War server player stats.

[Hethwill]

Not advocating anything. Giving my opinion on the subject same as everyone.

 

[Celtiberofrog]

Dear admin, I really respect & admire your NA project, even more because of your studio size.

This forum has tens of thousands of post, suggestions, reports, patches feed-back, etc... we've read & reacted to.

What is a fact to me is today your long development has worn out your playerbase.

I'm quite worried about the way to finish up your work with so little playerbase that will never reflect the marketing reality. 

It was said again & again, what should only matters is to get a well populated server back.

From this single reached basement every issues still to be solved might become much easier.

So, again my 1 penny selly question : Why did we witness +1000 players in 2016 and not anymore ever since ? 

 

You will say, had to move forward in optimization through successive patches & wipes.

Well, that possible statement might include a solution to recover playerbase, even or mostly before release.

 

Your goal is respectful indeed, but your means to reach it are cruelly deficient without playerbase.

 

Thx for your possible comments.

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

138-148 ping is 0.138 sec delay. If you had 0.5 sec or a second you would have 500-1000ping. 138 is not bad considering you're from texas. 

ping can say one thing and your actual results are diffrent. If you go look at the Wappen duel Jahil and Oglav did you can see a big delay on Jahils side every time he did something.   I know I can't hit board switch commands at the last second or I'll loose as they won't go through.  I Have to hit them about the 2-3 sec mark.  Every time I hit it at the 1 sec it doesn't go through so don't tell me it's  a .138 delay when dealing with actual delay vs what ping says.  Also I get lag spikes a lot in OW even though my ping never changes.

Lets not even get into the delay we get using the UI before and after patch any time....buit hay at least we don't have to esc ever time we craft something cause the confirm screen takes for ever to load.

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, vazco said:

Are you advocating for removal of a current leaderboard?
 

It seems you're in minority of PvP players. Everyone else I talked with likes a leaderboard, some actually play only to get on it. The only opposition I hear is related with sealclubbing getting you more points, which is actually adressed with modifications I proposed.

 

I'm simply advocating for improvement of this what we already have. Having both old and new leaderboard would be also cool, even if just for testing.

I really haven't heard folks speak of a leader board, what I heard folks want is to see there own stats.  LIke look at your char and see what your actual stats are.  Maybe even be able to share them with others, but no one until just now or Admin actually mention leader boards.

The funny thing about stats is they can tell diffrent stories, even just part or what you want some one to see by just showing part of them. This is why we have asked @admin to show us the high deaths side of these stats. Just to be fair and not name and shame (or witch hunt alt abusers) he can even black out the names, but if your going to show the top PvE  and PvP kills you need to show who has the worse Death rate too and how many PvE/PvP kills they get.

So Admin why aren't these stats posted yet?  Can you please post the other side of the stats of the folks that have been killed the most so we can see what they average for PvP kills?

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, Zoky said:

We had stable population of for 1-2 months of ~700+ people between hardcore patch and safe zone patch. After safezone patch population dropped almost overnight. You can check this at http://steamcharts.com Hardcore patch droped at end of may 2017 and safe zones patch month or two later

 You mean May when patch 10 (May 24)  came out and we had the wipe?  The numbers went up cause folks came back to check out the new patch after it had been almost to an all time low crawl on both servers.  Since than remember we have had a merge too so numbers right now are even lower than when that patched dropped.  More like numbers started to drop cause folks where tired of the ship grind and the Unity  patch was anounced but didn't drop until September 11 (Patch 11)  

[vazco]

17 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

I really haven't heard folks speak of a leader board, what I heard folks want is to see there own stats.  LIke look at your char and see what your actual stats are.  Maybe even be able to share them with others, but no one until just now or Admin actually mention leader boards.

I'd say that's because you're in USA In Prussia, HAVOC, or to my experience among experienced players in general it's a common topic. If someone unusual gets to a leaderboard, it's usually commented. People brag about their clan getting there.

What you propose - a personal list - is also very interesting. It could give players an information about how they're doing, and give them an option to improve themselves. It's however good to show statistics that work well. Eg. showing k/d ratio will only make people want to escape when they can die, making battles in NA less interesting for everyone. Showing someone fame - his result in relation to skill and numbers of enemy - could lead to players taking on more risk, just to improve their stats.

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, vazco said:

I'd say that's because you're in USA In Prussia, HAVOC, or to my experience among experienced players in general it's a common topic. If someone unusual gets to a leaderboard, it's usually commented. People brag about their clan getting there.

