Battle system core ruleset discussion

[Licinio Chiavari]

5 minutes ago, Hawkwood said:

This post makes no sense at all. Why are you initiating a battle then if you can´t win? The attacker can not be "ganked" if the BR gets equal on some point, no?

A - an hunter usually tag something he thinks he can engage and beat. The higher chances to disengage if something went wrong, the more targets he tags.

B - even in the most reasonable attack, something CAN go badly wrong, from an unespected very skilled enemy, a ship fitted (casually) to counter attacker fit etc... (and not last a brief DC changing a winning situation into a losing one).

C - if something goes wrong also by Articles of War, it's captain duty to save the ship... a floating ship (aside the investment crafting/buying her and fitting her) is worth for another battle.

D - A Bellona crosses a 3rd rate: is it fair? I'd say yes. BR: 450 v 300. Tagged side is the weakest. Battle stay open. A second bellona arrives and join the weak side.
New BR: 450 v 750... and the attacker cant leave. Easy counterganking, isnt?

[Hethwill]

Who says D is correct ? You have any details ?

Signalling was tested as a Perk. If you wanted to be reinforced you had to have the Perk. And the perk said 1.5x BR.

I personally expect not 1.5x BR( more like 1.0 BR ), but i expect it to be a perk.

 

[Sir Loorkon]

What I do not understand is the following: At the moment battle in OW closes after 2 1/2 minutes. No battle if you are to late. Boring. With the new system battle stays open for the weaker side. So you have the opportunity to join. You must not join, you are free to do so. What's wrong with that? @Licinio Chiavari I like your posts in general and your way of argumentation and I know you have a profound knowledge of the mechanics but you have not convinced me. 

I have to add that I would recommend to identify the "weaker side" of an battle by BR (dynamic) x PvP rank (has to be introduced)

Edited January 22, 2019 by Sir Loorkon

[Licinio Chiavari]

5 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

Licinio,

As i posted way above, for me circle of death makes no sense, hence i focus on the other aspects that do make sense. Glad I put that out of my way.

If it comes to that I will simply change my "character" career to play the "new edition".

Is like playing a french army with any wargames rules on the table in a waterloo scenario. I don't like it, i know i will be ganked and will not win, but still is great fun.

We have fundamental differences. I see the game as a mean to play a character, whatever the rules. You see it as a big arena to game the game.

Exactly the contrary. I hate arena games.

I was a random noob. I was then a medium solo hunter. I was a more successful solo hunter. I am still but I found a nice group to work with.

If I join always PvP servers in any game, and the more aggressive gameplay, the better, it's for the thrill of the hunt, being the hunter, the prey or often first one then the latter or even the contrary.

Not to repeat AGAIN, that the more complex RoE, the more tricky ways to exploit it. And, AGAIN, who better be able to exploit? the solo player, the random casuals or the organized veteran gank squads?

[Angus MacDuff]

3 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

Who says D is correct ? You have any details ?

The OP says D is correct

[Hethwill]

1 minute ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Exactly the contrary. I hate arena games.

I was a random noob. I was then a medium solo hunter. I was a more successful solo hunter. I am still but I found a nice group to work with.

If I join always PvP servers in any game, and the more aggressive gameplay, the better, it's for the thrill of the hunt, being the hunter, the prey or often first one then the latter or even the contrary.

Not to repeat AGAIN, that the more complex RoE, the more tricky ways to exploit it. And, AGAIN, who better be able to exploit? the solo player, the random casuals or the organized veteran gank squads?

You are not an entire game. Nor me, nor any single player.

Developers and community are.

Your opinion is as valid as any. Don't shake the water out of the cup. You get yourself wet.

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 minute ago, Sir Loorkon said:

What I do not understand is the following: At the moment battle in OW closes after 2 1/2 minutes. No battle if you are to late. Boring. With the new system battle stays open for the weaker side. So you have the opportunity to join. You must not join, you are free to do so. What's wrong with that? @Licinio Chiavari I like your posts in general and your way of argumentation and I know you have a profound knowledge of the mechanics but you have not convinced me. 

I have to add that I would recommend to identify the "weaker side" of an battle by BR (dynamic) x PvP rank.

Thank you mate. That said.

I agree that 2 minutes joining is too short. Not last because an upwind tag in a group of SoL easily means some mates even in plain sight cant join.
Being used for long time to hunt in enemy safezone, I'm used to get a bulkload of defender's reinforcements against me. So I agree that a longer timer would be nice and I'm fair with that.

