Suggestion for peace server (consensual PVP flags)

[toblerone]

54 minutes ago, Captain Reverse said:

no, im propose go play something easier. If u dont wont brain ON

Well, it seems to me that you are implying that playing on PVE server is not having the brain ON. This smells a deliberate try to flame or troll to derail the thread, but I'm not a moderator so my opinion is not relevant.

Anyway, since I do not want to follow in your attempt, I just ask you to let me know how the possible introduction of a consensual PVP experience in peace server may affect your non consensual PVP experience in war server. Tell me, since frankly speaking I do not see how!

 

1 hour ago, Socialism said:

However, if you've decided that the PVP on war is too much, too poor or just tired of it.....you should have to deal with the fact that there is none on the PVE server and live with that decision.  Lobbying to make the war server better seems to be choice of developers time rather than having to develop 2 servers differently.

why should I accept it? I'm a tester in peace server and I want to propose a feature that could enhance the game experience on this server as it's up to you proposing features that could make your game experience better on your server.

If you'd prefer just one server for both kind of players, I could agree with you, but - as you said - this seems not to be the case since devs have a different view. So I just adapt to the scenario.

1 hour ago, Socialism said:

Edited March 30, 2019 by toblerone

[Sang Noir]

I would be all in for consensual pvp on the peace server. I am in the game for the beauty and awe of the age of sail not for power tripping the Caribbean in a clan. The war server has become a no-go area for me. If there could be a corner on the peace server where you could do some pvp (1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, etc, by equal BRs) without the acidic ganking, the peace server would be great.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Jean de la Rochelle

[Sang Noir]

3 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

Full stop, it won’t ever happen.

The very idea that there could be people in the world who could actually have fun must be insanely annoying to you.

[Jan van Santen]

1 hour ago, Socialism said:

 

All I know is that if you were a merchant running cargo back in 1803 you didn't have the option to have "consensual" warfare and continue sailing on your way if you ran into a Privateer.  

You also had no choice to make the Constitution a ship of the line or the Indefatigable a 4th rate by a software patch. You could only use a saw and create a razee, 

Hint: NA is not 100% simulation, it has (and should have more) arcade/gaming elements.

Consensual PvP (and imho also PvEvP) is a proven success factor and endgame for many predominantly PvE based MMO's.

So why not in NA ?

I have made the same suggestion on this forums several times since 2016, so i fully support the OP.

 

[Zlatkowar]

2 hours ago, Socialism said:

All I know is that if you were a merchant running cargo back in 1803 you didn't have the option to have "consensual" warfare and continue sailing on your way if you ran into a Privateer.  Majority of the ships lost in this time period were not in single ship actions and most of the fights were in what you would call unfair numbers.  Only fools fight when they can't win.  I'm not sure what some folks signed up for when they chose to play a 19th century age of sail MMO, but commerce raiding, warfare and battles certainly come to mind.  

All that said, I don't begrudge players leaving to the Peace server.  If you've followed my posts on here over the years you'd have noticed I'm a fan of safe zones and protections for new/casual players.  Gameslabs has done a piss poor job keeping that base happy and shockingly enough.....they've left the game in droves or moved over to the Peace server.  However, if you've decided that the PVP on war is too much, too poor or just tired of it.....you should have to deal with the fact that there is none on the PVE server and live with that decision. Lobbying to make the war server better seems to be choice of developers time rather than having to develop 2 servers differently.

Not willing to sound like a sith lord but I sense great fear in your words and those of your like. Fear that consensual PvP on PvE might drain the last bit of players from PvP server. And if my interpretation of your messages is wrong and you have no fear because you are all having a great time on PvP, then let me ask you why are you even commenting on a thread that will have zero effect on your PvP Server routine?

Right now PvP server benefits from 100% of the content this game has to offer, under unbearable conditions for the regular PvE crowd. If they made that extra effort to bring all of the content on PvE under acceptable conditions for the regular PvE dude (as in consensual PvP, AI Port battles, no force fed ganking where you lose everything you got) there will be a lot more to do for a very stable (and growing) playerbase. None of us has the right to exige changes to the PvE server, but it would be dumb not to make suggestions that would improve life on PvE, just as it would be dumb for dev team to ignore such suggestions.