What you propose - a personal list - is also very interesting. It could give players an information about how they're doing, and give them an option to improve themselves. It's however good to show statistics that work well. Eg. showing k/d ratio will only make people want to escape when they can die, making battles in NA less interesting for everyone. Showing someone fame - his result in relation to skill and numbers of enemy - could lead to players taking on more risk, just to improve their stats.

I'm talking about in this thread not in game

Hay now.....we do some times make the other leaderboard.....well a few have in the past lol

and I do agree some stats are bad cause the encourage folks to do certian things, but still would be nice to see.  I mean I have 9K hours on this char (about 1-2k is prob AFK).  Would be intrested to see some of my stats even if they are from say the patch until now or after release what all I been doing on this or other chars.

[HachiRoku]

5 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

ping can say one thing and your actual results are diffrent. If you go look at the Wappen duel Jahil and Oglav did you can see a big delay on Jahils side every time he did something.   I know I can't hit board switch commands at the last second or I'll loose as they won't go through.  I Have to hit them about the 2-3 sec mark.  Every time I hit it at the 1 sec it doesn't go through so don't tell me it's  a .138 delay when dealing with actual delay vs what ping says.  Also I get lag spikes a lot in OW even though my ping never changes.

Lets not even get into the delay we get using the UI before and after patch any time....buit hay at least we don't have to esc ever time we craft something cause the confirm screen takes for ever to load.

That is not ping. It is paket loss

[William Death]

My ping is around 112-125. Usually pretty stable at some value within that range.  No issues with last second clicks in boarding. I did notice a very very slight difference in aiming for masts when we merged PvP1 and PvP2 (I had 38 ping to PvP2)...but really its almost un-noticeable at such low ping. 

The players I really can understand ping complaints from are our Australian playerbase, who, I'm told, routinely deal with 200-300+ ping. Ouch.

 

But a tip for last second boarding:

Pre-click & hold whatever command you want, release at last second. This at least removes the human reaction time to spam the button click. Of course, that doesn't help if you have last second attack loaded and waiting for release and enemy anticipates this and last-second defends. Then you have no way to release attack and move the mouse to musket volley/deck guns. Its a risk.

Sure wish we had a better boarding minigame...more skill/strategy based and definitely something other than rock-paper-last second defend-1776 muskets & win button.

[Licinio Chiavari]

Good evening.

I'm the epithome of ganker, or at least so I'm depicted (even if I mainly hunt and kill alone).

I read, nothing new, a lot of complaining/whining. A lot on the same topics (Camping, Seal clubbers, Requins).

- - - - - - - - - -

A) as I repeatly stated, game reward system push not-PvE-farmers to "farm" PvP.

I (and others) cant be obliged to mindlessly farm AIs to get cash/stuff etc... We are already obliged quite a lot.
Nor you can espect me to stay N hours online demi-AFK sailing to trade if I do not like.

Therefore people becomes raiders: PvPing for sake of hunt and prize.

I can enjoy a "serious duel" (even granted the "total fairness" NEVER exists).
Still it cant be reasonably economically viable. Think the value of a serious duel ship (that's BTW, well different from a PvP one and that one different even from a raiding one - I always find funny duelists on duel ship asking a duel to... a raider on a raiding ship - easy game!), evaluate the chances to lose her for a good (not exceptional) captain. Then evaluate the reward when winning. It's simply not working.

As I proposed, make reward (PvP Marks, Doubloons reward, Doubloons in hold) be function of experience (played hours), PvE rank (R.Adm. worth more than a Flag Captain), PvP ranking (like total PvP kills in a period; like above noted spreadsheet), PvP daily leaderboard AND VALUE OF THE SHIP.

On the contrary a shabby oak/oak Indef. with no mods, no open slots, with mediums of a 100 hr player with ZERO PvP experience rewards (statistically now) MORE than a Gold 5/5 v.agile Trincomalee t/wo with top notch mods and books lead by 5000 hrs PvP veteran.

So. Why in the hell should I risk a comparable ship for (at best) a 50% winning chances?
Where I could kill the noted shabby Indef. with NO RISKS AT ALL?

Make killing top captains on top ships really rewarding and killing a poor passing by noob far less... and then raiders habits could change.

 

B) Still this is a OW PvP game. Ganking is NATURALLY PART OF IT.
As in any OW PvP game. The more or the less, doesnt matter.

Trying to reduce it (like safezones) makes things only worst.

I was on NA when we had not even the forts. And we survived. We leveled up. We slowly get some experience and practice.

