Safe Zones OP?

[RedNeckMilkMan]

With the addition of Capital "Safe Zones" if a player is tagged inside of the zone he can call for reinforcements. Not too shabby of an Idea right? 

The problem lies with the reinforcements being composed of 2 first rates for every enemy player. Kinda overkill. 

 In the current iteration there is no point in even tagging a player inside their safe zone. Why allow tagging at all? 

I would personally like to see the reinforcements reduced to maybe 2-3 ships ranging from 5th rates to 3rd rates. Obviously these numbers could be adjusted to fit how many enemies you find yourself facing but as it stands now OW PVP has taken a serious hit since max level players tend to never leave the safe zone unless they have to. I understand that Capital camping was a serious problem in previous patches but I would like to see a happy medium reached. Make gank fleets less effective by allowing reinforcements. But don't make the reinforcements unbeatable. 

 

TL;DR Reinforcements OP either remove tagging in safe zone or give the tagger(s) a fighting chance. 

 

EDIT: I'm happy to see so many people care about the game still. Hopefully the devs still have a vision for the game.

Edited October 29, 2017 by RedNeckMilkMan

[Lord Gud]

Coming from a player who get's alts/pirates to tag new players so they get no reinforcements then 4 of you jump in to kill the player. I don't like reinforcements either but this is just too funny 

[Kawazz]

Amazing that the guy that created an entire ALT clan for other nations/victory marks thinks this is unfair... I've been wondering where your ALTS went...

[Guest]

Could we have one thread that doesn't devolve into PvP global ranting?

Anyways.

Quote

Reinforcements in coastal ports will come back to game (as fleets no longer give xp)

• to those who don't remember this is how they worked
  • If BR of enemy was higher than yours if you were attacked near your national port, the port would send you the support equal to the difference between your BR and enemy BR.
  • For example - if you were in a surprise and were attacked by two surprises port would send you 1 surprise to support you in battle (which you could command)

How it was first advertised.

Pretty far cry from the "We're gonna hotdrop 2x 1st rates on any player, regardless of BR differences or ship size, cause hello kitty you for trying" we ended up with.

[Barbancourt]

1 hour ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

 

The problem lies with the reinforcements being composed of 2 first rates for every enemy player. Kinda overkill. 

 In the current iteration there is no point in even tagging a player inside their safe zone. Why allow tagging at all? 

 

The point is to discourage it completely.  Go do your tagging where players actually want PvP.  If they're in the reinforcement zone they aren't interested. 

[Guest]

Just now, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

The point is to discourage it completely.  Go do your tagging where players actually want PvP.  If they're in the reinforcement zone they aren't interested. 

Which begs the question.

1 hour ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

 In the current iteration there is no point in even tagging a player inside their safe zone. Why allow tagging at all?

 

[RedNeckMilkMan]

1 minute ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

The point is to discourage it completely.  Go do your tagging where players actually want PvP.  If they're in the reinforcement zone they aren't interested. 

The thing about this game is that it shouldn't cater to what you want. I don't want to ever sink but it happens in game. I appreciate that capital camping is a problem but its the only way to find PVP since the player count it so low. Now that the safe zone is a thing PVP has hit an all time low.

[Rigs]

1 hour ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

The thing about this game is that it shouldn't cater to what you want. I don't want to ever sink but it happens in game. I appreciate that capital camping is a problem but its the only way to find PVP since the player count it so low. Now that the safe zone is a thing PVP has hit an all time low.

I think you are confused, you probably meant this game should only cater to what @RedNeckMilkMan wants.

Are the reinforcements too tough for your alts and gang squad?

 Lets see how long it takes you to bring all the other trolls in here and brag about your feats of glory in safe zone camping.

You're right the alts abuse and safe zone camping hast hit an all time low for you and your buddies.

It works miracle to kill the game sale. 

Edited October 28, 2017 by Rigs

[RedNeckMilkMan]

18 minutes ago, Rigs said:

Lets see how long it takes you to bring all the other trolls in here and brag about your feats of glory in safe zone camping. 

No, this thread was intended for constructive criticism of a game I enjoy. Not to settle PVP global beefs.

[Slim McSauce]

alt gank squads are the result of safe zones. If the point was to make capitals completely safe why not just remove PVP from these areas?

[Rigs]

32 minutes ago, Slim Jimmerson said:

alt gank squads are the result of safe zones. If the point was to make capitals completely safe why not just remove PVP from these areas?

All the stupid things people do are the result of their lack of judgment. Naturally, they blame everything and everyone else.

[Teutonic]

The safe zones are there for the very reason that you don't like them.

I feel reinforcement zones should change, but after their addition to the game....well the game is better than it was previously. We can go back to capital camping which had so many people stop playing the game....

No, again, there are places on Global that have been created by the players to encourage pvp there. There is a reason that the zone discourages players from tagging people there, it's to make it so you find pvp elsewhere.

[randommexi]

I agree with most people in here.  but they should just remove the ability to tag people within those zones entirely.  if not, i'm fine with them keeping the reinforcements the way they are.

