POLL: Should global, help and battles chats be removed?

[Urchin]

14 hours ago, admin said:

Removal of global, battle and help chat solves multiple problems including forcing players to actually talk to their nation. Talking to your nation builds stronger nations.

Unless you're Poland, Nation chat is empty and now the game is empty of almost all player interaction. 

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

22 minutes ago, BuckleUpBones said:

If GameLabs don’t want to moderate chat they should have contracted it out, considered it as part of the server costs.

Chat is a required service of MMOs.

Would not even need to have expenses with an 'outbound contract' (with a professional moderation service), as I am sure there are tons of volunteers for moderating. Volunteers don't ask payment.

[Slim McSauce]

9 hours ago, Darth Sidious said:

It's not equivalent.

There are close and ignore buttons in chat UI. Why users do not use this functional and prefere spam in tribunal topic?

Because through the lens of a game developer, removing global chat is a design decision.
A server-wide chatroom does not lend itself to an MMO like a Trade, Region, or help chat does.
Just like limiting repairs to 3 would lead to better fights, so would removing global chat.

 

[admin]

10 hours ago, Urchin said:

Unless you're Poland, Nation chat is empty and now the game is empty of almost all player interaction. 

Poland is a highest potential nation due to SEKIRO or WITCHER who you can talk to in chat.

[admin]

10 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

If GameLabs don’t want to moderate chat they should have contracted it out, considered it as part of the server costs.

Chat is a required service of MMOs.

Lol no thanks. 

Its not required and is detrimental. In fact in the most popular MMO world of warcraft you cant talk to enemies. Remember KEK?

[Karpfanger]

On 8/25/2020 at 9:47 AM, admin said:

Citizens are not always correct. If you polled citizens in the medieval times most would vote for dropping dead bodies in the drinking wells and believed that sun rotated around the earth. Polls are based on the status quo not on what is right or good for the game. 

Removal of global, battle and help chat solves multiple problems including forcing players to actually talk to their nation. Talking to your nation builds stronger nations.

Dear Admin,
if you already think that the mean, long-time player is too stupid to realize what is good for the game and to communicate with other players of other nations besides in the forum ...
Do you deny this ability to the clan leaders and diplomats of the nations / clans?
I have to assume so, since you compare us all to the most uneducated people in the Middle Ages.
My suggestion, which doesn't improve your wrong assumption and attitude, but might help us players a bit, is a new diplomat chat, which only players with diplomat status can read and use.

For the daily small talk between the nations there could be a kind of tavern.

The chat with the enemy in combat should be reintroduced, but it should be easy to switch off. e.g. with a button in the GUI

In conclusion, I would like to say that a player who plays an MMO has to put up with communication with other players. The possibility to turn off the chat or ignore other players should be given.
We could, I think, all live with that.

Sincerely
Berend Karpfanger

[admin]

1 hour ago, Karpfanger said:

Dear Admin,
if you already think that the mean, long-time player is too stupid to realize what is good for the game and to communicate with other players of other nations besides in the forum ...
Do you deny this ability to the clan leaders and diplomats of the nations / clans?

I just dont like players fraternizing with the enemies. Chats with everyone were added during testing so testers could find each other (just like teleports). 

This is the early open world with global chat and teleports

https://i.imgur.com/AfLbtTu.jpg

We wanted to remove global couple of years ago but shown weakness and kept it during initial outrage. We are no longer affected by outrage. 

Fraternizing with the enemy is not welcome in any military culture.

Britain

Quote

 If any letter of message from any enemy or rebel, be conveyed to any officer, mariner, or soldier or other in the fleet, and the said officer, mariner, or soldier, or other as aforesaid, shall not, within twelve hours, having opportunity so to do, acquaint his superior or a commanding officer, or if any superior officer being acquainted therewith, shall not in convenient time reveal the same to the commander in chief of the squadron, every such person so offending, and being convicted thereof by the sentence of the court martial, shall be punished with death, or such other punishment as the nature and degree of the offense shall deserve, and the court martial shall impose.

