Passive Aggressive Pirates.

[Kutai]

How many frigates did you use last time, how close are you to that santi compare to this time?

 

We had 6-7 to take the other Santi. We managed to demast, rake and board it within 40 minutes. So I was expecting us to be able to demast and cripple the Santi if not sink it within the full time limit with two ships. We were able to get closer with our other fleet because we had more Frigates and the Santi was attempting to run rather than engage us in direct combat. 

 

What Tommy seems to have wanted us to do, was allow his fleet to escape while he used his Santi as a barrier and then allow his Santi to leave because we are too small to challenge it? That makes no sense what so ever.

[Xoosch]

Lets again not mix up issues from another topic

 

I asked Tommy to discuss it separately because its important and this issue will come again and again in the future.

We have to design the ruleset and this is one of the rules that was not clear 

 

If you attack and do nothing. 

What is it? Kutuzov Strategy? Or something else.

 

Lets discuss. Without naming names, pirates, usa etc.. 

Exploiting unpolished Game Mechanics?! You want a realistic Age of Sail Wargame. Fine, tell me how a single Cutter can keep a Squadron of much bigger Warships from Sailing to it's Destination? Right it could not do it. So you should work out a Mechanic where it isn't possible in Naval Action either. As a simple Solution comes to my mind, that to Attack a Ship with say 500 BR you need at least 25% of this BR if your Ship has less then 125 BR you just can't attack, case solved.

 

And please make the attack Circle visible for everyone.... it is so annoying to get dragged into fights you didn't even see coming. Or at least work in some kind of popup that asks me if i want to join this battle.

 

annoying to

Edited January 8, 2016 by Xoosch

[Nash]

We had 6-7 to take the other Santi. We managed to demast, rake and board it within 40 minutes. So I was expecting us to be able to demast and cripple the Santi if not sink it within the full time limit with two ships. We were able to get closer with our other fleet because we had more Frigates and the Santi was attempting to run rather than engage us in direct combat. 

 

What Tommy seems to have wanted us to do, was allow his fleet to escape while he used his Santi as a barrier and then allow his Santi to leave because we are too small to challenge it? That makes no sense what so ever.

 

Lets me do the math for you

 

6 frigates to cap a santi in 40 minutes,

 

this time, you want to kill him then you dont need to de-crew the ship. so you have around 30 minutes with 6 ships. So With

2 frigates to kill a santi = 30*3 = 90 minutes = 1.5 hours, The santi has some time to leave with his repair. xD

[Kutai]

Lets me do the math for you

 

6 frigates to cap a santi in 40 minutes,

 

this time, you want to kill him then you dont need to de-crew the ship. so you have around 30 minutes with 6 ships. So With

2 frigates to kill a santi = 30*3 = 90 minutes = 1.5 hours, The santi has some time to leave with his repair. xD

 

Which would mean we could significantly damage him while he was away from the rest of his fleet. Which would impact upon the larger battle happening in the area and basically take their main player and a gold Santi out of the fight. I think that is a legitimate tactic. If we were greifing him so much that he no longer wanted to fight, he had the option to surrender. We were given a time limit to do as MUCH damage as we could to the Santi, do you expect us not to use that?

[Puchu]

Kutai, you are a new player.

 

It's understandable you dont now what's possible and what's pointless.

 

At this point you can stop worrying about the tribunal.

 

Please just accept the answers from people who have way more than 1000h played, that your actions in that fight would never ever made you sink or capture that ship. 

 

You would have had to do a lot of stuff different to actually have a chance of doing any significant damage to the santi. I will not get into detail on this, but be assured, it is very well possible to take down a first rate with 2 superfrigates (e.g. connies). Just not in the way that you did it.

There is a huge risk for Sols to sail around solo, there is a huge risk for Sols not only because they are slow, but also because they only have 1 durability, and if you loose it, it really hurts. 

 

What Tommy wanted you to do is put up a fight where you could actually damage him. 

