Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
rediii

The most complete Thread of RvR suggestions for NA in the Internet

Recommended Posts

Why not create a new type of battlegroup? One that cannot be tagged or tag and is you're only able to start it in the port where the mission was pulled, has a timer on it. Seems easy enough to do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Why not create a new type of battlegroup? One that cannot be tagged or tag and is you're only able to start it in the port where the mission was pulled, has a timer on it. Seems easy enough to do.

If you’re going to arbitrarily protect them then why bother making them sail at all? Seriously, if there’s so little attention paid to the content and value that is provided to players outside the PB fleets during RVR, just give us a lobby and be done with the trappings of a sandbox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rediii said:

From my experience screening is mostly helping the casual/worse skilled players. So screening is a good thing for most of the playerbase. Screening is bad for a small part of the playerbase.

I didn't think of this, and it brings a good point.

my perspective was to just allow the guys that like to PB to be able to, but you are right that it would just turn into 10-15 player groups smashing nations that aren't as skilled.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I didn't think of this, and it brings a good point.

my perspective was to just allow the guys that like to PB to be able to, but you are right that it would just turn into 10-15 player groups smashing nations that aren't as skilled.

But would the effect not be the same as we have now. A group that can smash thoes less skilled if they want.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bryan Von Gyldenloeve said:

But would the effect not be the same as we have now. A group that can smash thoes less skilled if they want.

Remember when HAVOC wanted to smash danes? Russia turned up and made us either not get into PBs or join early or ... etc etc

Without russia we would have continued. With russia we faced too many odds

(and I think sweden turned up too? Dont remember anymore)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just encourage players to join smaller underdog nations instead of removing screens? There's no motivation to join the small nations, if the game gave players reasons to join those nations, we might get a better balance. Give some unique perks, mechanics, bonuses to small nations so maybe players might find them interesting to join. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screeners just tend to die. The one time that I commanded Cartagena screeners, they didn't all die. Just got them to join in shitty position. Funnily enough people complained I didn't throw the newbies to the wolves.

Screening is one side getting massacred by the other, and the other complaining about the inconvenience.

Edited by Gregory Rainsborough
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understood the love for suicide DLC screening fleets that just die to keep enemy out of the PB. 

Also with BR lowered those who were doing screening could instead do their own PBs. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I never understood the love for suicide DLC screening fleets that just die to keep enemy out of the PB. 

Also with BR lowered those who were doing screening could instead do their own PBs. 

With planned portbattles you will see the same faces most of the time because they can be everywhere

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, rediii said:

Remember when HAVOC wanted to smash danes? Russia turned up and made us either not get into PBs or join early or ... etc etc

Without russia we would have continued. With russia we faced too many odds

(and I think sweden turned up too? Dont remember anymore)

But you was not a Big group that could. So you was not what we have now.

When Sweden was strong they could proberbly have smashed all. Like Russia proberbly could now.

A small group can’t either, not if others chose to stop it, with the system they talk abouth. All they have is to keep attacking, the small group will eventually get drained of ressources. Atleast I think so, but could be wrong. Could lets say Havoc alone fight 4 Pb’s a week for lets say a couple of weeks, and still get ppl on and replace lost ships.

As I recall Sweden took Passaje and Viques. Bf took Fajardo. The Pb where we all found out how to win over you. Just leet a bee in to your room.

Edited by Bryan Von Gyldenloeve

Share this post


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

just give us a lobby and be done with the trappings of a sandbox.

Isn't it... something when one man's irony is another man's wet dream?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bryan Von Gyldenloeve said:

But you was not a Big group that could. So you was not what we have now.

When Sweden was strong they could proberbly have smashed all. Like Russia proberbly could now.

A small group can’t either, not if others chose to stop it, with the system they talk abouth. All they have is to keep attacking, the small group will eventually get drained of ressources. Atleast I think so, but could be wrong. Could lets say Havoc alone fight 4 Pb’s a week for lets say a couple of weeks, and still get ppl on and replace lost ships.

As I recall Sweden took Passaje and Viques. Bf took Fajardo. The Pb where we all found out how to win over you. Just leet a bee in to your room.

