Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Ratty can tag privateer, but privateer cant tag Ratty..


Recommended Posts

It is intentional.

You need a certain amount of BR in order to tag. I believe the last numbers I read were that you can tag 5x greater BR when solo. Groups scale differently. Perhaps someone can confirm those multipliers, I'm not absolutely certain those numbers are correct anymore.

Its done to prevent trolling people. Before that mechanism was implemented people would buy a cheap ship, or even just use a cutter and tag in entire fleets and kite them in battle to waste their time. 

Realistically, you're not going to defeat someone with 5x your BR unless they're very, very, very bad, and you're very good. Or they're AFK.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, William Death said:

It is intentional.

You need a certain amount of BR in order to tag. I believe the last numbers I read were that you can tag 5x greater BR when solo. Groups scale differently. Perhaps someone can confirm those multipliers, I'm not absolutely certain those numbers are correct anymore.

Its done to prevent trolling people. Before that mechanism was implemented people would buy a cheap ship, or even just use a cutter and tag in entire fleets and kite them in battle to waste their time. 

Realistically, you're not going to defeat someone with 5x your BR unless they're very, very, very bad, and you're very good. Or they're AFK.

well... give him a chance to sink.......

and if the rat is afk it should be possible to get him in battle(why not)

it is a 1 vs 1 situation...

here you see that br has his counterpart... what is a restriction on his own. a rativisan is allowed to sink a privateer, but the privateer is not allowed to sink a rat...that's  weird (we live on the pvp server ?

i only see the benefits for the big fleets here  ...weird,.. but for a reason ...guess who's benefits it is.

the tagging br should be balanced in benefit for the small ships (every one ship is a one ship)

my solution: give every 7 and 6 rate  ship + 80 br points  for a start .(except the BC) 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thonys said:

well... give him a chance to sink.......

Its not going to happen.

3 hours ago, Thonys said:

i only see the benefits for the big fleets here

As someone who sails medium sized (3rd-5th rates) for PvP, sometimes alone, I do NOT want my time wasted by some 7th rate. For every one 7th rate skipper who wants to have a real fight (and is competent enough to put up a real fight), there are a dozen more who just want to waste time while a gank fleet assembles.

3 hours ago, Thonys said:

my solution: give every 7 and 6 rate  ship + 80 br points  for a start .(except the BC) 

And do what with port battle BRs? And doesn't everyone whinge that nobody ever takes 6th rates into PBs? Doing what you say, will only make the Surprise/Reno/Herc shallow PB spam even worse.

 

Sail a proper ship if you want to fight other proper ships. Use the small ships for what they were intended for (hunting traders and other small ships). A Snow or Prince or Niagara has enough BR to tag 5th rates and even 4th rates, last I checked. So sail those if you insist on trying to fight bigger ships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was added to prevent Port Battle fleets to be screened by small ships, which have no real intention to fight, only to tag and tag again the sails of big ships, to prevent them to get out of the fight during 90 minutes.

It works as intended. The advantage of removing it would be small compared to the drawbacks.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Aquillas said:

This was added to prevent Port Battle fleets to be screened by small ships, which have no real intention to fight, only to tag and tag again the sails of big ships, to prevent them to get out of the fight during 90 minutes.

It works as intended. The advantage of removing it would be small compared to the drawbacks.

true:  and i agree ...

but what about the one on one situations ... 

its looks unnatural and weird .

i do understand why it is this way.... but it seems not right.

and yes you should take a bigger better ship. but the noobie would not understand.

Edited by Thonys
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Thonys said:

true:  and i agree ...

but what about the one on one situations ... 

its looks unnatural and weird .

i do understand why it is this way.... but it seems not right.

and yes you should take a bigger better ship. but the noobie would not understand.

Let's play a mind game. You are in a ratt trinco or what ever and an requin tags you or you tag one. 

