Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

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

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, --Privateer-- said:

This needs to be fixed BEFORE DLCs get port bonuses.

Reasonable point.

If the policy will be keeping fine woods very rare, allow redeemable only with basic woods (so oak, fir and crew space) but give player owning them BP for them: allowing to craft them as he prefers.

So finally we will put an end to P2W whining crap... And there will be more balanced room for more DLCs without destroying game economy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think DLC owners should have an option either to redeem a note that can be converted into a fine wood ship without portbonus or a permit that will require proper crafting and get the port bonus. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
35 minutes ago, Sir Loorkon said:

I think DLC owners should have an option either to redeem a note that can be converted into a fine wood ship without portbonus or a permit that will require proper crafting and get the port bonus. 

good suggestion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Sir Loorkon said:

I think DLC owners should have an option either to redeem a note that can be converted into a fine wood ship without portbonus or a permit that will require proper crafting and get the port bonus. 

That would be even more P2W.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SantaRoja said:

I think the only thing pp are asking to devs is to made captain skill decisive again.

#skillfirst

Skill first? In order to do that you would have to balance the wood chars to the point where better woods compared to less better make only +/-1 %. In the Caribbean where everyone can have everything, you wouldn´t need LO/WO/Teak anymore. On the other hand, balancing all woods chars to the point where it does not matter which woods you use, RVR would again become boring, because why fighting and conquering ports if there is actually nothing to gain?

This is just another vicious circle.Either way, not good for the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hawkwood said:

Skill first? In order to do that you would have to balance the wood chars to the point where better woods compared to less better make only +/-1 %. In the Caribbean where everyone can have everything, you wouldn´t need LO/WO/Teak anymore. On the other hand, balancing all woods chars to the point where it does not matter which woods you use, RVR would again become boring, because why fighting and conquering ports if there is actually nothing to gain?

This is just another vicious circle.Either way, not good for the game.

So what is your solution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SantaRoja said:

I think the only thing pp are asking to devs is to made captain skill decisive again.

#skillfirst

I agree with you that skill should be the determining factor in battle, but how to do that here?  Access to all materials for a better ship of course.  This brings in other problems such as the already mentioned "reason" for RVR.  In this regard I would suggest that RVR must be an economic imperative and strategic positioning requirement.  This is all already happening with these new mechanics.  The "frontline" mentality will mean that RVR is necessary to protect your own security, and our clan economies will be tied closely with our fortresses.  Hopefully this will allow the devs to loosen up on the rarity of woods and other resources....allowing smaller clans and solos a portion of the good stuff. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hawkwood said:

Skill first? In order to do that you would have to balance the wood chars to the point where better woods compared to less better make only +/-1 %. In the Caribbean where everyone can have everything, you wouldn´t need LO/WO/Teak anymore. On the other hand, balancing all woods chars to the point where it does not matter which woods you use, RVR would again become boring, because why fighting and conquering ports if there is actually nothing to gain?

This is just another vicious circle.Either way, not good for the game.

yes skill first, either by nerfing bonuses and tightening the stack.

i know the fight for rare resources are the reasons cause people do RvR but the bonus shouldn't make the game unbalanced.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SantaRoja said:

yes skill first, either by nerfing bonuses and tightening the stack.

i know the fight for rare resources are the reasons cause people do RvR but the bonus shouldn't make the game unbalanced.

Because no matter what you do as a developer, in my opinion the end would be the wag the dog situation..

1. Balance the woods in order that "skill matter", like Santa Roja suggested to the point where all attributes of all woods won´t matter(+/-1%), there will be no motivation for..

2. RVR, which will eventually die(again) from boredom and saturation, because there is no motivation for getting the LO/WO/Teak ports. So if you want to balance this madness(meta) of..

3. LO/WO/Teak, you need enough ports for all nations in the whole Caribbean, otherwise some are having huge advantage, the others will be crippled at release. But then..

4. Having enough of all LO/WO/Teak ports, the RVR motivation goes down, which is a matter of time, because always the same reason for RVR? So balance the woods, and then...

5. Back to point 1....

There is an urgent need for another reason/motivation to do RVR.( and port bonusses aren´t a motivation enough, since any nation can have those)

This is another vicious circle that needs to be broken, by having this "another reason to do RVR". Not found yet.

(wrote this in another topic)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2019 at 12:43 PM, admin said:



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)
 

Why would it need port ownership at all ? The problem I see is the existing buildings/upgrades I already have and which I cant loose atm. If the new upgrades are tied to port ownership, how to seperate from the old ones ? Ie: if I loose my homebase due to economic warfare (warfare btw of any kind doesn't fit PvE server) will I still keep my buildings, just stripped from the new bonuses ??

Why not make these new bonuses clan/player based ? I wouldnt mind at all if someone else builds his shipyard in my homebase and upgrades it eg for speed, while I upgrade mine for armor.

Investment yes (be that marks, medals dubs, reales ...) but just on top of the existing upgrades and on a per player or per clan bases.