Either way, I fully support OP's suggestion.

[Capitalism]

6 hours ago, Captain Reverse said:

What do you guys need? You did not think that this game is hard for your brain? Maybe you should try to play something easier? although I don't know which MMO might be even easier

So calling me stupid for pointing out the indisputable fact that the majority of players in any MMO actually prefer a mixture of PvP and PvE is your idea of a good argument? Way to be a strong and supportive member of the community... You're a true, upstanding member. 

If you ever did anything other than bash noobs and rack up combat medals against inferior opponents you might be worthy of more respect and attention. But as it is, your opinions, though clearly mattering to the developers, are clearly out of line with the "average" Naval Action player.

I agree with my fierce rival @Socialism, however, that players should play where they get the content they want. And the biggest problem is that players who want anything other than ganking and seal clubbing after interminably long searches for PvP increasingly have nowhere to go.

[Barbancourt]

9 hours ago, toblerone said:

I was wondering if it would be possible to add some spice in the peace server implementing a consensual PVP flag system, like that

 

That would be really good if it's implemented as challenges between battle groups, to create large fun fleet battles. 

 

[Barbancourt]

8 hours ago, Jack Spencer said:

I don't understand the desire for PvP on the PvE server. You may be up against AI but you can vary your choice of enemy and choice of ship loadout to suit the difficulty from easy to hard.

The AI is a boring opponent which always does the same thing, and can always be beaten in the same way, and you're stuck with the composition of the AI fleets.  An arranged battle between player fleets is usually going to be more dynamic and fun. 

[Aerospace]

6 hours ago, Captain Reverse said:

no, im propose go play something easier. If u dont wont brain ON

It is normal, some language problems makes this guy seem harsh, but he must be afraid as this idea happens, WAR server will shutdown...

[Jack Spencer]

• Members
•  841
• 1,425 posts

• Report post
•  
•  

1 hour ago, Barbancourt said:

The AI is a boring opponent which always does the same thing, and can always be beaten in the same way, and you're stuck with the composition of the AI fleets.  An arranged battle between player fleets is usually going to be more dynamic and fun. 

 

I would agree this is true of a experienced combat player. But 95% of my experience is sailing traders. I have often wandered why most recommend live oak/white oak with carronades for PvE combat. So the player can win? Why not sail a Surprise for example - fir/fir with 6lb medium cannons and no mods or upgrades against an AI Surprise. Or try going against a ship with a fleet of 2 or 3. You don't know what ships are in the fleet until you are in battle. I have lost several times to an AI and I still enjoy learning.  

[Socialism]

5 hours ago, Zlatkowar said:

Not willing to sound like a sith lord but I sense great fear in your words and those of your like. Fear that consensual PvP on PvE might drain the last bit of players from PvP server. And if my interpretation of your messages is wrong and you have no fear because you are all having a great time on PvP, then let me ask you why are you even commenting on a thread that will have zero effect on your PvP Server routine?

Right now PvP server benefits from 100% of the content this game has to offer, under unbearable conditions for the regular PvE crowd. If they made that extra effort to bring all of the content on PvE under acceptable conditions for the regular PvE dude (as in consensual PvP, AI Port battles, no force fed ganking where you lose everything you got) there will be a lot more to do for a very stable (and growing) playerbase. None of us has the right to exige changes to the PvE server, but it would be dumb not to make suggestions that would improve life on PvE, just as it would be dumb for dev team to ignore such suggestions.

Either way, I fully support OP's suggestion.

What fear?  This game is going flounder shortly after release regardless of the server.  Admin and the dev team struggle to deliver anything other than DLC content these days.  Do you think they are going to independently develop different content for both servers?  Lol.  Up until recently the majority of my PVP kills was solo, as the US and Spain know well.  Ganking or not ganking doesn't bother me.

PVE server has seen a huge (huge being 200 players) uptick in the past couple of weeks which conveniently coincided with admin stating that their crap won't get wiped.  Over the past 2+ years I've been playing, the PVE server very rarely cracked 100+ players on at a time despite radical changes to ROE, RVR and various other mechanics on the PVP server that has gone back and forth through development.  Players dying to ganks isn't new...expensive ships isn't new either.  What is new is that the server is immune from wipe.  Until that promise gets revoked too. 