It was a enourmus wasp I had to choke it with both hands to kill it :P

I think we were dutch. Sweden helped you at the time. It was basicly 10-15 HAVOC vs you guys. So it was a situation like we get it soon, just without screening and without screening HAVOC just attacks until it wins as with other ports we struggled with. (When it wasnt a struggle for playernumbers)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, rediii said:

It was a enourmus wasp I had to choke it with both hands to kill it :P

I think we were dutch. Sweden helped you at the time. It was basicly 10-15 HAVOC vs you guys. So it was a situation like we get it soon, just without screening and without screening HAVOC just attacks until it wins as with other ports we struggled with. (When it wasnt a struggle for playernumbers)

Yes if you where allowed to keep attacking, a small group could dominante, against a small ore equal sized enemy. But lets say Russia get tired of you attacking then again and again. Even if you have a 4 to 1 kill ratio. Who do you think would run out of ships first?

But personally I like screening is a important part, sad to hear they plan to remove it. I also like ppl have to work like a nation. There is a reason some nations grow and some dosen’t. Sad if this get removed from the game.

Share this post


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

battle rating will be adapted withing 2-3 days

Also
We will start work on the feature that will allow nations to skip the screening and go into attacking port battles straight from the ports (item will be required - which can be gained by pvp/ow pve). 
 

 

*tinfoil hat on*

The best way to defend Maracaibo from russians taking it is to screen the channel..oh suddenly now the russians can skip the screen and hit Maracaibo directly. Why does this change coincidentally come now when the russians have finally pushed right up to Maracaibo. The timing is suspicious.

*tinfoil hat off*

Its not a terrible change. Too many nations can barely field 25 players to fill a pb. So forget about screening an offensive pb fleet. Now you dont need 50 guys to hit a bigger nation. So thats a bonus.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing the screening system from the game may be a big mistake. It's not the Port Battle problem, in my opinion. In most cases, screening was more interesting and saturated than port battles. And there you can and should bring new players.


POBS gaming mechanics was not perfect, to put it mildly. Many important battles could be easily spoiled by the arrival of low-level players on bad ships. And then the confrontation for the port was predetermined in 95% of cases. Most likely it will be in our game as well. Who will determine the composition of players for the port battle? What kind of game mechanism? Or is it the decision of Admiral Battle? There are a lot of questions.


Now players choose who goes to war on the port battle and on what ship. Those players who go to defend the UB fleet go at their own risk. And get their fan from this kind of game.
Strong nations in the game were formed by the choice of each of the players. Nobody prevented any nation from becoming stronger at the beginning of the game. And now we have three strong nations. Is it fair? I think so, it was the decision and the will of each player who chose this or that nation. Why artificially limit the choice of a player?


BR port battles, my opinion, should be based on trading, construction and generally the activity of players in the port. The more wealth in the city, the more protection is needed. The more protective fortifications are built. Protection of interests of less powerful nations (at the moment) = "game crutch". It's like equating Britain's capabilities with those of the Ottoman Empire. 
Perhaps, if the game had a battle with the capture of the fortress of the port, the situation would have been completely different. But it won't happen, maybe never (only the developers can give an answer).


Do I need to remove screening from the game? Very, very controversial decision of the developers, in my opinion. Although here you need to look at the implementation of game mechanics.

(Sorry, Translated with Translator)

(Дубль на русском:

