Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, admin said:

Solo player is not affected by the "battles open for weaker side". In fact your experience will slightly improve (or significantly improves at certain areas on popular routes)
You attack a similar or stronger ship - you get a 1v1 anyway after 2 mins
You are attacked by 5 players (you are alone) - you get a chance to survive because players might join on your side. (reducing the ganking negatives)

I don't see opening battles for weaker side affects the solo player.

This is similar to the patrol roe change suggestion i made a while ago

Though I would suggest to give it a little more room and not close a battle once it has reached 1:1 BR but instead allow reinforcments to about 1.2 - 1.3x the BR of the other side - often when it's, say, 4v2, the two might be already too crippled for two joining ships to balance it out. Also allows battles to"grow" more.

And perhaps it would be wise to test the changes in the patrol zone only first as a test, to see how it works out

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Liq said:

This is similar to the patrol roe change suggestion i made a while ago

Though I would suggest to give it a little more room and not close a battle once it has reached 1:1 BR but instead allow reinforcments to about 1.2 - 1.3x the BR of the other side - often when it's, say, 4v2, the two might be already too crippled for two joining ships to balance it out. Also allows battles to"grow" more.

And perhaps it would be wise to test the changes in the patrol zone only first as a test, to see how it works out

the new solo patrol feels amazing from the perspective of the solo player

  • small area near the main patrol (or in the center)
  • you can ONLY attack ships of your class 
  • you cannot attack ships of other classes
  • all battles are 1v1 - turning it to a pure skill based tournament dungeon (that you have to get to like in classic wow)

If it successful the main patrol rules could be adjusted too. 

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, admin said:

Solo player is not affected by the "battles open for weaker side". In fact your experience will slightly improve (or significantly improves at certain areas on popular routes)
You attack a similar or stronger ship - you get a 1v1 anyway after 2 mins
You are attacked by 5 players (you are alone) - you get a chance to survive because players might join on your side. (reducing the ganking negatives)

I don't see opening battles for weaker side affects the solo player.

True.

If any idea of circle of death and/or "attacker should bear the responsability of starting battle" and related ideas of not available/limited retreat for attacker will be cancelled.

And this still, again, with the problem of BR balancing (ie. a 3rd rate tagging at close range an Endy is the weaker side).

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another idea: adapt the tagging circles according to ship size. For example: large radius (1.0x current radius) for 1st-3rd rates, standard radius (0.8x) for 4th-5th rates, small radius (0.6x) for 6th-7th rates.  

1st rates should have a larger radius than smaller ships, justifyable by superior cannon range. This way, capital ships get some benefit in OW tagging on their terms. Right now, they are just dead ducks on the water and everyone is running circles around them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 11:48 AM, admin said:
  • This is a war server. Why escape options? Whats the point? If you attacked - fight!
    • Patrol rules for the whole world. Circle of death.
    • If you are ready to attack someone - be ready to die and fight to the end. 
    • Sure some will cry about it  - tough luck like they say in national chats - but it will keep only meaningful pvp.
  • Battle is always open for the weaker side 
    • This is a war server - this is a pvp game with the goal to increase amount of pvp for all. There is no point to close the battle for the weaker side. Let them escalate. This becomes the goal. 
    • Then you can come to help your own, and know someone will come to help.
    • Then you can build more friendships and get assists 
    • Then you will stumble to more battles and will have more pvp kills per hour. 

Perfect suggestion. The attacker shouldn't be able to escape.However I'm puzzling how this Circle of Death would work out with being attacked in trading ships. No chance for escaping there?

Later addition: I think a good solution for that puzzle would be the following:

  • Defender has to take a one-time decision - Escape or Defend
  • Option Escape: A dotted circle centered around the escaping ship. If the enemy sails out, you can escape.
  • Option Defend: A solid circle centered in the middle of the fight. Leaving the circle means death.
  • In case of no decision, the defend option will be chosen.
Edited by Anymn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, admin said:

I don't see how opening battles for weaker side affects the solo player.