 

What will happen? Exactly requin approaches, catches one boardside and sail away.   In that case if Privateer Vs ratt I am sure the Privateer will run. Or keep distance and shot sails to waste time until there friends are here to retag the ratt. Nah I think it's good that small ships can't tag big ones. On the other hand people cry for realism. Sorry a Privateer would never attack an rättvisan 😂🙏

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ever was attacked by a Saint Pavel, while being in a Lynx. I was scouting for France before a PB (before release). The Pavel never entered in the PB. I played the screening function, because the Pavel tagged me (to remove scouting). But normally, a Lynx should never prevent a 2nd rate to enter a port battle.

It would be the same in open world. Do we really want to see Lynxes as escorts of 2nd rates, to prevent interception of SOL's until the 2nd rate can tag the target it chooses?

When trying to attack an Indianman flleet, do you really want to have your frigate screened by a Trader's Lynx?

 

If something can be changed, this can only be prevention of tagging small ships while being in a way bigger ship, not the inverse. But I don't think it would be better than today. Today's rules of engagement work as needed.

Edited by Aquillas
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Let's play a mind game. You are in a ratt trinco or what ever and an requin tags you or you tag one. 

 

What will happen? Exactly requin approaches, catches one boardside and sail away.   In that case if Privateer Vs ratt I am sure the Privateer will run. Or keep distance and shot sails to waste time until there friends are here to retag the ratt. Nah I think it's good that small ships can't tag big ones. On the other hand people cry for realism. Sorry a Privateer would never attack an rättvisan 😂🙏

yes yes lets play a mind game .. i like that..

 

you mean..... it is just like a..... victory attacked by a snow 

the snow would run and sail away very hard ...?

and yes i do understand the issues :)

 

 

Edited by Thonys
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hethwill said:

Snow does not have enough BR to tag Victory BR.

Has to be a entire flotilla of Snow ships for 1 single Victory ship.

Yes, but in the 1st post here, someone ask for removing this rule...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Aquillas said:

Yes, but in the 1st post here, someone ask for removing this rule...

...right...

Careful what you wish for... it may actually happen. 😣 ... and then the same folk will be asking for the opposite...

Battle Groups work perfectly. BR difference for tag works good. I don't get the issue.

Yeah sure, at marginal BR difference a group of 4 or 5 Snows can tag a lonely rank 1 SOL. Tough luck.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Hethwill said:

...right...

Careful what you wish for... it may actually happen. 😣 ... and then the same folk will be asking for the opposite...

Battle Groups work perfectly. BR difference for tag works good. I don't get the issue.

Yeah sure, at marginal BR difference a group of 4 or 5 Snows can tag a lonely rank 1 SOL. Tough luck.

 

just a small example:  where the choice is taken by the game .. 

group attacks and single attacks

if i attack a single player the whole group seems to be attacked in the circle 

and that is the mechanism whats under fire here

actually development need to go to the EVE system   where groups do not exist.      

4ACA920FCD7274A0A3280310ED0837A0FBB7CA4D

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Thonys said:

actually development need to go to the EVE system   where groups do not exist. 

that game is seamless, NA is not. ( I wish, but not with seamless time dilation as in the game you refer to... )

Battle Groups obey same rules. Need BR to tag.

So make sure your Battle Group has enough BR.

Same rule, no br no tag.

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

that game is seamless, NA is not. ( I wish, but not with seamless time dilation as in the game you refer to... )

Battle Groups obey same rules. Need BR to tag.

So make sure your Battle Group has enough BR.

Same rule, no br no tag.

and here the story continues

4 wasa attack  + - 8 oceans ,and the br fails

8 oceans attack 4 wasa and it is granted

i do know how it works by the way... the br originally was used for and invented to protect fleets >>tagged by BC...

 

- in this scenario the big ocean number nation use this as a cheat: 

but high ranked (single br count) numbers will be a issue for some nations you know (just saying )

if the big nations also  came with 3 or 4 rates that br number would not become a issue (but who am i.... to tell the future.. )

((( in this scenario the big ocean number nation use this as a cheat ))) in favor of the biggest... in favor of the big groups.... in favor of the big bully....in favor of the biggest  ...(i can continue but you see the little problem here , or don t you see it, if you don't see it >>  well good luck in a other game because its a loss of time and effort with no gamy aspect (just do the silly walk) people are no interested anymore )

solution:   as  it still not working correctly as it should work:  (if br it above 1500 br total fleet group >>   there is no limitation to deny a battle.

