Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

ALOHA+BF exploiting game mechanics..


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, vazco said:

Not fighting part of enemy in patrol zones should be simply prohibited. It's an exploit now as well and will lead to issues. We can prohibit this now, or wait a week or two until it becomes a cancer of patrol zones :)

Lower BR would at least allow you to not to be forced to gank others.

Problem is that admin if I read him right have stated it is ok not to fight. Even if it was not allowed, ppl can just play bad ore as in this case chose witch target to kill. How will you ever prove it.

You are as it is now, actually not forced to take part in a gank. You have any right to sail away and say I will not take part in this fight.

Edited by staun
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's allowed to fight only a selected enemy targets and avoid others, that's what I will do in patrol zones. It can give me a non-gank environment. If this is not prohibited, I'm in!

It's very shitty for those that I'll sink or those that will sink since I won't help them, but hey, who cares. It's content! :)

@Caramon Mayer / Yordii, are you up for this? We'll set up staged battles. We'll fight each other, but as soon as someone joins, we'll avoid each other and focus on newcomers.

Edited by vazco
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, vazco said:

The issue of this battle is that if no consequences are taken or new rules introduced, next we'll see a lot of bait battles in patrol zones.

One side will tag another and will wait for others to join in. First-joiners will keep killing newcomers, avoiding fighting other first-joiners. This is not fun, not sporty, gamey and bad for the game, yet  the same as this battle, as no rules were broken.

This is the point and a very good one !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, vazco said:

If it's allowed to fight only a selected enemy targets and avoid others, that's what I will do in patrol zones. It can give me a non-gank environment. If this is not prohibited, I'm in!

We are not going to force the player to shoot or not shoot
We are also prefer system design solving the problem - not the tribunals. 

As a result. If this behavior described by you prevails two things will happen.

  • Patrol exit option will be removed (one side must always die) but in this case people will be griefed for 1.5 hours until the end. (it happened before thus we allowed exit from patrols)
  • or
  • Entry to battles that do not belong to enemy nations will be removed across whole caribbean. Drastically reducing pvp options (especially for solo players)
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear players!
Do you really consider that in a patrol zone it is necessary to attack all without analysis in fights? 
If went, saw fight, came and suddenly saw that on the opposite side, for example Lenin, then it is necessary to destroy it? Even, if it with you in one nation? In spite of the fact that you together are at war with it in port fights and usual pvp fights? 
Unless the player has no choice with whom to be at war and with whom not to be at war?
It is a game, it is my choice to attack someone or to leave from a fight with someone. If it is necessary to leave fight without a fight, for any reason, then I will make it. And personally I consider that the studio chose the correct decision when it entered an opportunity to disengage in a patrol zone.
I came into fight in a patrol zone for other nation recently and it turned out that on the opposite side players from other Russian clan. I was anyway obliged to attack them?
Are you serious?

(sorry google translate)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, admin said:

 

  • Patrol exit option will be removed (one side must always die) but in this case people will be griefed for 1.5 hours until the end. (it happened before thus we allowed exit from patrols)
  • Entry to battles that do not belong to enemy nations will be removed across whole caribbean. Drastically reducing pvp options (especially for solo players)

I believe all 3 options are bad for the game (third being do nothing). People will be exploiting to get content*. In my understanding the only reasonable solution is to give them a way to get it. Non-gank RoE for patrol is the only solution I know, but any solution that gives it would work.

*content - in this case non-gank meaningful battles which are quickly available to groups of 2-6 people.

 

[edit] thanks for at least  trying to discourage people from doing this. I'm still pesimistic about it though.

Edited by vazco
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should be systems against this in patrol areas. You wonder why new players avoid patrol zones? Of course they do because 2 of the largest "pvp" clans club them. You can be friends and competitive. Myself and @Havelock

are a great example. We love each other but we prefer sinking each other. 

 

Edited by HachiRoku
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't really been in a PvP zone fight in a while, do we still not have timers on the battles when they lock.  That would be the best solution to prevent baiting like this from two teams joining a side to make it look like it's 3 vs 3 and than wait for people join and killing those that join the other side like it looks might of happened here (didn't watch the video).  Maybe have a short timer to lock them.  Not the normal lock timer but something like 10-15 mins than they lock. So they can't bait folks to keep joining the battle thinking it's equal odds or something.  IF there is a timer currently (ROE changed so many times I can't keep up with them) maybe change it.  While these guys didn't Green on Green, but if they where baiting that it's not good sportsmanship.