Удаление системы скрининга в игре возможно станет большой ошибкой. Не в нем проблемы Портовых битв, на мой взгляд. В большинстве случаев скрининг был более интереснее и насыщеннее, чем портовая битва. И там можно и нужно приводить новых игроков.
Игровая механика POBS была не идеальной, мягко говоря. Многие важные битвы можно было легко испортить приходом низкоуровневых игроков на плохих кораблях. И тогда противостояние за порт было предрешено в 95% случаев. Скорее всего это будет и в нашей игре. Кто будет определять состав игроков на портовую битву? Каким игровым механизмом? Или это решение "Адмирала" битвы? Вопросов много.
Сейчас игроки выбирают, кто идет воевать на портовой битве и на каком корабле. Те игроки, что идут защищать флот ПБ, идут на свой страх и риск. И получают свой фан от такого вида игры.
Сильные нации в игре сформировались по выбору каждого из игроков. Никто не мешал любой из нации стать более сильной в начале игры. И сейчас у нас три сильные нации. Справедливо? Я считаю да, это было решение и воля каждого игрока, выбравшего ту или иную нацию. Зачем искусственно ограничивать выбор игрока?
BR портовых битв, мое мнение, должен исходить из торговой, строительной и вообще активности игроков в данном порту. Чем больше богатств в городе, тем больше нужна защита. Тем сильнее возводят защитные фортификации. Защита интересов менее сильных наций (на данный момент) = "игровой костыль". Все равно, что приравнять возможности Британии с Османской империй, в те времена. 
Возможно, если в игре были бы бои с захватом крепости порта, то ситуация вообще была бы совершенно другой. Но этого не будет, возможно никогда (ответ только разработчики могут дать).
Нужно ли убирать скрининг из игры? Очень, очень спорное решение разработчиков, на мой взгляд. Хотя тут нужно смотреть на реализацию игровой механики.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, huliotkd said:

SCREENING: the main problem with screening is that as it is now it doesn't give any reward to players in screening battle.  fast solution (1 programmer...cause you are developing too many games at same time) is to bring back the Area of the old Reinforcement Zone (not capital area): inside the old Reinforcement Zone , now on called Screening Area (SA)( they will appear only 15 min before PB start), can be started  screening battles (dedicated istance or same OW battle istance but with rewards) where every participant receive same reward of PB fleet (Vic mark and some of the resources used for killed crafted ship when looted, like doublons mod and MEDALS!!...yeah, you need medal for permit...so if you sink a crafted ship you can find some medals used to craft it).

I really like this idea!!!

It might need some more thinking about how the details should be like (rewards, timeframe, expanse of the area, best possible roe for such an occasion), but it surely would make screening more attractive!

The possible rewards for screening, plus @rediiis idea of a narrower BR-tag-difference could lead to more screening battles that are decent fights instead of kiting feasts.

Edited by Navalus Magnus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fine thing for nice screening battles - sorry @admin, -   would be the possibility of setting temporary friendships between clans from different nations (imo):

Officers of clans could be enabled to set a number of clans of other nations as „friendly“ for a time period linked to certain portbattles once a day.

It would allow players of other nations to participate in screening battles - i don‘t know if portbattles should be open for them too, - and get thier share of rewards for it.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

Why not create a new type of battlegroup? One that cannot be tagged or tag and is you're only able to start it in the port where the mission was pulled, has a timer on it. Seems easy enough to do.

Instead of making them entirely untaggable for the entire journey (Because then, what IS the point of making them sail instead of letting them teleport) you could just make then untaggable within a certain distance of the port battle.   So screening isn't entirely eliminated, but the defenders have to cover a much wider area of sea.   Get the radius right and it adds a layer to the port battle strategy game, instead of subtracting one - the attackers try to plan a course that gets them into the area unobserved while the  defenders try to anticipate and counter.  In war the smaller power CAN defeat the larger one... but has to do so with a healthy measure of guile and cunning, and a healthy dose of good luck.   This solution would give smaller nations a chance, but still require them to be smart and take a risk.

If a large nation is confident - they don't have to go from the hostility port in the 'port battle group' to enjoy this protection, but a smaller nation can take advantage if they want to.  

 

Teleporting into port battles from across the map because you found another idiotic rune is not a good idea.  But if you need a compromise idea - once a port battle is set, allow both sides to enter the port and make an outpost there...  but do NOT allow any ships towed in or out - the port is blockaded.   This way the attackers have 24 hours to make their approach...   but there's still risk in doing so and determined defenders have an opportunity to camp and catch the PB ships coming in.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@adminPlease make NA2 port ownership this way:

Port ownership should be set more indirect. We should have some kind of „domination“ value in ports that decides which nation owns the port. Every port should have a populations of people of all nations. The nation with the highest population owns the port. Population and domination should be changeable by special factors like victorious PB, sinking ships near a port, the nationality of the surrounding ports and maybe other stuff. So one PB may not change the port ownership but raise the domination value which - with continuos action - might lead to a change in ownership. With a system like that we could get rid of the static frontlines because ports that are surrounded by  own ports should have a much higher domination of the own nation.

