Battle system core ruleset discussion

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Crimson Sunrise said:

that would then make it pointless for rear admirals to sail anything but SoL's

Incorrect, view any post of battle results and you will see Rear Admirals sailing ships of every class, also you forgetting about shallow water battles and as an e.g. Rear Admirals sailing the Requin but now they won’t be able to demoralize new players.

8 hours ago, Crimson Sunrise said:

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

Correct, groups can only form up with a 3 rank spread. If your rank is lower than Commodore it would be best to forum up with players of the same rank, then you could attack a groups within a 3 rank spread. Most important, you will only be able to attack players of a similar gaming level, the exact reason for this mechanic.

8 hours ago, Crimson Sunrise said:

if battles are based on rank then u wouldnt be creating more pvp it would be causing less

Incorrect, long term will see far more players reaching Commodore and thus more pop, thus creating more PvP content. Realm is also the end game where this mechanic will have no effect. 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Guest

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Incorrect, view any post of battle results and you will see Rear Admirals sailing ships of very class, e.g. Rear Admirals sail the Requin but now they won’t be able to demoralize new players.

A - usually Captain's name demoralizes. Not the rank: NA community is pretty small, like a village. Majority of veterans are well known.

B - rank has zero to do with PvP skill. That mainly comes out PvP experience and practice. There are skilled Commodores (a few) and a bulkload of unskilled R.Adm.s.

C - Alts? Very often top players have got quite some, directly buying, or getting use of retired ex-mates.

7 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Correct, groups can only form up with a 3 rank spread. If your rank is lower than Commodore it would be best to forum up with players of the same rank, then you could attack a groups within a 3 rank spread. Most important, you will only be able to attack players of a similar game level, the exact reason for this mechanic.

So a group of veterans cant bring with them a less experienced captain to make him learning group battle combat, to test him, to correct his errors and in general to train him.

Nice. Isnt it?

10 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Incorrect, long term will see far more player reaching Commodore and creating PvP content. Realm is also the end game where this mechanic will have no effect. 

Granted the above it will ADD rules limiting group formation and tagging.

Therefore LIMITING PVP.

[Capn Rocko]

I have gotten my arse kicked by master and commanders and seen rear admirals stall in the wind for 5+ minutes. You cannot judge a player's skill based on his rank. Period. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

A... B... C...

So far forcing PvP content has gone sideways, so do the opposite, adding freedoms for new players to roam and see what happens.

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Guest

[Capn Rocko]

1 minute ago, BuckleUpBones said:

So far forcing PvP content has gone sideways, so do the opposite, adding freedoms for new players to roam and see what happens.

And what happens when I want to do a trade run on my low ranked alt? Invincibility from most players? No thanks. 

[Macjimm]

5 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

I have gotten my arse kicked by master and commanders and seen rear admirals stall in the wind for 5+ minutes. You cannot judge a player's skill based on his rank. Period. 

Very true.  My rank has been obtained by a redeemable and  sailing.  I have no PvP experience and very little PvE combat.  Some day I will be a Rear Admiral.

You cannot judge a player's skill by rank.  Period.

Limits should not be placed on players based on rank.

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

And what happens when I want to do a trade run on my low ranked alt? Invincibility from most players? No thanks. 

Surely you don’t prey on new players, even players with a rank less than Commodore!

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Macjimm said:

Very true.  My rank has been obtained by a redeemable and  sailing.  I have no PvP experience and very little PvE combat.  Some day I will be a Rear Admiral.

You cannot judge a player's skill by rank.  Period.

Limits should not be placed on players based on rank.

 

You mean limits shouldn't be placed on vets! Lol.

[AeRoTR]

@staun I am not gonna keep talking about this subject. I want it to be fair for everybody, I want it more skill based. You may prefer better wood / better upgrades, wider gap.

Best wood for dueling can be teak/wo which is 5 cm thicker than your mah/sab but 0.1 slower.

5 cm means one cartagena refit !, same speed. So you have to put 1 cartagena for same thickness, to be equal, 5 cm is about %10 percent for that trincomalee.