the ocean needs a other br number not only 800br but also the number 400 br(SOL   thirt rate ) or something in that order

it is up to the admin to look in the matter. and to come up with a thought about it. he can leave it as is . but also give a opinion about it for future implementation aspects  to come .(not finished game aspect) 

this is just not perfect. the perfect game would be>>>> to get rid of limitations and restrictions as long as the game engine has no problem with it ..

also the br is a product of the" old listening to player input "what was a huge but also sneaky silent mistake ...(no blame for anyone the intention was good)

 

quote of the day: "creeners are screened out by a limitation and BR what is used as a cheat"

2e  quote :" use 30 oceans to take a port by staging BR as a "do the funny walk" tactic"

3e quote : ""  do the funny walk and take a port a day" 

4e quote" NA  "NO tactics involved."

5e quote "small nation? big loss on forehand? "

6e quote:  let's stop quoting it makes you sick by the thought of it on the next version" (probably to deep for some)

Edited by Thonys
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Thonys said:

4 wasa attack  + - 8 oceans ,and the br fails

8 oceans attack 4 wasa and it is granted

i do know how it works by the way... the br originally was used for and invented to protect fleets >>tagged by BC...

Totally incorrect.

First 2 scenarios relate to BR and number of ships, 4 wasas do not have enough BR to tag the 8 oceans, like what 1/6th of the BR ? and they are 1:2 odds. They would NEVER ever tag. They need a combination of BR and ships numbers compared to enemy Battle Group ( assuming both groups are in Battle Group... because you know, battle group vs battle group is different from ungrouped versus group ), and at the same time numbers, so you need either more wasas, like 4 or 5 more or higher BR by throwing a couple 1st rates in there.

Last, the system was not introduced for basic cutter. Was actually introduced for Battle Group vs Battle group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated earlier, the reason was to prevent a pair of rattlesnakes (for example) from attacking 6 (again, example) L'Oceans to prevent them from entering a port battle. And before you scoff at it, a pair of small fast ships can keep 6 large ships tagged for quite some time. So to prevent this the BR difference ROE was introduced and players responded to this with forming larger screening fleets in an attempt to prevent PB fleets from reaching their objective. Is it realistic, not really as those small ships could cause the larger ships to arrive at their port battle with sails that resemble swiss cheese. Smaller ships tagging larger vessels is not anything new either, its called harassing a target and was done in real life quite a bit. It causes the larger ship to expend resources and thus lower its overall effectiveness should it reach its assigned task. Will players be willing to be subjected to such tactics, the ones trying to protect something would accept it while the other side would scream like a 3 year old that just had his ice cream taken away. Think back to the days of the flag carrying mission to attack a port, that sole little putz in the middle of that massive wall of wood would be sweating like crazy upon the appearance of any enemy ship. Because back then a single ship could engage him and just deal with the others that were there in order to prevent that flag from getting to its destination in the 45 min it was allotted. Sacrificing a small ship to prevent that flag making it was always deemed acceptable by the defenders, what do you think the attackers though after spending a fairly massive amount of resources to get the flag in the first place? That is why we have the ROE as we have it currently, certain points of reality is discarded so that gameplay can continue. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well i all agree with you guys 

but the "do the silly walk" is just...well ...silly..

another throw in solution is to have the same br for 3/2//1 rate. (or at least test...... @admin >  a closer together br for the 3/2/1 rates)

 

 

Edited by Thonys
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2020 at 4:26 AM, Thonys said:

and here the story continues

4 wasa attack  + - 8 oceans ,and the br fails

8 oceans attack 4 wasa and it is granted

i do know how it works by the way... the br originally was used for and invented to protect fleets >>tagged by BC...

