Battle system core ruleset discussion

[Ellias]

I was a latecomer to POTBS. I really wanted to play that game but there was nothing directing me to end game (pvp). I was clueless in middle of the sea only doing what other does, hunting AI ships for money. PvP was dominated by few groups and fighting them only helped to demoralize me even further, seeing the experience gap. I need to find a proper 6 players group to able to compete with them. No matter how eager I was, still failed to integrate myself in pvp there. Trying to reach the certain level required an insane amount of in-game gold, time and support from experienced players. 

You need Mexico Gulf as 100% safe zone for these players to grow up, test - compare themselves, challenge themselves when they think the time is right. The game needs to slowly guide them to PvP. A sole tutorial would never be enough. Giving them easy battles would never be enough.

And for those new players who want pvp and can't find battles, send them to experienced players. I am sure they won't mind fighting them. I bet those players are just delusional individuals who will give up playing after few real battles. 

Changing game features won't help this. Designing a smooth, rewarding progression path with a safe zone to grow up may help. 

[Sir Loorkon]

4 hours ago, admin said:

the weaker side battle opened (old reversed signalling) is going to be back
the rest can be discussed.

I agree with one poster that Attacker must bear the consequence of his actions. If you attack a player you must fight. I think it could be a good feature and will eliminate a lot of fake combat. And people who are just average (like me)will think twice before attacking a 3rd rate in a light ship just to try and run if something goes wrong. 

I like the idea that the weaker side of the battle stays open.

How about implementing PvP ranks to use them as a factor with the BR? So it could be possible for beginners or average players to use more BR against an skilled PvP player? If you use pure BR, the new mechanic would favour skilled players. But I do not think most of the skilled players would even like this „favour“ because most of them like a challenge and not an easy kill. BR in factor with PvP rank will also encourage beginners to fight.

This could also be a great anti ganking mechanik because if Beginner(s) with 2xBR fight an average player, this is not a gank, if average player(s) with 2xBR fights a skilled player, this is not a gank but it would be a gank vice versa. This is only a simple example.

@admin would it need alot of coding to do this? You have the data already.

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Sir Loorkon

[van der Clam]

Can this please be put to a vote before applying in a patch? I mean, why is @admin designing a new ROE to cater to one person complaining that his gank of a SoL failed because he was tagged by a light ship that busted up his sails and then ran? This is historical. This is what should be done to save your mates. This is what's done in PBs. If the light ship busted up your sail with 5 broadsides, then it truly is your fault for not sinking him in that amount of time. Or it's your fault for not having a smaller faster ship with you to bug the enemy. Props to the light ship for saving a SoL.

The only thing, IMO, that needs changed is increasing the join timer. 3 to 5 minutes. Allow both sides to balance the BR. Do that first.

Then maybe set a leave timer in the battle...say you cannot leave the battle within the first 20 minutes, This should be plenty of time for the ganker-wannabe to sink the light ship. 

[Slim McSauce]

19 minutes ago, van der Decken said:

Can this please be put to a vote before applying in a patch? I mean, why is @admin designing a new ROE

Because he feels like it. I for one agree with him wanting to look at alternatives. I'm gonna trust someone who brings up valid concerns on a system, to change that system for the better and not repeat any of the same mistakes that plague the current one which is holding back player pvp involvement, since December while population has gone up about 20% since then. I believe this is a spontaneous decision by the Admin but not one that is rash. Enthusiastic to see what comes out of this brainstorming, along with the road of updates leading up to the release.

[Guest]

@admin I don’t think 1 PvP kill per 8 hours is a problem for new players…

Resourcing via NPCs is a natural part of the game, especially for new players who are learning just to sail and aim against targets and also resourcing for building etc., the low end of the game is more about NPCs targets and less about PvP targets, however the next level is all PvP content.

Forget unlimited and unrestricted battles. Add “+1 -1 captain rank battle limit”, sure in the short term it will reduce PvP content massively (PS) but we’re looking at the long term goal here. If Dec. players knew they would only be attacked by their peers in OW, thus a fair contest, surely it would spawn more pvp kills, should control ganking from vets somewhat. 

