Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

RVR (port battles and territory control) feedback

Recommended Posts

Captains. 

We are not satisfied with RVR incentives and goals and wanted to discuss them with you.

Things that can be done within a short period of time. 

  • Tie port hostility points to port tax income
  • Reduce costs of ports trading posts and timers
  • Remove conversion of victory marks on War (RVR) Server as their current prices in doubloons is one of the things that makes RVR not worth the time. RVR rewards must only be accessible through RVR on the War server (but should be tradeable like right now). 
    • Additionally RVR reward trading should be disabled as i doubt Nelson could trade his Baron of the Nile title to others. This will make it important to participate in RVR if you want RVR related ships or rewards.
  • Add items or chests for victory marks to the admiralty with some conquest related exclusive items. (Including paints and rare ships)

Longer coding required and riskier features

  • Add feature allowing lockdown of ports by clans (giving access to port resources only to the clan who owns the port) + maybe adding docking fees. 
  • Like 26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hostility grind needs to be lessened and/or the amount of 1st rate hostility ports needs to go down.  

Ports need to matter - even wood ports currently don't matter with the weird drop system you have.

Needs to be a solution other than staying up (or getting up early) 2 days in a row to trigger and fight battles.  Needs to be some sort of immediate solution to help counter long term ownership of ports by different time zones.  Basically a flag system....but not the flag system.

Chest rewards for port battles again.  Was a good idea that had paints and ship notes.  Why did we stop.

More 25 on 25 battles please!

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost seems better with the change to doubloons system.  When we had Marsh Harbor and three other ports Marsh paid for all four ports.  We only had timers on Marsh and we even started to earn some money. Pre patch we where all ways loosing money cause the coast was to much, specially when we had timers on three ports and had a bunch of ports that didn't have timers.  For a smaller clan and only having one money making port it got costly.  Useless ports should not be such a burden on the clans to have.  Maybe have an option that one port can be set clan Home and it gets a discount of 50% Maintenance, but the clan has to keep it's warehouse int that port.

Hostlity missions was a pain, cause when you get a group togehter and defenders jumped in you could now be fighting 2 times the ships you have.  If you lost one or two ships in a 1st rate mission you could loose almot all your agro.  I remember one battle we where at 97% hostility after two hours grinding and French jumped in sunk two of our ships.  When we all got out we noticed that hostility dropped over 50%....so all that hard work was pretty much gone specially since we got tagged again and the rest of us was wiped out.  Being wounded and having same or more ships jump in was a killer.  Only way to do them was to flip fast and quick which is hard on the bigger BR ports.   Kinda wish we had other means to do hostility like bring the old flag system back or something.   Pull a flag and have to get it to the port and you get 33% hostility. You can't pull next flag until first one is placed. If flag is capture or ship sunk you loose that 33% so it sets you back.  Something like that which could be added to the grinding, just needs more option.  Even if we can slowly flip a port by sitting in front of it with said flag.  Once a port flip and it's a red zone turn that zone into a hot PvP zone until port battle happens.  (like the POTBS red circles when PB are set).  

Clans need to be in control of there ports, we brought up many times about allowing clans to set who can or can't put contracts up in the port.  Defualt would be only your nation.  Open port to all allows all to put contracts up.  Have setting for only friendly clan and only your clan can contracts up.  Let the nations police folks that abuse it by not supporting. Only strongest clans can be greedy and sooner or later even they will fall if they don't support nation and keep it all to them selves .   This will fix the problem with alts and super rich folks buying up all the contracts.

VM are pretty much useless right now other than to buy permits.  IF your not usiing SOL than they are stacking up. I think I have over 200 if them right now and I have stacks of permits in reserve all ready.  Let us convert them back into Doubloons.  You can buy a VM for 1000 Doudbloons why can't we convert them for doubloons?  This will allow folks that don't have a lot of time but been to port battles get 1000 Doubloons or more a week as payment for being in port battles. I bet it would encourage more port battles too.

Bring back the reward chest for port battles too.  I'm going to put my old paint chest would be great here;)  Or as you stated chest and items in the shop we can trade them for, cause right now it's only permits and nothing else.  If a clan owns ports in shallow and only shallow water fights what the point of a VM if they don't use SOL?

