Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
DreadPirateBob

Russia captures Roseau: the devs have to act aggressively to deal with the population balance

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tac said:

No one united to stop Sweden it's players became bored because  no one could,Redii left through boredom and to find something new i believe ,Most of HRE top players left or had already stopped playing and the Desire for RvR slowly ebbed away,pretty much what Russia faces now, you  must always be careful what you wish for.

Activity will always be the biggest driving force in this game, people need a reason to log on.

Everything you said is true, but you omitted that things got stale after the majority of the active clans and yourself united to stomp out russia, even though sweden at the time was more powerful and held more ground. For whatever reason no one else had seen fit to try to attack you guys after russia imploded despite sweden holding many of the strategic locations on the map. In the end it is what it is, i certainly got my moneys worth out of the game, and thats all i can ask for.

Edited by Potemkin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Raekur said:

the biggest difference between then and now is the cost to rebuild. Back then going to war and facing the possibility of losing ground was not crippling to the ability to continue to wage war. Now it is near impossible to just pick up and set up a new base somewhere without having close to 10 million reals and about 500K doubloons. Hell a level 3 shipyard costs what again....

What has made russia a problem is people jumping ship and joining russia then begin raiding their old nation out of spite. While a distasteful act and downright childish, I cant count the number of times I have seen it done. Players leave a nation just so that they can turn around and attack it. Nothing can or ever will be done to prevent it.

Agreed on the first part, its impossible to really blame one specific issue i guess because there are quite a few working in tandem atm. As for people jumping ship well, idk what to say. Ive been playing with the same group for like two years. Everyone who came over after the wipe made their own choices. Ultimately it was bad for the nations they left, which i was sorry to see, but i cant do anything about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Potemkin said:

Everything you said is true, but you omitted that things got stale after the majority of the active clans and yourself united to stomp out russia, even though sweden at the time was more powerful and help more ground. For whatever reason no one else had seen fit to try to attack you guys after russia imploded despite sweden holding many of the strategic locations on the map. In the end it is what it is, i certainly got my moneys worth out of the game, and thats all i can ask for.

Yea he forgets about the part where Russia generated 90% of the content on the server and then got double flipped into taking a siesta as a thanks.  Then the rest of the server quit.  Russia it seems needs to be the villain of the story, otherwise everyone else just quits.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Potemkin said:

Everything you said is true, but you omitted that things got stale after the majority of the active clans and yourself united to stomp out russia, even though sweden at the time was more powerful and help more ground. For whatever reason no one else had seen fit to try to attack you guys after russia imploded despite sweden holding many of the strategic locations on the map. In the end it is what it is, i certainly got my moneys worth out of the game, and thats all i can ask for.

That sir,is exactly how i look at it too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yea he forgets about the part where Russia generated 90% of the content on the server and then got double flipped into taking a siesta as a thanks.  Then the rest of the server quit.  Russia it seems needs to be the villain of the story, otherwise everyone else just quits.  

i have zero interest in any of you and your welps posts as you will always be know now as King of Crowns bitch no matter how many times you change your name in game or on the forum.

I will remember that part.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no one has actively dealt with the Russian aggressiveness.

however in other news, Russia took the first step in dealing with Russia aggression and have attacked the Dutch, so maybe we see some multi-flips against Russia soon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RepairyMcRepairous said:

I see no one has actively dealt with the Russian aggressiveness.

however in other news, Russia took the first step in dealing with Russia aggression and have attacked the Dutch, so maybe we see some multi-flips against Russia soon.

 

i heard somewhere you guys are still too scared of BF so...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, admin said:

Russian aggression too high was already discussed in the early 2018

I have no problem with a agressive russia. I have a problem with the inability of other nations to do anything

Either against russia or even against eachother. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trolls are out in force, I see.

I recommend everyone ignore Potemkin and Severus Snape.

This isn't about Russia.  Because if it wasn't Russia, it would be GB or the Dutch or the Pirates or the Swedes or whoever.

This is about bad game design.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DreadPirateBob said:

The trolls are out in force, I see.

I recommend everyone ignore Potemkin and Severus Snape.

This isn't about Russia.  Because if it wasn't Russia, it would be GB or the Dutch or the Pirates or the Swedes or whoever.

This is about bad game design.

