Patch 31: Port investments, new hostility and preparation for release

[van der Clam]

I'm guessing this is why the netlify map shows no activity for port hostilities. 

[BoomBox]

3 hours ago, admin said:

On war server there is investment loss on port loss - providing natural deterioration of investment over time if port changes hands multiple times. 
On peace server there is no port loss thus this feature becomes static and never deteriorates. 

This feature (port investments) does not make sense for the Peace server until there is some form of economic sabotage or port capture (to provide currency - victory marks - to make those investments into ports)
 

if i might ask , would  it make that much of a difference on peace server ? i mean sure everyone could build what they want once the vm's are invested but since there is no competition on peace server i don't think it would hurt to implement the port improvement. might put a steep exchange rate for the vms on the pve server.

Edited April 26, 2019 by BoomBox

[admin]

3 minutes ago, BoomBox said:

if i might ask , would make that much of a difference on peace server ? i mean sure everyone could build what they want once the vm's are invested but since there is no competition on peace server i don't think it would hurt to implement the port improvement. might put a steep exchange rate for the vms on the pve server.

my concern is not the victory marks but the steady state (stable state of port investments)
Eventually all ports will be fully invested on the peace server (with no conflict) which will make experience of players coming then boring or not interesting.

If you remember player housing problems in some MMOs - it is the same - eventually EVERYTHING is built out and there is no point to even play if you cannot put your own house on land. Hope you understand what i mean.

 

But we do not give up - i hope we can find some solution to bring economic warfare to pve server that is not increasing toxicity or find the way to reset ports (using NPC invasions for example that players will have to fend off). Hold on.

[z4ys]

6 minutes ago, admin said:

But we do not give up - i hope we can find some solution to bring economic warfare to pve server that is not increasing toxicity or find the way to reset ports (using NPC invasions for example that players will have to fend off). Hold on.

like RNG hurricanes ooooorrrrrrr some better roleplay - some sort of decay

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by z4ys

[z4ys]

3 minutes ago, Routan said:

So no content is more fun then some have it. 

Think you are done with war server, right?. Time to make peace server a great place for the PvE and casual PvP/RvR players.

- Allowe PvP in patrolezone, but only if ppl have  a PvP flag on.

Give every nation  5-8 ports that only the nation can captur,(close to there Capitol). Let evry clan be allowed to help develop the port(No friend list). Thise ports will be attacked by AI’s.

In my opinion that should be exlusive for pvp server

[BoomBox]

1 hour ago, admin said:

my concern is not the victory marks but the steady state (stable state of port investments)
Eventually all ports will be fully invested on the peace server (with no conflict) which will make experience of players coming then boring or not interesting.

If you remember player housing problems in some MMOs - it is the same - eventually EVERYTHING is built out and there is no point to even play if you cannot put your own house on land. Hope you understand what i mean.

 

But we do not give up - i hope we can find some solution to bring economic warfare to pve server that is not increasing toxicity or find the way to reset ports (using NPC invasions for example that players will have to fend off). Hold on.

thanks for the  fast and awesome answer. never saw it from that perspective 👍

 

32 minutes ago, z4ys said:

In my opinion that should be exlusive for pvp server

 

 

I agree

Edited April 26, 2019 by BoomBox

[Njord]

57 minutes ago, admin said:

Eventually all ports will be fully invested on the peace server

But isn't it the same for the war server or will the port be completely reset / investments deleted after being conquered?

[Socialism]

6 minutes ago, Routan said:

Should then not all  PvE be removed from war server?

I see no reason not to have a mixed server. It is simple enough. We have lots of players, some are hardcore, some are casual PvP/PvE player and some are PvE players. 

Think like a Car manufactur. Most have a cheap car, a medium car and a High end car. NA should do the same, Simply because it gives more player to the game. Optimal they have a war server, a PvE server and the casual PvP/PvE server. But I Think the last to can function Well together.

to use your car reference....

A car as several models, lets call them   EX, LX and Sport.  EX is the base.  LX has everything the EX has + a sun roof.  Sport has everything LX + EX + a manual shift.  See where I'm going with this?   

PVP server has everything the PVE server as + PVP.  But it comes at a cost (just like a better car model) and that cost is you can lose your stuff.
 

[van der Clam]

Did we ever get a better explanation of the Fort 1, Fort 2, Tower 1, Tower 2? Are these individual buildings, or are the upgrades of just the two buildings? Meaning would we be investing into 2 separate Forts (1&2) and 2 separate Towers (1&2), or are there only 1 Fort and 1 Tower with upgrades?

And are these "Port Points: 0/45" the total points the port can have for the nation, or 45 points for each clan, or 45 points for individuals? Or does showing 0/45 mean that our clan has no points to be able to invest in anything? Or does the shoe stick in the wood when eating a bowl of boomerangs in space?

