Small and Large Events

[Prater]

I propose small and large events have the following removed:

 

XP

Gold

Durability loss

 

 

Otherwise, what is the point of OW?  What is the point of sailing around on the OW when you can just do an event and get xp and gold?  I think both events need to stick around, but the effects (gold, xp, and durability loss) need to be removed from what happens to OW characters.

 

Removing Durability loss means we can remove the ring.  There is no longer an reason to run, and if anyone runs like they did in the first events, we can tribunal them like we did in the first events.

 

It also means that you don't have to worry about your 1 Durability SOL being sunk in a Trafalgar battle that doesn't have any impact on Open World except a player losing a very valuable ship.

 

 

Part of the fun in OW is the race.  The race to get into larger ships and the process you have to go through with the small ships.  With Large and Small Events, you can just avoid OW all together, avoid the required hunting, avoid the risks and time involved.  This gives an extreme advantage to those who utilize the events over those who just want to play OW.  The small and large events essentially negate the need for Open World.

 

Large and Small events need to stick around, #1 for the Trafalgars and #2 for quick and easy matches for those who dont have time to be on the OW at the moment.  But they need to be separated from the OW so those who do use them don't have a huge advantage that completely negates the need for OW.

[Captiva]

I like this idea! Prater, are in game missions immune to your idea (I'm thinking they are, but just want to clarify)? I kinda like their implementation and am hoping that exploration missions are added as well. 

[Prater]

Yes, this doesn't include missions, just the Large and Small events that don't take place on OW (and generic if that is ever brought back. Though basically, I'm requesting the generic event replace small events and for a large generic event to replace large events)

[Scorpio Shirica]

I wouldn't recommend this. Small and Large events provide an avenue to balance out fights so folks can have a chance at fair teams. They can be rewarded and not have to worry about getting in unbalanced fights. Not sure if they are balanced properly yet, but I think they provide an area where devs can create more balanced encountered. 

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

My personal opinion is that Events should effectively mirror Sea Trials 1.  Separate XP system, the ability to go all the way up to Santissima, no need to even own the ship in Open World, but absolutely no bearing on Open World itself.  You get Event XP from damage done in events, which grants you access to more ships the more XP you earn, but in Open World, you have all the rules there currently today, independent of Events.  This would allow GL to make SOL's very hard to get, very expensive, and very rare, but still allow people the opportunity to earn them in Events and play with them there, where they won't affect the larger game world.

[Nathaniel]

I'm of two minds on this (and that concerns Prater's as well as Henry's suggestions). On one hand, with the current situation a lot of people will level faster on the lower levels in small battles than on OW. On the other hand, the PvP-nerd speaks in me. Any fight, even a scenario fight, is better than people just PvEing, or even spending a lot of time ganking inferior forces or running from ganks. So as it stands now, i'm pretty relaxed with levelling up in small battles, people will probably get into frigs relatively fast, but then port battles will take over anyway as the main XP rewarding venue and that means OW sailing anyway.

 

IF however actuall PvP (non ganking) XP gets increased enormously (like fivefold - you can evade the exploiting by actually granting the huge bonus only if boths sides dealt massive damage and at least half ot the ships got sunk), then i would support restricting small battle xp, because then and only then actually cruising the open world looking exclusively for PvP fights (with all the additional time, risk and cost commitmend compared to missions/NPC hunting) will be the faster option to level up. Otherwise removing XP from small battles will just result in people PvEing missions. Which is extremely dull.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Nathaniel

[Prater]

I agree with Henry's idea. I just didn't know if the devs wanted to spend the resources on it. 

 

Otherwise Nathaniel, I do think that ganking matches where your player BR is say 2x greater than the enemy player BR, the XP for the greater side should be nerfed.  Though, already, ganking isn't the fastest way of leveling up because the ganking side has to fight among themselves for the limited XP.  So really, the fastest way of leveling up is medium to large sized fair fights.  If people did this instead of ganking, they would level faster.  I still think ganking needs to be in for a RvR perspective (I say this as someone who both was ganked and took part in ganks several times this weekend), but in the beginning that will be the worst possible way to level up.

[LeBoiteux]

@ Mr Prater and Esterre d'Arby 

I have no final opinion about that.

 

But you may be both argued against that OW and events could be seen just as two kinds of gameplay of a same naval battle game, for two kinds of players (those who like sailing, hunting and so on and those who just want immediate fights) and that two players having fought the same amount of battles (one in OW instances, the other in events) may deserve to have the same amount of XP and gold even if a OW player have indeed spent much more time in-game. The only difference between them is the time spent in OW. But the "OW player" likes it to be in OW, doesn't he ?

One could argue that you want to separate players' XP system according only to your gameplay preference or artificial rules. 

 

One could also think of a single XP/gold system but with lower rewards (in terms of gold and XP) when fighting in Events (75% of OW rewards ?).