What makes no sense to me are:
- CoD uber-crappiness.
- Attacker's responsability making him in someway unable to retreat.
- BR based weak side that doesnt make sense ATM. And will never do.
- Even a reasonable BR value would not take into account ship fitting/woods.
- Even one taking it into account will not take into account skill levels.
- Balancing a PvP players' rating + ship BR + ship fitting BR will be a NIGHTMARE. KISS principle. And it will be surely exploited in infinite ways... ways better understood by... veterans.
 

We can see the BR rebalance effect on PBs.
Is it really better having 2 Bellona than 2 3rd rates + Agamennon (BR 900 v 850)? I would say no. It's better the second set up.

From these unbalances came out new PB meta based on Bucetaure (better 2 Buce than 1 Ocean... obviously) and 3rd rates (better 3 3rd rates than 2 Bellonas).

These are practical examples of use of game mechanics. The more complex the rules, the more tricky the exploit, but often the more terrible the abuse.

[Licinio Chiavari]

22 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

You are not an entire game. Nor me, nor any single player.

Developers and community are.

Your opinion is as valid as any. Don't shake the water out of the cup. You get yourself wet.

I do not consider me meter of the game.
All opinions are to be respected; but respect has nothing to do with considering them "valid"/"reasonable".

Being valid or not is based on the sounding of argumentation.

Sorry. I am quite bound to old school philosophy: the "it's your opinion", "you have yours, I have mine", "every opinion is good", et similia of today relativism is utter no-sense for me.
We can keep opinions if discussing if it's nicer blue or red. We cant have opinions about an object being red or blue.

Therefore or I got serious arguments saying that OT proposal will be better than today RoE (which?), or I cant say "it's ok" if I think, for a bulkload of reasons repeatly expressed, I think it's a suicide for the gameplay, so the playerbase, so the game itself.

PS: If I do not like the game, nor love it, I'd not give a crap about these discussions: I could simply stop play and GG.
If I'm so vocal in some periods, it's because I love it... I see a potential (very often wasted) and I foresee more cons than pros in such proposals (moreover with more important stuff to be implemented and/or balanced already on the field).

Edited January 22, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

 

53 minutes ago, Sea Archer said:

In my opinion most battles should be 1v1. In frigates or lower with mainly equal chances for both players. Mainly depending in skill.

 

I could agree with that, make 1v1 insta close the default rule (with the smaller br side open if br difference is superior to a certain ratio  until balance) and attacker can't escape (except if defender side become the greater BR) and have to stay in a circle of death around the defenders,

If the defender or the attacker is part of a combat group, let that group join in for 2mn - and let the other side open until an equal br is met.

-That mean a solo new player doing 1vs1 pve can't be mission jumped

-You know what you will fight

-If a Requin tag a bellona to protect a friend, the requin can't escape, and have to stay & fight her.

-Friends in a group can fight together, and battle can escalate up to a more or so equal opposition.

-Any player can enter battles to assist lone players facing gank groups

-Lone trader can group allies around if require assistance in battle

-More 1vs1

-More reflex to group if you don't want 1vs1

 

I would prefer no circle of death, or the circle of death transformed into a circle of loose, meaning if you end outside of it after a countdown, you are considered as having loose the battle and can't shoot anymore, just leave the battle instance. The defender then is considered the winner and can loose if not tied in battle anymore, and gain usual battle victory reward, if he sink to another attacker later, he still get rewards for the victory against the ejected attacker.

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Licinio Chiavari]

14 minutes ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

the circle of death transformed into a circle of loose, meaning if you end outside of it after a countdown, you are considered as having loose the battle and can't shoot anymore, just leave the battle instance. The defender then is considered the winner and can loose if not tied in battle anymore, and gain usual battle victory reward, if he sink to another attacker later, he still get rewards for the victory against the ejected attacker.

This starts being reasonable. A retreating enemy is a tactical victory for the other side. Let's say half ship value Doub to chest respect of sinking.

BUT... have we idea of how many exploits...? Alt-Farming would be far more economically working 

And we are still missing the problem of defensive tag being the last defense of a trader or a single ship being chased by a group.

Circle of Retreat to both sides? I sincerely think another terrible pain to balance.

