Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Passive Aggressive Pirates.


Recommended Posts

The entire idea of "tagging" is necessitated by the fact that we have instances that players don't want to be held into if there is no valid point.

 

1. If doing damage is the only "valid point" for keeping an instance open - then it is just a damage dealt over time calculation - and all other "uses" of keeping an opponent in an instance will have to adapt to that?

 

2. Perhaps instead of the current countdown clicker - the server is capable of calculating the amount of damage done over the previous "xxx" seconds (i would think 180) and if you do none or very little the server releases your opponent and can do so at any instant that the damage falls below the threshold.

 

3. The amount of damage needed to retain the opponent might be based on your opponents ship size since Santi's don't really even notice what small damage can be done by cutters etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that this is not Potbs but in that game griefing was allowed during port flips if you were the defenders. Attackers could not grief.

 

These pirates know exactly what they were doing. Did they cross the line though? I can't tell. No screen shots or video to see how they conducted business. We all know they weren't looking for a good pvp match. Intention is everything here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. I thought I just figured out what griefing was. "Deliberately trying to annoy other players". In the situation described it sounds as if a couple smaller ships were delaying a larger ship to create an advantage for the other friendliest engaged elsewhere. Seems it is just a limitation (of instances) when we cannot all be fighting everyone in a giant open world. I don't see how this was done to simply annoy.

I certainly wouldn't have know this was poor form. Glad I've never done it. I would have had no idea I was expected to free the SOL and allow it to engage my fellow teammates or worse that I was expected to close with the SOL and be destroyed.

If the game mechanics continue to allow this and it is not permitted I hope the Admins post up a warning rule conspicuously.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally someone who seems to understand.

Could we realistically sink or seriously cripple the Santi with our two frigates? Apparently not. (Although I still contest that fact but feel free to blame that on my noobness)

Could we harras the ship and cause significant damage to its sails and masts.. Yes. Would this directly affect the larger battles happening outside of this one.. Yes.

So by definition with was not a pointless battle engaged upon simply to annoy the player and cause him the untold amount of stress and anguish that we seem to have done.

In addition to this the player had the opportunity to engage us with his frigates but instead used his Santi as a physical block to prevent us from hitting them while they escaped. This is what left him alone against our two Frigates.

What he seems to think we should have done is either rush into the Santis range and engage him on his own terms or otherwise leave him to do as he wishes with immunity. Sorry but it does not work that way.

People seem to completely miss the fact that this player placed himself in this situation through poor judgement and what would appear to be delusions of grandeur where he expected we should allow him to go on his way or fall to his guns simply because he is in a larger ship.

In addition to this the player was not FORCED to stay. We did not burst into his house and tie him to his chair and prevent him from doing anything. He always had the opportunity to surrender.

Edited by Kutai
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the context of a PB I would not consider this to be griefing - they are trying to split the attacking force which is fair enough in my book (but they shouldn't be in denial about their chances of actually endangering a Santi, especially in the hands of a veteran captain)

 

What Johny Reb said makes a lot of sense: with a port battle in play I propose we consider this legitimate.

So if your nation attacks a port and you are sailing within reinforcement range of that PB you are valid target for any shenanigans.

If there is no PB near - this should still be considered mild griefing.

 

There are two elements of tagging:

 

A cutter can not drag a first rate directly into battle - the BR diff system works in that case.

The BR difference even works for tags Santi on Santi (we were able to test this yesterday - balticsailor was unable to drag me into battle when i was planting the flag) provided you are in close vicinity of more friendly players.

The distance for the BR system to deny combat are very small, however, but I think this is ok because it forces the attacker to sail as a cohesive force and if they make a mistake the defender still has options to drag the flag into combat (which happened a day earlier to us - well played defense)

The only untested question is what happens if two forces bring full 25v25 complements - will this guarantee the defender can prevent a port battle from occuring and in turn make the port de facto uncapturable?

 

The second unresolved issue is getting dragged into combat by AI tags, or defender vs AI tags pulling the invasion fleet in with him. This needs game mechanic changes imho because there is very little the attacker can possibly do.

My proposal here is that if you are in close vicinity to a PB flag you become immune to any tags as long as the BR diff and range requirements are met.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A cutter can not drag a first rate directly into battle - the BR diff system works in that case.

The BR difference even works for tags Santi on Santi (we were able to test this yesterday - balticsailor was unable to drag me into battle when i was planting the flag) provided you are in close vicinity of more friendly players.

 

 

it can, actually, if a large friendly ai fleet is nearby. that is exactly what happened yesterday.

 

i'd like to add some background.

 

phase one: gamover buys the flag with basic cutter to save some time. he gets intercepted by american cutter, escapes, gets intercepted again with cutter and a connie (i believe that was seawolf) and escapes again. cutter was trying to keep our ships in battle, connie escaped. that was not about fight... but good job, i guess. totally legit and well done, imo.

 

phase two: our fleet on the way to place the flag. connie and cutter are constantly tagging gamover's santi, br diff prevents fight. american ai fleet (some 3rd rates) blocking the entrance of harbour, but br diff is working until 2 or 3 american frigates arrived.

 

that was not about fight, again - frigates tried to escape, just didnt make it.

 

couple of our ships stays in battle. those who left found themselves surrounded by american main fleet - boomsplat, shelby, ellis and co. since than our fleet splits, about half of us manage to regroup with gamover, some still fighting with passive-agressive frigates, some get separated. 