Safezones (especially pretty big like in this game allowing to almost "live" inside) end up only keeping majority of less experienced and less brave captains all in one pool.

Granted the above: where do you espect the raider to go? in the middle of nowhere? spending his evening playing time to see the horizon?
Or where he knows he has a fairly high chance to find multiple targets, usually unexperienced, undergeared... even risking the revenge fleet joining and Reinf. AIs?

 

C) The Requin.
Premise: I bought Requin even before any serious testing. I liked the idea of a xebec. And sincerely I'd prefer her a bit underperforming than overperforming: less risk of being called P2W.

She ended up to be my perfect ship: I was a fast boarder (due to reasons I already explained in the past... mainly lack of access to shiny stuff) like 2 years ago.
Requin is exactly the fast boarder. The more I use her, the better I become, the more I kill... a positive (for me) circle.

To me Requin looks pretty balanced. I do not say she wasnt way OP right introduced. She was.
Now definately no: a very specialized ship. A fast upwind boarder. Period. With all pros and cons.

I say she's not OP, not because I use her a lot... but because I have no fear to engage one, even on a LGV (not refit).

Is she uncatchable? no. Less than a equally geared Privateer.
Would you hunt down a Privateer with a Renomee? No.
So why people complains being unable to chase a Requin with a Constitution?

Moreover: why killing a 3rd rate with a Snow is SUPERSKILL and killing a 2nd rate with a Requin is P2W? In both cases is ALWAYS a mix of small ship captain skill/experience and lack of the same in the SoL captain. Exact percentages depends, but the point stands.

The fact someone doesnt know how to handle nor how to counter a ship doesnt make her OP. It simply makes him less experienced (and NA is more matter of experience than "skill").

The Requin, indeed, ends being (coupled with other DLC - Hercules) perfect raiding ships: fast and efficient.

So, due to A+B+C... we get requin campers.

 

Conclusion: as said in the past... there're small lies, big ones... and than statistics. Because the latter could be read to demonstrate more or less any thesis.

Anyone can feel stronger being high on the spreadsheet (epeen syndrom), but he should know intimately if really super good (or good doing what), lucky, opportunistic, smart or a mix of these.
Anyone can feel offended being underperforming in the sheet... but he should ask himself why.
It could be simply lack of time. Or of experience and adaptation. Or of teammates.
Or bad ship/gear choises: like in any game, metas change. Strictly adhering an old meta doesnt make anyone better. It makes him simply not smart.

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

31 minutes ago, William Death said:

My ping is around 112-125. Usually pretty stable at some value within that range.  No issues with last second clicks in boarding. I did notice a very very slight difference in aiming for masts when we merged PvP1 and PvP2 (I had 38 ping to PvP2)...but really its almost un-noticeable at such low ping. 

The players I really can understand ping complaints from are our Australian playerbase, who, I'm told, routinely deal with 200-300+ ping. Ouch.

 

But a tip for last second boarding:

Pre-click & hold whatever command you want, release at last second. This at least removes the human reaction time to spam the button click. Of course, that doesn't help if you have last second attack loaded and waiting for release and enemy anticipates this and last-second defends. Then you have no way to release attack and move the mouse to musket volley/deck guns. Its a risk.

Sure wish we had a better boarding minigame...more skill/strategy based and definitely something other than rock-paper-last second defend-1776 muskets & win button.

Signable as usual.
Only a note.

Barricades in the past granted a Firepower bonus.
Now it grants a Firepower DEFENSE, reducing so damage from muskets/deckguns/grenades.

This means that a Barricaded+Axes Hercules can withstand and safely disengage (probably EVEN WITHOUT AXES) a full boarding requin with Muskets... simply doing NOTHING.

Against any tactic, there's still a counter (usually).
Obviously: if people (and we are saying ALL THE SAME BY MONTHS) keep sailing around without even a single book for boarding defense, IT HAS TO BE NORMAL TO DIE VERY FAST AGAINST A SAME CREW SHIP DEVOTING 4-5-6+ Perm/books to... BOARDING. 

THAT SAID: WE DESERVE A SERIOUS BOARDING GAME.

[Barbancourt]

39 minutes ago, William Death said:

My ping is around 112-125. Usually pretty stable at some value within that range.  No issues with last second clicks in boarding. I did notice a very very slight difference in aiming for masts when we merged PvP1 and PvP2 (I had 38 ping to PvP2)...but really its almost un-noticeable at such low ping. 

