Other Faction Player Name and Hailing Button on PVE Server

[EdWatchmaker]

The summer has been busy and what little time I have had to play has been on the PVP server. Being a merchant Capt. I rarely come into contact with other factions, it can end in disaster. Today I had a lot of extra time and went onto the PVE server to play my character there. I must be WAY out of step with the times. As I was coming into KPR I was shocked to find that the Brits were labeled as "Enemy Player" and that the hail button was gone. I happen to enjoy greeting other Captains and sometimes talking to them. I see the point on the PVP server but on the PVE server it has no point at all and frankly I find it rude not to be able to acknowledge other Captains, after all on that server we're not at war with each other.

Admin, if it's possible would you fix this please. On that server we're a small tight community and we need more cohesiveness not less of it. Personally, on that server, I'd like to see the factions done away with except in name only.

Thanks for listening to my little rant. If you fix it thanks in advance.

Fair sailing to you all.      

[Macjimm]

Good point.  I would like to be able to talk to all players, even if I can't see their name.  We have an ignore button for those who don't want to see unwanted messages.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Makes sense as in PVE server the players cannot attack each other and then have a good chat.

[Jack Jones]

lonely place otherwise.....

[Suricato Rojo]

They should show players names and clans and the possibility to chat everybody in ALL servers.

 

[Christendom]

I’m surprised ship names were hidden on the PVE server since the entire change was to “promote more pvp”

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Just now, Christendom said:

I’m surprised ship names were hidden on the PVE server since the entire change was to “promote more pvp”

I think they share the same production baseline layout with the essential RoE/Conquest locks added, and not a entirely different "product". I may be wrong though  

The specific PvE-only server environment should really be developed independently and go its own course.

[Macjimm]

What is the logic behind restricting chat between players?

Seems that ships should be able to send a hail to each other, and if they agree to, communicate.

Perhaps optional chat in response to a hail.

I would prefer be able to talk to anyone/everyone, regardless of their nationality.

[Angus MacDuff]

5 minutes ago, Macjimm said:

What is the logic behind restricting chat between players?

Seems that ships should be able to send a hail to each other, and if they agree to, communicate.

Perhaps optional chat in response to a hail.

I would prefer be able to talk to anyone/everyone, regardless of their nationality.

It doesn't make any sense that I can see

[Suricato Rojo]

Right now you see in OW a player mostly enemy nation and a player of a mostly friendly nation.
You cant coordinate with your supposedly friendly ally and there is a chance that in fact he is one of the few enemies of that faction. So just dont iniciate any PvP.

Before anonymous OW many battles were initiated with a quick chat between players of different nations.

[Suricato Rojo]

I think anonymat and hiding fleet type info should be removed once you are in tagging distance.
So if you see a "Enemy Player" in the distance you can get close and see if he is friend or foe without need of starting a battle.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

42 minutes ago, Suricato Rojo said:

"Enemy Player"

 

42 minutes ago, Suricato Rojo said:

friend or foe

 

🙄... i know, semantics, but... yet...

[Jean Ribault]

2 hours ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

...The specific PvE-only server environment should really be developed independently and go its own course.

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by Jean Ribault

[Christendom]

2 hours ago, Macjimm said:

What is the logic behind restricting chat between players?

Seems that ships should be able to send a hail to each other, and if they agree to, communicate.

Perhaps optional chat in response to a hail.

I would prefer be able to talk to anyone/everyone, regardless of their nationality.

The logic was that not knowing who the other player is on the water across from you will incentivize you to attack them and find out, thus leading to more PVP battles.  In my experience this has not happened, but others "claim" that is has.  Just a waste of time IMO and a "patch" to fix glaring design issues.  

Personally, the only added improvement/feature that I've seen have a real impact in OW PvP in the 2 years I've played has been the DLC ships.  People like cheap ships, low risk and easy access to PVP....who knew..    

[Lovec1990]

7 minutes ago, Christendom said:

The logic was that not knowing who the other player is on the water across from you will incentivize you to attack them and find out, thus leading to more PVP battles.  In my experience this has not happened, but others "claim" that is has.  Just a waste of time IMO and a "patch" to fix glaring design issues.  

Personally, the only added improvement/feature that I've seen have a real impact in OW PvP in the 2 years I've played has been the DLC ships.  People like cheap ships, low risk and easy access to PVP....who knew..    

i agree hiding enemy players name did not increase PvP it may even decrease it becouse people are afraid of fighting PRO players and if they would see his name they would avoid him but attack other players, but now players are wary of that enemy players not knowing who is it.

DLC ships did increase OW PvP but ships needs too be balanced, but not denied PBs,...

 

[Macjimm]

15 minutes ago, Christendom said:

The logic was that not knowing who the other player is on the water across from you will incentivize you to attack them and find out, thus leading to more PVP battles.  

Thanks for trying to answer my question.

Why would players be more likely to attack a nameless foe?  