Now he has 1 free mod slot, he puts superior guacata gunpowder while you put carta on that slot to be equal. He will penetrate your carta, he will demast you, he will sink you. Now he has golden ship, he has 5 percent faster reload as upgrades, stacked with skillbooks which gives another 12%percent, so he is reloading 17% faster than you, he can penetrate you even if you are angled, but you can not penetrate him, he out dps you in his ship, he penetrates you in his ship, demasts you, leaks you.

Now let's go to port battle ships, my L'Ocean being LO/WO has %18 more thickness, coupled with some other mods and being only 3/5 blue ship, I have 92 cm thickness. Now go build any ship without LO/WO and come to the port battle. What is your build SAB/SAB or CAG/SAB ?

You guys can enjoy faster, agile, high dps DLC ships. You can enjoy mah/sab builds. You can enjoy using 6th rate skillbooks with 250 crew boarding ship which increases power of skills too much. That is how you enjoy this game. I do not enjoy that way, I have enough experience to see, many many people quiting this game because of these problems, I have been demasted enough to know that if I do not have some good mast thickness upgrade, that "particular guy" with his penetration moded, poods gonna demast me soon. I have seen this for 2300 hours. That is my experience, I respect yours, but do not agree with you.

[Capn Rocko]

20 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Surely you don’t prey on new players, even players with a rank less than Commodore!

 

This has nothing to do with me. You have a good suggestion but there are too many holes and possible exploits for it to work in the way you intend.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Capn Rocko

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Capn Rocko said:

This has nothing to do with me. You have a good suggestion but there are too many holes and possible exploits for it to work in the way you intend.

if you wish to debate it further please start your own suggestion thread because this has nothing to do with OPs post (creating MORE PvP)

The exploits of alts or of experience players restarting their character shouldn’t outweigh the benefits of giving a new player a clear path to populating the game.

@admin wanted us to brainstorm on ways to "increase new player kills per hour", this is my idea on a "long term" solution to do so, it has everything to do with this topic.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Guest

[Capn Rocko]

5 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

The exploits of Alts or of an experience player restarting their character shouldn’t outweigh the benefits giving a new player a clear path to populating the game.

If this was implemented everyone would use a low rank alts to undercrew trade ships to trade risk free. This is game breaking.  You are not the first person to suggest this and it has been debated many times before.

A clear path to new players populating the game is getting them in clans asap and let the veterans train them by taking them hunting:

On 1/18/2019 at 4:48 AM, admin said:

pvp assists has 100% of correlation with retention. If you dont participate in group activities you drop from the game 10x faster.  

 

[Angus MacDuff]

44 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

"increase new player kills per hour"

New players don't have kills per hour.  They need some protection, but this game is just harsh for beginners.  The population is growing as we speak and that will increase PVP.

[staun]

1 hour ago, AeRoTR said:

@staun I am not gonna keep talking about this subject. I want it to be fair for everybody, I want it more skill based. You may prefer better wood / better upgrades, wider gap.

All I am saying is that as the game is now,  everybody has acces to the woods, and can get it if they do an effort. Isent that fair enough that effort has a reward. As I also showed it might not be such a huge different on wood as ppl think.

Best wood for dueling can be teak/wo which is 5 cm thicker than your mah/sab but 0.1 slower.

I used a teak/teak to show the different between that and another build. The reason I chose Teak/Teak was that is the build I used for my OW PvP ships. If you want to compare with a teak/Wo maybe look at a Sab/sab. By using sab you get 5 % crew protection. Don't know the excat formular for reload time and crew. But if you lose less crew than your enemy, then  you will have a higher reload time, better repair time.  Better chance in boarding. How much is that worth?

5 cm means one cartagena refit !, same speed. So you have to put 1 cartagena for same thickness, to be equal, 5 cm is about %10 percent for that trincomalee.

You need to compare build that are likely has the same purpos. Here you want to have some thickness, so off you need to compare to a build that have thickness.

