not Hostility, rather Stability

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

1. Change name from Hostility to Stability
2. Invert meter - e.g. Stability in El Dorado dropped to 10%
3. Review factor needed to drop Stability to 0% - now 1.0, change to 0.5 - to accommodate all playstyles
4. Include port demand/supply in the Stability formula

Details for each topic as needed

3 - Sum of all parts being better. Still possible to completely drop Stability to zero just with combat missions -or- by trade alone. Reduce Hostility Missions factor to accommodate with Trade Stability. 

• Full cycle of X missions, drops by 100%. Reduce factor per mission.
• Full trade achieved ( supply and demand of NPC traders in town ), Stability drops/raises by 100%.

4- Simple ( and complicated ). Read...

• Port nation owner traders supply town with daily demand of products. Stability rises. "Population" is happy. They got access to the items they need.
• Port nation owner traders buys port npc produce - Stability rises. "Population" gets a influx of money. They are happy.

Nation dedicated traders have a indirect impact on keeping the "empire" stable and "population" happy.

• Enemy smuggler supplies town with daily demand of products. Stability drops. "Population" starts to trust foreign power traders. They got access to the items they need.
• Enemy smuggler buys port npc produce - Stability drops. "Population" is happy with the influx of foreign cash more than own nation.

 

Now to the Pros and Cons, the most complex part.

 

Pros

- direct daily influence on the empire stability (RvR) by non combatants - players more interested in the trader careers - as they also increase their personal fortune by being trader moguls

- increase importance of trade in the game world to mimic age of sail - "The Spice must flow" factor.

- opportunity to award marks to traders by amount of Stability secured by supplying goods ( only supply, not purchase ) in similar proportion to what combatants get with damage/kills in Hostility missions

- trade vs privateering

Cons

- in some cases a overextended period to drop Stability ( raise Hostility ), mainly in the big ports where supply/demand items are expensive. ( can also be a pro )

- different favorite playstyle - pvp, pve, trade - may have to coexist towards the same "national" goal.

- trade vs privateering

 

Further clarifications

Just to clarify some details which have been asked in private:

- Each port has a quantity for offer and demands a quantity, for several products. So it is visible to any player. A port that demands 100 Wine, will only count 100 Wine delivered towards the effect, any surplus can be sold to port but counts for naught. Quota has been met already.

- Same with offer. Port NPC offer ( across the entire day ) is 1245 Cider, it will only count 1245 towards the effect. Even if a player brings 2000 units to sell there, the NPC produce is what counts. Players cannot spam.

Note: Only products that cannot be produced by players via buildings count.

 

[Wick]

awesome idea to get trading be part of RVR and make it more rewarding. 

[z4ys]

I like it hardcore but will the majority like it?

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I see nothing hardcore.

[Capt Jubal Early]

That's actually a really good idea. It might need some more teething and tweaking to establish it.

So mechanical question.

Could it exist along side current hostility mechanic?

So instead of making a port unstable enough to attack you would have to still raise hostility but it would be directly affected by the stability.

So for example a port that had 20% stability would have a -80% modifier to the amount of hostility required to grind before PB achieved.


 

[z4ys]

4 minutes ago, Capt Jubal Early said:

..

Could it exist along side current hostility mechanic?

..

 

 

33 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

...

3 - Sum of all parts being better. Still possible to completely drop Stability to zero just with combat missions -or- by trade alone. Reduce Hostility Missions factor to accommodate with Trade Stability. 

...

I guess that is already answered. Its possible to do it 2 way. Like hostiliy and war supplies some time ago. It just wouldnt be called hostility anymore. Instead of raising hostiliy by combat missions we would say that we decrease stabilty by combat missions. Maybe that was misleading.

Edited May 10, 2018 by z4ys

[Capt Jubal Early]

PS

This would then promote the two to work side by side. So stability would be a long term affect that could be ground up or down over a whole weeks cycle for example (VM cycle). While the hostility would be still on a daily cycle.

[z4ys]

@Capt Jubal Early In my opinion trade war should be the slower way than forced by military strength. But shouldnt have a big gap. Whenever a way is to easy the other becomes a fake feature.

[Capt Jubal Early]

Yeah I agree with you completely.

[Fenris]

40 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

• ort nation owner traders supply town with daily demand of products. Stability rises. "Population" is happy. They got access to the items they need.
• Port nation owner traders buys port npc produce - Stability rises. "Population" gets a influx of money. They are happy.

