Patch 31: Port investments, new hostility and preparation for release

[Snoopy]

The new port buffs are way way too high, across the board.

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 minute ago, Snoopy said:

The new port buffs are way way too high, across the board.

That is indeed an issue IMO too.

On the other hand it's quite a long way to unlock high levels.

[Licinio Chiavari]

Update 2:

"Investments are applied on maintenance" (bottom line of the window).

We'll check again tomorrow.

[Eyesore]

why can't a nationplayer simply invest in a port?

I think it makes some sense to have a friendlylist for the use of buildings or dockyards, not that i like it, but i understand the reasoning.

Why can i not simply invest in the defenses of the port? Anything i (clan not a list) do doesn't help the port at all, it doesn't matter if i bring in supplies or whatever.

With only 20(?) slots available on the friendly clanlist ... how is the controlling clan supposed to deal with that? Accept 'donations' through a middleman?

[Angus MacDuff]

So I am allied with the clan who took a port and now have access to all advantages of that port.  As is their right, the owning clan want to make all decisions as to the direction they will go with port points etc.  I'm feeling like a parasite and want to contribute, and the only way I see to do that is to simply give my CM's, Dubs and VM's over to the owning clan.  The problem with this is that I have no recourse if they choose to remove me from their list.  I believe that they deserve the right to make all decisions regarding port, but I think there should be a mechanic so that you can be locked into the list for that port if the owning clan agrees...perhaps buying a slot to make you a permanent guest.  The clan friends list should also be big enough to allow this.

[jodgi]

9 hours ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:

You can lose your stuff on Peace Server as well, you just have to lose battles against NPC

We know the numbers, only 1 in 800 pve battles are lost. Or to be more precise you guys have a 800:1 K/D.

[Eyesore]

I'm not even talking about players getting shutdown because they got removed from a list to make room for somebody else. Sure way to make somebody ragequit when they have invested in many buildings and docks and whatnot and then after maintenance ... pooff, no more acces to anything, wasted investment.... I geuss all these rvr-clans will accept all those new and casual players/clans into their clans/lists? No questions asked? (which kind of defeats the purpose of that 'mechanic' being an altblocker ... ).

Not an issue at the moment, as you can't do/invest in anything if you are not the friendly list anyway.

 

Bonusses in capitals/regions should only be given if the whole region is under controle (nation would be enough, no need for one clan to hold all ports).

[Serk]

6 minutes ago, Eyesore said:

I'm not even talking about players getting shutdown because they got removed from a list to make room for somebody else. Sure way to make somebody ragequit when they have invested in many buildings and docks and whatnot and then after maintenance ... pooff, no more acces to anything, wasted investment.... I geuss all these rvr-clans will accept all those new and casual players/clans into their clans/lists? No questions asked? (which kind of defeats the purpose of that 'mechanic' being an altblocker ... ).

Not an issue at the moment, as you can't do/invest in anything if you are not the friendly list anyway.

 

Bonusses in capitals/regions should only be given if the whole region is under controle (nation would be enough, no need for one clan to hold all ports).

I think you have an answer in the first post:

 

• Clans will be able to decide who can access the facilities and build them
• Once you build the facility you will be able to use it even if you are kicked from clan  or alliance (provided you are in the same nation)

[Eyesore]

ok, must have missed/forgotten that.

 

Ok then, why have the restriction in the first place? I'm sure nobody actually believes this mechanic can keep alts out?

I must be a bit thick, i don't get it ... what does restricting the use of a port do? How does the controlling clan benefit from that? Why is the restriction absolute, all or nothing? Maybe more options are needed, so the clan can choose to open up all resources (or maybe keep the rare ones restricted)? Is that the only reason, rare resources ... and the solution is to make everything unavailable?

The only thing to do for new players/clans/casuals/whatever is to only use the starting uncapturable ports of their nation (if they even have such ports ...)? maybe we should reason further and say that you need to be on a friendlylist before you can build an outpost in a capturable port?