[SteelSandwich]

Kutai, let me explain you hoe the mechanic roughly works:

When you fire you shots, several thing can happen; it misses or it hits.

Missing: obvious, no damagrle

Hits: either penetrated, non-penetration or bounce.

So:

Bounce: no damage done

Non-prnetration: low damage done

Penetration: full damage potential.

The difference between pen en non pen is roughly comparable to 55 damage to 0,3 damage per shot. And here is what it all boils down to.

You thought that when the timer reset you hit AND penetrated. However thr range you were at gave you only non-pens, which still reset the timer. But, as shown above, they only do a fraction of thr full damage potential.

So, you were doing damage, but in no senario were you capable of demasting him in an hour and a half.

I hpe that explains it a bit?

Edit:

And the changr of penetration is directly linked to the range to target. Thats why everyone is saying it is down to the fact you were sitting at max range.

Im also fairly sure in the battle against the other sol you were much closer, so thr ball still had most of it valocity and there penetrated fully.

Edited January 8, 2016 by SteelSandwich

[Kutai]

Kutai, you are a new player.

 

It's understandable you dont now what's possible and what's pointless.

 

At this point you can stop worrying about the tribunal.

 

Please just accept the answers from people who have way more than 1000h played, that your actions in that fight would never ever made you sink or capture that ship. 

 

You would have had to do a lot of stuff different to actually have a chance of doing any significant damage to the santi. I will not get into detail on this, but be assured, it is very well possible to take down a first rate with 2 superfrigates (e.g. connies). Just not in the way that you did it.

There is a huge risk for Sols to sail around solo, there is a huge risk for Sols not only because they are slow, but also because they only have 1 durability, and if you loose it, it really hurts. 

 

What Tommy wanted you to do is put up a fight where you could actually damage him. 

 

Sorry if I do not take your word for it. 

 

Let me lay this out -

 

1) Tommy deliberately placed himself in that situation by sending his fleet away. 

2) There was a much larger battle happening outside of this one where the denial of the US main player and ship would have a substantial impact

3) We were given a time limit by the game to cause as much damage as possible to the ship that we can. Even if we were unable to sink it, any damage we caused would directly translate into the ongoing battle in the area

4) We had to stay outside of the Santis gun range in order to even hope to have a chance of surviving. 

5) The Santi had the option to surrender if our 'griefing' was too overwhelming for him.

 

I would also like to add, since this seems to be a pointing finger exercise..

 

The reason the Pirate fleet was split up in the first place was we were constantly being pulled into fights with cutters who were using NPC fleets to balance the BR difference. Right outside of the port we just took, half our fleet got caught in a battle just as we bought the flag. The group with the flag then got pulled into a fight as we left ours by some small ships who again used the NPCs around to make up the BR difference before instantly running away. This happened 4-5 times over 1-2 hour period. It resulted in us being massively split and giving the US a chance to form their fleet up and blockade our flag carrier. When our flag carrier attempted to make a break for it, the US fleet engaged. Because me and my friend had been separated we engaged from the opposite side of the conflict and managed to single out Tommy and his two frigate friends. 

 

So, what the US were doing is deliberately pulling our LARGE fleets into battle using small/insignificant ships in order to delay us long enough for their main fleet to get here with NO possibility of all of being able to win the conflict. We engage the main US player in his gold Santi in ships that can actually damage it and HE choses to place himself against us ALONE and suddenly we are the passive aggressive players....

Edited January 8, 2016 by Kutai

[Puchu]

To Admin and for discussion:

 

Distance based timers might solve the issue. (Depending on the set distance of course)

 

EDIT: To win vs a santi you need to get close and stay out of its gun arcs. Staying out of its gun range will make it impossible for you to do any damage to it. You didnt know that before, now you know. If you want to learn it, contact me in game or ask Manuva on SLRN, he can show you, im sure. 

