Cumulative hotfix notes for patch 35

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Hey, i'm a believer in the 2 min timer for both sides.  I don't believe in reinforcements at all, but i'm working within the rules that we have.  Devs already said that this is the ROE we will go forward with.

then you have to make a stand and speak up for yourself and tell your own meaning about it, else the devs will create alot of mechanics they THINK the majority would like but hate.

[Angus MacDuff]

6 minutes ago, Wyy said:

then you have to make a stand and speak up for yourself and tell your own meaning about it, else the devs will create alot of mechanics they THINK the majority would like but hate.

I argued hard at the time and many agreed, but the decision was made.  I can live with what we have as there are plenty of advantages for my play style in it.  I just always thought it was terribly unrealistic.  Yes, I understand the irony of using the word "realistic" in a computer game....

[Raf Van Boom]

11 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I argued hard at the time and many agreed, but the decision was made.  I can live with what we have as there are plenty of advantages for my play style in it.  I just always thought it was terribly unrealistic.  Yes, I understand the irony of using the word "realistic" in a computer game....

Aren't you usually found in newbie areas?  I seriously hope none of what you spew affects the devs decisions here.

[Angus MacDuff]

17 minutes ago, Raf Van Boom said:

Aren't you usually found in newbie areas?  I seriously hope none of what you spew affects the devs decisions here.

They would probably listen to a reasonable argument over a childish ad hominem attack.

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, admin said:

Game is a sandbox and players define their goals and rewards themselves. We do not plan to give you any reasons to not sail with 5 friends to win!

Attempts to create fair environments were tried multiple times. 
Not sure if players remember, but we several attempts for equality for example rookie zones. Which were deserted and empty (despite amazing proposition - cheap shallow ships and equal fights). 

Those attempts have not delivered anything except alienating those who love to sail with friends. People love sailing with friends and love to win. You are proposing to cut this content from players (stop them sailing with friends) under the pretense of solving ganking. We fell for such feedback before without thinking of the other side. But we learnt as we continue developing our first MMO.  Every feature must take both solo and grouped player into account. Not only one of them.

What do you even mean?

the RoE encourages sailing "with" friends over a covering distance of 20 mins so you can allways backup, while the 2 min timer encourages sailing in a tight squadron (rendering distance) fair for both attacker and victim that can tell how many there are, buth the 2 min timer also encourages solo play

[AeRoTR]

1 hour ago, admin said:

For example if the battle is in the La Habana Harbor -

Where should we move the spawn and how useful it will be? Will we move him inland or across cuba?
What about panama area - how useful that moved person be if he spawns in the pacific. 

This is my idea. Like in the second picture there is line between lands and there is basic boundary according to land shape. Circles does not need to move far away from each other, but from the battle. If it is an cramped area like La Habana, good opportunity for secondary battle in battle for late joiners.

Circles can get close to each other, or move away from each other on the symmetry line, but they always move far away from land, so no more circle on land. This is PVP server, why would join circle be on land, this is sea battle, we come from the sea.

They stop moving after a set time, and battle may close afterwards cause joining would not make sense.

[Jim Beamreach]

18 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

 

The idea is not bad, but i think it woud work when the circle stays in OW on his Position. But the drop in point in the battle will slide away from the Center of the Battle.

Lets say 100 to 200meter from the nearest join point after the battle startet per min. it slide away in the instace.

[Angus MacDuff]

30 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

This is my idea. Like in the second picture there is line between lands and there is basic boundary according to land shape. Circles does not need to move far away from each other, but from the battle. If it is an cramped area like La Habana, good opportunity for secondary battle in battle for late joiners.

Looks good.  I'd hate to be the enemy who ends up joining between two square forts, but that is always the risk when you join an inshore battle.

[AeRoTR]

1 hour ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Looks good.  I'd hate to be the enemy who ends up joining between two square forts, but that is always the risk when you join an inshore battle.

I think much better than what we have, as circles are moving, circle will be next to fort. So it is your decision to join or not

This idea can be simplified or improved.

[Doug Maoz]

4 hours ago, admin said:

Attempts to create fair environments were tried multiple times. 
Not sure if players remember, but we several attempts for equality for example rookie zones. Which were deserted and empty (despite amazing proposition - cheap shallow ships and equal fights). 

I loved these, people couldn't hide behind their fleet ships, so it was just them and you =D

Good times solo pickle hunting...

[Sir Texas Sir]

9 hours ago, Doug Maoz said:

I loved these, people couldn't hide behind their fleet ships, so it was just them and you =D

Good times solo pickle hunting...

and the fleet ships actually counted as BR so they locked out others joining. We use to catch US players all the time in the shallows with fleets.  They never learned that fleets never helped them, just caused them to lean on a crutch that did mean crap.  Even if they got fleets into the battle we just shoot sails and blow pass them so they fall behind.

[Serk]

5 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

and the fleet ships actually counted as BR so they locked out others joining. We use to catch US players all the time in the shallows with fleets.  They never learned that fleets never helped them, just caused them to lean on a crutch that did mean crap.  Even if they got fleets into the battle we just shoot sails and blow pass them so they fall behind.

The question is: what was a veteran like you doing in the rookie zone?

[Sir Texas Sir]

22 minutes ago, Serk said:

The question is: what was a veteran like you doing in the rookie zone?

It was the shallows, I do enjoy a good fight in the shallows and back on GLOBAL you found US all the time in the shallows.   So why not fight them.  Really dude there was very little rookies on this game back when it had a rookie zone.  

[Jim Beamreach]

@admin

Okay, today i was in the Nassau Patrol and i must say the first Time it doesent feels like a Ganking Zone more Balance in the Zone.