To many deep water ports have very low BR so that small group of elite players can tie down that port from any one even big nations/clans from taking it.  It's okay for none important ports to have low BR so small clans can have a port, but any port with inportant locations or resources should not be on the lower end of BR.  We have to many 2500 and 5K BR deep water ports basicly.  Some of them need higher BR or as spoken about before if a port makes more money raise the BR of it to match it's income.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think it makes sense to reduce the maintenance costs for ports and timers, because the costs are already no longer a real problem. Before the change, many port owners had a problem to maintenance their ports. I know clans who were permanently in the minus for maintenance. If you lower the maintenance costs even further, these costs are not even worth it to take some money out of the game.

 

Complete agreement...

-Add feature allowing lockdown of ports by clans (giving access to port resources only to the clan who owns the port) + maybe adding docking fees.

 (A white list for people who can trade in the harbor would be desirable)


If the DEVS ever have the time and interest to rework the pirate faction, I would suggest that the pirate faction is the only nation exempt from this rule. Although they can not set contracts, but they can not be completely excluded from trading. (Pirates as the classic smugglers!)

Edited by Hellmuth von Mücke
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The docking fees is a great idea. Punishes people for dock humping.

Along with port lockdown this would make so many ports valuable since alts could not buy up everything. Clans could cause shortages of resources and to end it RvR would have to take place. Scarcity causes conflict.

Edited by RedNeckMilkMan
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about titles maybe make thoughs titles worth something. Perhaps when you have X amount of title points (perhaps like the old conquest points where some ports are worth more) you would be able to buy a special reward like a paint, a flag, one of the special ships. Maybe it would be a tiered system or maybe you would just get the points and spend them. Ideally it would promote RVR without promoting swapping of useless ports.

Edited by Aster
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could just be silly stuff like nobility titles for X amounts of Victory Points....   play on people's egos.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't change current fees, most ports seem to cover their costs of ownership so I don't think this is a huge disincentive at the moment.  The biggest problem is that the cost in time and potential risk for running up hostility is too great. Lowering disincentive for running up hostility would improve things a lot. And as far as rewards, it's not victory marks that matter, right now it's doubloons, and their limitations. Unless the doubloon economy and what you have to buy with them is adjusted then the rest of it won't matter.  For example, 4th rates shouldn't cost doubloons at all and 3rd rates should be a fraction of what it currently costs. If victory marks could be used for something other than permits (e.g. paints, skill books, etc.) then RvR might be more of a focus.

My opinion is don't mess about with half measures. Go to finer grained clan control of ports ("Open to All," "Open to Nation", "Open to Friendly Clans," (allow foreign clans to be listed as friendly for both port defense and port access), "Closed to All But Clan").

And finally, commit to instituting raids for on-demand RvR action (e.g. exchange a number of victory marks to schedule pull a flag for a raid within a port's PB window, etc.) or agreed-on, no-hostility instant port battles that could be agreed to between clans...

In short, the little tweaks you mentioned aren't nearly far enough to fix the larger problems that are dragging the game and player populations down.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we get a turn based RVR? 

I mean we vote as a nation to attack a port, just like we voted for allies. Then the next day the pb is set, right on their timer, because this way maybe less salt. If the defenders win trow in some chests for the defenders same the other way. Now to make this right think about the screeners, by this i mean make all the fights between the two nations at pb window, allover the map as part of the war and reward accordingly.

My ideea on this matter at this moment!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a simple solution:  

Folks won’t flip 1st rate ports because they are afraid to lose 1st rates or don’t have the $/dubloons/resources to craft 1st rates. 

 

Im gonna flip flop in an issue and say BRING BACK capturable line ships.

More incentive to sail line ships and larger battles guaranteed.  

Edited by JG14_Cuzn
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JG14_Cuzn said:

Here’s a simple solution:  

Folks won’t flip 1st rate ports because they are afraid to lose 1st rates or don’t have the $/dubloons/resources to craft 1st rates. 

Im gonna flip flop in an issue and say BRING BACK capturable line ships.

More incentive to sail line ships and larger battles guaranteed.  

I'd say bring back capturable 3rd rates, leave 2nds and 1sts non-capturable. That would be a reasonable compromise.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, do not say dlc said:

Can we get a turn based RVR? 