:(

 

Share this post


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

i have zero interest in any of you and your welps posts as you will always be know now as King of Crowns bitch no matter how many times you change your name in game or on the forum.

I will remember that part.

And I'll always remember you as some noob in DAS that 7up would shit all over.  Some would even say Pellagos' bitch. 🙂     

Edited by Severus Snape

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
18 minutes ago, DreadPirateBob said:

The trolls are out in force, I see.

I recommend everyone ignore Potemkin and Severus Snape.

This isn't about Russia.  Because if it wasn't Russia, it would be GB or the Dutch or the Pirates or the Swedes or whoever.

This is about bad game design.

Cant get any more true then that, in the end its all about the game design

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If nothing else, this game has been a good social experiment....and the only way to curb the zergwagon in any game is for people to break it by making it completely imbalanced, because less people are willing to attempt to balance it themselves. They'd rather be controlled by a game mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, van der Clam said:

If nothing else, this game has been a good social experiment....and the only way to curb the zergwagon in any game is for people to break it by making it completely imbalanced, because less people are willing to attempt to balance it themselves. They'd rather be controlled by a game mechanic.

I think you've got the end result correct, but you're putting things in a rather insulting way.

This is not a new phenomenon.  Shadowbane is the most pertinent example of devs failing to address this issue in their game design.  They counted on players getting bored or unhappy with the lack of content to break up massive alliances.  But this never happened, because if a few broke off, that automatically created content for the rest.  And the risk of breaking off was too great - as it is here.  How many REDS or BF would quit the game, much less their clans, rather than have to endure the doubloons/reals/resources grind to re-establish themselves in another nation?  And what are the odds of success - rather than losing to those remaining with the horde?  This is nothing new in human behaviour, this is something witnessed in both history (how many nations were created by a dominant city-state - Moscow, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm, London, etc.), nor in gaming history.  Even in this game's history, it's obvious at multiple points that a population balancing mechanic was sorely needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, admin said:

you mean could not control?

     The only resources that are being limited are the ones we can't buy with real world money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin

You want population balancing mechanics?

1. Refunds for players switching from high-pop to low-pop nations.  Want to go from Russia to Commonwealth?  100% doubloons and reals refund.  However, as Commonwealth (or new lowest-pop) nation gets closer to average pop, reduce the refund.

2. Nerf crafting for overpop nations. Being part of the largest nation should not result in the cheapest, best ships, with all the upgrades.  Most overpop nation cannot craft more than level 1 port upgrades.  They also cannot capture or otherwise buy/trade/own ships with more than a level 1 upgrade.  Overpop nations get reduced rare woods/resources.  Average nations get full upgrades.  Below-average pop nations get cheaper construction.  AND NO MORE PORT-EXCLUSIVE RESOURCES LIKE COPPER.

3. Get rid of port bonuses, make them crafter bonuses.  This way, when the key crafting port gets captured, half the nation doesn't quit or transfer to most overpop nation.  Combine this with options 2 and 1 to really have an effect.

4. Allow clans to set port BR, relative to nation population.  Most overpop nation?  OK, 20,000 BR is fine.  Most underpop nation?  4,000 BR.

5. Above all, take ownership of your past decisions, admit that you ignored the players in the past, and DO SOMETHING.  We care.  We love this game.  There's nothing, absolutely nothing like it on the market.  But you, the developers, have repeatedly ignored our concerns and the VERY obvious warning signs from beta.  Eat your humble pie, admit you were wrong, and fix it.  We want this game to succeed as much as you do.

In the meantime - until you fix the shitshow - freeze RvR, give every nation a 55-point port, and freeze nation switches to/new accounts on the most populous nations (which includes my nation - Great Britain).

Edited by DreadPirateBob
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DreadPirateBob said:

 

You want population balancing mechanics?

1. Refunds for players switching from high-pop to low-pop nations.  Want to go from Russia to Commonwealth?  100% doubloons and reals refund.  However, as Commonwealth (or new lowest-pop) nation gets closer to average pop, reduce the refund.

Point 1 is too easy to exploit. Players will take an alt, move it from RU to PL (in your example) then trade the refund to the main account. And redo by reset of the PL account.

I like point 3. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, admin said:

Russian aggression too high was already discussed in the early 2018

 

In terms of population imbalance. 