You mention content.  This game has very little and up until recently, majority of it was beyond stale.  Which is kinda why PVE / Casual minded players have abandoned the game in droves.  Which is also why the PVE server has never been populated.  Has the community suddenly done a huge about face and swapped servers because of mythical toxicity or super ganks.....or is it a recent promise of keeping all your stuff.  What do you think?

[Barbancourt]

3 hours ago, Jack Spencer said:

I would agree this is true of a experienced combat player. But 95% of my experience is sailing traders. I have often wandered why most recommend live oak/white oak with carronades for PvE combat. So the player can win? Why not sail a Surprise for example - fir/fir with 6lb medium cannons and no mods or upgrades against an AI Surprise. Or try going against a ship with a fleet of 2 or 3. You don't know what ships are in the fleet until you are in battle. I have lost several times to an AI and I still enjoy learning.  

The problem isn't whether the AI is easy or hard, but rather that they are a predictable opponent, and you eventually see how the battles tend to develop in the same way because of that.  Player opponents just provide a more varied battle experience, have the ability to work in coordinated fleet actions, and are much better at friendly banter than the bots are.   It would be nice to have the option of arranged battles (or voluntary vulnerability I guess) against other friendly enemy player fleets on the PVE server. 

Edited March 31, 2019 by Barbancourt

[Norfolk nChance]

9 hours ago, Jean de la Rochelle said:

The very idea that there could be people in the world who could actually have fun must be insanely annoying to you.

Go back and read the whole POST and not just my last line…

 

Norfolk nGenius

 

[Guest]

For fncksake…

All you pvp’ers have run your own ship aground and now you want to captain our ship!!! No way man, all you guys are stuck on dry land and you ain’t going to captain another.

Look at all you pvp’ers trying to tell us how to play our pve!  LOL!

“There is only Peace”, and that’s all there ever will be on our server!

[Sinu]

Other Idea...... 1 Server with a Peace Flag for PvE Player

[Zlatkowar]

5 hours ago, Socialism said:

PVE server has seen a huge (huge being 200 players) uptick in the past couple of weeks which conveniently coincided with admin stating that their crap won't get wiped.  Over the past 2+ years I've been playing, the PVE server very rarely cracked 100+ players on at a time despite radical changes to ROE, RVR and various other mechanics on the PVP server that has gone back and forth through development.  Players dying to ganks isn't new...expensive ships isn't new either.  What is new is that the server is immune from wipe.  Until that promise gets revoked too. 

You mention content.  This game has very little and up until recently, majority of it was beyond stale.  Which is kinda why PVE / Casual minded players have abandoned the game in droves.  Which is also why the PVE server has never been populated.  Has the community suddenly done a huge about face and swapped servers because of mythical toxicity or super ganks.....or is it a recent promise of keeping all your stuff.  What do you think?

Again, this is not a question of PvP content or PvE content. It is a matter of how mixed content can be best used. As in same content, different server rules. Extreme mindsets never survive the test of time.

We can debate on the reasons why people left PvE in the first place for hours. I will use the same method you are using. Has the PvE community left the game because majority of the content was beyond stale... Or is it the fact that 100% of devs focus and developped content was going towards PvP? This is so easy... Yet it proves nothing. Pure speculation with a massive confirmation bias.

See, I am firmly convinced that the +200 players spike occured at some point about one month before the wipe was announced, or at least before admin's confirmation that PvE was safe. So this has nothing to do with the announcement. But I guess each of us will remember the most convenient thing to validate his own point eh?

In all seriousness, if this is something that will not affect your ingame experience whatsoever (since it will not affect your server and your population) then please, get out.

[Sang Noir]

5 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:

Go back and read the whole POST and not just my last line…

I did. One of your points is a trivial counter-argument - printing money on PVE, who cares? Forced into pvp - nobody is with consensual pvp? The only real reason for it to happen is the unwilligness of the devs and we all agree on that.