[Kutai]

To Admin and for discussion:

 

Distance based timers might solve the issue. (Depending on the set distance of course)

 

EDIT: To win vs a santi you need to get close and stay out of its gun arcs. Staying out of its gun range will make it impossible for you to do any damage to it. You didnt know that before, now you know. If you want to learn it, contact me in game or ask Manuva on SLRN, he can show you, im sure. 

 

We do not have to sink the Santi to win the fight. Simply doing damage to it and keeping it engaged with us while the larger battle happens outside is a victory. If we can cripple or damage the Santi then that is even better. Again, Tommy CHOSE to put himself in that situation. It is not something that was FORCED upon him. 

 

He chose to sit behind the rest of his fleet

He chose to not pay attention to his surroundings

He chose to send his escort away once engaged in battle

He chose not to surrender

 

At which point did we force ourselves on him in a passive aggressive manner? 

 

THAT is what this Tribunal was about. 

[Konali89]

Kutai as Puchu said, the admin has passed on from the tribunal and takes this oppertunity to come to a ruleset.

What happened or what did not happen is not really that important anymore and most likely no action will be taken

So lets focus onto the thing the admin has asked in this tribunal and come to an ruleset.

[Puchu]

Distance based timers might partly solve the issue.

[Kutai]

Kutai as Puchu said, the admin has passed on from the tribunal and takes this oppertunity to come to a ruleset.

What happened or what did not happen is not really that important anymore and most likely no action will be taken

So lets focus onto the thing the admin has asked in this tribunal and come to an ruleset.

 

I understand that and I believe that we should work together to make a more solid and fair ruleset. However this Tribunal was a finger pointing exercise against myself and my clan mate which I am not happy to simply let slide. If the Tribunal is over then it should be closed and a new thread started in the Suggestions area in order to work around a new solution. 

Edited January 8, 2016 by Kutai

[Konali89]

I understand that and I believe that we should work together to make a more solid and fair ruleset. However this Tribunal was a finger pointing exercise against myself and my clan mate which I am not happy to simply let slide. If the Tribunal is over then it should be closed and a new thread started in the Suggestions area in order to work around a new solution. 

i fully understand that when you feel targeted / blamed you want to defend yourself, that is normal human behaviour.

It is good to see we have moved on.

Whether this conversation moves on here or in another thread, that is up to the admins/moderators.

 

I think on topic, that puchu did indeed made some nice suggestions.

[akd]

This is the second Santi that we have had the pleasure of fighting in our Frigates. The last one we captured and sold onto Gamover. That was also a GOLD Santi with GOLD enhancements. That time we had a few more frigates with us but we managed to accomplish it in a much smaller time frame. So by our reckoning we should have been able to do the same but over a longer time period. At the end of the day there NEEDS to be a down side to having a SOL. That downside is that they are cumbersome and easily harassed by smaller ships. To tackle this you should always be accompanied by smaller ships... AKA Frigates. This should provide you with the adequate protection to fend off attackers like us. Tommy HAD those frigates and then decided to send them away.

 

At the end of the day if a SOL is caught in open water by itself, then it is that players own fault and the attacker should not be penalised. I agree that tagging needs some work but what happened to Tommy is the risk you take when you decide to sail solo in the largest ship in the game. There MUST be consequences for being singled out and found alone in your SOL. Otherwise why would EVERYONE not simple sail SOLs?

 

If developers want to endorse this sort of "strategic play" that leads to hours of boredom, that is cool, but it would be better for the game to think of ways to keep fights from devolving into completely pointless max range kiting fests where one side can't even shoot, because that is total crap gameplay.

 

I would suggest making max range gunnery have more realistic accuracy, i.e. basically hopeless and unlikely to achieve hits consistently enough to hold someone in an instance.)  No frigate in reality was ever able to attack an SoL and fire on it from long range over and over again without taking return fire.  If a ship was using heel to extend their max range, they would not be hitting anything, because they wouldn't be hitting anything at max elevation with no heel regardless.  There is no situation where a frigate with 18s / 24s would be in range of an SoL, but at the same time the frigate would be out of range of the SoL's 32 / 42 pdrs.  Completely artificial situation.