 

phase three: couple of minutes till flag expires. some of us tagging american 1st rates to buy time and place the flag. i think that is the time when incident with shelby and kuthara happened (i tagged boomsplat atm). things didnt went well, and the fight turns in a mess with 2 or 3 separate battles. 

 

i still have a feeling americans would win the battle with some help from towers, thou. well played tactically in the same time. i had a lot of fun.

 

tldr: both sides used current tagging mechanics to split up enemy and buy time.

Edited by dumpert
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can't undestand this problem.. there was big US fleet, there is BR protection in game, if you let split you - it's your mistake. 
And btw, few mounth ago some US player (and he was yesterday near Neuvitas) attacked my 3rd Rate on surprise (alone!!!), when I got medium cannons. And guys in chat, (Tommy, it was you at first) said that it's fait and wasn't "griefing", but when same happend with you, we have topic on tribunal. It's funny like always.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me this would've been better for all involved and definitely more fun, if you would have all just went to the "big" fight and joined...

Big fight=FUN!!!!

No tribunal.

No hurt feelings.

No long drawn out pointless argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok if i understand correctly what was happening As I see it here are a few Facts please correct me if I'm wrong on them,

 

1. Port battle related actions were occurring near point "A"

 

2. 2 5th Rates attack a solo or under escorted SoL with the intention of disrupting in someway or another his contribution to the port battle.

 

3. Upon entering the battle the SoL's escorts if any left the battle soon after / when ever they could/ did ( this is something I consider a mute point relating to the tribunal )

 

4. By what ever means the 5th rates were able to keep the SoL locked in battle for the full timer there by effecting his influence to the port battle/larger picture.

 

 

And here is what I think 

 

That this sort of thing is aloud to happen only under the circumstances that there is a "Bigger Picture/ Bigger battle happening around"

 

the 2 players in 5th rates were able to keep a first rate from being able to participate in a bigger battle. This is ok

 

If and Only If there was not this larger battle going on I would say there is a issue in how the SoL Was kept in battle 

 

I.e, if the 2 5th rates were attacking a lone SoL and doing nothing more then keeping him in battle for a 90 min just because they can with no bigger picture type stuff going on This is not OK

 

 

 

 

Now that that out of the way my opinion what happened

 

The pirates did the Dick thing(no offence to them ) by keeping that SoL in battle for so long, But it was the right thing because it kept him out of the other fights

 

The SoL was so un escorted that 2 5th rates could pull him into a battle and Im not fully clear or not his escorts left, this was a miss play. Like other games Ive played in the past there are 2 important things that need to be going on getting your gun in the fight , and keeping it there. about 72 guns were able to keep over 100 guns out of the bigger fight.

 

Keeping Big fleets as Big fleets is important Keeping people all grouped so that if you get pulled into a fight everyone gets pulled in This is a misplay on the over all fleet picture where we have unescorted SoL's

 

 

 

In no way do I want to pick sides on this because tomorrow or the next day the shoe maybe on the other foot.

Edited by Deepgift
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will never define if it was splitting bigger fleet of just griefing because you will never know who else will join the battle. (Everyone has 5 min for that).

I was in these battles from the first PB. USA was trying to get our flag timer to go off. That was the reason of tagging us (mainly tagging flag carrier) . Not because their SOL's was coming. They had time for that after we declared capturing first port.

They had to fight because our lighter frigates managed to keep them in battle. US ships was trying to escape in the beginning.

So i would say rules for griefing, splitting or something like that is pointless.

Leave it all up to players honor. Its all tactics and if we keep it this way will be less work for court.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps a system to stop this kind of thing should be thought about.

 

If your ships BR is too low then you can not start a battle with said ship, this would stop cutters from dragging other ships in to fights and also stop lone bigger ships stopping a SOL. If your in a party then your BR are added together with diminishing returns.

Edited by Pantora
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps a system to stop this kind of thing should be thought about.

 

If your ships BR is too low then you can not start a battle with said ship, this would stop cutters from dragging other ships in to fights and also stop lone bigger ships stopping a SOL.

 

It's already like that as far as I know.

The other day a lone american cutter tried to tag my Navy Brig and it said Combat cancelled, BR difference too high.

If a fleet sticks together, they can avoid getting split.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways I personally think Tommy shelby is just being a little baby about this, perfectly valid tactic regardless of the situation, Tommy's fault for being there in the first place. If you really don't like being stuck in combat and want to get out, press the surrender button or sail a faster ship.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a tough issue for a general rule, I like the idea to trying to use Fabian Strategy and delaying opponents, breaking up formations, etc. The potential for abuse and griefing can come with it. 

 

I perhaps a radius around a port battle where smaller ships could engage one with a larger BR than they could normally engage. and couple this with some Improved tagging so that if in the course of 2 minutes a minimum damage threshold is not met, then the player may escape?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys 

This topic either have to be locked or moved out of the tribunal

All nations at some time in the past have attacked the enemy to delay port battle flag installation and there is no way to prove that they did it to grief. 

They did it to stop the port battle from happening achieving their goal sometimes.

The best way to avoid such events is to employ a screening fleet yourself sending it forward to clear the area. This will bringing tactical depth to assault flag gameplay.

 

But we will continue thinking of ways to improve mechanics. Bring your ideas on how to improve it into ROE (rule of engagement) topic or port battle feedback.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...