19 mln vs 60 thousand - the cost of crew - moderated

[admin]

Moderators please help us clear off topic if it happens

 

The cost of crew

Everyone remembers that the cost to build HMS Victory (and refit it several times) did not exceed 150,000 pounds over the whole career. The size of the fleet in 1800 was around 1000-1200 ships (in various states from ready for action to being built)

Total expenses of the British Navy only in 1800 were 19 mln british pounds.  

• 90% of this cost were salaries and provisions - not ships

Current ships are cheap and easy to get for 2 reasons

• Crew does not get paid
• Crew does not die
• Officers don't take the share of your prize (in reality officers and crew took a lot away leaving captain only with a share - especially if he was a pirate)

We want to fix it. Proposal is actually simple

 

Changes to crew

• Crew is a limited resource in ports (cannot be crafted). 
• Crew has to be hired in ports or impressed from enemies by means of boarding
• Crew is provided in certain number per day (a-la labor hours)
• Crew hire cost includes lifetime salary and insurance
• You lose crew when you lose the ship (all durabilities)
• You lose crew completely even if did not lose durabilities if you explode
• You don't lose crew if you surrender (maybe - not sure)

Losing 25 santisimas will lose your nation 25000 sailors

Whole british navy staff in 1812 was 140,000 sailors

 

Crew is attached to Captain (like officers) not to ships. You don't need to move crew from ship to ship. It transfers with you - the rest stay (wait) in barracks.

 

• Boarding players will be more important - (impress from enemies). 
• Some ports will generate more crew per day and will become valuable targets in port conquest. Crew regeneration increases if you port does not change hands (does not fall to enemy nations).
• Protecting ports will become more important (crew reservers)

 

More populated nations will have less crew per player (total crew pool of 250,000 for 1000 players)

Less populated nation will naturally have more crew per player (total crew pool 100,000 for 100 players)

 

Discuss and propose changes/improvements/alternatives 

[OlavDeng2]

I like the idea of loosing crew, but personally i am of mind that if you loose 10 crew in battle, you loose 10 crew in open world as well having to go back to port to replenish the lost crew, maybe it is a bit too hardcore?

 

Also on the topic of if you surrender you dont loose crew, i would say if you surrender you keep maybe 50% crew, giving an incentive to surrender, but there is still a reason to fight if the fight is close.

[admin]

I like the idea of loosing crew, but personally i am of mind that if you loose 10 crew in battle, you loose 10 crew in open world as well having to go back to port to replenish the lost crew, maybe it is a bit too hardcore?

 

 

 

 

Original idea is - you lose crew if you lose your ship (not if you lose crew in battle). We don't want players to run back to port after every battle.

+ Hire a doctor

[CeltiberoCaesar]

Yes! Finally a national resource that punish the most crowded nations and help the small ones. Now the nations balance should avoid british bulling other nations

[BungeeLemming]

Dont forget to disable crew recruitment from AI ships if you want to keep crew a scarse "item".

 

 

What I would hate to see is a scenario which happened with the buy orders. That players snipe crew in ports and make others unable to recruit.

- do you provide barracks for each individual player or do you intend to make it one barrack per port and each player has to pick from that pool? If so I fear ppl are left behid with too little crew to man their ships.

 

 

Dont forget to add the crew's share if you go with the argument of prizes an 8th for the crew it was, right?

 

 

I hope that - with your proposal - boarding is not going to be the new meta..

 

 

 

 

Yes! Finally a national resource that punish the most crowded nations and help the small ones. Now the nations balance should avoid british bulling other nations

Altho that might sound good on paper for you. It opens up for too many problems and rage

[Anymn]

Original idea is - you lose crew if you lose your ship (not if you lose crew in battle). We don't want players to run back to port after every battle.

+ Hire a doctor

 

What about survivors? Can I pick up swimming sailors once my enemey ship is sunk? Or force captives to work on my vessel after a successful boarding?

[richardphat]

Please don't do that, the game is already economy dependent. Don't make it worse than it is currently with the inflation. 

Further, don't forget alt/spy account are hijacking the economy as it is now. I surely don't want to see some troll hiring all the sailors and leaving me nothing left to hire.

 

Last but not least, how is this important to the game? Why adding something unecessarily? You are basically forcing players to run to port everytime he finish his mission. There's no guarentee that mission stacking is viable. (At least from my understanding that crew stick to captain.... care to elaborate)

 

 

Look, I just want to enjoy the game, I don't want to become a manager of my own crew....