I admit, my attack was a bit harsh and  probably more directed towards a general sentiment of opposition. I apologize.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Jean de la Rochelle

[Sir Texas Sir]

I'm game for the flag and allowing us to capture ports against AI.  Than have the map reset every 3 months.  I bet you bring those two things and you will get a lot more players. I don't caure if' I'm taking a port from AI, it's still more content and somethign to do other than just sit in port doing nothing on PvP cause of the lack of players. Only active players tend to be the same toxic guys over and over that can't get the fact them camping capital hurts the game doesn't make it better.

[LIONOFWALES]

also... some Peace server players would like to PVP once in a while... a simple attack function where the attacked player has to consent by choosing to engage would work well... many of the peace server players would like to PVP... they just don't want to get ganked is all. So a less libral approach to PVP on the PVE server... when someone gets attacked... the attacked player then could choose... ENGAGE or... EVADE applications... if the player is running goods... he/she will likely EVADE... if in a warship the player may... ENGAGE... if the player doesn't want PVP on the peace server... there are plenty of NPCs available to kill also... Just a thought.

Three cheers to the frigates and their gallant Captains.

[LIONOFWALES]

21 hours ago, toblerone said:

22 hours ago, Captain Reverse said:

no, im propose go play something easier. If u dont wont brain ON

Well, it seems to me that you are implying that playing on PVE server is not having the brain ON. This smells a deliberate try to flame or troll to derail the thread, but I'm not a moderator so my opinion is not relevant.

I think he is just a PVE hater... many of them on PVP server...

If not... he is probably just tired of hearing complaining continually from a crowd of players that have received so much content added since day 0 of game development... 

Anyway... just something to consider.

[LIONOFWALES]

9 hours ago, Routan said:

Don’t worry the PvP players don’t come to the peace server.  But lot of the casuals will for sure,  if concensual PvP can be implemented.

I am a hard core PVPer… I go to the Peace server because I have buddies that went their... also I can try to encourage them to join me on the War server...

Three cheers to the frigates and their gallant Captains.

[Sang Noir]

41 minutes ago, LIONOFWALES said:

If not... he is probably just tired of hearing complaining continually from a crowd of players that have received so much content added since day 0 of game development... 

Excuse me if this is irony that I am not getting, but PVE players had almost no content added until very recently when some new delivery missions were (re-)added. It was only through perpetual complaining that we did get anything after that hellish patch in June 2017.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Jean de la Rochelle

[Lovec1990]

PvP flag- i disagree i would rather see it done the same way trade in OW works its more secure less chance of: i forgot too change my flag.

PvP Events- we could get events where players face each other in event for example on 21 October we could have Battle of Trafalgar it would be an event so game chooses ship and side for you at the end you get chest for perticipation+bonus for winning.

Ai port battles and map reset every few months i approve.

 

 

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, Lovec1990 said:

PvP flag- i disagree i would rather see it done the same way trade in OW works its more secure less chance of: i forgot too change my flag.

PvP Events- we could get events where players face each other in event for example on 21 October we could have Battle of Trafalgar it would be an event so game chooses ship and side for you at the end you get chest for perticipation+bonus for winning.

Ai port battles and map reset every few months i approve.

 

 

The flag thing can be program to always reset to Peace ever time you go into port or say log in.  So you have to actively set it to be able to fight with some one else.  Back when they talked about making the GoM a PvE zones the flag system was brought up and some of us said we would keep the PvP flag up prob even in that zone to encourage folks to try it.  

 

For any one that might say that port owner ship is unfair and they can't just get missions out of those ports. Beside the perm ports there is 300+ ports in game you can capture.  Just flip one for your clan and you shouldn't have a problem.  Also folks will not want to own all the ports in a region cause than all AI would be that nation and that is boring not having AI's to kill.  Devs could even set a limit of ports owned by clans, lets say simply you can't own more than 10 ports as a clan.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

I don't understand the function of a "yellow flag", signalizing you are agreeing to get attacked but can't attack yourself. That is nonsense. Either it has to be mutual or nothing at all.

A differing between 'full risk duels' with ships being vulnerable and 'insurance mentality duels' with ships staying secure after battle is more rewarding and interesting.