[RedNeckMilkMan]

1 hour ago, Teutonic said:

The safe zones are there for the very reason that you don't like them.

I feel reinforcement zones should change, but after their addition to the game....well the game is better than it was previously. We can go back to capital camping which had so many people stop playing the game....

No, again, there are places on Global that have been created by the players to encourage pvp there. There is a reason that the zone discourages players from tagging people there, it's to make it so you find pvp elsewhere.

Like I said I think the idea is great. The execution is dog shit. Why not just remove tagging inside the safe zone if their intention was to kill all pvp near the capital?

As far as cayo, it's pretty dead there 90% of the time. Plus it's hard for Frenchies to get supplies to that port.

[Christendom]

yawn.......

Another safe zone pirate alt cheat upset that he can't club all the seals he wants....but yet his actions in game prove exactly why the safe zones are needed.

Nothing to see here...move along.

 

[RedNeckMilkMan]

4 minutes ago, Christendom said:

Another safe zone pirate alt cheat upset that he can't club all the seals he wants

 

 

Do you speak solely in buzz words?

Also at no point did I advocate the removal of safe zones. This thread is for suggestions not salty global players to complain.

Edited October 29, 2017 by RedNeckMilkMan

[Lord Gud]

9 minutes ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

Do you speak solely in buzz words?

Also at no point did I advocate the removal of safe zones. This thread is for suggestions not salty global players to complain.

You do have a chance of killing a pirate in a safe zone if you use a ship with lower BR.

[RedNeckMilkMan]

Just now, Lord Gud said:

You do have a chance of killing a pirate in a safe zone if you use a ship with lower BR.

How low exactly because a Pfrig still gets 2 first rates. I haven't seen anything other than 2 first rates.

[Lord Gud]

Just now, RedNeckMilkMan said:

How low exactly because a Pfrig still gets 2 first rates. I haven't seen anything other than 2 first rates.

Depends on the BR of the other ship unless all ships get reinforcements no matter what.

[Guest]

Just keep in mind the "you do you and Ill do me" gameplay separation that this advocates. If PvErs and crafters are to be able to operate with zero PvP, then PvPers have the same right to operate with zero PvE and crafting.

So in that case, make all ships into cheap note redeemables. "I never signed up for crafting".

Give PvP 10x more rewards to make it on par with PvE for money and marks per hour. "I never signed up for PvE".

Make all ports accessible and available for outposts. "I never signed up for RvR".

Here I thought that a living breathing world where all aspects were intermingled would be better, but if we get to opt out completely then where's the free pass for PvPers?

It's bullshit.

[victor]

 

But ... also in safe zones, skilled PVPers are able to tag fleets and IAs to drag players into PVP battles without reinforcements.

And ... at least on PVP EU, around some free towns you are able find all the OS PVP you want.

And ... profitable trade routes involve sailing outside safe zones and PVPers know those routes

So my impression is that safe zones really hurted only the average ganker of helpless carebears.

Edited October 29, 2017 by victor

[Landsman]

12 hours ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

If they're in the reinforcement zone they a̶r̶e̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶i̶n̶t̶e̶r̶e̶s̶t̶e̶d̶ are carebears.

Sorry, couldn't help it.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I kind of like having a "tutorial zone" but it is a double edge razer sharp thing.

If you think about it ( and there's always a bigger shark out there ); Did, any player, materialized in the open sea being a very good captain dealing death and destruction ? Or did that PvPer had to practice, and practice and practice some more ?

I dislike how the "career" and planning made by the captains that are now considered the "sharks" is suddenly put aside as they were simply a part of nature, that they came to be without any kind of ...effort. For example, a trade raider knows trade routes because he spends a lot of time, open to being attacked, sailing the enemy areas and taking notes. Is he not in the same condition as the trade, player wise ? Is he not open to be attacked ? The same way a war captain, sailing his long cruiser frigate, looking for worthy enemies. Isn't he open to the full extent of PvP when he sails out ? The same way as all other players ?

Yes, the game requires pratice and getting into trouble a lot of times so one can learn. Maybe rushing to the biggest thing is not a smart decision as the Sharks in brigs can, due to their time in game, practice, practice and more practice, bring that big ship down.

If you think about it, 2000-3000 hours across 3 years of early access is normal. It means the player did not play any other game. And did only play 3 days per week, like 3 or 4 hours sessions.

 

To end, safe zones are safe. What is their purpose ? Should the roaming AI be removed from safe zones ? 

Removing Attack is really a bad suggestion. Look at the East territories and share how would a no attack rule would work...

 

 

 

[Zoky]

One might thing that we have 3 PvE servers with 2 of them having optional port battles, and one would not be wrong

[King of Crowns]

16 hours ago, Lord Gud said:

Coming from a player who get's alts/pirates to tag new players so they get no reinforcements then 4 of you jump in to kill the player. I don't like reinforcements either but this is just too funny 

good to see you consider yourself a newb.