Edited by Sneakyfinger

Share this post


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

Its not an excuse at all. We are aware of it.
But with one programmer we can only work on one thing at a time, and its not alliances - Our development plans were announced long time ago and they do not include alliances as main priority. We will finish that plan first and then we will consider other options. New player experience, fixes of trading and ship balance, improved trading and crew and officers and improvements in progression systems are considered more important than alliance

Emphasis added.

My heart skipped a little beat of joy reading this. I don’t even like to trade but think that making trade (and crafting) interesting, even necessary for continued clan/nation success is key for long term expanded growth of our game’s population. It would provide a roll for new players or those who don’t wish to fight constantly (or every time they log on), would stimulate OW traffic, and require a “Zerg” to consider their economic health or development as well as their military. All this equals a richer — a better — game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Chieftain said:

Screening is by far generally more FUN than the actual PB! It gives the oppertunity  for novice players and smaller clans to engage in large fleet battles. Yes it's sometimes a mess and crap ships are used,but it mobilises the nation and players have fleet pvp FUN. I don't understand what planet you guys are on ...! Yet another nail in the coffin of Naval Arcade..Sad times

Speaking for the few remaining casual players...I have participated in FAR MORE screening fleets than Port Battles and find them more fun. Sometimes other nations help weaker nations by contributing their own screening fleets to the scenario. That's fun!  Often I do not have time or availability to be present for an entire PB, so can just be in on a portion of screening. That's fun! And now my clan is virtually inactive, so it will be unlikely to be included on the friendly clan list. So without screening fleet action, I will have fewer chances to be in big battle. Less fun, sadly...

The proposed change is a big thumbs down for me, and I don't hardly ever complain. 

If it has to go this way, devs, can you please make the friendly clan list much larger, so us tiny clan folk can still get into the PB's? 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Preechur Blackheart said:

 

If it has to go this way, devs, can you please make the friendly clan list much larger, so us tiny clan folk can still get into the PB's? 

to be fair, currently friendly clan list now has a maximum of 30

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Flinch14 said:

Its not a terrible change. Too many nations can barely field 25 players to fill a pb. So forget about screening an offensive pb fleet. Now you dont need 50 guys to hit a bigger nation. So thats a bonus.

No idea if it will be a good ore bad idea. We will see.

I don’t expect a change for small nation in RvR to be honnest. And for sure not against a Big nation. I seen what it does to a nation to lose a crafting port. No small will dear to attack a Big one in fear of losing there crafting port.

The clan I am in. Bocar, went broke to help the danes to develop a new port. And thats only a 40 point. The danes still strugle to get get the level 4 done. My guess it will take weeks for that alone(We spend more than 200 k dubs and 200 cm). I am so broke, I even can’t make a level 1 shipyard.

The Numbers that either left the nation, stopped ore just play less. Well it for sure didn’t help. For some reason some dutch chose to join. So dob’t Think this will bring any change to small nations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screening fleets is only one part of why small nations can't do PBs; removing screens does not solve the problem. All it does it streamline PBs for large nations, most of the time when I was in a small nation that could barely fill a PB fleet it wasn't the screen that was the concern but the response from the larger nation after we attacked that kept our nation from going on the offensive. What happens when a small nation attacks a large one and doesn't win the PB? what if they lose all their fleet? The larger nation can now attack multiple ports from that small nation at once with ease. 


Removing screens is like treating a symptom of the disease but still ignoring the actual root cause of the problem, nation's power unbalance. If you want to solve the problem you don't treat the symptoms only, you address the main issue. The decision to remove screens seems shortsighted. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this game was in full release?

That means no big updates or changing how the game works?

Loki Runes need to be taken out.

PB's need to go back to the old system, where you have to destroy the towers first before engaging.

All the changes are stripping out the essence of the game..

Just my honest opinion

  • Like 1

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...