Battle system core ruleset discussion

[admin]

19 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Does that apply to the defender as well. Statistic might be blind to it because most people who are attacked just run and never fight. But in the end sink.

If not it clearly favors the defending side. So equal grps will never attack each other becuase they want to get attacked while it will give them more options.

Its a game. Сhess horse moves the certain way because its good for the game, not because its historical way horses move.
We will tune the gameplay rules to fit the goals and solve the problems. 

There are no equal groups in NA. But if they were equal equal groups will still attack because they attack already. But because they know they are not going to be masturbated in battle by griefers in vain + they can never get ganked = they will sail more and have more battles. Even with the attacker penalty. Imagine port battles with these change. Screening will be turned upside down. It will become both useful (for both sides) and get loads of kills for those who come to the area (due to reinforcements of weaker sides). 

Statistic is blind but it does not matter what happened because the result - the main number is on the SCORE board.

1. We get griefing reports every week and we want to eliminate any attacker griefing from the game completely (because we dont want newcomers to have it used against them)
2. Those who are able to get at least 1 pvp kill in the first 30 days get them every 8 hours in game (too slow). So they maybe run sometimes but they fight - they do get those kills. You cannot have a pvp kill without fighting.

[Iroquois Confederacy]

Do I recall correctly that these RoE mechanics will apply to someone who tags an AI fleet as well?

[Guest]

 

1 hour ago, admin said:

Its your opinion. But it is the problem that needs solving. Because all players including new players face such fake attacks constantly. And the average player facing 4 1 hour fake runs will uninstall after support says - its a grey area. 

 

So the best way is to just take a stand and destroy fake battles completely. This will increase pvp scores and will increase enjoyment. Our old statement was here "honor will be provided to you", it is time to do it for the attackers. 

Want to attack? But do not want to fight? Face the consequences. Attack if you really want to fight and do not want to run (at least for some time)

Cant you just give the defender side a 3 min invisibility timer? Thats long enough time to either logout if he see no chance to get away, sail out of render range of enemy fleets or get back to safe port.

IMO i also think that players within render range should be able to join the battle from their OW location, this would simulate actually not having wireless communication which they didnt have during 18th century.

[Licinio Chiavari]

13 minutes ago, admin said:

You seem to be ignoring my points based on our jumping straight to repeating your previous post.

Upgrades are irrelevant because there always going to be a fastest ship with fastest upgrades. If we nerf them - some ships will still be faster and will be used for solo hunting.
For example - imagine the game where only 2 ships . Lynx and Victory. Will upgrades matter for ROE discussion (stopping lynx from attacking victory and running)?

Same in your case. If you sail solo you will fit for speed to be faster than your target and your potential gankers. If roe allows one side to run - solo players will sail a faster ship. So we can ignore upgrades because nothing will change and we should just focus on ROE

Let me know I am espected to retreat if you put CoD crap in OW battles.

And, again and moreover, why should I risk a ship being the attacker with a RoE banning me even the hope (there's never 100% assurance) to break off if being beaten.

Sidenote: it's skill and experience knowing after the first two broadsides the most probable battle outcome. And how and why this will happen.

[Rompers]

Count me strongly on the side of keeping strategic and tactical options as open-ended as possible, and keeping niches open for players with diverse goals and play styles (including solo traders and hunters). That means NOT forcing "balanced" battles or circle-of-death rules, at least not across the board.

I don't do much hunting (mostly solo trading), and have lost my fair share of ships and time/effort to hunters, but I see nothing wrong with allowing hunters to maintain the tactical initiative in battles (e.g. having the option to run/exit), especially if they are the ones who took the time to sail the greater distance, outfit their ships specifically for the task, and did the most preparing/coordinating/legwork. Home-water defenders, after all, already have the massive advantage of being able to repair/switch/buy/outfit ships at local ports, and call in local players for backup. Hunters in enemy waters, on the other hand, are limited what/who they brought with them and thus must rely ENTIRELY on discretion, opportunity, and planning - almost none of which would be possible if you implement the changes you propose in this thread.

Those who want balanced/closed battles can play Naval Action Legends or do patrol missions, but please do not force arcade-style rules on everyone :(

PS: All that being said, I would be excited to see an option for players/groups to challenge others to some kind of closed/fair/balanced/circle-of-death fights (duels?) in free ports or patrol-like zones or other instances where BOTH sides agree. Or even add a "conditional attack" or "duel" option in general open world or beginning of battles where both sides must agree and the battle instance is immediately closed to others and circle-of-death rules implemented. That would actually ADD options/fun to the game rather than just taking away.

[admin]

2 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Let me know I am espected to retreat if you put CoD crap in OW battles.