Now he has 1 free mod slot, he puts superior guacata gunpowder while you put carta on that slot to be equal. He will penetrate your carta, he will demast you, he will sink you. Now he has golden ship, he has 5 percent faster reload as upgrades, stacked with skillbooks which gives another 12%percent, so he is reloading 17% faster than you, he can penetrate you even if you are angled, but you can not penetrate him, he out dps you in his ship, he penetrates you in his ship, demasts you, leaks you.

So now only the the vet have skillbook ore am I getting your example wrong? He is the only one sailing a gold ship. Have I got the ship crafting wrong, does PvP/vets have a higher chance to get a gold ship. But I am not fan of the random ships, If it was up to me all ships had the same upgrade slots.

Now let's go to port battle ships, my L'Ocean being LO/WO has %18 more thickness, coupled with some other mods and being only 3/5 blue ship, I have 92 cm thickness. Now go build any ship without LO/WO and come to the port battle. What is your build SAB/SAB or CAG/SAB ?

Actually think most players use teak/wo for pb's. We did atleast when I was doing RvR.  We prefered the speed over thickness so we always could either get away ore gank up on a slow ship that could not escape, because it was a slow build.  If I knew you was on slow Lo/Wo build I think actually a Cag/Sab could get you in trouble. It is faster, so it can close that gab so your thickness don't matter and as I think in total it have more hit points it could just sail up to you and change broadside for broadside. Faster ships also give you an advantage with circles as you faster can deploy your forces and get an upper hand in an area. But this topic is about OW PvP, not RvR. The issues with RvR is in my opinion more than acces to wood. But that is another topic.

You guys can enjoy faster, agile, high dps DLC ships. You can enjoy mah/sab builds. You can enjoy using 6th rate skillbooks with 250 crew boarding ship which increases power of skills too much. That is how you enjoy this game. I do not enjoy that way, I have enough experience to see, many many people quiting this game because of these problems, I have been demasted enough to know that if I do not have some good mast thickness upgrade, that "particular guy" with his penetration moded, poods gonna demast me soon. I have seen this for 2300 hours. That is my experience, I respect yours, but do not agree with you.

Who you guys is, I am not sure who you refere to. I sail my Herc in 2 patrolezones. I cap a frew AI traders on it. Never gone hunt in Ow in it. It have been used a couple of times in homeguard, but that was basicly because it was the only ship build in that area for hunting. Not much help trying to hunt in a L'Ocean. Even when you remove all and let it be all about skill. The best will still beat the less skilled captain. That will not change how ppl feel that lose all the time. Trust me I hate demasting too. For a long time it killed my interest in PvP, proberbly still the reason why I don't care for dueling, besides ofc I always had thought bigger fights are more fun.

 I respect you disagree with me. This thread was made by admin, so he could have some input on, what will give more PvP, You had a solution, some changes. I simply asked why you thought, those changes would give more PvP. I challanged you on your ideas. You then explained why you thought it would give a better PvP. It is simple as that. I never have seen any change be good, if all just say it is great, it is when it get challanged you find the answers if it is good ore not.

Edited January 19, 2019 by staun

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

So far forcing PvP content has gone sideways, so do the opposite, adding freedoms for new players to roam and see what happens.

EXACTLY.

Freedom to engage. To fight. To try to run. Everywhere (almost).

 

3 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

to brainstorm on ways to "increase new player kills per hour", this is my idea on a "long term" solution to do so, it has everything to do with this topic.

More kills per hours doesnt mean better, more fair, etc... PvP.

And first and foremost "long term" is MORE PLAYERS. That usually play "sandboxes" games... TO BE FREE.

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

As I have said, dura helped people with the idea of loosing. And going back to fight.

 

This was removed to help crafters & the Econ and I was totally with this move.

 

But if the goal is to make everyone going knifes out and pvp, I think the idea could be brought back if done in a manner that all line ships stay unaffected. Or if dura is granted as a compensation for loosing to a supperior  enemy.