[Kutai]

You do remember that you started all this by accusing Tommy of exploiting / cheating because you were doing no damage with your hits.

Summary: two players are not very good at the game.  So bad, in fact, that Tommy felt they were griefing rather than just being incompetent.  Case closed.

 

If developers want to endorse this sort of "strategic play" that leads to hours of boredom, that is cool, but it would be better for the game to think of ways to keep fights from devolving into completely pointless max range kiting fests (I would making max range gunnery have more realistic accuracy, i.e. basically hopeless and unlikely to achieve hits consistently enough to hold someone in an instance.

No frigate in reality was ever able to attack an SoL and fire on it from long range over and over again without taking return fire.  Completely artificial situation.

 

I see you have not read any of this thread and are simply jumping to the aid of your friend. So I will discount your post and your not very well veiled insults and forget it was ever made. 

 

I see you edited your post rather sharpish. 

 

So lets sum this up shall we, you are complaining that two new pirate players were griefing US players by using game mechanics that are not against the rules and in fact only capitalising upon a situation that the said US players had CHOSEN to put themselves in while at the same time coming onto the forums in MASS to point fingers, accuse and then insult said pirate players.... 

 

Hm....

Edited January 8, 2016 by Kutai

[akd]

I removed the barbs almost immediately since I hadn't read your latest post where you stopped solely blaming Tommy.  My apologies.

[TommyShelby]

I understand that and I believe that we should work together to make a more solid and fair ruleset. However this Tribunal was a finger pointing exercise against myself and my clan mate which I am not happy to simply let slide. If the Tribunal is over then it should be closed and a new thread started in the Suggestions area in order to work around a new solution. 

 

I would like for you to go back and read my latest comment. 

At no point did i make this Tribunal with the intention of pointing fingers. I was asked by Admin to make a new thread in which we could discuss "passive aggressive pirates" as admin called it. 

I made the thread in the Tribunal since we were already in the tribunal. I'm sorry if i offended you by posting it here and giving it the title i did. To me it matters not what the thread is called nor where it is placed, so long as we try to find a solution. I sincerely hope you will go back and read my latest comments..

 

As i said, i hold no grudge against you but i would like to find a solution to the problem which this has highlighted (EG; The use of cutters to pull your guys into battle and the way i was locked into a battle instance in which my enemy did not do any considerable damage what so ever. In my opinion both of these examples should be considered griefing but as stated by others; If game mechanics allow it people will take advantage of it.) 

[Kutai]

I would like for you to go back and read my latest comment. 

At no point did i make this Tribunal with the intention of pointing fingers. I was asked by Admin to make a new thread in which we could discuss "passive aggressive pirates" as admin called it. 

I made the thread in the Tribunal since we were already in the tribunal. I'm sorry if i offended you and i sincerely hope you will go back and read my latest comments..

 

As i said, i hold no grudge against you but i would like to find a solution to the problem which this has highlighted (EG; The use of cutters to pull your guys into battle and the way i was locked into a battle instance in which my enemy did not do any considerable damage what so ever. In my opinion both of these examples should be considered griefing but as stated by others; If game mechanics allow it people will take advantage of it.) 

 

I see,

 

Yet your original post and your post in the previous tribunal very obviously points fingers at myself and my fellow clan member as 'Passive aggressive' pirates. Now that I have come back with several rebuttals to this you are attempting to come across as the nice, friendly person in an attempt to try and make me look like the aggressor. 

 

It is very easy to see through your vein attempt at deflecting the fact that you placed yourself in that situation, you know this and have been put into a position where you can no longer argue that. 

 

Also, I do not think the situation of a cutter being able to pull in an entire fleet and YOU deciding to tell your escort to leave you in battle against us is anywhere near the same. As I have stated on here, YOU chose to put yourself in that situation and expected us to simply leave you alone after you had covered the retreat of your frigates. That is quite obviously not going to happen. 