Yes, I just realized last night that the Frigate I tagged in my Herc had a higher BR, so I would be the weaker in that case.  But of course, if my Herc tags a TBrig, the battle is always open for the Brig's side.  My objection all along is the addition of the attacker being forced to remain in the battle.  This means that if the TBrig does get reinforcements, the attacker would likely die.  From attacking a trader.....Naval warfare in the 18th/19th centuries was full of traders being taken and rarely was the raider at risk.  I strongly feel that battles remaining open for ANY side is too similar to the PZ ROE and is the main reason that so many players dislike the PZ.  You don't take a good ship to the PZ.  If battles are to remain open in OW, does this mean you wont take a good ship there?  More likely, you may sail your good ship in OW, but you won't tag lesser BRs.  That certainly makes it safer for traders, but is that good?  It's less PVP.  Another option is to stop using high quality ships/mods because the risk to them has become too high with always open battles.  Not good for the economy.  The fact is, that hunting in OW will always include tagging lower BR ships.  The proposal in OP will make this too risky in many cases and will lower the amount of PVP.  We will definitely see a lot more unescorted, un-gunned players in TBrigs, because it's too risky to tag them.  Score one for the PVE crowd. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If battles can only be entered by players that are already in sight of the battle, there shouldn't be much surprises, even if the battle stays open for more than 2 min (which I wouldn't like).

But those players had to join in the ships they are already sailing. Changing ship ships must not be allowed. If a player looses sight of the battle, he cannot join anymore.

Wouldn't really help against ganking, but would be ok for me.

Still it does not solve the problem of small ships attacking larger ones to prevent them from fighting. And that for several times in a row.

This could only be solved IMO, when the damaged caused by the larger ship would be really devastating on the smaller one. Maybe we can test such a more realistic damage and gun model on the test server. At least I would really like to test it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, admin said:

the new solo patrol feels amazing from the perspective of the solo player

  • small area near the main patrol (or in the center)
  • you can ONLY attack ships of your class 
  • you cannot attack ships of other classes
  • all battles are 1v1 - turning it to a pure skill based tournament dungeon (that you have to get to like in classic wow)

If it successful the main patrol rules could be adjusted too. 

Wouldn’t it be better to have them a bit apart, so players looking for a duel don’t risk end up in a group battle and the other way around?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, staun said:

Wouldn’t it be better to have them a bit apart, so players looking for a duel don’t risk end up in a group battle and the other way around?

it will be near (adjacent) so you can get into main patrol zone no-one is duelling today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin what about defensive tagging? should players just let the ganksquad sail up right next to them and let himself get tagged?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chevalier du Ethuville said:

I propose 2500m on Signalling entry.

800m on normal tag.

If by signaling entry you mean reinforcement then I think that distance is to great. When wind is taken into account the result will be many situations where your help must travel to far. Equated to approximate time to get into the fight roughly 10 mins in average or more. In a unequal fight your friends are likely sunk or beyond beaten to ineffectiveness. The reinforcements become the second part of the gank, or simply never get into the fight.

500 m is probably to little if I judge correctly 500 is about the range you start seeing player names roughly. At that range your already in cannon shot and essentially engaged. This would lead to unfair situations for the attacker to often, not allowing them enough time to adjust to the new situation. I would propose something like 1 km to about 1.5 km. That should allow friends to get into the fight in about 5 mins or less give or take depending on wind and give the other side time to reevaluate and adjust.

I'd rather not put much more effort into this idea unless there is some indication from admin that it's something they think worthy of consideration. If it is then it's worth further effort and time to work out and discuss, otherwise although a interesting conversation to this point ultimately a waste to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ridiculous that we are discussing someone dropping into a battle within canon range.  How can you go from over the horizon to within gunshot range with what is effectively a teleport.  I'm not even convinced that 2500m is reasonable.  There is too much emphasis on "rescuing" players.  If they wanted to be safe, they should have an escort.  I attacked an Indiaman the other day with 1 in fleet.  Nearby (also in the tag circle) was a Niagara with 2 in fleet.  I ended up against a group that worked their bots well and I had to bail out (I had been hoping for less competence!!).  To me, that is properly done PVP where the trader had plenty of teeth. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I find it ridiculous that we are discussing someone dropping into a battle within canon range.  How can you go from over the horizon to within gunshot range with what is effectively a teleport.  I'm not even convinced that 2500m is reasonable.  There is too much emphasis on "rescuing" players.  If they wanted to be safe, they should have an escort.  I attacked an Indiaman the other day with 1 in fleet.  Nearby (also in the tag circle) was a Niagara with 2 in fleet.  I ended up against a group that worked their bots well and I had to bail out (I had been hoping for less competence!!).  To me, that is properly done PVP where the trader had plenty of teeth. 