Granted that more or less today ROE is working, and granted so many stuff to balance (ships, woods, mods) and to work on (trading patch, Battle UI)... for God sake: let's touch it in a far future if ever, aside, may be, small timer corrections, corrections to positional joining (like no more someone spawning in front of you at 50mt in combat), single or double joining circle (joining circles on land anyone?) and similar without making a totally new one.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[Sir Loorkon]

40 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

 

50 minutes ago, Sir Loorkon said:

What I do not understand is the following: At the moment battle in OW closes after 2 1/2 minutes. No battle if you are to late. Boring. With the new system battle stays open for the weaker side. So you have the opportunity to join. You must not join, you are free to do so. What's wrong with that? @Licinio Chiavari I like your posts in general and your way of argumentation and I know you have a profound knowledge of the mechanics but you have not convinced me. 

I have to add that I would recommend to identify the "weaker side" of an battle by BR (dynamic) x PvP rank.

Thank you mate. That said.

I agree that 2 minutes joining is too short. Not last because an upwind tag in a group of SoL easily means some mates even in plain sight cant join.
Being used for long time to hunt in enemy safezone, I'm used to get a bulkload of defender's reinforcements against me. So I agree that a longer timer would be nice and I'm fair with that.

What makes no sense to me are:
- CoD uber-crappiness.
- Attacker's responsability making him in someway unable to retreat.
- BR based weak side that doesnt make sense ATM. And will never do.
- Even a reasonable BR value would not take into account ship fitting/woods.
- Even one taking it into account will not take into account skill levels.
- Balancing a PvP players' rating + ship BR + ship fitting BR will be a NIGHTMARE. KISS principle. And it will be surely exploited in infinite ways... ways better understood by... veterans.
 

We can see the BR rebalance effect on PBs.
Is it really better having 2 Bellona than 2 3rd rates + Agamennon (BR 900 v 850)? I would say no. It's better the second set up.

From these unbalances came out new PB meta based on Bucetaure (better 2 Buce than 1 Ocean... obviously) and 3rd rates (better 3 3rd rates than 2 Bellonas).

These are practical examples of use of game mechanics. The more complex the rules, the more tricky the exploit, but often the more terrible the abuse.

 

Well, we agree on some points. I know that you hunted alone in brit. savezone in the past. I did the same (before ROE and reinforcement changes) with my Endymion, most times alone, sometimes with my friend @guest ck9ubl3t. We had lots of fights and it was fun to try to escape from the brilliant  costguard with @MassimoSud and his friends. Nice days, all over.

I hunt alone. I do not like arena games so I do not like NAL or the patrol zone of NA with this CoD.

Where can I find battles in an acceptable time? OW battles close to fast. It takes a long time to get a battle.

I do not like exploits and I see your point. Some of the mechanics will be exploited. For sure. But what is the alternative? At the moment - and admin is right here - it takes to long to find a battle.

I do not want the CoD to be introduced. It will kill OW feeling. Even if only introduced for the "attacker" it will be a bad mechanic because it will kill defense tags.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Sir Loorkon

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

I've made here a lot of suggestions  but for real, ow roe is the least of the problems, if a problem at all.

[Capn Rocko]

The devs have provided no details regarding the exact rules they plan to implement, just concepts. I think its the little things that will make or break these mechanics (ex: BR differences, join circle duration, ect.) and all of that is unknown at the moment. All I know is if I attack someone that is the same rate as me and a Bellona at full HP joins 20+ minutes into battle, I will quit the game. 

 

[Sea Archer]

The battle must be closed at a point.

To be fair, only ships that were in sight by attacker and defender shall be able to join. So you can see what might be coming. (Exception is reinforcement zone).

If members of a battle group are out of sight, they cannot join.

To avoid ganking, the attackers may only join the battle up to twice the BR of the defender (if more than one ship attacks), if the defending forces increase, more attackers may join, so they will have  a maximum BR advantage of the originally attacked ship's BR.

How BR is calculated is another thing and not too easy to balance.

[Hethwill]

3 minutes ago, Sea Archer said:

The battle must be closed at a point.

Yep

I hope it is, at best, equal BR combined. At best case scenario.

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

Yep

I hope it is, at best, equal BR combined. At best case scenario.

Aye. The famed equal battle of 3 AI/shop Surprises without mods and just a couple bookslots opened handled by 100hrs players vs. 3 t/wo 4/5+trim ones with approx 1mil worth mods each handled by 3000+hrs veterans.