And, again and moreover, why should I risk a ship being the attacker with a RoE banning me even the hope (there's never 100% assurance) to break off if being beaten.

Sidenote: it's skill and experience knowing after the first two broadsides the most probable battle outcome. And how and why this will happen.

Exactly what i said. If there is a ROE ban on retreat upgrades do not matter

But it is possible to find the system which will reduce griefing but will allow exit in case things go not as planned for a honorable player. 

[admin]

18 minutes ago, rediii said:

if running away is a problem then making backchasers laseraccurate doesnt help TBH

speeddifference makes a difference because you need to chain someone down to 80% to catch him instead of 90% or even less.

 

 

ROE must remove desire to grief completely without requiring another player to do something. 

[z4ys]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

ROE must remove desire

to sit in port and wait for battles to happen

[Simon Cadete]

 Please, make leaving impossible for the attacker and make the ship attacked, the center of the circle of death. Tired of these guys that have nothing to lose because if the battle that they start, starts looking bad they just run away so no risk and just time wasting for those that got attacked and defended themselves. Make the fights count and be meaningful

as for timers, do the signaling type of system but readjust the br of all ships. 

Edited January 20, 2019 by Simon Cadete

[admin]

4 minutes ago, z4ys said:

to sit in port and wait for battles to happen

This is a lesser evil compared to attacking someone and doing nothing (wasting everyone time).
+ it reduces ganking because in the new system you can only reinforce the weaker side, which reduces ganking, which is a good thing. I don't care if you reduce ganking by sitting and waiting in port. 

[z4ys]

Just now, Simon Cadete said:

for the attacker and make the ship attacked, the center of the circle of death.

so in case the ship of the defender is faster he can just sail away and circle of death does the job 😉

[z4ys]

1 minute ago, admin said:

 only reinforce the weaker side, which reduces ganking, which is a good thing.

Any infos about ...  lets say 100 vs 50 BR what kind of BR can join the weaker side?

Edited January 20, 2019 by z4ys

[Licinio Chiavari]

40 minutes ago, admin said:

 

1. We get griefing reports every week and we want to eliminate any attacker griefing from the game completely (because we dont want newcomers to have it used against them)

How many on total pvp battles?

Not last because in some periods I was called a cheater daily... And still I am not.

And I would like to remember that all this discussion was born... from a Banished's whining. A captain who (RIGHTFULLY I'd add) uses any possible ingame trick DAILY and perhaps invented a couple too.

40 minutes ago, admin said:

 

1. Those who are able to get at least 1 pvp kill in the first 30 days get them every 8 hours in game (too slow). So they do not run and never fight - they do get those kills. You cannot have a pvp kill by not searching for pvp. 

Granted NA steep learning curve, a feature you defended for long time making game quite "elitist", I would consider a newbie getting even a single pvp kill in the first month a miracle (and honestly probably a veteran's alt).

40 minutes ago, admin said:

Its a game. Сhess horse moves the certain way because its good for the game, not because its historical way horses move. 

The fact of NA being a beautiful and realistic simulation of Age of Sail naval combat and Chess an abstraction of ancient combat looks like being ignored.

40 minutes ago, admin said:

Statistic is blind.

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

40 minutes ago, admin said:

There are no equal groups in NA. But if they were equal equal groups will still attack because they attack already

Plain false.

Even now there are ganking teams avoiding tagging even 3+v1.

Two days ago I got notice of the usual french ganking team out Nassau. 4 Hercules.

I sailed alone and tagged alone. Boarded (2 times, it's impossible to win a boarding Requin full boarder v. Hercules no book atm - then someone says boarding is OP) one and sunk. Then retreating being unable to withstand so higher damage out put (still 3 hercules v 1 requin).

In OW they fleed (3 Hercules hunted by 1 Requin - I'd repeat) to Little Isaacs and entered. Then a Brit mate arrived in hercules.

We tagged the re-sailing Frenches 3 Hercules + 1 Prince with our 1 Hercules + 1 Requin.

We sunk the Prince and 1 Hercules, losing our Hercules. 2 surviving french Hercules retreated against the lone surviving Requin (me).

Do you think that with your idea of RoE these french will ever think to tag nothing aside a lone trader in the middle of nowhere?

Or do you think I/we GB in such situation should bear the burden of being attacker with CoD idea attacking 1v4 and then 2v4?

