a reasonable speed buff upon exit is a good one.  Basing the buff on the time spent in the instance is a very good idea.  We should be murdering Banished Privateer before he jumps on a poor little lamb...not after.

[staun]

5 minutes ago, Oberon74 said:

There is nothing realistic in a bunch of ships waiting outside of the exact location of a battle instance, and then having an enemy ship falling into their laps.  The idea that you get invisibility and a reasonable speed buff upon exit is a good one.  Basing the buff on the time spent in the instance is a very good idea.  We should be murdering Banished Privateer before he jumps on a poor little lamb...not after.

Ofc the game cant be realistic. Thats why there have been made things to balance it. You ask me, I think they have made good compromise, so it make sence for both the hunter and the revenge fleet. 

In what real World can a ship vanish in thin air, if its not are hit by a Cannon ball,(leave battle), even in sight?

The join cirkle is another. I am pretty sure in most fight in the real world if a ship chased you would know, and there would be a long chase. It simply would not with a snap of a finger end up right next to you.

We can’t just take one point, But have to look at the hole picture. Wenn I add it all up, in my opinion, the attacked have got at good deal. But again it is a question on how hard the game should be for PvE,- PvP,- and RvR players.  

[Angus MacDuff]

To add to the economic aspect, The real world brits had Crown Prize agents in Key ports (generally a hub).  They would purchase the prizes (and cargos) that Captains brought in.  There was definite risk to transporting your prizes to one of these locations and many prizes were recaptured.  The further away you were from a port with a prize agent, the higher the rish in getting it sold.  Right now, we instantly get money for sinking a ship.  How far do we want to take the realism?

[Wick]

To be honest, i am not a big fan of the possibility of losing hard-earned rewards after a battle. Problem is it will punish lower skilled players exponentially more than organised teams. It is hard as it is to progress with a lot of grind to produce money to replace ships and so on. I would like to see changes and additional content in other areas. I do believe we can still have treasure fleets and stuff without the need to over-stretch realism by making Combat/PVP marks or own gold reserves losable. Maybe gold only but that would be as far as i want to see this develop.

[The Marinadtor]

17 minutes ago, Oberon74 said:

To add to the economic aspect, The real world brits had Crown Prize agents in Key ports (generally a hub).  They would purchase the prizes (and cargos) that Captains brought in.  There was definite risk to transporting your prizes to one of these locations and many prizes were recaptured.  The further away you were from a port with a prize agent, the higher the rish in getting it sold.  Right now, we instantly get money for sinking a ship.  How far do we want to take the realism?

As I mentioned earlier a good historically realistic abstraction for this would be to do it like in Elite: Dangerous(a game very similar to this except for setting) where you have to claim the prize money in a friendly port. Maybe give out prize notes with different values that can’t be traded or looted, but that can be stored in the hold/warehouse until redeemed in the admiralty.

[Kloothommel]

After increasing risk for the fish, I applaud increasing risk for the sharks as well. I like the idea of lootable marks!

[staun]

4 minutes ago, VO101_HWick said:

To be honest, i am not a big fan of the possibility of losing hard-earned rewards after a battle. Problem is it will punish lower skilled players exponentially more than organised teams. It is hard as it is to progress with a lot of grind to produce money to replace ships and so on. I would like to see changes and additional content in other areas. I do believe we can still have treasure fleets and stuff without the need to over-stretch realism by making Combat/PVP marks or own gold reserves losable. Maybe gold only but that would be as far as i want to see this develop.

But are gold not the prize for the trader for doing his job and are PvP marks not the prize for a PvP player. Why should there be a different. I am personally not fan of creating A and B players.

With the risk of a PvP player loosing it all, we might actually get more PvP. Lets say I had 50 marks. I for sure would like them back, so I call upon some friend. 

When a player read combat news, He knows there might be extra PvP marks to. Yes higher risk But also potential reward, it just give more PvP. I cant de a downside to admins proposal.

[Sea Fox]

Replacing marks and PVP marks with real historical currency is a good thing. BUT until there is currency available for everyone and not two sets of currencies (one common and one for clan effort) the economy and the game will not be fixed. 

Traders and Crafters need a pathway to the top.

Nothing new is happening just more reinforcement of the same. 

You have to be in a clan to make it to the top. 

Still no room for Solo or casual players.

I'm afraid the naval action rudder needs to be repaired because it is going in one big circle

[staun]

1 hour ago, Banished Privateer said:

I'm sorry, but that's the OW-battle instance mechanic fail that cannot be solved. You don't have to be near enemy ports for revenge fleet, that happens around free towns too. Literally having 1h you can sail 1/3 of the map for the revenge battle. 

@HachiRoku The 2 min timer was just in theory that, but we know fast ships would still get there being out of the visual and slow ships against the wind within visual wouldn't.

Yeah But look at your own statements. Most times you get away. But when they catch you, it is because they have chased you in 3-5 battles an drained you from repairs. They have spend 4-6 hours chasing you. And you ask for even more? Is the goal never to get tag by a revenge fleet ore do you think they should spend 10 hours chasing you, if the want to get you? 

Honnestly if what you say is true, we need to nerf the invisibility, no way can you expect players have to spend 5 hours just to have a chance of getting a player.