[Hethwill]

4 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Aye. The famed equal battle of 3 AI/shop Surprises without mods and just a couple bookslots opened handled by 100hrs players vs. 3 t/wo 4/5+trim ones with approx 1mil worth mods each handled by 3000+hrs veterans.

Absolutely. ... Well.. not really... I still prefer 5v1 with no chance for the enemy...

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

Absolutely. ... Well.. not really... I still prefer 5v1 with no chance for the enemy...

5 of the firsts could have (maybe) some chances vs one of the latters.

"Only" 3v1 I will surely bet for the latter 😎

[Hethwill]

The server has no clue how experienced you are, or anyone, nor does it cares.

Read again. It doesn't care.

At best you have a dynamic BR by ship, woods, equipment and books.

And that's it. There's no BR for player "XYZ".

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Why would anyone initiate a battle when he knows he's going to get outnumbered? Defensive tag. Players start battles that they think they can win.  I tag a frigate in my Herc.  My BR is higher.  After 15 minutes of good fighting, with both of us damaged, someone joins on his side in an Endy.  How is this "good" PVP?  All I see is an easy victory for the Endy Captain and me swearing that i'll never start another battle...just hang around and wait to jump into someone else's fight. So many loopholes in Admins suggestion

 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

32 minutes ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

The server has no clue how experienced you are, or anyone, nor does it cares.

Read again. It doesn't care.

At best you have a dynamic BR by ship, woods, equipment and books.

And that's it. There's no BR for player "XYZ".

So what about each player having an hidden pvp ratio calculated on win/loss, then when clicking on him the game calculate a score taking in account your ratio and his + your ship model server w/l ratio vs his ship model. Depending on the score, one or the other side can stay open for one allie or more, or just be a 1vs1.

(I know i can be a bit too complex)

Edited January 22, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

So what about each player having an hidden pvp ratio calculated on win/loss, then when clicking on him the game calculate a score taking in account your ratio and his + your ship model server w/l ratio vs his ship model. Depending on the score, one or the other side can stay open for one allie or more, or just be a 1vs1.

(I know i can be a bit too complex)

Lets not overdo it.  2 5th rates are a fair (enough) fight.  One Captain will always be better than the other.  It's actually quite realistic, and yes, I know that we don't always use realism here.  Shannon V Chesapeake.  Chesapeake Had the higher BR, but Shannon had the better CO.

[Licinio Chiavari]

2 minutes ago, Baptiste Gallouédec said:

So what about each player having an hidden pvp ratio calculated on win/loss, then when clicking on him the game calculate a score taking in account your ratio and his + your ship model server w/l ratio vs his ship model. Depending on the score, one or the other side can stay open for one allie or more, or just be a 1vs1.

(I know i can be a bit too complex)

A - if "hidden" it will mess up any group set up: I am on a Endy and I am killer with that... My "real BR" is not 330 but 460. I got in battle vs two veterans never pvping on Agamennon+Essex and they are the weak side.

B - so why not working in PBs too? 😁 We could end with people like Ram Dinark filling half PB BR ALONE 😂😂😂

C - Joking aside.

Do you imagine the pain to wisely balance the weight of wood/mods/pvp rating for every player, on every ship depending on fitting too vs any other combination?

 

Sincerely I proposed an "automatic" bounty of top leaderboard captains (both daily and weekly/monthly): the more someone kills, the far more should worth killing him. IMO not respective of being 1v1 or 5v1 (aside that being 5 the value of the kill will be "diluited" among 5 - as normal even now).

This still requires (as repeatly proposed) to move doubloons reward from loot to directly chest one (more similar so to previous mark system).

[Sea Archer]

Players have a certain skill, but that has nothing to with battle rating. I see battle rating as the theoretical difference between two ships in case ai commands them.

Players may have a good day, be drunk or whatever. That cannot be rated and must not be rated. Skill is the result of hours of training and therefore earned. 

But I like the idea to bring in the upgrades in the rating. Though it doesn't help too much since BR is not shown prior to battle. The first two ships must enter battle independent from the rating.

Only the following ships may depend on BR.

[Sparkydog]

Let’s not overdo it again please and needlessly complicate things. Only small changes are needed at this point.  We can test different join timers and invisibility timers when leaving- I know we have changed them before but have we ever discussed the results?  How about always one circle join battle instance- but anybody not in the circle during the initial tag must join at the edge of the circle? Then no more magic ships popping up right next to you in the battle. Then we could vary the size of the circle too. Maybe the join circle gets bigger until it closes? Small changes at this point please.