I mean we vote as a nation to attack a port, just like we voted for allies. Then the next day the pb is set, right on their timer, because this way maybe less salt. If the defenders win trow in some chests for the defenders same the other way. Now to make this right think about the screeners, by this i mean make all the fights between the two nations at pb window, allover the map as part of the war and reward accordingly.

My ideea on this matter at this moment!

I actually kind of dig this idea to guarantee some kind of RvR action daily.

If you have conquest points for your nation then you get a voting interface each day. You can vote for three of your national ports to protect from this mechanic, and three foreign ports you would like to schedule an attack for. Each day the foreign port with the most votes, and for which is not in the top three ports voted for protection goes up for a port battle at the middle of its timer window or for the time when that nation's player population is at its peak. 

If you limit this to one port battle attacking and defending per nation per day, ranked by numbers of votes to determine which nation gets what, it would be great.  This wouldn't replace the current hostility mechanic, but instead be in addition to it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin said:
  • Remove conversion of victory marks on War (RVR) Server as their current prices in doubloons is one of the things that makes RVR not worth the time. RVR rewards must only be accessible through RVR on the War server (but should be tradeable like right now). 
    • Additionally RVR reward trading should be disabled as i doubt Nelson could trade his Baron of the Nile title to others. This will make it important to participate in RVR if you want RVR related ships or rewards.
  • Add items or chests for victory marks to the admiralty with some conquest related exclusive items. (Including paints and rare ships)

Longer coding required and riskier features

  • Add feature allowing lockdown of ports by clans (giving access to port resources only to the clan who owns the port) + maybe adding docking fees. 

I like it.

What I personal would like is customization of ports. Ofc we already have some kind of it but thats just done in a few clicks.

I would want to see my clan port grow. I would like to improve it. I want to feel linked with it.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

1.

  • Every captured port starts with minimal fortification (minimal fortification depends on city status aka regional capital for example)
  • Fortification can be improved by building it.
  • location is determind by the game "NO PLACING"

Example:

Port_Battle_Map2.jpg.d2e42c776e4319492d8cb17d82c11198.jpg

  • A = minimal fortification (after captured against AI)
  • B = Clan can build additional fort and tower (just like a shipyard or workshop by delivering stone + iron + coal + wood)
  • This could be set as "Trade mission" so anyone in the nation can contribute to the goal of building the tower. Ofc player that contribute get rewarded by tax % off or or or
  • When an improved port gets attacked and forts/ towers get destroyed they have to be rebuild so it might be wise to not destroy them to reduce rebuild cost
  • This feature could be hidden and fortification has to be scouted before attack.
  • Time of building after resources are delievered depends on townsize /tax income etc

 

2.

  • A clan can build/spawn 1 additional resource by building/exploring the port (to make ports more attractive)
  • Destroying and rebuilding / or further exploring is possible and generates a new RNG round.
  • Manufacture has upkeep

Example: Lets say a port produces hemp and stone (this port might never be attractive to any kind of player because that are some easy to get resources). A clan could now improve this port by exploring the surroundings ( cost doubloons or resources or both) this will add one random resource. Or they could build a manufacture which spawns a rng (trading good)

 

3.

Port map windows shows additional information when visited to make certain things more obvious and attractive for other players

image.png.95d30cced0606ffa68e2efeff0685918.png

 

 

Edited by z4ys
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, admin said:

We are not satisfied with RVR incentives and goals and wanted to discuss them with you.

Personally I don't think that the incentives are the main problem. The cost, i.e. risk, is the main factor.

Considering it is easy for absolutely any conquered port now to make profit for the owner with little effort, the owning ports is actually more profitable now than before. The problem is that the rewards do not match the risk, and the amount of grind required both for rising a port and for building the ships. If successful RvR would offset some of the grind, i.e. by rewarding owning clans with a pension of doubloons balanced to allow rebuilding RvR-fleets that are lost.

Another option is clans that own ports will have extra insurance on their lost Lineships. Insurance that also recovers say 60-80% of doubloon cost of a ship. Those who want to use a Lineship only to grind AI in reinforcement zones can afford to grind a couple of thousand doubloons to build their lineships. Those who want to do RvR every evening cannot afford to have to spend 3-4 evenings grinding doubloons for every lineship they have to replace. So the insurance would work that as soon as you participate in RvR your RvR-ships have extra insurance.