Edited April 26, 2019 by van der Decken

[AeRoTR]

There should be upkeep costs may be ? So make initial investments a bit lower but needs maintenance costs.

Random hurricanes or native attacks, famine which happens when supply fleets attacked by enemy nations or sunk due to bad weather etc.

 

[van der Clam]

24 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

There should be upkeep costs may be ? So make initial investments a bit lower but needs maintenance costs.

Random hurricanes or native attacks, famine which happens when supply fleets attacked by enemy nations or sunk due to bad weather etc.

And enemy raids...if raids get patched in. Would be nice to raid all ports to steal any production items that might be in those ports.

I'm also confused on why I am able to "invest" supplies in all things, as I thought the port owner would be setting which things they want built there. I would hate to invest thousands of items to buildings that the port owner does not want to use them for. What happens to the donated supplies if this happens?

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 hour ago, van der Decken said:

Did we ever get a better explanation of the Fort 1, Fort 2, Tower 1, Tower 2? Are these individual buildings, or are the upgrades of just the two buildings? Meaning would we be investing into 2 separate Forts (1&2) and 2 separate Towers (1&2), or are there only 1 Fort and 1 Tower with upgrades?

And are these "Port Points: 0/45" the total points the port can have for the nation, or 45 points for each clan, or 45 points for individuals? Or does showing 0/45 mean that our clan has no points to be able to invest in anything? Or does the shoe stick in the wood when eating a bowl of boomerangs in space?

Most ports had two small and two big, so it's prob per fort your building so you can build two towers and two forts.  Devs said they are currently in old placements but later we might be able to place them or they will balance placement to make them more usefull.  

It's 40 points just to do all the shipbuilding stuff, 4 points for the forts.  Than add what ever resources you add so you can't do every thing. I'm going to bet we won't have 45 points when game is released that is just for testing.  Prob something more like 15-20 points.  That 45 points is for the port.

 

Edited April 26, 2019 by Sir Texas Sir

[toblerone]

On ‎4‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 2:35 PM, Angus MacDuff said:

There is actually a place for solos and small clans in this scenario.  Once the big clans are localised in their fortresses, you'll know where to find them for......dirty deeds…

Of course mate, going in a few oak/oak ships harassing people just outside of the fortress where are stockpiled dozen of fully upgraded teak/white ships is a great plan indeed … to just loose some ship in no time

Edited April 26, 2019 by toblerone

[Licinio Chiavari]

And still no idea about effect of Port improvements on DLC and notes...

[mikawa]

On 4/24/2019 at 1:12 PM, Wyy said:

its sadly to prevent alt exploits, but if you're a solo player what kind of RvR are you going to do anyway?

You simply just never could prevent alt exploits no matter whatever you're doing except steam accounts will be connected to your personal ID (which will never happen because of privacy affairs). 

[Sea Archer]

19 hours ago, AeRoTR said:

There should be upkeep costs may be ? So make initial investments a bit lower but needs maintenance costs.

Random hurricanes or native attacks, famine which happens when supply fleets attacked by enemy nations or sunk due to bad weather etc.

 

I would prefer to have the upkeep in materials. A certain amout of food (livestock, beans, stones for forts, etc.) will be consumed daily. If this is not supplied, parts of the investment will decrease. This would give an incentive to sail traders with supplys and blocking a port really hurts the enemy. 

If maintenance would only be money, its too easy.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

20 hours ago, Socialism said:

PVP server has everything the PVE server as + PVP.  But it comes at a cost (just like a better car model) and that cost is you can lose your stuff.

It just amazes me again and again what ideas some people have of PvE server when judging it from afar, from their PvP throne...

You can lose your stuff on Peace Server as well, you just have to lose battles against NPC... misjudgement of your strength, bad understanding of economics and you are back at the drawing board, which is a basic cutter.

... if the community wasn't as helpful as it is on Peace Server. People may donate to you a new ship for starting anew.

Just stop that myth that there is no risk and all you see are carebears.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Cetric de Cornusiac

[huliotkd]

On 4/24/2019 at 12:38 PM, admin said:

Forts destroyed in port battles will have to be rebuilt

if they have to be rebuilt after every destruction, this mean you must raise the peace time after a PB.  i can attak a port first day, and day after making hostility to nex day so i come again destroying what survived in the first battle then i'll attak again a 3rd time so the port ins't defended... a solution should be lower the amount of resources OR raising days of peace after a PB to 1 week or 5 days

On 4/24/2019 at 12:38 PM, admin said:

Forts were buffed

can we have and example of how Forts were buffed? i mean, do they worth the amount of resources required for build it? have they longer firing  range?more damage and range like a mortar brig?  cause if not, they are still useless vs a mortar brig.