If anonymity is the prime consideration.  Perhaps we could chat without knowing the name of the other player.  Players could then choose to share their names and PM each other.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Macjimm

[Christendom]

19 minutes ago, Lovec1990 said:

i agree hiding enemy players name did not increase PvP it may even decrease it becouse people are afraid of fighting PRO players and if they would see his name they would avoid him but attack other players, but now players are wary of that enemy players not knowing who is it.

DLC ships did increase OW PvP but ships needs too be balanced, but not denied PBs,...

 

The simple fact that you can redeem a ship (or two) daily in a port, slap some medium cannons on it and go out to join the fight has immensely helped OW pvp.  More so than any asinine tweak to the OW like hiding names or removing grid coordinates that these hardcore types wanted.  I think most of us can agree that the most recent patch was underwhelming and perhaps the only thing keeping folks around at the moment is the redeemable ships.  

Personally If I were admin I'd expand on the idea a bit more and attempt to create a need for both redeemable and crafted ships in Naval Action.  Redeemable ships can only be 3/5 with various wood trims, same goes for ships bought with PVP marks.  If you want a gold or purple ship you gotta craft it.  And only craftable ships can get into PBs.  

But yea, back to your original point.  No ship names is stupid.  Should at least give players the option to identify other ships on the water at a certain distance and maybe introduce a perk called like "Sailing Master" or something that allows you to do so.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Christendom

[Sir Texas Sir]

33 minutes ago, Macjimm said:

Thanks for trying to answer my question.

Why would players be more likely to attack a nameless foe?  

If anonymity is the prime consideration.  Perhaps we could chat without knowing the name of the other player.  Players could then choose to share their names and PM each other.

The concept the Devs thought is that if you didn't know that is Billy Badass PvPer in that ship you will be more than likely to attack him and fight.  What they don't understand is as soon as some one gets tagged by Billy Badass PvPer/Ganker it gets called out and folks avoid that area (well for the most part).  Are instead they just assume that is Billy Badass PvPer in that enemy ships when it could be Joe Newb lost in the wrong waters so they don't attack him.  

There really is no reason other than a few very very few elite hard core PvPers that want no names (they are the ones folks avoid fights with any way).  Just like there was no reason to remove the grid on the map recently or even before that map cords, but the very few hard core players want game a certain way that keeps running off the majority of the casual players.

[Captiva]

5 hours ago, Christendom said:

The simple fact that you can redeem a ship (or two) daily in a port, slap some medium cannons on it and go out to join the fight has immensely helped OW pvp. 

This is a question more than a statement.

In hind sight I'm wondering if the Dev's original idea of reducing 5 dura ships to 3 dura ships would have been the better direction NA should have gone? And for the record I was all in favor of and supported the idea of 1 dura ships.

DLC ships are sorta the same concept, and it looks as if this is the direction the game is heading to some degree.

If an increase in OW pvp (which seems to be the case with the introduction of DLC ships) is the end result, then 3 dura ships would surely trump any small adverse affect they would have on the economy. 

Again, a question to ponder, not a statement.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Captiva

[Suricato Rojo]

9 hours ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

 

 

🙄... i know, semantics, but... yet...

Did I said something wrong?
We can carry on this conversation in spanish if you wish.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

1 hour ago, Suricato Rojo said:

Did I said something wrong?
We can carry on this conversation in spanish if you wish.

No, nothing wrong  

Was just the combination of "enemy player" and "friend or foe". I'd say the first excludes the second, by mechanics.

[Tiedemann]

I want a hailing/Ohoy button on PvP server! So if both players uses this, then their details will be visible.

[Macjimm]

18 hours ago, Tiedemann said:

I want a hailing/Ohoy button on PvP server! So if both players uses this, then their details will be visible.

What could be the downside of this?  Sounds like a win win.  On both servers.

[EdWatchmaker]

Admin and Captains,

I want to thank everyone who joined in this discussion. Yes, let's bring back the hailing/ahoy button and I want to know who the captain is too. Okay, I'll accept that you only get the name if they respond to your hail. But, if that, it should work like this. If they respond, then you know that captain and their name appears when you meet them again on the high seas. It goes into your sea captain's knowledge base. If you are looking for realism then this is a part of it. Any captain worth captaining a ship would get to know other captains, especially foes, or he wouldn't last long.

If you're worried about trash talking then that is what the ignore button is for. Grow a pair and get a thick skin. 99% of all players in this game are good in my personal experience. Some that have caped or sunk me have even taken their time to instruct me. Now that is sportsmanship! Don't take away what is good because a very small amount of garbage. Listen to me! PVP server is supposed to be rough. It's a WAR. War is brutal, is now, always has been. Every time I play on the PVP server I know the risks of sailing my usually unarmed trader and by playing I accept them. IT'S EXCITING. I love it. When I want a nice relaxing sail I use the PVE server. That's what it's there for.

Fair sailing and have a great day/night.

    

Edited July 29, 2018 by EdWatchmaker