WOWS system works very well, they do it by ship tier, even if a vet sails a tier 1 ship that ship still only has tier 1 ability and very low rewards. NA is not going to have model volume like WOWS so by captain rank is the next best supporting feature it can offer. Players would build up there rate of kills as there rank increases (theoretically).

Forget the super high “risk of loss” theme too, it doesn’t produce PvP content. Rely on the age-old standard of players just want to “Play Games”, it’s enough for every other game out there and it will be enough for NA, trust players. The adjective is “through away ships” ideology; the less important a ship is the more likely they will use it in combat. Best a balance of the two ideologies.

By joining the war server is the very definition of omission to fight other players, so just let them do it by their own accord, again trust them. Capitals should be busy and alive, a community, surely this leads to clan recruitment, new clans and group formations, then gaming friendships, let these formations find their own way out into OW. Keep the community productive.

If a player gets ganked by his peers then a promotional campaign should ensue to get them to join a clan or group to survive his peer level, unforced.

But in the first, new players should have a comfortable induction into the game (I believe changes are already underway, noted in topic “Mission Changes”).

Create the arena and trust players to play there.

 

PS: "Reduce PvP content", not really, Rear Admirals will still battle Rear Admirals so no loss there, new players will seek-out and battle other new players so no loss there either. +1 -1 gotta be good for the game, especially at release with a full wipe.

Edited January 30, 2019 by Guest

[Capn Rocko]

@admin what happens when a player (in a 6th rate) baits an enemy (in a 5th rate) to attack then his friend in a Bellona comes out of hiding and joins the battle? Does the battle open back up for the player in the 5th rate or is he hello kittyed? 

I think the best thing you can do is implement the "attacker cannot escape" rule. It would eliminate a large amount of griefing.  Even if you leave everything else the same, it would be a great improvement for the game. 

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Capn Rocko

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

So what happens when a player (in a 6th rate) baits an enemy (in a 5th rate) into battle then his friend in a Bellona comes out of hiding and joins the battle? Does the battle open back up for the player in the 5th rate or is he hello kittyed?

It’s by rank…

If the 6^th caption is a Rear Admiral and so is his attackers, then he’s a fool on his own who’s going to die.

But if 6^th caption has only a rank of Master & Command, then the Bellona captain would have to be of a too higher rank to join, because Bellona caption would have to be a Flag Caption to crew his ship, 2 ranks above M&C.

I’m not saying its will fix everything, only mitigate unfair contest.

[Capn Rocko]

Sorry @BuckleUpBones I was responding to this post: 

8 hours ago, admin said:

All battles will be open for the weaker side (vs ai or players does not matter). Attack a weaker ship - prepare for guests.

However, in regards to your suggestion: 

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Forget unlimited and unrestricted battles. Add “+1 -1 rank battle limit”, sure in the short term it will reduce PvP content massively but we’re looking at the long term goal here. If Dec. players knew they would only be attacked by their peers in OW, thus a fair contest, surely it would spawn more pvp kills, should control ganking from vets somewhat. 

I do not like it because it is impossible to determine a player's skill based on his rank. All this suggestion would do is limit the amount of PvP battles (the exact opposite of admin's intentions). It is a good suggestion and makes sense in theory, but there is no way to accurately rank a player's ability. 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Capn Rocko

[staun]

2 hours ago, Banished Privateer said:

I will say just one thing, capital blockades by 15-25 ships was the best PvP content NA had. You couldn't ignore them, no one was allowed to pass through and nations had to gather fleets to break through the blockade, often ending in 25v25 battles at capitals.

Would that not reguire we drop tow and teleport to be affective. 

[HachiRoku]

20 hours ago, admin said:

If the goals is to increase pvp these ideologies can be rethought or abandoned as they dont increase an amount of pvp. 