 

Seducing letters or messages from any enemy or rebel, or endeavor to corrupt any captain, officer, mariner, or other in the fleet, to betray his trust, being convicted of any such offense by the sentence of the court martial, shall be punished with death, or such other punishment, as the nature and degree of the offence shall deserve, and the court martial shall impose.

USA
 

Quote

  Art. 57.  Whosoever shall be convicted of holding correspondence with the enemy, either directly or indirectly, shall suffer death, or such other punishment as shall be ordered by the sentence of a court martial.

 

Chat is removed and never will come back. Private chats also might get removed or cost will be added in doubloons to correspond to enemies in private (with half of cost going to the recipient).

 

[Koltes]

14 minutes ago, Karpfanger said:

My suggestion, ....., is a new diplomat chat, which only players with diplomat status can read and use.

@adminThis is a very good idea by the way

[Karpfanger]

1 hour ago, admin said:

I just dont like players fraternizing with the enemies. Chats with everyone were added during testing so testers could find each other (just like teleports). 

This is the early open world with global chat and teleports

https://i.imgur.com/AfLbtTu.jpg

We wanted to remove global couple of years ago but shown weakness and kept it during initial outrage. We are no longer affected by outrage. 

Fraternizing with the enemy is not welcome in any military culture.

Chat is removed and never will come back. Private chats also might get removed or cost will be added in doubloons to correspond to enemies in private (with half of cost going to the recipient).

 

In the world of nations this is called diplomacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy

One of the goals is to find out the enemy's goals and to turn nations with similar goals into allies.

Given the views expressed, it is no wonder that we still do not have a working diplomacy or alliance system.

The mentioned paragraphs from the British or American naval law (? the source was not mentioned) refer to two parties in state of war. Since we have not implemented an alliance system or diplomacy in the game, they are not applicable here.

 

 

[Urchin]

2 hours ago, admin said:

Poland is a highest potential nation due to SEKIRO or WITCHER who you can talk to in chat.

I was in SEKI clan for a few weeks but left after a Tequila gate crash.  All nations have potential, but not until Russia collapses. 

 

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by Urchin

[Liq]

tbh I'm not missing global chat as much as I thought I would, I still get in touch with the people I need to via other means, and get distracted less by spammers / toxic trolls

Only sad thing is you can't say GG after a fight anymore.

What about some pre-set text commands like War Thunder has it?

[Potemkin]

3 hours ago, admin said:

Poland is a highest potential nation due to SEKIRO or WITCHER who you can talk to in chat.

Yeah, because they can craft, trade and fight in russia on their mains.

[admin]

1 hour ago, Karpfanger said:

 

The mentioned paragraphs from the British or American naval law (? the source was not mentioned) refer to two parties in state of war. Since we have not implemented an alliance system or diplomacy in the game, they are not applicable here.

 

 

All nations are in a state of war because thats the game's rule on the war server. There is global chat on peace server because all nations are in a state of peace. 
Some tmie ago I added alliances because community asked for them (later claiming we dont listen) and then i removed alliances because they turned into pandora box of development like outlaw battles. Alliances are bad for RVR/PVP games because they reduce pvp and rvr. 

So thanks for the link but it does not apply in the game I created.

You should destroy your enemies, burn their cities. Unfortunately you wont hear lamentations of their women in chat because chat is removed.

[Serk]

4 hours ago, admin said:

Fraternizing with the enemy is not welcome in any military culture.

Britain

USA
 

 

@admin

That's some interesting historical rules regarding discussion with the enemy.

Spying was historical, yes, but so was their death by hanging once discovered.

We need a way to deal with known alts in our nation, spying and setting up ambushes on our guys entering or exiting kill mission or heading for capital fleets.