Edited April 26, 2016 by richardphat

[Bloody Hound]

Hmm interesting, So for example if a pirate raids a port will it also get a certain amount of crew from the raid (From freeing Slaves or something) rather than just boarding other ships.

 

 

I really like this idea it makes you feel more attached to your crew and officers, it'll stop suicide attempts and other silly stuff as First Mate Gibbons is honest man who gives great advice, Nay wanna see him dead!

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bloody Hound

[Shrez]

I don't like this crew concept it's like a SLF (Self Loading Freight)

These are Humans Individuals with strengths and weaknesses, they shouldn't be treated as cargo / resources.

Losing a Santisima is painful enough!

Edited April 26, 2016 by Shrez

[admin]

Dont forget to disable crew recruitment from AI ships if you want to keep crew a scarse "item".

 

 

What I would hate to see is a scenario which happened with the buy orders. That players snipe crew in ports and make others unable to recruit.

 

 

 

 

Crew is not goods and will be limited by your rank. The goal of the system is not to lock out players out of content.

The goal is to rebalance cost of the ships to 20% ship / 80% crew and provisions

[Sella]

Is hiring crew gonna have a cost? If it doesn't an upkeep should be applied to maintain them. Not anything crazy though.

Some buildings could also be introduced like a tavern which will provide a bonus in crew regeneration. But make them national projects and costly since the boost provided will be for everyone.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Sella22

[woodenfish]

I think this would seriously impact pvp since most people will be sat in port waiting for their crew to replenish so that they can effectively crew their ships again.

 

[SphinX]

I think this is would be a step in the wrong direction. If you have to wait for crew to become available after losing a ship in combat, less people will be willing to PvP.

 

A simple gold value added to crew, taken from the prize amount for each lost would be much simpler, and just as effective. Add in shares for the crew, deducted from the prize amount as well, and you can limit the rate / usage of first rates by making them even more valuable, rather than limiting people by how fast they can get crew again.

[BungeeLemming]

well if you look at it from the business perspective crew is a good.

You pay for it, you use it. It binds capital.

 

You write that

 

• Crew is a limited resource in ports (cannot be crafted). 
• Crew has to be hired in ports or impressed from enemies by means of boarding
• Crew is provided in certain number per day (a-la labor hours)
• Crew hire cost includes lifetime salary and insurance

 

Which means that somehow crew is limited.

 

An example:

My rank determins the maximum crew I can have. The men on the ship and the men in harbour (barracks) add up to my rank capabilities.

The barracks "produce" crew. Like labour hour.

Maximum "stored crew" is my rank capabilities.

 

When I loose a ship (consti for example: 450men) And I am max rank with 1100 crew max.

I loose 450 men and have 650crew left to hire for my next ship.

 

Is that somehow the way it might work?

[Bloody Hound]

I think this would seriously impact pvp since most people will be sat in port waiting for their crew to replenish so that they can effectively crew their ships again.

 

Original idea is - you lose crew if you lose your ship (not if you lose crew in battle). We don't want players to run back to port after every battle.

+ Hire a doctor

 

 

Hmm that is also true, However it could also help 'ganking' so after a battle if you lose X crew you only replenish 75% of you crew meaning after a certain amount of ganks (if you lost crew) you need to go back to port and replenish your crew.

 

We can't jump straight on the band wagon and assume this will destroy PVP as we have to test it first (How much crew costs etc)

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bloody Hound

[KuroNyra]

That would have been a good idea... If there wasn't the problem of spy and alt account.

So no. At the moment, it is not even possible to think about it, don't think "realistic" = "fun". Game too much hardcore won't be played in the end.

[Bloody Hound]

 

This would also be a great time to make it so Nations need to replenish crew in there National Ports and are unable too in free towns.  While pirates are able to do it in free towns/pirate ports.

 

That would also stop Nationals sailing deep into enemy territory as they can't replenish crew in enemy ports or freetowns. (Will also stop people setting up war ports in free towns)

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bloody Hound

[richardphat]

The balance perspective is there, but is it going to "help" or "harm" the game playerbase at the end of the day?

 

There are player here who work hard and want to enjoy NA with their remaining 1-2 hours . They probably don't want to lose their time just for sailing and purchasing crew, when they can go straight to do a mission, small/large battles.

[Bloody Hound]

The balance perspective is there, but is it going to "help" or "harm" the game playerbase at the end of the day?

 

There are player here who work hard and want to enjoy NA with their remaining 1-2 hours . They probably don't want to lose their time just for sailing and purchasing crew, when they can go straight to do a mission, small/large battles.