 

However, whatever the final solution will be, it'll work for me. 

[Prater]

@ Mr Prater and Esterre d'Arby

I have no final opinion about that.

But you may be both argued against that OW and events could be seen just as two kinds of gameplay of a same naval battle game, for two kinds of players (those who like sailing, hunting and so on and those who just want immediate fights) and that two players having fought the same amount of battles (one in OW instances, the other in events) may deserve to have the same amount of XP and gold even if a OW player have indeed spent much more time in-game. The only difference between them is the time spent in OW. But the "OW player" likes it to be in OW, doesn't he ?

One could argue that you want to separate players' XP system according only to your gameplay preference or artificial rules.

One could also think of a single XP/gold system but with lower rewards (in terms of gold and XP) when fighting in Events (75% of OW rewards ?).

However, whatever the final solution will be, it'll work for me.

The problem is those who only use OW will be at a disadvantage. They will be behind on gold and xp, which means their enemies, if they use the events as I have described, can get to frigates and sols faster. This has direct consequence in OW. It basically means that in the beginning at least, you have to use the events to level up to stay in competition. Otherwise your nation might lose ports.

[Jon Allen]

I actually really like the current setup.

 

Sometimes I just want to jump on the computer and fight a small battle, and I know approximately how long that will take. Sometimes that's all the time I have. I feel if I am doing that I should get gold/XP for it, otherwise it's just a practice session...my 50th practice session.

 

Other times I want to get into the OW, sail around, but that's when I have a long period of time to play, like an hours-long opening. That isn't always the case.

 

If the idea is to lure more people into the OW to play, then my suggestion would be the up the amount of goal and XP  you get on the OW, and trim back the amount of gold/XP earned for small battles/large battles. If anyone asks why, it's 1. To encourage people to get on the OW, and 2. Because those rewards sorta factor in the amount of time you are probably spending on the OW, where things tend to take longer.

 

What that will do, is encourage at least some gold/XP grinders (those with immense amounts of play time available) to get on the OW. While the players who really just don't have a choice sometimes (e.g. it's small battle or nothing because they got about an hour to play the game and then they gotta go to work) those folks have an option too.

 

But like I said at the top, I really like the current setup.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Jon Allen

[jodgi]

I agree in general. Even low-end powergrinding options outside the OW is a possible problem.

However, Admin has stated many times that "noone uses the events", so it doesn't seem like it threatens the OW population significantly. Fear of loss takes care of that.

I use the events as my own little powergrinding room, though. I know that most players click out of the small events when they see an actual player queued up, because of fear of loss. So either I get really lucky and can have a PVP match, or I get the normal equally "tiered" bot enemy I can farm in total safety.

I don't think that tribunals is an adequate way to police player behaviour after release. We are better off having automatic systems.

For my own selfish reasons I prefer events without loss. I think the amount of players queuing for event battles without loss will increase sharply. I don't care about not getting xp, I value true PVP a lot more than getting rank or money for a santi. For that reason I actually think non loss events is a greater threat to the OW population than xp grinding events like we have today.

I say that, but I'm not afraid on behalf of the OW whatever events we end up having. Whenever I poke at the loss mechanic vs. PVP, people pile up on me shouting that carefree PVP is terrible and that fear of loss makes the OW the nirvana of online gaming. Surely, this great mass of jodgi gangbangers won't leave the OW to grind in pointless events?

The problem with events today is that noone plays them, why would this change? If events start sucking players out from the OW in the future, do we put on our fun-nazi uniforms and make them less attractive or do we dare discuss how to make the OW experience even more attractive?

I'll be in my corner polishing my martyr's halo...

[Nathaniel]

I agree with Henry's idea. I just didn't know if the devs wanted to spend the resources on it. 

 

Otherwise Nathaniel, I do think that ganking matches where your player BR is say 2x greater than the enemy player BR, the XP for the greater side should be nerfed.  Though, already, ganking isn't the fastest way of leveling up because the ganking side has to fight among themselves for the limited XP.  So really, the fastest way of leveling up is medium to large sized fair fights.  If people did this instead of ganking, they would level faster.  I still think ganking needs to be in for a RvR perspective (I say this as someone who both was ganked and took part in ganks several times this weekend), but in the beginning that will be the worst possible way to level up.

 

I wholly agree with your assessments Prater, but i fear i have to draw different conclusions. Fair PvP fights will be technically the fastest way to level up after wipe if you remove small battles xp, however, as the last two months have shown, and jodgi has written in great detail about it, time commitment, risk aversion and the still pretty good XP in comparision will almost certainly mean that mission grind will be the way to go. Most of the players i know (excluding those who got in after they opend sells) felt obliged to level through PvE. PvP XP need to be increased a lot for people to actually not just make arranged battles or sinking PvE ships, but massively go out risking their ships and risk their fortune. And i can't see how it could damage the game in any way. And it's not about leveling fast either, if you wish, just decrease PvE XP by three times. But untill we try out that kind of system i would rather like for small events XP to remain in. I still prefer that world to a world where mission grind is the norm.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Nathaniel

[admin]

last weekend there were around 1500 battles in the OW

and 70 events

 

also you cant run from events.

