PB's - efficient counter for denying a fight and griefing

[vazco]

@admin Today for a second time Prussia attacked Monte Cristi and didn't field a proper PB fleet. It's a tactic focused on annoying their enemy, making people don't show up for battles in the future, or make them quit the game. In the same time they set all their timers to night time, so that their enemies can't retailate with port flip when they're griefed this way. 

I don't blame Prussia for using this tactic so much, they simply use mechanics of the game. On the other hand making those tactics possible in the final game is going to bleed out the community fairly quickly. I suggest a few simple improvements to fix it:

• when you flip a port, you have to pay 30.000 doubloons to activate a PB. You get them back once half of PB's BR joins the battle the next day. If you don't join, doubloons are redistrubuted to defenfers.
• if you want to attack a port in a given timer, you need to set your own port to a given timer (if you have 0-3 ports, you don't have to). Make time switches have 7 days of cooldown

Edited January 20, 2019 by vazco

[Licinio Chiavari]

 

8 minutes ago, rediii said:

Also Clantimers instead of porttimers could be a thing to think about

This.

But at the same time: you can grind hostility ONLY if in both YOUR clantimer and ENEMY ones.

So a EU clan has to choose:

Or hiding behind nightimers, but being unable to set PB against other EU Clans (that set proper timezone). Or having prime time timers... Being able to attack other prime timer ports risking a retaliation.

Really big multi TZ clans would not set clan timer either... Being allowed to attack in any hours (so in enemy clantimer) but attacked too.

7 Days CD to swap (and 48 hrs after last hostility: so not attack a prime Port and swap timer the day after) would complete the matter.

 

PS/edit: it could be exploited using "fake"/"temporary" clans (quite easy with alts), still it could be a barrier to RvR abuses, possibly.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[OjK]

@admin Lack of PvP? Decreased amount of battles?

Maybe start with fighting the trolling, instead of making some drastic mechanic changes?

[staun]

8 minutes ago, vazco said:

@admin Today for a second time Prussia attacked Monte Cristi and didn't field a proper PB fleet. It's a tactic focused on annoying their enemy, making people don't show up for battles in the future, or make them quit the game. In the same time they set all their timers to night time, so that their enemies can't retailate with port flip when they're griefed this way. 

I don't blame Prussia for using this tactic so much, they simply use mechanics of the game. On the other hand making those tactics possible in the final game is going to bleed out the community fairly quickly. I suggest a few simple improvements to fix it:

• when you flip a port, you have to pay 30.000 doubloons to activate a PB. You get them back once half of PB's BR joins the battle the next day. If you don't join, doubloons are redistrubuted to defenfers.

What happens if you are screned out, blocked in a habor by a supirior fleet?

• if you want to attack a port in a given timer, you need to set your own port to a given timer (if you have 0-3 ports, you don't have to). Make time switches have 7 days of cooldown

With a global server, does that make sence. Lets say @King of Crowns want to take an Havoc port(Eu timer), he and his merry men get get up at there night time to do it, also for the PB the next day, Then they for the next 7 days also have to get up at night to defend there ports, because they have an Eu timer now. You actually think this will give more Pb ore contested PB?

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 minute ago, OjK said:

@admin Lack of PvP? Decreased amount of battles?

Maybe start with fighting the trolling, instead of making some drastic mechanic changes?

Best ever record online in almost a year (610+)... CombatNews almost unreadable so much spamming.

And the problem is Banished losing 10 minutes and may be a kill a few days ago.

GB fielding a full PB FOR NOTHING FOR THE SECOND TIME IN A WEEK (after fighting another 3 PBs yesterday - honours to Spain showing off in all 3)... Isnt a problem.

[Abram Svensson]

1 minute ago, staun said:

What happens if you are screned out, blocked in a habor by a supirior fleet?

valid point

1 minute ago, staun said:

With a global server, does that make sence. Lets say @King of Crowns want to take an Havoc port(Eu timer), he and his merry men get get up at there night time to do it, also for the PB the next day, Then they for the next 7 days also have to get up at night to defend there ports, because they have an Eu timer now. You actually think this will give more Pb ore contested PB?

EU primetime is mid day for the US, which is easier to manage than getting up in the middle of the night (we tried it)

In addition the timer resets after a port got captured so you can set your own timer when the port can gain hostility again.

[staun]

3 minutes ago, rediii said:

Also we tested 2 timer mechanics now.

 

Cheap = Timers everywhere

Expensive = clans not making any money anymore

 

I would like to suggest increasing costs of timers. 

1st timer of clan = 20k reals

2nd timer of clan = 40k reals

3rd timer of clan = 60k reals

4th = 80k reals

etc.

Idea is good, if not for the players in NA. We all know how it would be abused. PPl  would just use one man clans(alts)to own the port. Not a problem to invite them over to a clan for the hostillity and then go back to there normal clan. We did it all the time in DNP to help some of the smaler clans to flip and get aport.

But we both know it will be abused.