 

41 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

• Enemy smuggler supplies town with daily demand of products. Stability drops. "Population" starts to trust foreign power traders. They got access to the items they need.
• Enemy smuggler buys port npc produce - Stability drops. "Population" is happy with the influx of foreign cash more than own nation

Sounds familiar

Definitely yes

 

[Guest]

I like it, but I dont think it will work given the current population. If I follow you, clans would be taking ports and requiring daily maintenance through trader activity. There is just not enough people to make that work.

[Fenris]

3 minutes ago, Headless Parrot said:

There is just not enough people to make that work.

currently there are not enough, because everyone is waiting for new updates,

This project needs NEW things like this one suggested, and NOT always the same reworked. If players have something to do when they log in, NOT ONLY shoot ships and craft ships, then more people will join the game.

If this is going to be a pew pew game, with hauling stuff from A to B to make a new ship, it is going to fail. Everywhere i go, i hear people WANT MORE in game to do.

And currently, there is not much to do, because basically not much has changed for a long time.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Just now, Rickard said:

absolutely agree! this game needs more content!

Players are content. Making their actions matter is content.

[z4ys]

2 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

It is interesting, I have to say but maybe too much time consuming.

game should invole everyone even the guy that has 30min and if he just does a traderun to maintain a city

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

1 minute ago, Intrepido said:

too much time consuming

Explain please. Thank you.

[z4ys]

10 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Port nation owner traders supply town with daily demand of products.

 

Im not seeing rediii or any guy interested in rvr doing this to ensure stability in their ports.

What about other people? game doesnt envolve around a special grp game should target more players grps

[z4ys]

4 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Arent we talking here about RvR?

Have you seen a trader caring about rvr when they have smuggler flag?

rvr can be more as just conquer ports. there can be a bigger picture

[Vernon Merrill]

I hear "dedicated traders" talk all the time about how they should be part of the "big picture" in NA as well as the pew pew guys....   I think this suggestion does much to try and include their efforts into the main framework of the game.....

I, for one, would love to see the devs implement this....  Even if just to test it for a short time.

[z4ys]

When grps like rvr players stay isolated and play their rvr game thats not a good design. We play one game but OW players, traders and rvr guys we are all isolated currently. Better would be if all grps would work together and get connected to each other that would increase content for everyone i am sure.

[Vernon Merrill]

I think more people would do stuff like convoy duty if they knew there was a good chance to find a fight...

 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

36 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Port nation owner traders supply town with daily demand of products.

 

Im not seeing rediii or any guy interested in rvr doing this to ensure stability in their ports.

It will work on its own by gameplay of the 90% of nameless players that use multiple ports for their playstyle. Their actions will simply have a result. ( which can be countered by a lot of other nameless players that do their trade plight everyday simply because they like it). It will be seamless and, more important, a choice. I didn't think it as a min/max mmo meta, but inclusion mechanic. 

So, please, explain again why is it a waste of time for all players. Thank you.

[Capt Jubal Early]

1 minute ago, Hethwill said:

It will work on its own by gameplay of the 90% of nameless players that use multiple ports for their playstyle. Their actions will simply have a result. ( which can be countered by a lot of other nameless players that do their trade plight everyday simply because they like it). It will be seamless and, more important, a choice. I didn't think it as a min/max mmo meta, but inclusion mechanic. 

So, please, explain again why is it a waste of time for all players. Thank you.

Yeah the effect a single player can have on stability should be minimal to reduce exploitation and should coincide with hostility effects.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

9 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Do you trade? Traders look for the most profitable route. Max money in less time. They also look for safe trade routes, they wont go to a hot zone.

 

What is a hot zone ?

And as you say, traders will use the trade routes that yield profits. True to form.

If it is your nation "countless nameless" traders they will, seamlessly and without your explicit approval, help out because they are simply playing the game.

If it is the enemy nation smugglers, they will, seamlessly and without anyone's consent, contribute to rebellion without even directly noticing it.

 

[z4ys]

Stability could although work like this.

Stability high =  good place to buy, very bad for selling

Stability low = very good place to sell

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

4 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Stability could although work like this.

Stability high =  good place to buy, very bad for selling

Stability low = very good place to sell

Give a example please.