[maturin]

last weekend there were around 1500 battles in the OW

How many were PvP?

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

last weekend there were around 1500 battles in the OW

and 70 events

 

also you cant run from events.

 

And I absolutely knew that this would be the response to what I suggested above - and it's a completely correct response.  As is the response that even at the end of Sea Trials 1, with no Open World to speak of, there weren't a lot of people playing the arena-style matches.  

[LeBoiteux]

last weekend there were around 1500 battles in the OW

and 70 events

@ OP : This appears to show that current NA "players" are more willing to get the fun out of what they like rather than just using the events as a way to level up as fast as possible to stay in competition and help their nation to keep ports (as you stated). You may take players for more "professional" (ie ready to make sacrifice purposely, such as pure boring grinding) than they are. Lots will play NA only for (casual) fun and OW may appear funnier to them.

Edited January 11, 2016 by LeBoiteux

[admin]

OW is hunting

Events are a boxing ring

 

To each his own (or its own)

[Prater]

How will it be day 1 of ea though? That is the question. When we are all wiped and back in the frigate and sol arms race, how will those numbers be? If you gain a large advantage of not having to search for pvp (or US players having to travel 1-2 hours before they even get to the pvp zones), how will it be?

[jodgi]

@ OP : This appears to show that current NA "players" are more willing to get the fun out of what they like rather than just using the events as a way to level up as fast as possible...

I wish it was so. I'm convinced the main reason is that the OW offers three choices: Run, win, lose with "run" being the most accessible and used option. Events offer only win and lose.

[jodgi]

How will it be day 1 of ea though? That is the question. When we are all wiped and back in the frigate and sol arms race, how will those numbers be? If you gain a large advantage of not having to search for pvp (or US players having to travel 1-2 hours before they even get to the pvp zones), how will it be?

I understand your point much better now. But I don't worry. Events will spike with the perceived throwaway little ships but as soon as people get into more expensive stuff they will flee to the safety of OW running. Then there's crafting, "winning the war" and proactive loss averse ganking. The event grind exploit could end up as a small blip on the radar scope that might as well be a flock of seagulls.

Even if events run rampant, it could be a good thing for the new guys. Glorious PVP is a fantastic way to be introduced to this game, at least it was for me.

[admin]

How will it be day 1 of ea though? That is the question. When we are all wiped and back in the frigate and sol arms race, how will those numbers be? If you gain a large advantage of not having to search for pvp (or US players having to travel 1-2 hours before they even get to the pvp zones), how will it be?

 

Events were there since Trafalgar moved from Plymouth sea to the lobby.

Ask Puchu.. he is like ALL IN on events, he only wants events. Ask him about his event based levelling.

[Puchu]

You called me master? Here i am.

 

 

The fastest way to level is currently: Making friendly port battles.

 

Currently we have a dev-testing build. That means:

 

Devs want us to test port battles, so they make flags cheap and ppl get massive amounts of exp and gold every port battle.

 

If the Devs wanted us to play events, if they wanted us to test combat mechanics and so on, they would give us a proper lobby system and not this horrible system that we currently have. The code for the sea trials system is probably still there, but they didnt implement it because they want us to play and test ow.

 

The numbers of the fights dont show anything at all, and you all know that. They might show e.g. that ppl dont find the small battles, they show that ppl are afraid of small battles because someone in a santi might jump in, they show that the small battles lobby is horrible and so on and on. In fact the only thing the numbers show is, that there are more small battle fights than ow fights atm. nothing more. They  certainly dont show WHY ppl do this or that.

 

So let's talk about the future:

 

Exp-Race:

Yes, i also think small battles will be a fast way to level, because you dont have the search time. It also will be more likely for you to loose your ship. So that's a risk-reward thing. Farming ai will be safer.

But farming exp in Small Battles will not necessarily be faster, since people often are better at not taking damage than bots are, and you have to sink every ship in those battles, so actually the fights might take even longer than searching ai and quickly finishing it off with overwealming odds.

I wouldn't say that Small-Battles is actually faster than pve-leveling. But it's certainly much more fun for me, to fight real players.

In the end, if you want to win the exp race, get an ally and farm exp off of each other, that will probably your fastest exploit to max rank. (If exp-race is important to you, go do that.)

I personally hate the grind, i only do it so i have access to all i want and to not haveing to worry about it anymore.