Screening is definitively a problem also, exacerbating the risk/reward factor. This has been pointed out an endless amount of time, but if we ever get back to a well populated server, most port battles are never going to happen simply because it is extraordinarily easy to screen out any attacking fleet now that all ports have very limited BR rating.

1 hour ago, admin said:

Tie port hostility points to port tax income

Sounds like a worthwhile idea, but I don't see it as really changing that much. 

1 hour ago, admin said:

Reduce costs of ports trading posts and timers

Currently this is not necessary. Again. Ports can easily make profits now with relatively little effort from port owners. With a higher population, ports will automatically be profitable. Your plan to improve the economy to implement distances in trade goods profitability - if you also implement it to make trading equally profitable outside of capitals - will make most ports on the map into potential gold-mines.

1 hour ago, admin said:

Remove conversion of victory marks on War (RVR) Server as their current prices in doubloons is one of the things that makes RVR not worth the time.

I don't agree that this is a factor at all, but I nevertheless agree that Victory Marks should not be possible to convert from doubloons. I would rather seriously consider making the reverse conversion possible though, turning victory marks into doubloons. It would expand the RvR pension as I suggest above, with much less coding.

1 hour ago, admin said:

RVR rewards must only be accessible through RVR on the War server

Yes.

1 hour ago, admin said:

Additionally RVR reward trading should be disabled as i doubt Nelson could trade his Baron of the Nile title to others. This will make it important to participate in RVR if you want RVR related ships or rewards.

For ships - NO. Just no.

I do not get why we are constantly getting back into this track of suggesting changes that enforce certain playstyles. I want my playstyle enforced on other players no less than I want others' playstyles thrust upon myself:

I refer to your post in the link above.

Moreover, we simply cannot have the (semi-)clan-based RvR that we have now and then add on top of that RvR-exclusive ships or content. This will give to clans the ability to arbitrarily restrict core content in the game from players. Giving control of RvR to clans is a good thing as we have got now. But then you must be careful what dependencies you build between RvR and other content. 

It is bad practice to tell people who want to sail all the ships, but simply cannot get into an RvR-clan for whatever reason (teamspeak, past history, general likeability, etc.) that they have to go re-grind on the PvE-server to get access to some of the content.

1 hour ago, admin said:

Add items or chests for victory marks to the admiralty with some conquest related exclusive items. (Including paints and rare ships)

YES. Absolutely.

1 hour ago, admin said:

Longer coding required and riskier features

  • Add feature allowing lockdown of ports by clans (giving access to port resources only to the clan who owns the port) + maybe adding docking fees. 

Docking fees sound potentially interesting. I do however completely oppose the idea of ports locked down by clans. At least for as long as there are RvR-strategic crafting-resources with limited availability. In RvR everybody has to have reasonable access to the same strategical resources and modules. Otherwise those who do not have access will feel like they have no chance and cannot get ahead even if they work hard, and that will tear on communities and in the end reduce RvR and challenges. 

Maybe the clan that owns i.e. Cartagena should get some drops of Tar for free, or have access to cheaper bidding. But RvR-important resources such as for instance French sail and Cartagena Tar should be available to all that can afford to buy it.

Winner-takes-all sounds cool until the looser tires of it and quits and then there's nobody to challenge the champion. This is boring for the winner as well. 

Whoever is the dominating fleet on the server at any time needs to be constantly challenged, and for that to happen it needs to be easy to challenge them and recovery after a failure needs to be quick and easy. 

Even the winner has more fun successfully beating back attacks 19 times only to be finally defeated on the 20th run, than if the challenger has to give up after 7 attempts.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I'm going to say this and it's going to piss some folks off......how about every 3-4 months we have a map reset?  Part of the reason folks don't fight is cause they are settled in with what they have. If they have to decide every 4 months (better than 3) what ports are important and what is not in the scramble than some folks might snag up the others and we have a change in the map.   We also need less nations....11 is to many as it cuts numbers down to much.  Maybe if we have 2000 players bring back extra nations but right now and while we have a base number we need less not more.   

I bring this up cause of some factions getting ports and putting them in retarded timers that no one can fight in and than nothing happens cause of this.  If they have to reset ports than folks have to decide do I wan tto keep all the US coast line or grab my high making port back home first?   If they don't move fast enough the high profit port can be capture and than they have to fight for it again.  We don't fight enough to to many folks settle for what they have. 