[van der Clam]

• It would be nice if the AI in PBs were coded for priorities. I would imagine since they start in Zone A that it should be 1st in priority to cap it before leaving for closest aggro. It takes 10 minutes before we close in to actually battle, so just leave the AI to cap it during this time.
• Also would like to see AI have a mix of rates in one PB. They should follow player restrictions for their rank on how many crew they can command and the size of ship. I wouldn't even mind if there were more than 6 AI; let the lower rank AI captains bring in smaller ships.
• And most importantly, I'd like to see the port max BR be directly related to the port's infrastructure growth. Meaning, if there are no forts or production buildings, then BR would be lower. The more that's built up the higher the max BR.
• On the above, I'd really like to see Raid Missions come in,  where we can take missions for neighboring regional ports to take production materials that the port might have...forest, iron, etc. Then we sail there and attack it against players or AI. Make it work like Hostility Missions.
• Would also like to see Anolytic's proposal of limiting the region hopping to only 1 region at a time. 2 - 3 neighboring regions is just too far, and Frontlines just has no meaning currently.
• Also force us to take 1 or 2 ports in that region before being able to take another region. This would force us to have some sort of presence in that region, otherwise it should automatically turn back to Neutral.

Edited April 28, 2019 by van der Decken

[--Privateer--]

17 minutes ago, van der Decken said:

• It would be nice if the AI in PBs were coded for priorities. I would imagine since they start in Zone A that it should be 1st in priority to cap it before leaving for closest aggro. It takes 10 minutes before we close in to actually battle, so just leave the AI to cap it during this time.
• Also would like to see AI have a mix of rates in one PB. They should follow player restrictions for their rank on how many crew they can command and the size of ship. I wouldn't even mind if there were more than 6 AI; let the lower rank AI captains bring in smaller ships.
• And most importantly, I'd like to see the port max BR be directly related to the port's infrastructure growth. Meaning, if there are no forts or production buildings, then BR would be lower. The more that's built up the higher the max BR.
• On the above, I'd really like to see Raid Missions come in,  where we can take missions for neighboring regional ports to take production materials that the port might have...forest, iron, etc. Then we sail there and attack it against players or AI. Make it would like Hostility Missions.

This would be nice, but lets just focus on fixing the broken stuff first 😉

[Michiel the Ruyter]

On 4/24/2019 at 12:38 PM, admin said:

• Investments. 
  • Investments will drop their level after you lose the port, multiple losses of ports will lose all investments (to remove port trading)
  • Forts destroyed in port battles will have to be rebuilt
  • Clans will be able to decide who can access the facilities and build them
  • Once you build the facility you will be able to use it even if you are kicked from clan or alliance (provided you are in the same nation).
  • Other nations WILL NOT use the facilities and investment benefits 

This is very good!

• • Ship building bonuses are created by clan alliance only if they build ships in their city. Other captains (who are not part of the alliance are not going to be able to hire artisans trained by clans).

Ship building bonuses are way too much and will have an unwanted very high impact of the ships battle performance. Ship building bonuses MUST be reduced across the entire board.

• • Due to limited investment points some cities will have to specialize – in the first iteration there are going to be 2 types of towns
    • Resource base
    • Shipbuilding base
    • Or a mix of two

Investment points should overall be reduced or prices have to increase, otherwise there are too many points to spend. This will result in no need to make (a) meaningful choice(s), cause you got plenty of points. Suggestion: increase investment points needed for forts from one (1) to three (3). Reasoning: a fort is more powerful than a tower, and even compared to two (2) towers. 

• • There is a limited number of ports that can build amazing ships with all the possible bonuses. Nations will have to fight for them.

In my point of view, NO port should be able to get all ship building bonuses, or ONLY at the cost of having no ability to have defence (fortifications). Suggestion: if you started a 5th ship building bonuses line. If you build one of the fortifications, the 5th ship building bonuses line will be greyed out (unavailable). 

• Hostility mission changes
  • Hostility now can be gained only using missions. 
  • OW hostility points are no longer granted to avoid exploits. 
  • Hostility generation in missions will feel much faster
  • Defense timer cost is 250k Reals per day (might go up even more)
  • County capital and capitals give missions to capture 2 nearest county capitals
  • Free towns give missions for 2 nearest county capitals
  • Once you taken the county capital you can take its regional cities.

Interesting change, good to make the defense timer cost high. 

Other changes 

• Forts were buffed

This was needed!!!

• Lord protectors are no longer have tiered rewards for VMs
  • you get what you hold (but not more than 15VMs per week – lets see how it goes and maybe increase this limit later)

I prefered the tiered rewards, to prevent people having limited playingtime getting too far behind compared to people who have unlimited time. This will drive the casual player(s), like myself, away. 