[staun]

1 minute ago, Abram Svensson said:

valid point

EU primetime is mid day for the US, which is easier to manage than getting up in the middle of the night (we tried it)

In addition the timer resets after a port got captured so you can set your own timer when the port can gain hostility again.

And monday- friday. lets hope they don't have a job.

How is the seven day cooldown for all ports(if you have more than 3) to be understod?

[OjK]

Well, the idea of "taking the cost" of PB is also valid.

However, that should be compensated with proper rewards for participating.

[vazco]

3 minutes ago, staun said:

What happens if you are screned out, blocked in a habor by a supirior fleet?

You loose an equivalent of 3 1st rates - probably much less than you lost by being screened out.

 

4 minutes ago, staun said:

With a global server, does that make sence. Lets say @King of Crowns want to take an Havoc port(Eu timer), he and his merry men get get up at there night time to do it, also for the PB the next day, Then they for the next 7 days also have to get up at night to defend there ports, because they have an Eu timer now. You actually think this will give more Pb ore contested PB?

I understand it is a problem, but a small one. A result would be better than using nighttimers to prevent content, which is happening right now. If it becomes a problem, even setting a closest port as capturable in a time of attack would solve the issue.

 

 

An alternative is to have night timers set by geography. Eg. all ports in Gulf of Mexico would be US time, all ports in Antilles would be EU time etc. It would make you choose targets based on your activity and would prevent tactics which deny content to others. Another bonus of this is it would focus RvR activity on a smaller area in a given time.

[Licinio Chiavari]

A solution to one man (alt) clans abuse in any noted proposal is pretty simple:

A clan can be attacked only in 1 port per reset by an enemy nation up to 2 contemporary flip if hostility done by a different nation.

I could make a bulk of alt single man clans... But I could be multiflipped hard... that I can avoid owning a good share of ports with the same clan.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[Abram Svensson]

1 minute ago, staun said:

And monday- friday. lets hope they don't have a job.

Same for us. EU and US can only fight on weekends, but we have to get up at 3-5 AM for that.

 

2 minutes ago, staun said:

How is the seven day cooldown for all ports(if you have more than 3) to be understod?

The 7 day cooldown starts after you set the timer. Should work that way at least.

[Licinio Chiavari]

2 minutes ago, Abram Svensson said:

The 7 day cooldown starts after you set the timer. Should work that way at least.

Obvious IMO.

Case 1 - I use Primetime clantimer: I can attack any Primetime clan port but it can retaliate.

Case 2 - I can hide behind a nightimer, but I cant attack Primetime clans. I can attack and be attacked by Nightime clans.

Case 3 - I can swap my Primetime timer to another to attack an enemy, but I will remain on that for 7 days (or less?).

[staun]

1 minute ago, vazco said:

You loose an equivalent of 3 1st rates - probably much less than you lost by being screened out.

So you are ok with punishing ppl for trying and faling.  How do you think it might affect ppl's will to do pb, if they know they will be punished because some body screened you out. We allready have a problem with screening. I remember when we at Barahona got got blocked by a very big Russian fleet, so we couldn't go fight the dutch, so now we should be punished for that. We had all the intention to show up, We got more times screened out by players that just was looking for PvP, so we didn't get in to a pb. One of the reasons we stopped doing PB's was we only had the numbers for a Pb and not a screening fleet. But guess you are right. All hail the big and mighty.

I understand it is a problem, but a small one. A result would be better than using nighttimers to prevent content, which is happening right now. If it becomes a problem, even setting a closest port as capturable in a time of attack would solve the issue.

We are a global server, It is not a small problem, With your idea, you might as well split the server again, because those outside EU time would never ever fight other than them self.

An alternative is to have night timers set by geography. Eg. all ports in Gulf of Mexico would be US time, all ports in Antilles would be EU time etc. It would make you choose targets based on your activity and would prevent tactics which deny content to others. Another bonus of this is it would focus RvR activity on a smaller area in a given time.

Why then have a global server?

 

[staun]

9 minutes ago, Abram Svensson said:

Same for us. EU and US can only fight on weekends, but we have to get up at 3-5 AM for that.

But it is not for the weekend. It has a 7 day cooldown. So after they flipped the port, the next 7 days there ports would be at EU timers. Don't know where you live. But I don't have 7 days weekend. Personally I think it is a bit easier to get up at night, than it to go to your boss and say you have to go early to play a game.

The 7 day cooldown starts after you set the timer. Should work that way at least.

So we can agree on it is not only for the weekend?

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

4 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Obvious IMO.

Case 1 - I use Primetime clantimer: I can attack any Primetime clan port but it can retaliate.

Case 2 - I can hide behind a nightimer, but I cant attack Primetime clans. I can attack and be attacked by Nightime clans.

Case 3 - I can swap my Primetime timer to another to attack an enemy, but I will remain on that for 7 days (or less?).

And as said: every clan can be attacked in 1 port by a nation, max 2 in total by 2 nations during a reset.