 

Edited January 20, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[Simon Cadete]

1 minute ago, z4ys said:

so in case the ship of the defender is faster he can just sail away and circle of death does the job 😉

When people attack they have to know what they’re getting into. Also if the defender runs away and escapes. Battle is over

[z4ys]

1 minute ago, Simon Cadete said:

 Also if the defender runs away and escapes. Battle is over

Then the attacker is outside of the circle and dies 😉

[Licinio Chiavari]

5 minutes ago, Simon Cadete said:

 Please, make leaving impossible for the attacker and make the ship attacked, the center of the circle of death. Tired of these guys that have nothing to lose because if the battle that they start, starts looking bad they just run away so no risk and just time wasting for those that got attacked and defended themselves. Make the fights count and be meaningful

as for timers, do the signaling type of system but readjust the br of all ships. 

I am waiting to see a bunch of veteran snipers losing nicely fitted PZ like LO/WO+kiritimati frigs to a gangs of t/wo frigs.

Gankers will be faster and tagging 5v1 loners in circle range. Killing them in minutes. Still without risk of being intercepted.

[Licinio Chiavari]

7 minutes ago, z4ys said:

so in case the ship of the defender is faster he can just sail away and circle of death does the job 😉

New pvp meta: super fast LGV / t.brigs waiting to be tagged faking afk noobish sailing.

[Simon Cadete]

well if you want to attack traders you need to be in fast ships that will be faster than the trader anyway, if you want to be a hero and tag a buccentaure with your Hercules and stern camp and hull hugg you gotta be good and make no mistakes or it’s game over. No more of these stupid fights where the attacker tries and fails and runs and then talks about it in global chat for 45 minutes

[Licinio Chiavari]

Just now, Simon Cadete said:

well if you want to attack traders you need to be in fast ships that will be faster than the trader anyway, if you want to be a hero and tag a buccentaure with your Hercules and stern camp and hull hugg you gotta be good and make no mistakes or it’s game over. No more of these stupid fights where the attacker tries and fails and runs and then talks about it in global chat for 45 minutes

a) you should know, being a veteram, that getting a decent tag and being the fastest are two separate matters.

b) you should know, moreover, that being faster in OW doesnt mean you're faster in combat.

c) you should know that attacking a Bucetaure (with a couple of clues) with an Hercules gives already very few room to errors.

[Simon Cadete]

Seems like the people that are the most vocal about these new rules are the ones that run away from battles all the time and running away is their best skill

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 minute ago, Banished Privateer said:

I find a lot of targets, so does Ram Dinark. Maybe if you play for GB, you deny yourself like 50% of the server targets? Just a thought...

I'm finding too plenty targets daily if I'm looking for them... and I'm GB.

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, Simon Cadete said:

Seems like the people that are the most vocal about these new rules are the ones that run away from battles all the time and running away is their best skill

Fighting a lost battle (due to any reason, skill, gear, numbers, ships involved) is not skill. Nor "courage", nor honour.

It's stupid.

Granted you were a lone hunter yourself, and very often, I'm very interested to see you unable to tag anyone in OW without accepting you'll not be able to retreat for the full battle duration. And if tagging a lower BR ship (like tagging a 3rd rate or an Agamennon on an Endy) having to accept one more ship joining enemy side.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[Corona Lisa]

21 minutes ago, admin said:

it reduces ganking because in the new system you can only reinforce the weaker side, which reduces ganking, which is a good thing. I don't care if you reduce ganking by sitting and waiting in port. 

At some point you need to stop doing a 180 on every mechanic and start doing fine tuning. Just look in my signature, a quote from u from the last patch.

 

Reduced ganking is a good change, but I hope you monitor it and and adjust it with small changes instead on hopping to the next construction and completely abandon the last changes.

 

Potential problems are that people who are attacking are discouraged, because joining the weaker side offers more benefits (you know enemy fleet, you know which players are in).

Also people baiting with 1 ship and the rest will join later will become normal, but im not sure if that is a problem,

[Teutonic]

RoE improvement --

3 Minute Join timer
Side with higher BR - after the 3 minutes has the battle close for their side.
Side with less BR - Battle stays open until BR is equal.

change nothing else about open world battles as they currently are - no need for a circle of death (keep those in patrol zone). Make these changes above to the patrol zone too.

you could mess with the numbers slightly but overall seems fine. or alternatively, don't change anything - but honestly current RoE isn't enjoyable for many.

-----------

OR just change the RoE to patrol zones as a test to see how it goes.

[Licinio Chiavari]

20 minutes ago, rediii said:

@admin if you consider timewasting griefing now. What is about a portbattle ruleset change?

if PB is empty on attackers side circles should be captureable instantly

Indeed.

@admin what about empty PBs or trollfleet in PBs? Today it's the second time in a week that Prussians (so Banished, the poor griefed that started this) set Monte Christi. First time they came with a random bulk of light ships (technically trollfleet) and today the PB is empty aside 1 Hercules and 1 Requin. Isnt this GRIEFING... having 20 people losing their time for NOTHING?