 

another thing is to incitate players to go sail in dangerous waters even if they meet no other players, reward this or simply make it interesting instead of simply time consuming & boring. 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Durin]

1 pvp kill per 8 hours for new players? that does not sound bad at all! you have to consider that at the current state of the warserver, its is a lot more likely for a new player to run into a pvp-veteran than to run into another new player. add ~1000 other newbs to the game and i bet that number would change a lot.

edit: that kill ratio is a LOT better then what i had when getting into eve-online for example

Edited January 20, 2019 by Durin

[Hethwill]

After rummination...

Circle of death is a not so good idea.

But immediate close, open for weaker side sounds fair and balanced towards equal fights.

-------

And to add 2 cents - the best of open world sandbox is the "unknown". Unknown is there's a enemy sail beyond the visual horizon, if there's more beyond that one.

Without sailing, there's no PvP. Without sailing there's no possibility of raiding, coming across a enemy squadron, or whatever activity.

First and foremost, sailing is how players access content, and this part must be explained and understood by veterans and newcomers alike.

PvP might occur 5 seconds after setting sail, or it might happen 5 minutes after, it is unknown unless there's a defined Conquest operation going on.

So, taking on generic OW PvP of chance encounters...

How many, just how many of those encounters are equal ships or equivalent BR end in no engagement because one of the sides decides to run away ? ( i'm not against retreat, i'm talking about no engagement at all, immediate action is to turn as soon as battle starts and try to escape battle )

That's where 8 hours for 1 PvP kill go.

I'd say majority of PvP encounters end in barely a shot being fired, just with chases.

[vazco]

On 1/18/2019 at 12:35 PM, Banished Privateer said:

Solo hunters are the minority ONLY because it require a lot of experience.

Solo players are a minority because at the current state of the game, there's noone to hunt. It's a waste of time. I was solo-hunting, and that's why I stopped.

 

@admin I'm ok with not bending rules for solo players in OW - the whole community is more important. Giving PvP zone to solo hunters is a good compromise... Still, I think you should create just a single PvP zone, with dynamic BR. Then it's good also for solo hunters.

Creating circle of death in OW creates big issues - you can't use the wind right, you're stuck in battle with people to avoid a fight etc.

[Stilgar]

Some good ideas in this threat. Thought of throwing my two cents in.

I always thought some sort of phased combat instances should be implemented in order to encourage all elements of the naval engagement and give place/role for all/most ships and importantly improve the quality of the time spent in OW battle instances.

This proposal might suit better ROE in pvp battle zones, but can perhaps be considered for all OW battles.

Phase one: tagging / skirmish (duration 10-15 mins?)

Battle remains open for the whole time. Battle group and some sort of BR balancing rules of joining should be implemented, I suppose. Fast / smaller ships can use their speed to disengage and escape. Position during OW tagging, composition of the group and opening moves are the key aspects (just as it is now).

Phase two: main engagement (duration 15-20 mins?)

After 10-15 mins, circle of death appears for another 15-20 min (?). It should be larger than current circle of death in pvp zones to allow manoeuvring and not just a “cage” fight (sailing should still rule!). So, if attacker manages to keep the defender in battle in phase one (or both sides feel like fighting), full engagement will take place. In this phase heavier ships will play main role, whereas smaller ships / weaker groups will have to play manoeuvring game to slow / wear the attacker down and stay alive. The circle should be large enough and static I’d say (no shrinking!).

Phase three. Disengagement / end battle (duration 30 min max ?)

In this phase circle of death disappears and the loosing side can try to disengage and save their ships. Fast / healthier ships will have advantage in this phase and weaker group can switch to disengagement gameplay.

Battle instance should perhaps be limited to 1 hr: life is short. 

[Guest]

On 1/19/2019 at 9:33 AM, Crimson Sunrise said:

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 

because it would also simulate that they didnt have telephones in the 18th century and actually could give a message by writing or telling it to peoples in person? 

[Hethwill]

14 minutes ago, Stilgar said:

Some good ideas in this threat. Thought of throwing my two cents in.

I always thought some sort of phased combat instances should be implemented in order to encourage all elements of the naval engagement and give place/role for all/most ships and importantly improve the quality of the time spent in OW battle instances.

This proposal might suit better ROE in pvp battle zones, but can perhaps be considered for all OW battles.