same i proposed a mechanic that admin ignores that would give players "you fight what you see" and players that can join, joins from their initial OW location.

Edited by Wyy
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Angus MacDuff the point to the discussion isn't about saving people, although being a bit of a side discussion it may be hard to pick out. It's about those instances where joiners magically appear right in the middle of a fight.

Sometimes a fleet appearing right on top of an inferior number of attackers with perks the first thing they know about it is when their hull is coming apart. Conversely a lone joiner might land magically in the middle of a group of enemies. 

Either way how do you say this is ok? That's the issue at its extremes. 

The discussion is about how to have joiners from either side enter in such a way that is relatively fair to both sides and realistic-ish. Also consistent and simple enough to be easily understood by players in game. No ones trying to give extra advantage to your prey.

The fact we even need to have this discussion is rather ridiculous I agree. However current mechanics allow it thus sadly.....

Edited by Jack Lowe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Wyy said:

same i proposed a mechanic that admin ignores that would give players "you fight what you see" and players that can join, joins from their initial OW location.

@Jack Lowe, here is the answer.  You see the swords...you click on the swords and you enter the battle relative to where you were in OW.  Make the swords disappear after 1 minute, because you have to be in sight already and click on them right away.  Players who were close when the battle initiated will still be close. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we make the swords Red too? Imagine how many battles have been missed because someone didn't see the swords because they are the same color of the clouds 😉

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think changing the ROE will considerably change the amount of PVP we have. I like keeping it sandbox and immerse with the least regulations/rules possible. Changing the OW ROE to PZ ROE with circles will kill the immersion (for me) as well as create new problems with defensive tags and other possible exploits. 

Rather than trying to "regulate" people into pvp they don't want (what is basically how this whole discussion has been started) we should encourage players into pvp they enjoy.

Basically what I mean is to guide new players better into the game (e.g. start with some quests with simple explanations, creating the right mindset with stories/immersion and the advice to look for a clan), tweak economy to make pvp affordable (reduce the fear of loosing a boat... right now many freshies cant even deal with npc and go bankrupt), bring back special pvp rewards (atm pve is way more lucrative and economically there is no sense in pvp), create content for traders (the thrill of trading is the risk vs reward isnt it? so make those risky routes very rewarding.) and pvers (more endgame content and maybe multiple quests/missions with a little story connected with special rewards: first cap that boat then bring the captured captain there etc...). Make RvR more rewarding (right now you risk a lot (balloons/money) while gaining what?, e.g. special boat you can redeem only if you finish a RvR mission)

This will increase pvp not another test on the ROE.

my humble opinion

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

about griefing and boring 1 1/2 h running/hunting battles

we need an option to leave the battle when the enemy dont make enough damage. 

the most tribunals about griefing are the same. only shooting with balls in sails. 

i think the best is when you can leave battle after 30min when the enemy dont make enough damage (Hull,Crew,Sails) at your ship.

the same is with hunting battles.

6 enemys vs me all the same speed. 

they can only shoot with front cannons (balls) in my sails. they dont make enough damage to stop me.after a 1 1/2h battle i can leave. why not after 30min?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019 at 11:48 AM, admin said:

Current ruleset is based on these ideologies

  • I want to attack someone and people far away must not enter = "i must be able to sink you solo if i want to"
  • I want to be able to sink a 1st rate in a cutter (old heated topic). 
  • I want to be able to run away if i want to (because my ship is fast)
  • I do not want a player from far to join my battle, because its mine. 