The only way to control overpopulation by natural means is to remove unlimited resources out of the air and go all in on the forest spawns (increasing their number). 
As a result

  • Nations with limited numbers will have all types of woods and resources cheap. Everyone will have best ships
  • Nations with lots of players will not have all resources - and will have to overpay and haul more (or build secondary bases for production - spreading their investments thin)

Lets say 1000 of oak per nation per day (or week) and thats it. No more oak for nation. This will solve all overpopulation issues. 

1.: For sure, that is not the only way to balance the pop! Additionally i think that is a bad way because you do not have think about the massive impact wich the alt accounts have. Lets say a superpower nation has the most players. Much of them have alt accounts and 24/7 players. They start sending their alts to the low pop nations and farm ressources as much as they can. At that Point the low pop nations are at the same situation as the superpower Nation: no ressources. That will never work. (remove the ability the trade betwenn nations and you will have a Chance, but i fear the Players will find another way to transfer goods to the main account)

2: Why not bring the ally system back? Do not allow the superpower nations to ally with anyone and the smaller ones can ally up with much of the other smaller. Make the indicator dependant of a mix of several attributes: Pop, Amount of ports, Win/Loss Rate of PBs, Players average online time per day, … You have so much data you can use to make a nation leaderboard wich could be the base for an ally system.

And no going back on that - eventually players will get used to it and accept it as a given. More people = less GDP ;)

(PVE server wont have this problem as oak will be also available from admiralty)

 

WOW style - queues wont work, pop caps wont work as player who bought the game wants to play for the flag of his choice.
Maybe additional cost should be introduced for nation switch, like 10 mln reals + 25000 doubloons, as some people report that in the long term - nation change item is too cheap compared to other games (wow makes you pay EUR for every switch), as it is causing long term imbalance and reduces value of nation choice and permanence. Causing more imbalance

And WoWs way is the better one, because now we have players who could jump all the time and others who cant. Bring a one time switch dlc item with significant lower Price and you would make clans able the switch nations as whole and help balance out the server.

 

 

 

Edited by Sven Silberbart
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin

All we need is RVR fix, remove pointless 25k and 20k port battles for every second port and create an appropriate balance in port battles so even small clans can participate.

Share this post


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

@admin

You want population balancing mechanics?

1. Refunds for players switching from high-pop to low-pop nations.  Want to go from Russia to Commonwealth?  100% doubloons and reals refund.  However, as Commonwealth (or new lowest-pop) nation gets closer to average pop, reduce the refund.

 

nice idea
1,000,000 DB cost to switch to OP nation, 0 to small nation
Its like buying a passport. Some nations will have a free passport (if you sneak in) and some nations will have it very expensive due to strict immigration policy.

Additional idea to naturally control expansions is to have national manpower.
Crew right now comes from air. And i think it should not.

More manpower = more cost and food required to maintain
If your nation has 50% of players only ship you can get (due to lack of free manpower) is the frigate or you have to ask someone to lend you 800 sailors (who each eat 1 ton of provision per game month and needs 1 gold db salary per month).
To provide some protection 100 crew is free for all, but all crew above comes from national manpower

  • if you nation has 10 players and 10000 manpower they can sail 10 first rates
  • If you nation has 500 players - you have bigger manpower - but not 50 bigger. Enough Field 10-20 first rates the rest will have to sail in frigates. Crew becomes a resource like guns (but will be expendable) making large countries vulnerable in case of fast manpower loss.

This will also give incentives for  skilled players to move to smaller nations because large nations will lose more manpower in general due to wide variety of skill levels.

This could become a natural balancing force.

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

1,000,000 DB cost to switch to OP nation, 0 to small nation
Its like buying a passport. Some nations will have a free passport (if you sneak in) and some nations will have it very expensive due to strict immigration policy.

Additional idea to naturally control expansions is to have national manpower.
Crew right now comes from air. And i think it should not.

More manpower = more cost and food required to maintain
If your nation has 50% of players only ship you can get (due to lack of free manpower) is the frigate or you have to ask someone to lend you 800 sailors (who each eat 1 ton of provision per game month and needs 1 gold db salary per month).
To provide some protection 100 crew is free for all, but all crew above comes from national manpower

  • if you nation has 10 players and 10000 manpower they can sail 10 first rates
  • If you nation has 500 players - you have bigger manpower - but not 50 bigger. Enough Field 10-20 first rates the rest will have to sail in frigates. Crew becomes a resource like guns (but will be expendable) making large countries vulnerable in case of fast manpower loss.