 

Well now we know how some folks have such inflated kills it seems.  It also proves that Pro-Hardcore PvPers do not fight each other.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Battles really should be free for all's and this wouldn't be an issue. As is there really a reason why a ships captain and crew couldn't go rouge or flip sides in battle? Reputation of course.

 

Hachi you have no friends don't lie.

Edited by Aster
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HachiRoku said:

There should be systems against this in patrol areas. You wonder why new players avoid patrol zones? Of course they do because 2 of the largest "pvp" clans club them. You can be friends and competitive. Myself and @Havelock

are a great example. We love each other but we prefer sinking each other. 

 

We do ♥
Battling your friends is the best. You guys never played mario kart on a couch?

On the subject: Even though not shooting is not against the rules, its definetely not honourable to leave your teammates to die. You guys are in patrol ships, why dont you fight each other? ALOHA und BF have a reputation of "pvp clans" but are scared (and this is what it comes down to) to battle it out?

One rule of this game is red = dead. If others are relying on you in a battle, dont leave em hanging.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I find interesting is we are trying to justify the actions, but it comes down to 1 simple thing, both sides went to the patrol zone to fight and cause damage as per  mode they then choose a side to fight on? so why did they choose to fight against each other? that's the question here that we seem to be moving away from.... they made there choices which were not in good graces of the mode of play they chose.... no one forced them they chose and then left? how can it not be wrong?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Caramon Mayer said:

I am entered into this battle to help the Prussians. And when I came to tyre I realized that they were helping each other despite being adversaries.

On one side Banished privateer and Wy did not fire on the BF and let them kill me and the others who did not make part of their clan.

The battle starts at: 3:28:00,

Unfortunately it is not well seen what others do from its perspective, but you can clearly see that they exchanged a couple of broadside to show that they fought and then nothing.. Towards the end reverse passes right next to banished and do not shoot, the whole game they are clearly avoided each Others.

 

We reviewed the video  (and suggest every commenter to review it)

Video you linked does not support your points.

  • BF sees a 1v3 battle and send 2 ships in for a equal 3v3 fight. The rest stay outside. 
  • Once more players join the prussians more BF join
  • They actively shoot ALOHA in the beginning of the battle and its not a couple of broadsides. 
  • Then more brits join they decide this battle to be unfair and stop shooting the initial participants and exit 

We do not see any exploit and abuse in the video (especially if you listen to what is being talked about). Also do not see un-sportsmanship behavior. If all vets exited unfair battles there would be less ganking.

This topic is over but we will let you guys talk and vent a bit more. @Hethwill the Red Duke please watch this a bit. and then lock.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

completely agree with both Havelock and Hethwill, u chose to be red against ur friends no one forced u, u chose to fight in the patrol zone again ur choice..., simple fact is Prussia doesn't want to fight Russia then don't join opposite sides how is it that difficult ur all of sound mind to make a choice its just a shame u made these choices.... and based on it if nothing comes of this then I guess all the dicussions taking place of this game being dead are right which is a crying shame.... ;-(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Powderhorn said:

z4ys suggested removing names from battles.  That might resolve some issues described here.

abit ot, but I would love this to be towards all ships so a player is shown as "indefatigable" instead of "enemy player"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Black veil said:

so just to clarify.... BF sent 2 ships in so where aware of who was fighting for Prussia? and then sent more in that even though they didn't want to fight each other then left?

 

and that's ok?

 

we fight and focus only clan ALOHA first fckin 24 min of battle.

when we saw that the fight was not fair, we decided to leave it. ALL, this is ALL.

we kill 2 pirates and lose Tutanhamon, and then, when we can - we leave battle. 

U can see few stream ago, where im fight vs banished and clan ALOHA, where i kill banished, they kill me. If we have good battle - we fight each other. We always fight in open see, if we wont this. But if we dont wont, why i must kill my friends or they must kill me? wtf?

U can see on my stream where im fight 3x time vs Ram Dinark.

U can see on my stream or moskal stream where we fight vs each other

hello kitty! U can see on my stream, where im in my alt accaunt kill MY BF CLAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and this is not a problem, we play this game for FUN and fck ACTION! 


all that you say here is nonsense and not true. Finish this circus. You look very funny.

 


 

 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Black veil said:

so just to clarify.... BF sent 2 ships in so where aware of who was fighting for Prussia? and then sent more in that even though they didn't want to fight each other then left?

 

and that's ok?

 

seriously.. we engage and fire at each other for a long time and when we see more of you guys are joining in so it turns into a gank BF dont want to participate in this and decides to disengage, whats your problem about this? Are you mad that BF didnt help you out with a gank?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...