• Problem 1 - inability to help your own.
  • The common message from rookies in national chats are well known - "I got attacked near XXX port - please help if you can" or "I see enemy ships - lets tag them - come help"… 
  • Usual answer in chat - silence and "tough luck" - as you CANT. I think its time to accept the fact that distance based ROE is bad and is reducing pvp and only helps solo hunters (which based on data are a huge minority).  
  • This is a problem because we know that pvp assists has 100% of correlation with retention. If you dont participate in group activities you drop from the game 10x faster.  
• Problem 1.1 part of lack of group pvp
  • There is actually not enough ganking (hold on and bear with me).  For accounts created in December: Only 5% of players have pvp assists and only 1% of players have more than 10 pvp assists. 
  • Again the problem because assist increase retention
• Problem 2 Speed
  • Fast ship controls the OW pvp, and heavy battle ready ships do not have anything to counter against the gank even if they outnumber enemies in guns.
• Problem 3 combat ready ship balance - described by OP in the post.
  • When line ship is fighting 3 fast frigates to win the lineship must not make a single mistake
  • When 3 fast frigates fight the lineship they can always run away if they make a mistake

None of these so called problems have anything to do with ROE. 

Problem 1 has been caused by AI reinforcements. You destroyed content for a large amount of players that patrolled the capital waters. Why bother go waste your time helping some idiot that gets tagged in the greenzone if he is most likly getting killed by a requin? Is there a point in chasing a requin?  

Problem 2. You were the one that released the requin. You clearly knew the effects it would have in open sea. 

Problem 3. Simple sollution. In 1 hour ships can repair 4 times. That is 12 reps vs 4 reps in bellona vs 3 frigates. Back in the day with 1 repair the lineship had way higher chances. Your repair system doesn't scale and I think you should finally accept this. People defend it because they want easy PVE. 

Maybe you should look at the actual problem. You change so many unnecessary things and make them worse. The game was in its best playable stat before we had the ship structure wipe in 2016/2017.

@Banished Privateer had a bad day there but that is the price to pay for having sandbox games. Everytime people complain about something minor you end up bringing in a gamechanging patch that causes major issues.

 

[Crimson Sunrise]

15 hours ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Why SHOULD they get help if nobody was within visual range??  that's 20-25k distance!

 

say a cutter was in visual range of that battle and relayed that info to nation chat and additional ships from nearby port responded why should they not be able to help out the one that got attacked 

[Crimson Sunrise]

3 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

It’s by rank…

If the 6^th caption is a Rear Admiral and so is his attackers, then he’s a fool on his own who’s going to die.

But if 6^th caption has only a rank of Master & Command, then the Bellona captain would have to be of a too higher rank to join, because Bellona caption would have to be a Flag Caption to crew his ship, 2 ranks above M&C.

I’m not saying its will fix everything, only mitigate unfair contest.

that would then make it pointless for rear admirals to sail anything but SoL's since it would be based on their rank, this would also prevent group battles as u are likely to have mixed ranks in most groups so how will a battle be determined based on which players rank the rear admirals or the starter they are helping, what about the other side will it be based on their highest or lowest rank.  if battles are based on rank then u wouldnt be creating more pvp it would be causing less

[z4ys]

4 hours ago, Capn Rocko said:

@admin what happens when a player (in a 6th rate) baits an enemy (in a 5th rate) to attack then his friend in a Bellona comes out of hiding and joins the battle? Does the battle open back up for the player in the 5th rate or is he hello kittyed? 

I think the best thing you can do is implement the "attacker cannot escape" rule. It would eliminate a large amount of griefing.  Even if you leave everything else the same, it would be a great improvement for the game. 

 

I was thinking of the same situation. Surprise and indef. 

The indef will never attack the surprise because it's open to reinforcement.

The surprise will never attack because it might go wrong and there is no way of escaping.

When attacking is a penalty why should anyone attack? How does it increase pvp? Why is a equal br fight considered fair when we still have player skill? So far I don't see any benefits. Only baiting exploits and port sitting.

On top of that most pve dudes like to overpower their ai enemies. That mechanic will work against them as well.

[z4ys]

Better idea would be to allow undocking only when in Grp with certain br. So all encounters are potential fights ...

[Spitfire83]

12 hours ago, admin said:

We will start with the following.
All battles will be open for the weaker side (vs ai or players does not matter). Attack a weaker ship - prepare for guests.

So basically from now on if I attack a surprise in my trinc within 50k of the surprises nations town I can expect to be GANKED at least 2v1 because that makes the br more even and this is fair and fun how ?? 

[staun]

19 minutes ago, Spitfire83 said:

So basically from now on if I attack a surprise in my trinc within 50k of the surprises nations town I can expect to be GANKED at least 2v1 because that makes the br more even and this is fair and fun how ?? 