This will also give incentives for  skilled players to move to smaller nations because large nations will lose more manpower in general due to wide variety of skill levels.

This could become a natural balancing force.

This crew thing is a bad idea, so im being punished for mistakes others make? I cant sail a first rate becuase other make dumb decusiobs and get sunk? GB will be out of crew incredibly fast with all the newbs joining and getting ganked, Also let alts join a different nation and get them sunk to reduce manpower..

 

Edited by Razee
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bodye said:

@admin

All we need is RVR fix, remove pointless 25k and 20k port battles for every second port and create an appropriate balance in port battles so even small clans can participate.

RvR isn't really content for single clans light on members. You'll always end up screened out by larger opposing force, it's not worth trying to balance it out.
We're getting raids which is more geared towards that anyway. I imagine being a large nation with lots of territory will make you big target for attack.
but I don't think that's happening because PB's are just such the hassle for most of the population. For some reason I don't think frontlines
are really working, instead of being strictly enforced I think it should be more of a build up with the ability to jump paces.
for example if you added a supply item that allowed you to take heading on a port further away.

Share this post


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

nice idea
1,000,000 DB cost to switch to OP nation, 0 to small nation
Its like buying a passport. Some nations will have a free passport (if you sneak in) and some nations will have it very expensive due to strict immigration policy.

Additional idea to naturally control expansions is to have national manpower.
Crew right now comes from air. And i think it should not.

More manpower = more cost and food required to maintain
If your nation has 50% of players only ship you can get (due to lack of free manpower) is the frigate or you have to ask someone to lend you 800 sailors (who each eat 1 ton of provision per game month and needs 1 gold db salary per month).
To provide some protection 100 crew is free for all, but all crew above comes from national manpower

  • if you nation has 10 players and 10000 manpower they can sail 10 first rates
  • If you nation has 500 players - you have bigger manpower - but not 50 bigger. Enough Field 10-20 first rates the rest will have to sail in frigates. Crew becomes a resource like guns (but will be expendable) making large countries vulnerable in case of fast manpower loss.

This will also give incentives for  skilled players to move to smaller nations because large nations will lose more manpower in general due to wide variety of skill levels.

This could become a natural balancing force.

You should tie it to town consumption. For example, if you want to generate crew, deliver provisions+ smth else... After x amount of hours crew is available for hire in the port. I would even go a step further and do something similar for workers for production buildings and housing but thats another story. Basic idea is that if the town is poorly supplied it gets debuff to crew generation and workers. Supply it and it prospers. Plain and simple

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, admin said:
  • if you nation has 10 players and 10000 manpower they can sail 10 first rates
  • If you nation has 500 players - you have bigger manpower - but not 50 bigger. Enough Field 10-20 first rates the rest will have to sail in frigates. Crew becomes a resource like guns (but will be expendable) making large countries vulnerable in case of fast manpower loss.

This will also give incentives for  skilled players to move to smaller nations because large nations will lose more manpower in general due to wide variety of skill levels.

This idea is positive:

44 minutes ago, admin said:

This could become a natural balancing force.

We all witness the unbalanced player population that entails zerg Factions.

I thought that controlling the maxi number of ships (from 4th to 1rst rates) available in War server, per Faction, could be a way to spread population among every existing Factions (due to reached overcapacity).

Now the suggested crew ressource limitation, depending on Faction population, is a better way for same purpose: avoid overpopulated Factions.  

(Negative: romantic players might have to forget about sailing under their prefered national flag. But at this stage of the game, who cares ? since clan system prevails)

45 minutes ago, admin said:

1,000,000 DB cost to switch to OP nation, 0 to small nation
Its like buying a passport. Some nations will have a free passport (if you sneak in) and some nations will have it very expensive due to strict immigration policy.

Very interesting too.

 

Another idea to look for more balance in RvR would be to limit the number of "allied clans" per clan, a reduced number would help smaller groups to fight PB's (as long as port BR are revised), while screening would still remain as OW battle feast where helping national clans are unlimited. 

Choosing an "Ally clan" should become an important move with important consequences, with limited allies clans relations will become much more valuable. Clan alliance should have some cooldown period though.

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...