Are current PB's too selective ?

[Celtiberofrog]

Hey there,

If we imagine a server with more (or many more) players, will it be sustainable to remain with this PB system ?

I saw some proposal from a Faction to agree for "fresh players only" port battle entrance, which is a good intention surely. It certainly shows that PB should be accessible for more peeps.

So I'm wondering about the current PB system being too selective, today it's not a real problem for most Factions since there is a lack of players, but it might become a bigger issue when player number will (or would) increase.

What kind of solution could be applied there ?

- Come back to Flag system with faster hostility and/or shorter cooldown ?

- Allow port attacks to other ports than regional ones ? possibly with lower BR ? and lower victory/defeat effect ?

- Offer other types of hostilities, like raids ? which has already been mentioned.

 

Final NA configuration looks extremely tricky, NA mechanics tend to be as universal as possible but in the other hand chosen systems can become uneffective depending on the number of players... Typically like the nightflip issue.

 

  

[Christendom]

A larger population would have to have more PB slots and PBs would more likely be clan affairs.  

[Christendom]

24 minutes ago, rediii said:

Not possible because then portbattles would have to be at the same time then. Imagine a server with 2000 people online. In every portbattle will be random players with no intention to get inside TS.

The current PB system isnt scaling with the population and that's a bad thing in my oppinion. Flagsystem was working better in this situation i guess

We'll It'd have to be similar to the lord protectors system.  PBs just won't be as big of an affair anymore.  It'll be impossible to coordinate a server of 1000+ in this current system.  

[Serk]

7 hours ago, Celtiberofrog said:

Hey there,

If we imagine a server with more (or many more) players, will it be sustainable to remain with this PB system ?

I saw some proposal from a Faction to agree for "fresh players only" port battle entrance, which is a good intention surely. It certainly shows that PB should be accessible for more peeps.

So I'm wondering about the current PB system being too selective, today it's not a real problem for most Factions since there is a lack of players, but it might become a bigger issue when player number will (or would) increase.

What kind of solution could be applied there ?

- Come back to Flag system with faster hostility and/or shorter cooldown ?

- Allow port attacks to other ports than regional ones ? possibly with lower BR ? and lower victory/defeat effect ?

- Offer other types of hostilities, like raids ? which has already been mentioned.

 

Final NA configuration looks extremely tricky, NA mechanics tend to be as universal as possible but in the other hand chosen systems can become uneffective depending on the number of players... Typically like the nightflip issue.

 

  

Edit: After re-reading my post, I realise it is a long text that simply says '' keep the current hostility system, make it take longer, and scrap the final PB''. There it is, much shorter 

I share your concerns about Port Battles and server population, but I don’t think quickening the hostility generation and multiplying the PB’s is the solution. It would just offer more opportunities for empty PB’s and quick flips of regions or ports, which is not a good thing IMO.

I'm also worried that the current hostility system fails to deliver its promises because it is just another quick PVE grind to unlock a PB, thanks to war supplies and easy PvE missions.

Maybe this is what you have in mind with the raids idea, but I’d rather promote what I had expected the hostility system would bring: Long sustained campaign over a few real life days (to cover all time zone), involving a national or alliance effort to conquer a region.

This is why I would just scrap the ‘’single PB by an elite few deciding the day’’ idea and expand the hostility system as a ‘’area wide campaign’’ made of an unlimited numbers of OW PvP battles in the said area to raise or lower the hostility (or war score) to 100% and conquer the region.

That way, the RvR would really be tied to the OW PvP and every player could play a role in it, instead of the elite 25 players and the screening fleet.  Just imagine a huge screening effort over a few days instead.

This is just a preliminary suggestion for discussion purpose, but here is the general idea :

1-Get rid of war supplies and PVE hostility mission.

2- Nation A buys a flag to open an enemy region to hostility generation over a few real life days (and not a few hours). This information is public, so everyone knows where the PvP hotspot is.

3- Nation A starts raising hostility in said region by sinking either AI fleets from OW (slow generation) or PVP (faster generation). If unopposed, the region is conquered once a set limit is reached, hopefully after more than 24 hours.

4- If Defender plans to defend, it must lower the hostility, but since there are no enemy AI fleets in their own region now, they must patrol the area and destroy Nation A's captains, thus creating more PVP.  ‘’No show’’ is not an option for the defenders, or else they lose the region.

5- Once the hostility reach 100%, the region is conquered. I personally don't see the need of a regular PB at this point. The last battle taking place at 99% war score could be considered as a vital PB anyway.

 

pro's:

 - Inspired by the PvP events, the targeted area becomes a PvP hotspot over a few days to conquer or defend a region. Difference is, people actually need to show up to defend or else the area is lost.

- Less regions flips, but more sustained efforts involving anyone who bothers to show up in the targeted area and fight. Even Fox2run in his lone HMS Surprise could do it without being on TS

- With the correct tweaks, it should not be influenced by the total amount of players online. More players showing up simply mean more ships are sunk, from both sides, so balance is kept.

 

Con's:

- Might advantage the most populous nation too much, but OW battles are still 25 vs 25 players anyway.

- Need to find a way to prevent attacker limiting itself to sinking AI fleets to raise hostility and avoid defender's player to risk losing said hostility points. Since the current regions are smaller than the PvP event circle, an attacking fleet should be easier to spot for the defender and they could react accordingly.

 

So in the end, the conquest of regions becomes a real campaign of multiple PvP battles. It is not limited to 50 players anymore and instead of capping points in specific circles, you raise hostility (war score) by sinking ships, which is what most of us are after

P.S. War supplies could be kept and used instead of flags to launch a campaign on a region. It could simulate the landing of an expeditionary force to take the towns, supported by the fleet actions in OW during the following days.

Feel free to comment.

Cheers,

Serk, (aka La_Pérousse on PvP 1 France)

 

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Serk

[Serk]

14 minutes ago, Louis Garneray said:

La Perousse,

I like your proposition. It does share some elements with my proposition from a month ago... but it's simpler. So I like it.

 

 

Looking at the thread you've linked, I see Wraith proposed something similar here. I just use the current hostility system and regular PvP battles instead of his large 24 hour PB instance warzone.

Edited March 6, 2017 by Serk