I've being blocked to port in my trader more than once because a known spy alt was waiting outside to report my movement, preventing me from playing the game.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Serk

[Montagnes]

5 minutes ago, admin said:

All nations are in a state of war because thats the game's rule on the war server. There is global chat on peace server because all nations are in a state of peace. 
Some tmie ago I added alliances because community asked for them (later claiming we dont listen) and then i removed alliances because they turned into pandora box of development like outlaw battles. Alliances are bad for RVR/PVP games and reduce pvp and rvr. 

The alliance system introduced created 2 huge blocks because the maximum number of possible allies were up to 3 nations. 

The total number of nations then were 8 (including pirates, not allowed to ally), so the creation of the 2 blocks was something to be expected.

The biggest rvr clans have lost a considerable amount of players since the end of the last big war. For example, BF had over 40 players connected at the same time while in recent streams those numbers have gone down to ~10. Seems that quantity of pvp-rvr targets are not enough to keep them interested.

 

[Karpfanger]

@adminWe'll agree to disagree.

But I still have one question ... Why are there diplomats in the game?
Just to coordinate within a nation? About what? Only on national issues?
Everyone who sees this game for the first time will be excited, but will also see that with 8 nations in the game you can never seriously wage war against all of them at the same time.
With the current server population spread across the 8 nations you need alliances to make a difference.

[Montagnes]

17 minutes ago, Karpfanger said:

@adminWe'll agree to disagree.

But I still have one question ... Why are there diplomats in the game?
Just to coordinate within a nation? About what? Only on national issues?
Everyone who sees this game for the first time will be excited, but will also see that with 8 nations in the game you can never seriously wage war against all of them at the same time.
With the current server population spread across the 8 nations you need alliances to make a difference.

12 nations, not 8.

[Serk]

Error, plz delete. 

Edited August 26, 2020 by Serk

[Karpfanger]

12 minutes ago, Montagnes said:

12 nations, not 8.

you're right ... they are 12 nations

 

[Louis Garneray]

There is no diplomacy in this game... We only do what Russia let us do.

 

[Darth Sidious]

2 hours ago, admin said:

You should destroy your enemies, burn their cities. Unfortunately you wont hear lamentations of their women in chat because chat is removed.

rofl

There are no Conans in game. They became wealthy landowners.

Please, begin plays in your game.

[admin]

3 hours ago, Montagnes said:

BF had over 40 players connected at the same time while in recent streams those numbers have gone down to ~10. Seems that quantity of pvp-rvr targets are not enough to keep them interested.

 

You are missing a point. That drop would be a major shame for a subscription based game. But its not a subscription based game so drop in BF numbers is an opportunity - an opportunity for other nations to **** their borders.

[Montagnes]

57 minutes ago, admin said:

You are missing a point. That drop would be a major shame for a subscription based game. But its not a subscription based game so drop in BF numbers is an opportunity - an opportunity for other nations to **** their borders.

I take it as a symptom of something going not as good as it could.

As Rusia is now so big that even the next nation in size have no chance in hurting them. Only several nations with a proper alliance system in place could be a threat for them (the system that make possible to stop British expansion 3 years ago).

[Conte D. Catellani]

2 hours ago, admin said:

You are missing a point. That drop would be a major shame for a subscription based game. But its not a subscription based game so drop in BF numbers is an opportunity - an opportunity for other nations to **** their borders.

There is not a more faster way to beat russian? Dunno how many months we have to wait till also Reds and Shock leave the game, you and your team, made a so nice job with the combat  sail mechanics, so dont you have a bunny to take out the magician top hat  to fix the balance between strong and weak nation?

[Urchin]

8 hours ago, admin said:

You are missing a point. That drop would be a major shame for a subscription based game. But its not a subscription based game so drop in BF numbers is an opportunity - an opportunity for other nations to **** their borders.

Do you actually play the game? Or talk to clan CO's from all nations other than the seven players you listen to? 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Urchin