So again, if I set multiple alt clans... I am increasing the risks multiflips too.

[vazco]

8 minutes ago, staun said:

So you are ok with punishing ppl for trying and faling.  How do you think it might affect ppl's will to do pb, if they know they will be punished because some body screened you out.

People are already punished for this - you loose your ships and don't get a port. Your loss would be only a bit bigger if not even half of your fleet goes to a PB.

The only real difference would be that people who flip and don't plan to get to a port - for them a punishment would be much bigger.

 

8 minutes ago, staun said:

Why then have a global server?

People could still participate and interact based on their availability, which is good. If you're in EU but play late at night, you would still have some action. Can you show me why such a solution would be bad for anyone? The only one I heard is monopoly ports, which could be excluded from this and could use current timer mechanisms.

Edited January 20, 2019 by vazco

[OjK]

Another idea!

If You fail to fill up the BR of the battle, next hostility is scaled by the difference.

Day 1 - Clan X did the hostility for port Y
Day 2 - Clan X brought only 10% of the port BR
Day 3 - Any other hostility attempts of Clan X are reduced by 90% 

Penalty is reduced by 10% every day or wiped out if hostility for the same size port is completed.

[Christendom]

regardless of the prussian / GB drama, port cooldowns need to be increased.  I remember 1 week was too long and admin changed them to 1 day "temporarily" to see what happens.  We'll it's been a while and being attacked every other day is a pain in the ass.

I feel like 3-5 day compromise would be fine.

Trying and failing already has the punishment of precious doubloons down the drain.  go attack another port in the meantime.

Edited January 20, 2019 by Christendom

[staun]

14 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

A solution to one man (alt) clans to abuse any noted proposal is pretty simple:

A clan can be attacked only in 1 port per reset by an enemy nation up to 2 contemporary flip if hostility done by a different nation.

I could make a bulk of alt single man clans... But you could be multiflipped hard... that you can avoid owning a good share of ports with the same clan.

Ask @Gregory Rainsborough if a single clan can be multiflipped hard. 

Your idea now change how it is now. As I know it to be you can have 3 ports to be flipped by a nation and all nations can do it at the same day.

But your idea will not be so much different. How many clans has port in different nations. Try calculate it and see how many ports that can be flipped. what have Gb 10 clans. So it would give what 20 pb if I get you right?

 

[staun]

5 minutes ago, vazco said:

People are already punished for this - you loose your ships and don't get a port. Your loss would be only a bit bigger if not even half of your fleet goes to a PB.

The only real difference would be that people who flip and don't plan to get to a port - for them a punishment would be much bigger.

No it would not. They haven't lost any ships, because they didn't sail out. But those that tried might have lost ships and on top of that you think they should be punished for trying.  Think it will make RvR bloom, atlest the big and mighty will have a field day.

People could still participate and interact based on their availability, which is good. If you're in EU but play late at night, you would still have some action. Can you show me why such a solution would be bad for anyone? The only one I heard is monopoly ports, which could be excluded from this and could use current timer mechanisms.

I see you put an extra layer to your idea. But this idea with timers depend geografy was not what you presented, so what is your idea?

 

[Dalai Lama]

I don't see the problem here. We set our timers to a more favorable time when we are able to defend them against an aggressor which has 10x more players and is weirdly fixated with hate and salt. We are a multinational nation, as every nation I guess. A cool-down on changing the timer to decrease abuse wouldn't hurt though. 

[staun]

11 minutes ago, OjK said:

Another idea!

If You fail to fill up the BR of the battle, next hostility is scaled by the difference.

Day 1 - Clan X did the hostility for port Y
Day 2 - Clan X brought only 10% of the port BR
Day 3 - Any other hostility attempts of Clan X are reduced by 90% 

Penalty is reduced by 10% every day or wiped out if hostility for the same size port is completed.

Fine idea. Problem still is the same with alt clans, where you just switch ppl over for the hostillity. Think it is a good idea, problem is just the player in NA.  So unless you make a cooldown on clan switch, I do think it will be abused,

[staun]

28 minutes ago, Christendom said:

regardless of the prussian / GB drama, port cooldowns need to be increased.  I remember 1 week was too long and admin changed them to 1 day "temporarily" to see what happens.  We'll it's been a while and being attacked every other day is a pain in the ass.

I feel like 3-5 day compromise would be fine.

Trying and failing already has the punishment of precious doubloons down the drain.  go attack another port in the meantime.

The idea is not about longer cooldown on a port that have been defended . If Your clan attack a port in EU time and your clan have more than 3 ports, all your ports will for 7 days have a EU timer. That how I read attack in a given time and timers set to a given time. Have I gotten that wrong?

Edited January 20, 2019 by staun

[Dalai Lama]

1 hour ago, vazco said:

when you flip a port, you have to pay 30.000 doubloons to activate a PB. You get them back once half of PB's BR joins the battle the next day. If you don't join, doubloons are redistrubuted to defenfers.

I think this would decrease RVR quite a bit!