Other changes

• Combat medals are now only granted for mission and patrol completion.

Highly disagreed, missions and patrol should be additional ways to get combat medals (secondary). Primary MUST be sinking players. 

• Improved FPS performance in instances and port battles 
• Added additional item descriptions
• Bots now use universal ranks to help judge their difficulty easier

Finally!

• Permit prices and requirements rebalanced

Please tell me, why do I need a permit for a Constitution and not for an USS United States? Unless the Constitution becomes a slightly better version than the USS United States (just like the Frigate and Pirate Frigate variant). 

I liked the idea that the Trincomalee needed a exchangable permit, because the Endymion requires a random permit. What about the Diana? Will it be craftable? If so, please add a permit to it. 

Wapen von Hamburg should require a permit, not sure about the Indefatigable (what makes this ship so special)?

All first- and second rates must require a permit, with the Christian and either the L'Ocean or Santisima or BOTH being random.

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by NOJODU
Grammer

[Licinio Chiavari]

17 hours ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Update 2:

"Investments are applied on maintenance" (bottom line of the window).

We'll check again tomorrow.

Update 3:

Port craft bonuses do NOT apply to redeemed DLC or note ships.

[Dostojetski]

What? No way! 😂

 

Dont worry Licinio, they will change their mind in a few weeks.. not likely they would kill their own cash cow.

 

UPDATE

Also, them not allowing the perks on the DLC ships is admitting that the ships are superior to normal ships?

Edited April 28, 2019 by Dostojetski

[Eyesore]

Dlc- and noteships are not crafted ... so, why would they receive the craftingbonusses?

If you want an extra portbonus, collect the resources and craft a ship?

[Licinio Chiavari]

2 hours ago, Eyesore said:

Dlc- and noteships are not crafted ... so, why would they receive the craftingbonusses?

If you want an extra portbonus, collect the resources and craft a ship?

Give me BP for DLC ships I bought and I'll craft them 😎

 

May be you're missing that DLC owner fuelled the game you are playing.

For nothing in the future.

[van der Clam]

23 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Give me BP for DLC ships I bought and I'll craft them 😎

 

May be you're missing that DLC owner fuelled the game you are playing.

For nothing in the future.

I think the $49 per game fueled the game we are playing. DLCs only added to it.

16 minutes ago, Routan said:

Nobody say they should. But nice to know game mechanic. Now we know dlc ships are not worth buying. 

Pretty sure we soon will see rewievs on steam abouth dlc ships being overpriced and with little value in game. 

Fact is with crafting buff, a Oak Oak is as good, and we all know the time to gather ressources for a Oak Oak ships is something like 15-30 min a week, and you can craft all the ships you need.

They just killed all reasons to buy dlc ships.

DLCs offer convenience and repeatability. These are the only reason DLCs should be created in the first place. They already get the best woods without doing any work for them. Aren't they 5/5 all the time? Why are DLCs killed? I suspect anyone who gives a shit review because they won't get port bonuses would be someone who expects DLCs to always be P2W.

[Werewolf]

As a DLC owner, I appreciate that the DLC ships are just quick throwaways I can redeem every 24 hours. I am glad they do not get the port bonuses. Keep DLC ships in their place. People who gather the materials and spend the labor hours SHOULD have an advantage over me, a lazy guy that just clicked a button and a ship magically appears at my docks. DLC ships for me are great for practice/training/trying new stuff without much fear of losing, since the only valuables I am losing are my guns and repairs.

[van der Clam]

9 minutes ago, Routan said:

Why i belive they are killed is simply enough. As you say they are easy to get, but lets be honnest so are a Oak Oak ship. They simply dosent Add enough value for the cost. Thats my opinion. Might as Well spend your money on other things.

I like how ppl always have to scream P2W everytime ppl, says the dlc ship is nerfed.(Know it tecnaticaly isent nerfed, they just changed the game). Short fact is a Oak Oak ship with a couple of bonus is full egual to a dlc, witch remove the reason to spend money on dlc ships.

P2W when a Oak Oak ship is better, I think not. When they have to fight ships build with rare woods, and buff, Well they are just sup to the crafted ships, unless you belive buff and wood have no importants.