 

- in this scenario the big ocean number nation use this as a cheat: 

but high ranked (single br count) numbers will be a issue for some nations you know (just saying )

if the big nations also  came with 3 or 4 rates that br number would not become a issue (but who am i.... to tell the future.. )

((( in this scenario the big ocean number nation use this as a cheat ))) in favor of the biggest... in favor of the big groups.... in favor of the big bully....in favor of the biggest  ...(i can continue but you see the little problem here , or don t you see it, if you don't see it >>  well good luck in a other game because its a loss of time and effort with no gamy aspect (just do the silly walk) people are no interested anymore )

solution:   as  it still not working correctly as it should work:  (if br it above 1500 br total fleet group >>   there is no limitation to deny a battle.

the ocean needs a other br number not only 800br but also the number 400 br(SOL   thirt rate ) or something in that order

it is up to the admin to look in the matter. and to come up with a thought about it. he can leave it as is . but also give a opinion about it for future implementation aspects  to come .(not finished game aspect) 

this is just not perfect. the perfect game would be>>>> to get rid of limitations and restrictions as long as the game engine has no problem with it ..

also the br is a product of the" old listening to player input "what was a huge but also sneaky silent mistake ...(no blame for anyone the intention was good)

 

quote of the day: "creeners are screened out by a limitation and BR what is used as a cheat"

2e  quote :" use 30 oceans to take a port by staging BR as a "do the funny walk" tactic"

3e quote : ""  do the funny walk and take a port a day" 

4e quote" NA  "NO tactics involved."

5e quote "small nation? big loss on forehand? "

6e quote:  let's stop quoting it makes you sick by the thought of it on the next version" (probably to deep for some)

Just no. The system we have now works well. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2020 at 12:23 PM, Thonys said:

another throw in solution is : to have the same br for 3/2//1 rate. (or at least test...... @admin >  a closer together br for the 3/2/1 rates.

 

If the BR of 3rd rates is the same than 1st rates, why using them in PB's? (Why not same BR for Privateers, to allow them entering in deep water PB's)

As @Hethwill ever told you, please be careful with what you wish for. It may actually occur! :(

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

If the BR of 3rd rates is the same than 1st rates, why using them in PB's? (Why not same BR for Privateers, to allow them entering in deep water PB's)

As @Hethwill ever told you, please be careful with what you wish for. It may actually occur! :(

i do not talk about small ships in general  as if i want privateers in deep water battle... (don't fool everybody here with assumptions)

the limitation for using a 3 rate in a huge battle, is the limitation of the captains crew and numbers of a nation...and the overwhelming ocean fleets by the biggies ....on the other side.

 

fleet composition of the biggies look like 25 oceans doing battle .

what a horrible game if you see this happen in battle.....(my own opinion:to have only the big boys in battle and the small captains left out of it )[ts oke some times ,but not always..)

gregory was right on this one ...the br rating for ports needs to be balanced on fleet composition like as a

example 3450 br for a port x and for a other port  x 4820 br and for other big ports 14630(just give a number)  just to get a nice fleet composition .  br should not be increased , it should be lowered ...at least for the big ports and the  big ships.

something along the line went very wrong here.....at office....and was abandoned by forum talkers...just to reduce more harm than good..( .you know!!!!  developers are not saints sometimes and make huge mistakes also ...that is why they are humans...too. )

but that does not mean,that small iterations cant be proposed . one way or the other  you need to get to your goal .

 

this also means when you see a big pb fleet doing the silly walk to a particular port they cant be attacked by a privateer fleet to protect certain arias as well and just use the mechanic as a cheat.

 

 

Edited by Thonys
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Thonys said:

the limitation for using a 3 rate in a huge battle, is the limitation of the captains crew and numbers of a nation...and the overwhelming ocean fleets by the biggies ....on the other side.

Correct. But that's not a mechanical limitation but rather a result of players actions.

Means any player is free to join any clan, any nation, build any ship and sail with whomever player wants and participate in whatever activities player wants or has time for.

And i urge you to review your thoughts on that design. By proposing more liberty to a small group ( aka. nation aka. clan ) you will be imposing limitations to a big group ( aka. nation aka. clan ).

NA is not a classic match-up wargame, albeit it may simulate classic match-up wargame tactical combat, but at the "stategic" level is rather a power-creep competitive combat mmo. What does this means ? Pure min-max setups and outcomes. Bring the max fleet to the tactical level ( combat instance).

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...