Phase one: tagging / skirmish (duration 10-15 mins?)

Battle remains open for the whole time. Battle group and some sort of BR balancing rules of joining should be implemented, I suppose. Fast / smaller ships can use their speed to disengage and escape. Position during OW tagging, composition of the group and opening moves are the key aspects (just as it is now).

Phase two: main engagement (duration 15-20 mins?)

After 10-15 mins, circle of death appears for another 15-20 min (?). It should be larger than current circle of death in pvp zones to allow manoeuvring and not just a “cage” fight (sailing should still rule!). So, if attacker manages to keep the defender in battle in phase one (or both sides feel like fighting), full engagement will take place. In this phase heavier ships will play main role, whereas smaller ships / weaker groups will have to play manoeuvring game to slow / wear the attacker down and stay alive. The circle should be large enough and static I’d say (no shrinking!).

Phase three. Disengagement / end battle (duration 30 min max ?)

In this phase circle of death disappears and the loosing side can try to disengage and save their ships. Fast / healthier ships will have advantage in this phase and weaker group can switch to disengagement gameplay.

Battle instance should perhaps be limited to 1 hr: life is short. 

Poor traders. 

They are a part of PvP you know...

( PvP is... when you want it and when you don't but others do )

[admin]

16 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

New players don't have kills per hour.  They need some protection, but this game is just harsh for beginners.  The population is growing as we speak and that will increase PVP.

they do. 25% of players who are less than 1 month old have at least 1 kill.
You are not that player (less than 30 days old) your perspective is distorted. 
30 days is a lot for a game. You can finish more than 90% of games on the market in less
 

[Ellias]

38 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

Without sailing, there's no PvP. Without sailing there's no possibility of raiding, coming across a enemy squadron, or whatever activity.

First and foremost, sailing is how players access content, and this part must be explained and understood by veterans and newcomers alike.

PvP might occur 5 seconds after setting sail, or it might happen 5 minutes after, it is unknown unless there's a defined Conquest operation going on.

2

When teleporting was not possible, most of the Swedish nation was stuck around Macanao, Saint George. Dutch were stuck around Caracas, Rio Schico.

Frontier was created naturally, map size was reduced by rule and player population was focused in the same place. You could get almost instant action by sailing out.  With 1500 players average battle size was 10vs15, I don't care if it would become 2v4 today.

This game saw many better days till player suggestions ruined it. Forum players kept pulling the strings to twist the game for their liking and personal success.

• I don't want to sail, granted.
• I should able to sink 5 ships easily, granted.
• "Demasting is the only skill in the game", granted.
• I should be fast enough to run from everyone and to able to catch everyone, granted.
• Everyone is enemy, this is not nice, we need diplomacy, granted(removed).
• I am working and have life (yes all others are just freaks), can't bother myself with hardcore trading and crafting. Need faster action, granted here is your DLC and Shallow patrol zones
• Can we make it when I am trading, trader safe and when I am hunting, hunter centric? When I sail line ships it is ridiculous that 5th rate can even dare to come close to me, when I sail 5th rate I should have a chance to able to sink line ship for sake of balance and skill-based gaming.

I was very optimistic when teleportation fees were introduced. People cried so loud. "I need TP to pvp" could be translated; I need it to outbid contracts and  TP somewhere where my nation crowd is gathering to lynch a few spotted players.

 Sailing is obsolete.

[admin]

1 hour ago, vazco said:

Solo players are a minority because at the current state of the game, there's noone to hunt. It's a waste of time. I was solo-hunting, and that's why I stopped.

 

@admin I'm ok with not bending rules for solo players in OW - the whole community is more important. Giving PvP zone to solo hunters is a good compromise... Still, I think you should create just a single PvP zone, with dynamic BR. Then it's good also for solo hunters.

Creating circle of death in OW creates big issues - you can't use the wind right, you're stuck in battle with people to avoid a fight etc.

solo hunters are a majority and they are not hunters. As i said before only 5% of players have pvp assists. Majority of starting players (30 days in game) sail solo.