So why do I think there will bad rewievs on dlc ships. Simply because they add to little value to the cost.

Just before I get accused of review bombing. i havent made on, not even sure I will. 

I definitely get your points. But if a Surprise and a Herculese with the same fine woods, same build, and same mods and gunnery are close to equal and the Herc sinks, well then, the Herc can be right back out there in 2 minutes. However, if the Surprise sinks....it definitely takes longer. To me, this is a valuable advantage.

Make a review. All reviews are valuable, positive or negative. The spamming ones with no real content are the worthless reviews.

[AeRoTR]

So are you comparing oak/oak ship to every day get one free live/wo or teak/wo ship? Which you can stack up to your fleet number in your dock as you want be losing one everyday. 

DLC get instant ship anywhere!!! with any wood!!! They are not trash but good ships. 

DLC should always be standart blue with some trims. 

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by AeRoTR

[AeRoTR]

No one needs to buy the DLC if value is missing. I have not seen a post complaining that dlc is trash, have seen many complaining some are op. 

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 hour ago, van der Decken said:

I think the $49 per game fueled the game we are playing. DLCs only added to it.

DLCs offer convenience and repeatability. These are the only reason DLCs should be created in the first place. They already get the best woods without doing any work for them. Aren't they 5/5 all the time? Why are DLCs killed? I suspect anyone who gives a shit review because they won't get port bonuses would be someone who expects DLCs to always be P2W.

DLC get already reduced chances of purple-gold ships. And it's fine: it's not 1-2 mod difference breaking the balance.

Herc-Pand-Ratt are already medium ships. As port bonuses will get higher they will worth nothing against similar sized ships (Surp and other 4th rates) even if oak/oak: did you read port bonuses?

Requin on other hand is unique ship: there's not any similar option around. With pros and cons: if I want a xebec I should use DLC (or hefty 150 CM now).

 

As I repeatly pointed: make DLC 24hr CD a full ship (even oak/oak 3/5 no trim) sharing CD with 48-72hrs redeemable (and I'd say tradable too) permit. If I want a good Ratt I have to craft her. If I want an expendable one, I'll have an instant full ship.

Or as I said a couple post up, give DLC owners BP for ship owned: be sure some will craft their DLCs too. Fair and plain.

 

Personal note (again): Requin without port bonus will keep working due to totally different handling. Herc-Pandora-Ratt will die.

And already ppl saying: "I will not buy DLC being not worth". So in the end not good.

[Licinio Chiavari]

28 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

No one needs to buy the DLC if value is missing. I have not seen a post complaining that dlc is trash, have seen many complaining some are op. 

DLCs will be trash as port bonuses will grow.

Right now Pandora and Herc are in trouble against a Surp; imagine a Surp with 2-3+ port bonus.

For me personally nothing will change: Requin is a so unique ship she can work finely 3/5 no trim (like the great majority I'm using - seen 3 purples on over 250 redeemed).

 

If the point is "YOU HAVE TO CRAFT THEM AND GATHER MATS": give DLC owners BP for owned ships. Plain and simple.

[Licinio Chiavari]

47 minutes ago, Routan said:

I don’t care abouth dlc ship, they shouldnt have been in the game. But if you take money for something I think it should ad some value.

exactly: as craft bonuses will start stacking DLCs will be total crap.

And (sidenote): dropped ship notes (usually highly appreciated) too.

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 hour ago, Werewolf said:

As a DLC owner, I appreciate that the DLC ships are just quick throwaways I can redeem every 24 hours. I am glad they do not get the port bonuses. Keep DLC ships in their place. People who gather the materials and spend the labor hours SHOULD have an advantage over me, a lazy guy that just clicked a button and a ship magically appears at my docks. DLC ships for me are great for practice/training/trying new stuff without much fear of losing, since the only valuables I am losing are my guns and repairs.

Already DLC get lower chances of superior (purple/gold) ship.

As port craft bonus will start to grow, Herc-Pandora-Ratt will be totally sub-par against any similarly sized crafted ship. Please re-read port craft potential bonuses.

 

PS: all these "mystic" of DLC are free is pure crap.
What usually costs are mods.

An unmodded (so really free - aside cannons as stated) ship (and moreover with port bonuses) will be not a easy throw away, but simply feeding enemies' kills, simply standing no chances.

Edited April 28, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari