Lack of benefit in surrendering

[maturin]

1 minute ago, H2O said:

Player Reputation. Long awaited addition that could fix so many problems. Reputation could open new missions, events, ships and other cool stuff. 

Sinking would slowly damage your reputation.

So a game of PvE saints and PvP scoundrels.

 

Maybe surrendering could remove a random mod from your vessel and put it into your captain's chest. But only if an enemy player gets the kill.

[H2O]

11 minutes ago, maturin said:

So a game of PvE saints and PvP scoundrels.

Why not? Surrender would be -50% less reputation penalty. ex. sinking -10 points, surrender -5, win +5. Missions would give away +.5 point. 

With 1000 Point ceiling we would have tons of fun.

 

0 - No rewards

100 Rep Points - New Title (one time award)

200 Rep points -  Flag

300 Rep points - Paint

...

1000 Points - Ship Writ (one time reward) + Celebrated Title. 

Unfortunately you guys obsessed with pvp , so mature it your way. I will just eat my popcorn and observe. 

Edited February 6, 2018 by H2O

[Landsman]

10 hours ago, Otto Kohl said:

Nor worth a slot ? LEL you dont pvp much do you ? That first broadside can give you huge advantage in battle when you position yourself good in OW. I never undock for PvP withour prepared perk.

Huge advantage? Maybe on a SOL... it is 1/5 slots man and maybe you haven't check the other options? Yes, you get a headstart with one broadside if you position yourself well and then that's it... with the broadside weight of a frigate or schooner is doesn't make as much of a difference as some of the other options, if you arent fighting some noob that gets sunk within 10 minutes. 

10 hours ago, Otto Kohl said:

LEL you dont pvp much do you ?

No, I don't because even tho I only play PvP in NA, I don't play the game alot ( not as much as the top pvp players anyways ). And considering how I have never seen your name on the PvP leaderbord or combat news, you don't seem to either? Either way I wouldn't act so cocky... maybe prepared is worth a slot for your playstyle but I think it is kind of overrated ( except for SOLs ).

[Odol]

How about perma death for the captain.

If your ship sinks in combat you lose EVERY bit of experience for that character.

If you are captured or surrender, you lose nothing but what ever they take.  No experience loss.

 

 

[Landsman]

2 minutes ago, Odol said:

How about perma death for the captain.

If your ship sinks in combat you lose EVERY bit of experience for that character.

If you are captured or surrender, you lose nothing but what ever they take.  No experience loss.

 

But what's the point of it really other than more realism? Who would not surrender if given the chance??? And if people could decide to sink you anyways, it would be a complete griefer fest.

[Farrago]

Reward Captains for saving the lives of their crew. Trained crew have value. Right now, a loser gets XP but no gold.

What about if admiralty rewarded a Captain for the lives he saves by surrendering, something like 50 gold x crew?

[Navalus Magnus]

I don‘t think that there should be big benefits in surrendering.

... and imo there certainly shouldn‘t be any punishment for getting sunk other than the loss of ship and crew!

That would just be another reason for new (and veteran) players to leave the game!

[Navalus Magnus]

But I would suggest to make surrendering the most common way of losing a fight - like it was in the age of sail!

Like @NicklasK i‘d suggest to change the structure bar into a moral bar:

- If decreases by a certain percentage the crew should be slower in fullfilling thier tasks (adjusting sails, loading guns, repairing the ship).

- If lowered to 0% the ship / crew should surrender automatically instead of sink.

- A surrendered ship still not captured should sink automatically though, when every other player left the battle instance.

 

Other possibilities of sinking a ship instead of beating it into submission would be the following:

- leaks

- fire / fireshock -> explosion of the magazine

- „sink“ as an option implemented in the loot menu

So basically, I would keep the options of sinking a ship, which are already implemented into the game - except the one of just shooting down the side armor and structure bar.

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Navalus Magnus

[Odol]

1 hour ago, Landsman said:

But what's the point of it really other than more realism? Who would not surrender if given the chance??? And if people could decide to sink you anyways, it would be a complete griefer fest.

There was some sarcasm in what I was suggesting.

[Landsman]

2 hours ago, Odol said:

There was some sarcasm in what I was suggesting.

Ok, then I don't get the point of your comment... Liq is right and too many good PvP ships are sunk because people don't surrender, because they have nothing to lose... officer lives helped this issue somewhat.

[Odol]

Just now, Landsman said:

Ok, then I don't get the point of your comment... Liq is right and too many good PvP ships are sunk because people don't surrender, because they have nothing to lose... officer lives helped this issue somewhat.

Yes they did, and no they didnt all at the same time.  The problem is there is nothing to be gained by surrendering.  You already lose next to nothing by just sinking, crew costs nothing, ships are easy to replace, and everything on them is easy to replace.  The only time things were expensive was when there was a wipe, since then it is a cake walk. 