[Disavowed]

I am reading this and the whole,"effective range" argument is really bothering me, if the goal of the aggressor frigates was to slow down a first rate, by hitting its sails or mast and the frigates were "effectively" doing that(keeping them in battle), then they were in effective range.  If you do not understand how effective range is determined(accuracy + desired effect), then please don't use the words.  Harassing an army with skirmishers has occurred through history for Millennia, why in the world would two ships with long guns catching a larger ship with short guns be exempt from enemy harassment?  Larger ships should not get special treatment for poor decision making, it is that simple.

[Konali89]

its just better if this get locked. This is a neverending story.

 

It does not matter who did what. It matters how we can make sure it does not unbalance things after EA.

[Kutai]

its just better if this get locked. This is a neverending story.

 

It does not matter who did what. It matters how we can make sure it does not unbalance things after EA.

 

Agreed - There is a place for suggestions and the Tribunal is not it. This is an argument that will not be settled in here any time soon. 

Edited January 8, 2016 by Kutai

[TommyShelby]

I can't even... You must not have read my post's.

I expect you to fight or leave me alone. I don't expect anyone to sit outside effective range of their own guns and keep me tagged. 

 

What you did is basically the same as what the Cutter did. 

 

It would have been another story had you actually used a tactic that might have worked. But as it have been explained over and over again you CANNOT demast a Santi with a Connie and a Trinc from the range you tried to, you can't even damage it. It's pointless, as pointless as a cutter keeping a SoL tagged in battle... 

I used the word "Passive aggressive pirates" because Admin used that word. I didn't use it before that. 

I made a separate topic because admin asked me to. 

As i mentioned in the comment i just made it really does not  matter to me what the thread is called nor where it is posted. As long as a solution is found. 

 

I have realised that you are a inexperienced and therefore did not know that what you were doing was pointless. Therefore i have apologized and i have moved on. 

[Puchu]

Basically imo you cannot blame ppl for abusing the games mechanics. If it's in the game, it will be done. (ship cloning, chainboarding, alts and so on... just to mention the more popular stuff...) There is no way to solve the stuff by applying some kind of ruleset. With more ppl joining we will have tribunals every day on these things. And you cant ban people for analysing and using the games mechanics to gain an advantage. Thats basically what "skilled" gameplay is about.

 

That's why these things need to be dealt with by ingame mechanics. 

 

Why does something like this even have to be dealt with?

Because it's annoying, frustrating, time wasting and generally no fun at all and defeats every point of playing a game.

That's why "griefing" (whatever that actually is) is "forbidden".

 

If Tommy was caught in that battle, with you actually fighting him, getting close, maneuvering, threatening his stern, forcing him to pull out all kinds of tricks out of his sleeve like backward sailing, surpriseboarding, single shotting and so on, while you would have been maneuvering like crazy, trying to not overshoot, staying out of the arcs, allways knowing that your next moove could be your last, because you have no room for error vs such a behemoth, allways on your toes, celebrating every rake you get in on him, then the whole battle would have been 1 strategically valid in the bigger picture and 2 fun for all of you. (He would still hate you for taking him out of the important fight , but at least he would get a proper fight instead and not just afksailing.)

 

But in games people will use every part of the games mechanics to gain an advantage, since gaining an advantage seems to be more important to many people, than actually having fun. That's why we need the games mechanics to be rock solid to prevent fun killing behavior.

 

Maybe a distance based tagging system could solve that, if the distance is low enough. (We would need to do proper focused testing on that to figure out a good distance.)

[TommyShelby]

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/8197-tagging-mechanics/ 

 

New thread in the suggestion's forum for continued discussion. 

[Guest raat]

There seems to be quite a hypocritical stance here on this grief tagging issue.  How is the issue that Tommy is raising any different from this thread way back when: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/5763-grief-tagging/ ?