Not sure you have to be affraid of that. Think actually most gank fleet will stay far away from comming to the aid of a captain in trouble. It is a death trap. I send in a ship to get attacked. When it then have lured players to attack it, I come with some guys that have been hiding out of sight. Trust me the homeguard stay in port affraid of what is out of sight. 

Also if you have attacked a trader it ties up some of the BR.

[do not say dlc]

The simplest and most viable solution is the circle of death battles, and  allso include chests, paints and flags as after battle pvp rewards. And because hoarding is an issue have the pvp rewards time limited.

[Ellias]

All recommended by admin are to solve the issues mainly caused by DLC ships. 

Thanks to Requins none bothers to help newbies.

Thanks to Hercules, now you want to introduce hated, ridiculous circle of death to all PvP combats.

You have to change DLC's. No need to mess up with the years of work and tuning to justify your DLC mistake.

 

[Admiral Howe of Gibraltar]

Here we go again with white and black changes.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Admiral Howe of Gibraltar

[OjK]

Ohkey... So start with some quite impressive news.

Endymion vs the 3rd Rate. 
Due to (still) totally messed up BR for some ships, it's a 3rd Rate which can be reinforced, not the Endymion. And its' just a simple example out of MANY.

I've said long time ago, that messed up BR's are an issue, but they only mess up with Port Battle settings, which are fair for both sides and prepared the day before. Now, You want to make such a big change with no fix to the BR numbers?

Wasa's and Bellona's will be now excluded from both OW and RvR - the enemy will be able to join against You almost always - unless You attack a Bucentaure or 1st rate. 

Not to mention Trinco and Endymion - those will be now completely useless as well

 

Other than that - I'd support the idea of always opened battle, however there are still some issues.

Like the circle of death beeing quite bad for square sailed ships - as most (proper) fights tends to go upwind, and at some point You're more fighting the super fast moving circle than the enemy.
However - someone made a good point of maybe centering the circle on attacked ship? (if it's a group of ships, probably on the biggest ship in the group) That's something really should be considered.

 

Also I need a proper clarification - if I attack a higher BR battle is insta closed, or attacking side can still be reinforced and a battle stays open?

None of the answers will be good.

1) Yes - cool, I'd like the idea of ALL battles currently beeing fought are visible on OW, even if they are closed, however that will probably mean that people will tend to gether massive revenge fleets even easier and they will rather wait to catch someone 5v1 after battle, than joining the already lost one.

2) No - it will easily lead to the trap exploit...

 

[staun]

7 minutes ago, Ellias said:

All recommended by admin are to solve the issues mainly caused by DLC ships. 

Thanks to Requins none bothers to help newbies.

Thanks to Hercules, now you want to introduce hated, ridiculous circle of death to all PvP combats.

You have to change DLC's. No need to mess up with the years of work and tuning to justify your DLC mistake.

 

Where do ppl see the Requin hunt all the time. I rearly see them. To hunt traders any  war ship is better than a trader. Against a warship a Requin can easy be defeated. Think @Banished Privateer Yesterday streamed a fight against a Lrq and easy killed it. 

I don’t only see Herc on OW, But actually a lot of other ships. Only in 2 patrolezone I see most Herc. But even there I see a lot of other ships. Trust me when I say I don’t fear the fight against Herc, no it is the Nisguara that bring fear to my heart.

So how is it actually you think the Herc have ruined PvP?

[OjK]

7 minutes ago, staun said:

Against a warship a Requin can easy be defeated.

True, however sailing upwinds for hours trying to avoid getting boarded with insta-ready boarding preparation isn't really a PvP fun.

This stupid insta-boarding should go at a cost... 

If You find a person who understand his Requin it's not gonna be a challenging fight, but only an annoying one. You won't loose if You won't make a mistake, but it will take You ridicoulous amount of time before You get him / he decide to escape.

Edited January 19, 2019 by OjK

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

4 hours ago, Banished Privateer said:

I will say just one thing, capital blockades by 15-25 ships was the best PvP content NA had. You couldn't ignore them, no one was allowed to pass through and nations had to gather fleets to break through the blockade, often ending in 25v25 battles at capitals.