Most of the active veterans that are playing and follow the forum are happy with the old ideology, that is why they are still here. So keep that in mind when the "entire forum" hates the proposed ideology change. I some times fear that the current player base/forum members no longer helps this game moving in a healthy directions for getting a larger stable player base (I'm looking in the mirror here). 

On 1/18/2019 at 11:48 AM, admin said:

Patrol rules for the whole world. Circle of death.

This is practical reuse of a working mechanic, but far from elegant and I think/hope we avoid this. Having this all over the map would be a crazy huge change and we would still be able to be attacked by smaller ships. So getting locked in battles for 20-30 minutes before we could leave would become more common! And if you have allies/friends in other nations this would be insanely annoying because we can not see who we are attacking until we are in battle. 
Also the shrinking circle works great for sinking players fast, but it is exploitable by those who know it. Having a dusin defending rookies getting lured up to the circle edge, being sunk by shrinking circles because they got their sails shot out immediately after repairing hull will not increase their impression of this game. I think you need a more elegant solution if you want to make it the standard ROE for the entire map.

On 1/18/2019 at 11:48 AM, admin said:

This is a war server - this is a pvp game with the goal to increase amount of pvp for all. There is no point to close the battle for the weaker side. Let them escalate.
This becomes the goal. 

I have argumentet a lot for a mechanic that allows this in the past, so I'm very positive to this. But I belive you have to put some thought into making new ROE that does not involve a shrinking circle of death because it is so extremely unrealistic and ugly mechanic in this beautiful game.

ROE suggestion: Need 40-50% BR to be able to drag an enemy into combat. Battle open for weakest side for 20-30 minutes, if BR is equal open for both sides. Instant leave option for defender if attacker is further than 400-500 meters away, even if defender is tagged. This would force the attacker to stay close, making it hard to grief in small fast ships. 

Consider a start option to lock the battle for entry. So solo players doing a duell in OW have an option to have a battle with out more players joining. Just like we can chose control on of now in the beginning of the battle, players can chose to "Close battle". If players involved agrees it closes.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make all battle have the Patrol Zone ROE and you will have a mass exodus of players. You recently made battles close sooner and it has improved the game dramatically in my opinion. Gone are the days of attacking a single Russian ship outside a freeport with the intention of a 1v1 and having 4 or 5 other players jumping out of the port to join because they simply do not have time for that tactic anymore.

I've said it before (and I mean no disrespect) but @admin, I'm sure you do not play the game as instensly like the rest of us and as such do not know what it is like on a day to day basis for a player. Sure, you have access to stats and figures but they mean very little without the proper context.

Edited by NethrosDefectus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Christoph said:

about griefing and boring 1 1/2 h running/hunting battles

we need an option to leave the battle when the enemy dont make enough damage. 

the most tribunals about griefing are the same. only shooting with balls in sails. 

i think the best is when you can leave battle after 30min when the enemy dont make enough damage (Hull,Crew,Sails) at your ship.

the same is with hunting battles.

6 enemys vs me all the same speed. 

they can only shoot with front cannons (balls) in my sails. they dont make enough damage to stop me.after a 1 1/2h battle i can leave. why not after 30min?

 

This is a viable solution! 

Or... we can only count hull penetrations as ‘tags’.  

Sail hits are damage but not counted as a ‘tag’. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JG14_Cuzn said:

This is a viable solution! 

Or... we can only count hull penetrations as ‘tags’.  

Sail hits are damage but not counted as a ‘tag’. 

 

You saying that shredding the canvas ( no penetrating shots ) wouldn't keep a ship in battle ?

I must disagree with such monotonous way to see naval engagement being relied solely on hull shot.

Damage threshold would work better as I see it, and allow for different tactics and approaches to battle. With equal rates needing minimal %, and maximum difference of rates, high % threshold, as presented before. A 8% tag needed for a 7th rate to keep a 1st rate in battle ( 1% + rate difference % ) makes more sense than having to rely solely on hull penetrative shot/mast penetrative shot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...