 

Well they could make crew unlimited for hire in the Nations Capital, While Regional Capitals produce huge quantities. Meaning Pushing the War Front for Regional Capitals becomes important to the war effort. As hiring crew (for line ships) from small ports becomes difficult.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bloody Hound

[Marten van de Voerde]

Guys, read posts more carefully please. You loose your crew only when you loose your ship. Last dura of your ship, except explosions. This is actually a ballance matter, making sailing for example 2nd rates MORE PROFITABLE FROM EXOCOMICAL STANDPOINT - costing you less crew and having one "safe" dura. You have few spare crew left in your personal pool? Sail something with duras to avoid loss.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Marten van de Voerde

[CeltiberoCaesar]

ok... It isnt has I though, this doesnt fix the nations balance... British will still have more ports and therefore they will have more crew therefore they will still have advantage...

Devs, please, consider to include the crew in the "fix" ship cost. Make it a limited resource per nation so all nations have always the same amount and we dont see 10vs1 nations... That is killing the game, if a nation is OP, the other player will run out of motivation and they will finally leave the game.

From dev to dev, from historical accurate man to historical accurate man, dont let it kill your game, make an effort to balance the nations.

It's a good idea but it needs to play a balance role.

Edited April 26, 2016 by CeltiberoCaesar

[Burca]

This will push ppl to use only crafted ships, what is not that bad but we already do not have the labour hours to keep building them. You won't risk your crew, just like you don't risk your exceptional upgrades on a 1 dura ship. So not sure how many ppl you can hire after you've lost your 1st rate or captured ships but you might end up without crew so what can you do then? Just leave the game for that day because you do not have the crew to sail?

 

 

You don't need to move crew from ship to ship. It transfers with you - the rest stay (wait) in barracks.

 

This might be tricky. What if I teleport to another Outpost. How much is coming with me? And if I sail in a cutter to another port?  will I have enough crew for my ship there or I'll have to hire there aswell? And the rest stays in the previous port so I'll have to go back for them or what?

[Gishank]

I personally feel that the proposed changes are a bit too extreme, and will have a detrimental impact not only upon PvP, but also upon player's enjoyment of the game. Realism isn't a justified reason for the harshness of the proposed changes; people tend to play these games for authenticity, not realism.

 

If you want to change the crew system, then you should start slowly to see what impact it has. I propose the following.

 

1) Have two types of crew, "trained" and "untrained". Untrained crew should offer % penalty, depending on how large a portion of the crew is untrained.

2) Crew in open water is persistent.

3) Crew regenerates in the open water. Regenerated crew are untrained. Regeneration could be approximately 5%/minute in the open water. Regeneration is slowed by amount of days at sea.

4) When in a port, players may pay a fee to fully replenish their crew levels with either trained/untrained crew. Price should be automatically adjusted depending on amount of crew missing and untrained/trained crew to replace; trained crew, should naturally cost more.

[Wyspa]

Guys, read posts more carefully please. You loose your crew only when you loose your ship. Last dura of your ship, except explosions. This is actually a ballance matter, making sailing for example 2nd rates MORE PROFITABLE FROM EXOCOMICAL STANDPOINT - costing you less crew and having one "safe" dura. You have few spare crew left in your personal pool? Sail something with duras to avoid loss.

It is amazing how people don't read posts carefully, isn't it...

More than that If I understand correctly even in case od explosion you crew is filled up in open world from your reserve automatically. it is only in case your reserves are depleted that you need to sail around hiring crew in ports.

People, please just read admin posts because misinformation only derails discussion (most of concerns here right now are born from not understanding first post correctly).

 

For me I'm more concerned how it will be determined if nation is small or big?

 

 

More populated nations will have less crew per player (total crew pool of 250,000 for 1000 players)

Less populated nation will naturally have more crew per player (total crew pool 100,000 for 100 players)

Does that mean it will be based on territory or strictly player numbers, maybe something else?

[Chimera]

This basicly reduces dura by one for lower tier ships.

Don't know if I really like the idea of boarding becoming more important. With the currant mechanic boarding ships are one of the main annoyances in the game. if it is boarding the last surviving stragglers in a battle in fine with it. Me personally: I don't enjoy the gameplay that comes with fleets just kitted out to board other ships. Don't enjoy playing with or against them.

I just hope these mechanics won't lead to a further increase of ganking by making it a vital part of the game and "forcing" people to do it, in order to compete within the game.

Other than that: I don't really know if I am pro or con on the issue of complicating the game further. We sure need to test it.