Blockades were an integral part of Napoleonic warfare, while blockades had less effect on mainland ports, against Islands they could break Island nations due to the economic factors involved, a factor negated in game by the lack of  a effective trading system and the general unwillingness to run convoys,  the odds are usually in favour  of the commerce raider who utilise the best points of the ships they use,  and, are usually prepared to disengage, to disappear into an empty sea and try elsewhere.  Take away the choice of disengaging and a large part of the game dies as the effects overflow into PVP and RVR. 

Blockading only works at high density ports, as the continuous blockading of KPR and Belize demonstrated,  Somewhere like Truxillo  is less likely to see large scale actions in part, due to time zone differences, and, partly due to the blockading of a port deep inside enemy waters where there is little support, where, some unfortunate American runs into a British inshore squadron or worse a SOL squadron. It is equally demoralising  for those blockading, as well as those blockaded, knowing the enemy is there and you cannot get to him,  and knowing you cannot sail because that one small ship is probably the advance ship for a squadron that will give you little chance to escape to open sea, or, reach safe haven in port. In any sea battle it is normal for a Captain to seek to preserve his ship to fight another day, if he can, it is also normal to want to destroy the enemy, it is, in reality, a balancing act, often tempered by the Articles of War, (which Admin thoughtfully provides, although, I doubt many players actually read them!)  Any Captain who fails to do his utmost to defeat the enemy  shall Suffer death,  Harsh? It may have been, (and it still is!)  There was still sufficient leeway to disengage, and, preserve the ship, if that could be done, as the Articles of war also states Any Captain who recklessly hazards his ship shall suffer death.  (Generally, Captains careers come to a crash stop if they ground their ship, or, if they find themselves against overwhelming odds and fail to 'do their utmost' to preserve the ship and crew, even, if that meant surrender,  IRL a trained crew could have  been paroled, and, returned home, in game, ships could be recaptured, or even sold back as some Captains have done, so, it is not unusual to find lesser sentences, or, even in rare cases acquittal, even during a war). It is, perhaps, fortunate or, unfortunate, depending on your viewpoint, that the Articles of War have little in common with the Rules of Engagement in game!

Banished Privateer's assessment of the blockading of major ports as a contributor to OW PVP is accurate, but, only when such blockades happen perhaps 3-4 times in a week, a continuous blockade inevitably leads to frustration, a desire to do something else other than continuously defend or, attack the same ports day after day is natural, after all, a fleet in being ties up the enemy ships blockading, a factor that was true in Napoleonic times, it was when some of the biggest fleet actions occurred.

In a war where there is a true victor and vanquished, blockades, convoys and patrols are vital tools (to be fair such routine missions are generally boring when compared to a fight), in an endless slog to kill each other, they may, provide a killing ground, but little more than that, and, in a  game where players provide most of the content, then that, is a good thing.

 

[staun]

9 minutes ago, OjK said:

True, however sailing upwinds for hours trying to avoid getting boarded with insta-ready boarding preparation isn't really a PvP fun.

This stupid insta-boarding should go at a cost... 

If You find a person who understand his Requin it's not gonna be a challenging fight, but only an annoying one. You won't loose if You won't make a mistake, but it will take You ridicoulous amount of time before You get him / he decide to escape.

But did we not to some extended have the same Issues with a Prince back in the days. 

I remember a little bitch of a pirat that always sailed a Prince to cap traders and small war ships. He could sail free because nobody wanted to chase a Prince. First when we got tried of him, we build fast princes to chase him. So when He attacked a player, the player kept him in battle until we could get a revenge fleet of princes ready to get him when He came out of the battle. I know revenge fleet are bad, Sorry for doing it. But he got the message and started to hunt by the brits.

But the question was why the Dlc seams to have ruined PvP. I just don’t understand how it did it.

[AeRoTR]

15 minutes ago, OjK said:

If You find a person who understand his Requin it's not gonna be a challenging fight, but only an annoying one. You won't loose if You won't make a mistake, but it will take You ridicoulous amount of time before You get him / he decide to escape.

This.

May be the new battle joining rules should not consider BR, because it is broken for balance. 

A Hercules (170) attacks an Endymion (330), as Endy has about double BR  , hercules can be reinforced ???