3 Battles most even numbers.

[AeRoTR]

Patrol zone ROE is a success so far...

 

[Serk]

26 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Way more important to fix its ROE than trading, rvr, the absurd timesinks, the grind, nation unbalance...

To be fair, reforming the ROE in the patrol zone was long overdue.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Serk said:

To be fair, reforming the ROE in the patrol zone was long overdue.

Tbf if they had pulled their shit together earlier we wouldnt need a pz

[Severus Snape]

On 8/23/2019 at 8:56 AM, admin said:

Game is a sandbox and players define their goals and rewards themselves. 

"Game is a sandbox" and instanced battles don't exactly go hand and hand here.  Quasi sandbox would perhaps be more appropriate.  

A shift towards a more sandbox-esque environment would be to allow battles to be open indefinitely with the load in distance changing dynamically based upon how long the battles been open.  I think this was last seen with your signal perk way way back.  I've always thought it's preposterous that a battle can theoretically close within my view distance and there is nothing you can do to get in.  History books are riddled with anecdotes of captains coming across a battle in progress or even hearing the guns for miles drawing ships to that location to investigate.  

Personally I've always been a fan of slower OW speeds and battles open indefinitely.  A game more fitting of the sandbox designation.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Severus Snape

[CrustyJohnson]

1 hour ago, Staunberg said:

Anybody been in Nassau Pz after the change in RoE? Is it still the Big gankparty with 1-2 vs 10 ore has the change in RoE made a different. I am asking because, Well first of all I have dropped Shroud because of the unballanced, and because with soe many players, from one nation in a very little place, I have been thinking a 2 min join timer will make very little different.

 

9 hours ago, Jim Beamreach said:

@admin

Okay, today i was in the Nassau Patrol and i must say the first Time it doesent feels like a Ganking Zone more Balance in the Zone.

3 Battles most even numbers.

 

[AeRoTR]

2 hours ago, Staunberg said:

Anybody been in Nassau Pz after the change in RoE? Is it still the Big gankparty with 1-2 vs 10 ore has the change in RoE made a different. I am asking because, Well first of all I have dropped Shroud because of the unballanced, and because with soe many players, from one nation in a very little place, I have been thinking a 2 min join timer will make very little different.

It is better, battles mostly turn out to be equal. When it is about equal, battle closes. 

But zerg still is a problem. In initial 2 minutes ganking is possible. I saw Russians attacking a Spanish, 8 to 1. Still initial br limit needs to reduce to 400 from 1000. So only 4 can join against 1. That way some players can join weakside. No body will join to help 1 player against 8-10 enemies. 

 

[Sea Archer]

So why don't we put the solo patrol in the outer circle and in the center is just a big melee, whoever joins will always join the weaker side...

[Hethwill]

7 minutes ago, Sea Archer said:

So why don't we put the solo patrol in the outer circle and in the center is just a big melee, whoever joins will always join the weaker side...

So that guys that want to play group don't get tagged on 1v1.

What could be done though, devs willing, is have daily rotation of 2 zones.

Example: Nassau normal PZ + Tumbado 1v1 PZ

next day rotates.

 

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Now if patrol zone are a success with the ow roe, could we have the same dmg based reward system from ow pvp dmgs ? That would really encourage fighting instead of hiding or running.

[Ferdinand de LaSalle]

Hello guys,

if i read this, i am not wondering, why the game population decrease and decrease. A lot of things go´s wrong.

1. Biggist mistake, why the hell can an attacker in front of an enemy capital (hardly outside the inner Zone and with a very good ship) do what they want. He has no risk to attack an enemy player with fairly the same BR but much underperformed ship. The result is clear. The raider with his fast and strong ship evades easily and looking for the next victim. That can´t be the final solution, it is total unrealistic. If you enter a dangerous zone you have a certain risk. I suggest, that the time to react for all attacker and defender must be 5 minutes.

2. Otherwise, if a player attacks an AI-ship why is it possible for others to intercept for along time. This Player Needs mostly XP-Knowledge and our reales. Ist a source for him to get rare goods. This possibilities are really limited. It is a hard Task to win against against ai-ships with similar size, so why do you raise the difficulties for this case??? And this for the Background you plan aggressive AI. That make really no sense.

2. The actual Battle Rating System would be fine, if we would  have similar fighting conditions. But this is definitley not true. There are big differences in the strength of the ships. 

3. A strong Nation attacks a harbour of a weaker nation. They are attacking with 25 first rates (very good ships). The Defender has no, really no chance to win the PB, even if he can form a defence group with similar size. The attacking force are able to overrun the defence in minutes, the influence of the fortress is low. I saw this more than one times, loosing good ships in one or two broadsides. Pls think about it, to reactivate the BR-limitations for PB we had a year before. This was more fair for the Defender.

Thank you, and sorry for my bad english

[Puchu]

The RoE that was the best was 2min timers without any other restrictions. We argued for even less, even 1 min timer would be fine with me. The reasons are plural.

1: With instance speed you wouldnt reach any battle that is 2mins ow speed away from you anyways. It just feels like its closing within view distance, but it is actually hours of instance sailing away. (The distance system would work fine for me aswell, it's just unnecessary imo due to the programming difficulties. That system would actually just be there to show you how far away from the fight you actually were on the ow.)

2: Groups would be forced to sail together so you would get a "what you see is what you get" system. So if you engage a group, that's the people that you will fight. No more, no less.

3: Solo hunters could choose their targets nicely and e.g. catch the stragglers who sail too far away from the group blob.

Just reposting what me and the likes of me have been posting for years and has been deafened by time.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Puchu