The players I really can understand ping complaints from are our Australian playerbase, who, I'm told, routinely deal with 200-300+ ping. Ouch.

 

Yeah, mine is around 125-175.  I can't mast snipe.  Sometimes I'll whiff a stern/bow rake.  Otherwise it isn't a big thing.  When it comes to boarding I have no grand strategy and against players it's a crapshoot what will get chosen in the last second.  Sometimes a boarding command doesn't register in the last second, and I can't make a last half-second counter anyway, but otherwise it's just throwing crap at the wall hoping for a good rock/paper/scissors outcome. 

[RedNeckMilkMan]

11 hours ago, rediii said:

New players need a safe space to learn the game from. Getting hunted and killed in 1v1's constantly by requins is no fun when the biggest ship you can sail is a brig.

A Coast guard can't do enough to protect these new players because coast guard can only react after something happened and requins are not catchable anyway. (not even by requins)

You can't have a massive map with few players and then turn 90% of the hot zones in to pve only zones.

No other MMO does this. You have 1 safe zone that allows players to learn the game (i.e. starting island). No pvp takes place here. Missions are close, easy, and tutorial based. Players can choose to enter and leave this zone up until Lt. Commander or Master and Commander. After that no more safe zones. Keep Capital zones to prevent dock humping.

Rework towers and square forts to make them relevant. Only capitals should have square forts.

Also shrink the map, lose 1/3 - 1/2 of the useless ports and make ports worth owning passed getting "vic marks"

Edited November 27, 2018 by RedNeckMilkMan

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, RedNeckMilkMan said:

You can't have a massive map with few players and then turn 90% of the hot zones in to pve only zones.

No other MMO does this. You have 1 safe zone that allows players to learn the game

just move the hot zones. Why are we bypassing 300 other ports just to hit people at their starting zone anyway?

[RedNeckMilkMan]

4 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

just move the hot zones. Why are we bypassing 300 other ports just to hit people at their starting zone anyway?

Because 80% of players don't leave the safe zones. Also the capital of the nations are by nature going to be the most populous area. A hunter goes where he is most likely to find his prey.

If the Devs limit what you can do in the safe zones even more then people just cry. Like what happened when you couldn't re-roll missions 99 times to make sure it instant closed. Maybe Capitals shouldn't be consumption ports?

Edited November 27, 2018 by RedNeckMilkMan

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, RedNeckMilkMan said:

Because 80% of players don't leave the safe zones. Also the capital of the nations are by nature going to be the most populous area. A hunter goes where he is most likely to find his prey.

If the Devs limit what you can do in the safe zones even more then people just cry. Like what happened when you couldn't re-roll missions 99 times to make sure it instant closed.

people who want pvp should be pitted against each other in most cases. For some reason RvR fails to do this.

[RedNeckMilkMan]

3 minutes ago, Slim McSauce said:

people who want pvp should be pitted against each other in most cases. For some reason RvR fails to do this.

RvR is worthless again, the only time it wasn't people cried about scarcity of vic marks.

Now it's not worth risking your expensive ships for ports that get you nothing of value. Give clans more control over production specialization in their ports. Make ports money sinks, but not through arbitrary "upkeep cost". Let the clan spend on the port and make it useful (clan docks, specialized economies, defensive upgrades, a smugglers den that allows smugglers to sell their goods in your port etc.)

Edited November 27, 2018 by RedNeckMilkMan

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

RvR is worthless again, the only time it wasn't people cried about scarcity of vic marks.

Now it's not worth risking your expensive ships for ports that get you nothing of value.

Partly it's less worthless than pre last patch: majority of clans are gaining from ports, contrary of the past when aside a few exceptions, owning a port was a cost.

IMO it's the interest missing.

[Slim McSauce]

Just now, Licinio Chiavari said:

Partly it's less worthless than pre last patch: majority of clans are gaining from ports, contrary of the past when aside a few exceptions, owning a port was a cost.

IMO it's the interest missing.

I was more interested in RvR when it was hundreds of players of a nation v another nations hundred players. Now they're very small scale and not very important for many people. If there was a way to participate and be rewarded for rvr then i'd be happy doing them, but they're hard to start and require a very narrow window of time to do which puts me off.

[Barbancourt]

1 hour ago, Slim McSauce said:

just move the hot zones. Why are we bypassing 300 other ports just to hit people at their starting zone anyway?

That was already done - the "Patrol Zone" is a daily thing.  But the "raiders" instead prefer easy meat that isn't prepared to fight back. 