Hell can even just do the rest every 6 months.  Just like anything else if you don't want to loose your stuff when it's reset and another nation takes the port keep your goods in a free town or none captured port.  As for the three impossible nations, well you picked extra extra hard mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remain unconvinced that there isn't enough incentive to RVR and as for risk people have doubloons, I believe it's purely down to lack of numbers playing.

Non elite players are more care bear than any of you realise, the casuals are almost all gone, players like me are finding it a bit too hard because of the changes to AI fleets and Missions that leaves less for the better players to feed on when you are not engaged in RVR.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ARCADE...do you know what is this ??   Make game more and more ARCADE....now is unplayable. Is a big boring....Do you really want to sell this game....

PLEASE  think about it , and restart to do everything NEW  EASY to PLAY, FASTER  TO  GET  FUN....  remember 3 words.....  EASY  TO   PLAY.

MORE  History.....we are 3 years given us advices...but the game does not work properly and everyday is getting hardest to play.

Thank you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

The docking fees is a great idea. Punishes people for dock humping.

Along with port lockdown this would make so many ports valuable since alts could not buy up everything. Clans could cause shortages of resources and to end it RvR would have to take place. Scarcity causes conflict.

agreed! could not have said it better myself!

Edited by Rickard
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problems are:

+Very time consuming activity

+Zero rewards, all risks

+People splitted in 11 nations. Even with 1000 guys online it is not sustainable.

+Alts everywhere.

 

My recipe is:

O. Allow clans to have only 1 foreign ally. It will need several rules to avoid exploits but it can counter low population issues.

1. Unique rewards (paints, flags, unique ships) for successful attacks or defenses.

2. Fourth rates shouldnt cost doubloons. 

3. Third rates must be cheaper to produce. You can keep the high prices on the big toys if you make point 4.

4. RvR missions with proper rewards in doubloons.

5. No more random ressource spawn. For example, Bluefields spawning greenhart logs, weird.

6. Raids as another alternative to hostility missions. Variety never hurts and they can use flag system as the port battle itself will still happen the following day.

7. Increase of Trader holds to move way more crafting stuff and repairs. Logistics is a key aspect of any rvr campaign as it is very time consuming right now.

8. The clan owning a port should automatically receive in their warehouse a % of the port production. This is more interesting than accumulating lots of reals as it saves time to their owners and it will mitigate alt interference in the economy.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Intrepido
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

OK I'm going to say this and it's going to piss some folks off......how about every 3-4 months we have a map reset?  Part of the reason folks don't fight is cause they are settled in with what they have. If they have to decide every 4 months (better than 3) what ports are important and what is not in the scramble than some folks might snag up the others and we have a change in the map.   We also need less nations....11 is to many as it cuts numbers down to much.  Maybe if we have 2000 players bring back extra nations but right now and while we have a base number we need less not more.   

I bring this up cause of some factions getting ports and putting them in retarded timers that no one can fight in and than nothing happens cause of this.  If they have to reset ports than folks have to decide do I wan tto keep all the US coast line or grab my high making port back home first?   If they don't move fast enough the high profit port can be capture and than they have to fight for it again.  We don't fight enough to to many folks settle for what they have. 

Hell can even just do the rest every 6 months.  Just like anything else if you don't want to loose your stuff when it's reset and another nation takes the port keep your goods in a free town or none captured port.  As for the three impossible nations, well you picked extra extra hard mode.

I doubt this would work. Just look at the drop in numbers because the rumors of a wipe coming up, and now imagine that every few months. The game would become a quick rush for neutral ports after a reset followed by a bit of RvR activity which would die down as you got closer to the reset because why spend the time and resources capturing something you were going to lose shortly after.

If the game is going to have map resets it would have to be based on some form of victory condition such as when one nation controls more than a certain percentage of ports they are declared victorious and the map is reset. At least this way people would ally together to stop one nation claiming victory and it would not be a set time for reset.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make the wall smaller to get a portbattle (easier hostilitygrind) so folks can do it in other ships than 1sts aswell

Give clans the option to set 100% taxes. No coding needed for a lockdown on ports for clans.