[Macjimm]

23 hours ago, Routan said:

 I guess I am more guy that belive in many solutions.

Many solutions are good.  Your shop description is not of NA.

We have TWO ice-cream shops.  The B&C Shop has banana and cherry flavor.  2 customers like B&C.     The C Only Shop has no banana.  It advertises  "No Banana Here".   1 customer likes it because he hates the smell of banana and thinks the banana loving customers are rude.

You propose we add banana flavor to the C Only Shop, but you will call it strawberry flavor.  So in part of the shop we can get limited amount of banana flavor, labeled as strawberry.  We still advertise that the C Only Shop is 'banana free', but it's a lie.

We will end up with two shops that each have cherry and banana flavor, and losing the customer that doesn't like banana flavor.

Just add the fake strawberry flavor to the B&C shop,  so the C Only customer can enjoy icecream also.

 

[Dostojetski]

On 4/26/2019 at 2:54 PM, Licinio Chiavari said:

On other matter.

What about DLC and ship notes and port crafting improvements? Are DLC redeemed in developed port getting the bonuses. Or not? At least the notes?

It could feel an interested question (Requin) but less than apparent: a well fitted requin would keep her "niche" even with frigates running +5% speed.
The problem will be evident for Herc, Herm and Ratt that are already definately "normal" ship (as it should be) and will end totally outpaced by super crafts.

It could be good... but I think lecit to know this beforehand.

Thank you.

Licinio... of course the DLC are going to get the bonuses. Devs are making it clear they dont care about ship building as long as people buy the DLCs.

Turning the game into a p2w DLC mess would make little sense if the DLC ships wouldnt get the bonuses? I promise you, they will get the bonuses or then you will be given a separate DLC to beef up DLC ships or some dumb idea like that.

Its funny that before christmas they made the economy update to make the prices of ships realistic(lower them) and now they are jacking up the prices skyhigh with permits and whatnot to encourage DLCs?

 

PS. Can I have all the DLCs and some doubloons if I remove my negative review and make a positive one on steam?

Edited April 27, 2019 by Dostojetski

[Licinio Chiavari]

19 minutes ago, Dostojetski said:

Licinio... of course the DLC are going to get the bonuses. Devs are making it clear they dont care about ship building as long as people buy the DLCs.

Turning the game into a p2w DLC mess would make little sense if the DLC ships wouldnt get the bonuses? I promise you, they will get the bonuses or then you will be given a separate DLC to beef up DLC ships or some dumb idea like that.

Its funny that before christmas they made the economy update to make the prices of ships realistic(lower them) and now they are jacking up the prices skyhigh with permits and whatnot to encourage DLCs?

 

PS. Can I have all the DLCs and some doubloons if I remove my negative review and make a positive one on steam?

Crappy statement.

And definately not costructive.

 

a) it is known that DLC (and notes) redeemed ships get already far less chances of superior quality.

b) requin is a specialized ship who could work without port bonuses.

c) on the other hand, hercules/pandora are already subpar vs Surprises.
Surprise with 1-2+/5 port bonuses (and already higher superior quality chances) will be totally OP against Herc/Pandora making the DLC worthless. Just useful to be easily sunk.

Think first, reply later.

 

Update:

added Sailing bonus 1 to one port.

Redeemed 1 note and 1 DLC: no port bonus. No idea if bugged, intended or we should wait server restart.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari
update.

[Dostojetski]

You can see it from Admiralty Connections DLC already that this game is going be p2w DLC game.

State your doubloons, matey... a wager. DLC ships will get the bonuses.. I wager 10k doubloons.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Dostojetski

[Licinio Chiavari]

2 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Update:

added Sailing bonus 1 to one port.

Redeemed 1 note and 1 DLC: no port bonus.

No idea if bugged, intended or we should wait server restart.

 

[Dostojetski]

...

No payment. You didnt accept the wager

 

Update. And yeah, pretty sure it just need a patch and bum, it will happen

Edited April 27, 2019 by Dostojetski

[Licinio Chiavari]

9 minutes ago, Dostojetski said:

...

No payment. You didnt accept the wager

 

Update. And yeah, pretty sure it just need a patch and bum, it will happen

LoL.

That said.
For some DLC (and to make notes dropped worth something) is necessary.

For me is more question of knowing IF working. Personally it's the same. Knowing is always right.

 

About DLC in general, I always said: DLCs should be tradable permits (NOT full ship) on a bit longer CD (like 48hr), sharing CD with daily full ship that will spawn ALWAYS 3/5 no trim (and I'd say only oak/oak too with rarity of woods now).