 

Open World:

We have absolutely no knowledge about how many ppl will be online when ea hits. Maybe it will be enough that the open world will be so crowded, that you find pvp all the time. Maybe it wont, i dont know that. But if i had a way of completely skipping open world, i would personally do it for various reasons. But the question is: Should the game force me to sail on the ow? Maybe because if im not using the awesome OW, then im not "playing it right"? (Sarcasm intended) Many MMO's out there have arena and ow parts. Many do it in different ways, usually pvp gear is separated from pve gear aswell, but e.g. in Wildstar, you can level up exclusively from arena gameplay. You will suck at the pve content, because you lack the individual skill, not because you lack the levels, if you try it, but as a pure pvp-player, i dont want to do pve anyways, so i dont care if i suck there. 

 

I think the game should offer many different ways to play the game with all of them equally viable. I dont think arenas are currently a faster way to level, if you actually have real opponents. But they are certainly the more fun way of pvp.

 

That is because if you get pvp on the ow, it's almost allways a chase. 1 has the wind, 1 has more guns, 1 wants to fight, 1 just wants to sail to port, 1 has more friends, 1 was about to log out it's allmost allways a chase where one side wants to fight, and the other side doesnt want to fight it. I just come from a fight where me in 1 bellepoule vs 1frigate+1cerb were fighting for 10 minutes, and then the frigate and the cerberus ran away in opposite directions and i let them run because shooting masts for 40 minutes is not my definition of fun.  The time it takes on the ow to actually get a fight is enormous. All the sailing back and forth, the port hopping in and out, all that planning and secrecy and everything to slaugther 1 poor guy that gets left behind by his friends because they dont want to sink, is also very sad gameplay. And then there is this interesting behavior: Someone gets caught by trincomalees chasers with no chance of escaping. But he still sails downwind afk for the rest of the time. It's like saying: "You make my time miserable by attacking and sinking me, so i make your time miserable by wasting 50 minutes of your life! PAH!" It seems like ppl who sail on the ow hate the core part of the game and the goal is to make ppl are miserable as possible. The number of actual proper fights that i had on the ow that ended with someone saying: "gg, good fight, see you for the next fight", postwipe is actually 0. In Small battles the gg wp happens all the time since ppl are more inclined to fight because they are prepared to loose their ship, and they know they cannot escape. But also that's not the whole picture. Ive seen people run away for the full timer of small battles just to not sink. I've actually done it myself once to test it. If you have someone like that in your small battle... well than small battles is for sure not the fastest way to level. (if something like that happens to me in a disposable ship, i would just surrender my ship and moove on.) (An Admin witnessed me chasing a lynx in small battles for 40 minutes and said his behavior was totally fine)

 

I like the small battles, and the whole arena play very much, its instant pvp (if someone joins) no sailing around, no hunting, no sailshooting for hours, no "why do you attack me?" people come in prepared to loose their ship and you have an actual fight and not a boring chase.
I think there are many more ways to farm quicker and safer on the ow than joining Small Battles (e.g. friendly farming, killing big ships as a group, soloing frigates in yachts, using carronades and so on...). The arena awards you with instant fights for risking your ship. To me that's a fair deal. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PS: Whish for the Djin: Can we have a better lobby system please and a no exp no loss fighting/duel room? (I would even trade 1 min timers for that )

[Nash]

instead of  gold and xp, give us an honor point for every ship you sink. and have a leader-board, people always want to be good at something, they will join the battle. Now you ask me, what honor point for? you use it to buy cosmetic stuff for your ship. Mark it at a reasonable price or you can make it a bit expensive so you could buy it with real money, win-win situation.

 

Also, many people dont  want to loss their ship during the small event? fine, make it no ship loss when you sink. And better lobby too, so we can see player name, what type of ship.

[Puchu]

The more i think about it, imo farming big npc's in groups is probably going to level you much faster than fighting your way through the small battles, where you have to deal with ships your size, ships that will be really hard to hit in the early stages, ppl will kite from long range, a lot of ships, a lot of shiploss aswell. Even when i'm queueing up with a team, i will go down a few times due to the sheer amount of players that will be in it if it gets more obvious for ppl how to get in.

 

You can kill a frigate in a yacht solo. that will be much more exp for you than doing a couple of small battles i think. Especially if you can bring down big ships with a swarm of small ships, the kill-exp and the assist-exp (if it stays like this) will be so much more exp/time spent.

 

Other than that, i think to make the Arenas realy fun, is to divide it into 3 parts. 1 small ships up to snow, 1 frigates up to constitution, 1 Sols up to santi.

 

And 1 arranged dueling/testing room where all players in it have to click "ready" to make the fight happen like this which is not autobalanced by bots and doesnt give exp or gold.

[Prater]

Yes, you guys have convinced me this won't fix anything because there is still the crafting race. What needs to change is captured ships should lose one quality level for built ins and lose 1 perm and 1 normal upgrade slot.