Would save you the entire effort of programming smthg like economic warfare/sabotage...which btw  could easily turn into economic ganking (the thing most despised by PvE players) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found out by mistake a way alts or other nation players could (be) use(d) to go around hostility mechanic. Russian player was making hostility at Blanquilla and I was getting my Christian out of Cumana at that moment. Sailing there I noticed a hostility missions from a Russian player and I entered it. As you can't see where he is I entered the fight and found out I was not only on the other side of the map, but I misclicked, cause I had a big blue cross in my 'neutral' flagg. So I joined Russia in this..

However, I was there, Pavel next to me I choose to kill it as I was apparantly not escaping it. Also I was curious if I could make hostility for Sweden or Russia. And indeed it was Sweden I did hostility for, Is this a mechanic or not. Cause now you only need one alt in the nation that owns a region capital to make hostility in a small ship. While another nation can enter in big ships. This changes the game in ways it was not supposed is my guess?? hostility should Always be made by the nation that chose hostility missions in my eyes.

I hope this info is of any help. ( happened 29-4-19, 14:52 CET) hostility La Blanquilla, Margaritha region/Pampatar.

 

greetzz,

player called Cornelis(repost of earlier post in forthcoming patch info).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On other note - have the Hard Caps for Speed, Reps etc. changed since introduction of Port Upgrades? Or are they still the same as before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hawkwood said:

There is an urgent need for another reason/motivation to do RVR.( and port bonusses aren´t a motivation enough, since any nation can have those)

This is another vicious circle that needs to be broken, by having this "another reason to do RVR". Not found yet.

(wrote this in another topic)

I think this suggestion will go down like a fart in church, but what about regular map wipes to trigger RvR?  Many other MMOGs have victory conditions which, once achieved, cause a map reset (NOT player reset).  Give something to the players of the victorious nation; either a ship-bonus or something cosmetic like a special crown beside their names.  I think a crown in the color of the nation would be prestigious enough to be motivating.  Imagine having two white crowns, a blue crown and a orange crown by your name (I helped the Russians win twice, I won with the Swedes and I won with the Spanish.  Fear me, bribe me)...  Would solve the situation of having a couple dominant super-nations, and the Russians would get the pleasure of repeatedly stomping we poor Dutch instead of it being a one-time satisfaction.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrote from "investments" long time ago and it got no support. I am surprised that you took it.

In initial idea clans were able to provide services to all, add some rent shipyard feature? Idea was also that there can be carpenters ship to decrease repair costs, etc. These were supposed to be something that clan can offer for others as well. Make hubs outside green zones. Give reasons to PvP outside green zones in the process. Also good reasons for players to leave green zone to these hubs.

Maybe buildings can also come with mission givers? This way a big clan port can be very important for whole nation to grind XP. In process players build PvP hot spots as well. Whole nation would be interested to defend it.

 

etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system.

I hope this gets fixed asap.

Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
6 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system.

I hope this gets fixed asap.

Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed.

I heard some important players like it. So don't expect any changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

So literally everyone and their mother is now using hostility missions from other groups to bypass the frontline system.

I hope this gets fixed asap.

Even more so I hope that the hostility done this way should absolutely be reversed

Frontline system is a failure if two things are not fixed.  The clan initiating hostility must be the port owner (if they win the PB), and hostility must not drop from Free towns.  I won't argue whether the frontline system is something we want, but it certainly does not work currently.  However, without a frontline system, the whole port investment scheme is on dangerous ground.  Why invest when every other nation can attack you, any time?

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So ship crafting and port investment points.

something needs to change, either:

1. Port investments for crafting ships cost double the investment points

OR

2. Ports should never have more than 20-30 investment points maximum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Investments look good but could we please get some more information on how it works @admin ?

My first concern is with the Fort and tower placement . All i can see is it says Fort 1 and Fort 2 but doesn't give us positional indication of which fort will go where and in some ports this is very important especially if we will put only 1 fort

I had a look at API but it says only "fort2"

 

Also how exactly do clans regulate who uses facilities? and how can friendly clans who invest be safe from being kicked off the list later. And how to get more than 15 clans to use facilities?

 

What happens if clan A captures port , buys sail bonus then clan B buys hull bonus and clan C is on friends list of only clan B..  will they be able to use only hull bonus?

 

Edited by John Sheppard
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should be able to build buildings in national ports owned by clans. Major benefits like shipyard crafting bonuses should be only for the clan and their allies.

Forcing people to bigger clans/groups does not have purpose, simply harming the game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 7:38 AM, admin said:

There is a limited number of ports that can build amazing ships with all the possible bonuses. Nations will have to fight for them.

This is looking like it could turn into a disaster.  Nations can corner the market and have a permanent advantage.  Best to make it go away and have all ports have the same potential.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 7:38 AM, admin said:

Combat medals are now only granted for mission and patrol completion

This is starting to hurt.  We used to get CM's for individual kills and also for completion of the PVP mission.  Now it's only for the mission, but the number of CM's awarded does not make up the difference in production.  For instance, an individual 4th/5th rate kill was 3-4 CM's.  Need 10 for completion of 4th/5th PVP mission which awarded another 10 CM's.  That's 40-50 CM's.  Now 4th/5th PVP mission awards 26 CM's.  6th/7th rate is the same.  Used to be 2CM for each 6th rate kill plus 10 for the mission.

  • Like 2

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...