Repairing of ships and reals for production should be taxed too

big thing, make people get something for their effort in rvr, not only give something to the clan. Humans are egoists

Edited by rediii
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

OK I'm going to say this and it's going to piss some folks off......how about every 3-4 months we have a map reset?  Part of the reason folks don't fight is cause they are settled in with what they have. If they have to decide every 4 months (better than 3) what ports are important and what is not in the scramble than some folks might snag up the others and we have a change in the map.   We also need less nations....11 is to many as it cuts numbers down to much.  Maybe if we have 2000 players bring back extra nations but right now and while we have a base number we need less not more.   

I bring this up cause of some factions getting ports and putting them in retarded timers that no one can fight in and than nothing happens cause of this.  If they have to reset ports than folks have to decide do I wan tto keep all the US coast line or grab my high making port back home first?   If they don't move fast enough the high profit port can be capture and than they have to fight for it again.  We don't fight enough to to many folks settle for what they have. 

Hell can even just do the rest every 6 months.  Just like anything else if you don't want to loose your stuff when it's reset and another nation takes the port keep your goods in a free town or none captured port.  As for the three impossible nations, well you picked extra extra hard mode.

have fun in your pve server. Because thats what you get. (after a sipe there is 2-4 weeksnof pve to get all ports on the map

The US has ports without any timer on the US coast, why not attack that?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Archaos said:

I doubt this would work. Just look at the drop in numbers because the rumors of a wipe coming up, and now imagine that every few months. The game would become a quick rush for neutral ports after a reset followed by a bit of RvR activity which would die down as you got closer to the reset because why spend the time and resources capturing something you were going to lose shortly after.

If the game is going to have map resets it would have to be based on some form of victory condition such as when one nation controls more than a certain percentage of ports they are declared victorious and the map is reset. At least this way people would ally together to stop one nation claiming victory and it would not be a set time for reset.

It worked in POTBS, but they had the victory thing and the time set thing....so you couldln't drag it out and not have a victory.

36 minutes ago, rediii said:

have fun in your pve server. Because thats what you get. (after a sipe there is 2-4 weeksnof pve to get all ports on the map

The US has ports without any timer on the US coast, why not attack that?

Dude really it's more than folks are doing now and you do know it's a PvP/PvE server, some times you actually do have to kill AI you know, but if they fix the hostility to make it easier and not such a grind than something is better than nothing.  

I think the problem is we have to many folks that don't like PvE when just about every game out there is mainly PvE......with a grind to get just about every thing and than PvP.   How else you plan to open up those slots on your ships....oh wait we have been playing for ever and our slots are all ready open....I see the problem.

As for US ports, come help us take them....your good at that aren't you, or do you only play on the best of the best teams?  I never seen you play on an underdog team.  Would be nice to see some of these so call pros actually take on a challenge.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if upon capture of the port your clan got deposited 50,000 or some other random large number doubloons for the effort, therefore getting a squadrons worth of pay for for the trouble of sacking the port.  Call it a special hidden vault that has been collected the taxes for the town, now sacked by the victor and paid handsomely.  Maybe 500,000 real per player (again robbing the town bank) and make it nice and juicy/worth the time & risk of spending 150,000 doubloons on a real PB fleet.  Clans also need numbers to flip the larger ports, most have had suppressed player activity, but I think being able to tell your clan you'll bring them a large prize if they win with you, would go a long way to getting more RVR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, admin said:
  • Remove conversion of victory marks on War (RVR) Server as their current prices in doubloons is one of the things that makes RVR not worth the time. RVR rewards must only be accessible through RVR on the War server (but should be tradeable like right now).  

Quite the opposite, victory marks should be able to be converted into doubloons, IMO.

And in the absence of that, what would make RVR more worth the time is allowing victory marks to be spent on things you normally need doubloons for (mods and notes). They're undervalued right now because they're fairly easy to acquire, in small numbers for individuals and hilariously vast numbers for clans, but no one can spend them as fast as they earn them because of the steep crafting requirements for 1-3rd rate ships. Give me something to burn them on other than permits, and I will actually care about being a viscount.

Who is even buying victory marks in any appreciable amount, to the point that it supposedly hinders RVR? I assume you have data on it? It was my understanding that everyone who needs them already has huge stocks of them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×