I am serious when I say the best thing they can do is, add more cost to things in game.  Make it so you have to pay to outfit your ship for every voyage, buy and carry ammo for your guns.  Be forced to pay for maintenance on ships in harbor, have to pay your crew.    And crew should go back to being expensive.  Nerf or remove the rum fix in battle, and only have it a thing that gradually returns crew to duty after the battle.  No more just magically adding crew to your ship at sea. 

If you take a 100 casualties on a ship that has 200 men, then roughly 75% should be "fixed" by the doctor to return to duty over the next few game hours at sea.  The remainder are dead, dead, dead.  If you assign crew to a prize ship, well hope you have crew to sail both ships because now you are under crewed.   Unless you have the press gang perk, which can make a comeback. 

Get sunk and end up in a random neutral port, well hope you can afford the crew costs to crew a cutter to get home.   Or you end up back at your port with your other ships.   Surrendering should give the victor an option of taking the ship, the cargo, or both or none.  Not the current system of all or nothing.   If the victor takes the cargo the defeated keeps his ship, and is sent to the nearest neutral/free port with it.   If the victor takes the ship, the defeated captain is sent to the nearest free port WITH his crew, so he doesnt have to pay for a new crew.  

Crew prices in free ports should be 100% MORE expensive than your own nations port.   Also no NPC built ships on the market, only the basic cutter, and player built ships if any are there.  Making gearing out of free ports difficult to say the least. 

 

 

[Landsman]

5 minutes ago, Odol said:

Yes they did, and no they didnt all at the same time.  The problem is there is nothing to be gained by surrendering.  You already lose next to nothing by just sinking, crew costs nothing, ships are easy to replace, and everything on them is easy to replace.  The only time things were expensive was when there was a wipe, since then it is a cake walk. 

I am serious when I say the best thing they can do is, add more cost to things in game.  Make it so you have to pay to outfit your ship for every voyage, buy and carry ammo for your guns.  Be forced to pay for maintenance on ships in harbor, have to pay your crew.    And crew should go back to being expensive.  Nerf or remove the rum fix in battle, and only have it a thing that gradually returns crew to duty after the battle.  No more just magically adding crew to your ship at sea. 

If you take a 100 casualties on a ship that has 200 men, then roughly 75% should be "fixed" by the doctor to return to duty over the next few game hours at sea.  The remainder are dead, dead, dead.  If you assign crew to a prize ship, well hope you have crew to sail both ships because now you are under crewed.   Unless you have the press gang perk, which can make a comeback. 

Get sunk and end up in a random neutral port, well hope you can afford the crew costs to crew a cutter to get home.   Or you end up back at your port with your other ships.   Surrendering should give the victor an option of taking the ship, the cargo, or both or none.  Not the current system of all or nothing.   If the victor takes the cargo the defeated keeps his ship, and is sent to the nearest neutral/free port with it.   If the victor takes the ship, the defeated captain is sent to the nearest free port WITH his crew, so he doesnt have to pay for a new crew.  

Crew prices in free ports should be 100% MORE expensive than your own nations port.   Also no NPC built ships on the market, only the basic cutter, and player built ships if any are there.  Making gearing out of free ports difficult to say the least. 

any TL;DR?

[SKurj]

10 minutes ago, Odol said:

Yes they did, and no they didnt all at the same time.  The problem is there is nothing to be gained by surrendering.  You already lose next to nothing by just sinking, crew costs nothing, ships are easy to replace, and everything on them is easy to replace.  The only time things were expensive was when there was a wipe, since then it is a cake walk. 

I am serious when I say the best thing they can do is, add more cost to things in game.  Make it so you have to pay to outfit your ship for every voyage, buy and carry ammo for your guns.  Be forced to pay for maintenance on ships in harbor, have to pay your crew.    And crew should go back to being expensive.  Nerf or remove the rum fix in battle, and only have it a thing that gradually returns crew to duty after the battle.  No more just magically adding crew to your ship at sea. 

If you take a 100 casualties on a ship that has 200 men, then roughly 75% should be "fixed" by the doctor to return to duty over the next few game hours at sea.  The remainder are dead, dead, dead.  If you assign crew to a prize ship, well hope you have crew to sail both ships because now you are under crewed.   Unless you have the press gang perk, which can make a comeback. 

Get sunk and end up in a random neutral port, well hope you can afford the crew costs to crew a cutter to get home.   Or you end up back at your port with your other ships.   Surrendering should give the victor an option of taking the ship, the cargo, or both or none.  Not the current system of all or nothing.   If the victor takes the cargo the defeated keeps his ship, and is sent to the nearest neutral/free port with it.   If the victor takes the ship, the defeated captain is sent to the nearest free port WITH his crew, so he doesnt have to pay for a new crew.  

Crew prices in free ports should be 100% MORE expensive than your own nations port.   Also no NPC built ships on the market, only the basic cutter, and player built ships if any are there.  Making gearing out of free ports difficult to say the least. 

 

 

Nothing like encouraging pvp...