[RedNeckMilkMan]

16 minutes ago, Barbancourt said:

That was already done - the "Patrol Zone" is a daily thing.  But the "raiders" instead prefer easy meat that isn't prepared to fight back. 

The "raiders" aka pvpers go there and find nothing. Also the rules of the pvp circle make people less likely to go there. Trapped in a battle that stays open for an extended period of time does not cater to individuals or small groups.

[Njord]

1 hour ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

Now it's not worth risking your expensive ships for ports that get you nothing of value. Give clans more control over production specialization in their ports. Make ports money sinks, but not through arbitrary "upkeep cost". Let the clan spend on the port and make it useful (clan docks, specialized economies, defensive upgrades, a smugglers den that allows smugglers to sell their goods in your port etc.)

Hear, hear! I and many others asked for this aswell... maybe some day. There could and should be so many upgrades and expansions a clan would be able to purchase for their port.

[King of Crowns]

15 hours ago, Zoky said:

Its not better during EU prime time either. We are lucky to have ~400 on sunday prime time!!!

NOT sure if math is your strong point. but 400 players is almost 4x as many whats on during the usa times. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

2 hours ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

You can't have a massive map with few players and then turn 90% of the hot zones in to pve only zones.

No other MMO does this. You have 1 safe zone that allows players to learn the game (i.e. starting island). No pvp takes place here. Missions are close, easy, and tutorial based. Players can choose to enter and leave this zone up until Lt. Commander or Master and Commander. After that no more safe zones. Keep Capital zones to prevent dock humping.

Rework towers and square forts to make them relevant. Only capitals should have square forts.

Also shrink the map, lose 1/3 - 1/2 of the useless ports and make ports worth owning passed getting "vic marks"

Most other MMO's don't have mulit factions.  THey have pretty much 2 main ones and they will have two main safe zones, one per faction.  That or most MMO's are all PVE with small zones for PvP only in those zones....not the whole dang map PvP.  Show me one MMO that is all PvP?  And don't list off games like WoT cause those exactly aren't MMO's.

The hot zones are made cause ya'll won't fight each other or go cause your PvP by stricking up hostility on main ports of other natiosn that will fight back.  The hotzones are easy zones if anything where your not looking for good fights your looking for easy kills.

2 hours ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

RvR is worthless again, the only time it wasn't people cried about scarcity of vic marks.

Now it's not worth risking your expensive ships for ports that get you nothing of value. Give clans more control over production specialization in their ports. Make ports money sinks, but not through arbitrary "upkeep cost". Let the clan spend on the port and make it useful (clan docks, specialized economies, defensive upgrades, a smugglers den that allows smugglers to sell their goods in your port etc.)

I'm prob sitting on over 200 VM right now.  I have a bunch of spare first rates so what the hell do I spend them on?  They really need more things for us to spend them on or allow us to convert them to Doubloons.  Meaning any one that does RvR can get Dabloons weekly just from being a Lord Portector.  Giving one more means of getting them.

I agree clans need more control over ports they own and we need more reason to fight over them.  Right now there really isn't a reason to fight over ports, or the other problem when some nation moral is so low and they are stuck in a corner and can't get any ports back.   You want to keep server numbers up you don't beat one nation to death over and over until the players stop logging in.  That never encourages folks to play when they never win.

12 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

Thats a bad sign. This could mean if we ever get more players the west coast players will quit fast if the servers cannot handle the traffic. I really do hope we have very stable servers on day one. This is the most important thing in any online game and even more so if there is no singleplayer.

@Wraith did a great survey on locations and where best to have a server.  It should be on east coast US or even West Coast EU to help others get decent ping.  I remember folks say ping don't matter, but all the EU's are sitting on mostly 20-30 pings cause they don't have to go across a pound connection wise.  If ping didn't matter than putting the server in a better location for all players would be in the games best interest.

I really don't think we will have the numebrs on release to do mulit servers.  They should pick best location, make a global server, but if the numebrs get high open up extra servers like they did back when we had to Mirrour the EU server and make the PvP2 server.

4 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

That is not ping. It is paket loss

Which brings up my point there is more than one factor than just ping.

[Licinio Chiavari]

39 minutes ago, Barbancourt said:

That was already done - the "Patrol Zone" is a daily thing.  But the "raiders" instead prefer easy meat that isn't prepared to fight back. 

a) RoE is close to a suicide alone.

b) being in group I got a dozen kills in 2 hours. So no problem: usually same easy meat. BUT again: RoE problem is suicide alone.