Patch 31 - Port investments and shipbuilding bonuses feedback

[Sir Texas Sir]

26 minutes ago, z4ys said:

Ai got penetration buff to compensate their sailing skill nerf. you can now rake them but they can pen you 😉

Pen really doesn’t matter when your broad side to broad side under 250m every thing pens.  I was fine keeping distance and shooting other things over 250m and bounce there shots cause I would angel.  My point was the AI was our reloading me even with 30% reload and doing more damage per broad side.

[Capsize More]

There's multiple threads on the pirates taking St Mary's, so that's apparently been addressed.  But my feedback (from our damage control attempt at St. Mary's) is it seems nearly impossible to stop, screen or engage a fleet entering a neutral pb due to br tagging limits and even if you have the numbers to be able to, all they need is 2 ships (on standby) to make it in, one to kite the a.i. while the other caps the points.  Perhaps a.i. port battles could be joinable by adversaries?  Not sure, just my thoughts.  

[Sir Texas Sir]

55 minutes ago, Capsize More said:

There's multiple threads on the pirates taking St Mary's, so that's apparently been addressed.  But my feedback (from our damage control attempt at St. Mary's) is it seems nearly impossible to stop, screen or engage a fleet entering a neutral pb due to br tagging limits and even if you have the numbers to be able to, all they need is 2 ships (on standby) to make it in, one to kite the a.i. while the other caps the points.  Perhaps a.i. port battles could be joinable by adversaries?  Not sure, just my thoughts.  

That would be abuse to much.  Bad enough any one can join hostility missions while your already fighting buffed AI.

St Mary’s wasn’t handled at all.  It’s good they found a big and reported.  It’s bad they exploited it and keep the port.  Devs should of reset it to neutral to be captured by normal in game means.  Just cause you report something doesnt means it’s right to still do it until it’s fixed.  After they test all the crashed port battles so why shouldn't a bug/exploit be reset to?

the answer we got from devs is to just deal with it.  Wonder how all those crashed port battle players would feel if the devs told them the same thing?  

[--Privateer--]

52 minutes ago, Capsize More said:

Perhaps a.i. port battles could be joinable by adversaries?

I tend to agree, not that it would have helped the US though, considering we took the port and sunk your screening fleet.

58 minutes ago, Capsize More said:

it seems nearly impossible to stop, screen or engage a fleet entering a neutral pb due to br tagging limits and even if you have the numbers

Numbers don't matter if you're trying to tag 12 1st rates with 20 4th-5th rates. The BR limit is put in so you can't tag a real fleet and just kite around with your fake fleet. If you brought a real fleet you could have pulled us easily. Like you said, you had the numbers.

[Sir Texas Sir]

3 minutes ago, --Privateer-- said:

I tend to agree, not that it would have helped the US though, considering we took the port and sunk your screening fleet.

Numbers don't matter if you're trying to tag 12 1st rates with 20 4th-5th rates. The BR limit is put in so you can't tag a real fleet and just kite around with your fake fleet. If you brought a real fleet you could have pulled us easily. Like you said, you had the numbers.

Did they bring 4-5 rates?  I wasn’t a fan for them to even show up cause it’s realy realy hard to screen folks out of a port battle like that.  I figure y’all would roll heavy to just kill the AI and cap circles and be over with.  Unlike the US did mama duck and just lead AI away and cap circles.  You don’t get better by not fighting, but hay I wasn’t in charge of those PB.

[--Privateer--]

1 minute ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Did they bring 4-5 rates?

They did, you should have seen all the DLC. Considering how much they seem to care about Saint Marys on the forum, they weren't willing to risk much to keep it.

11 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

St Mary’s wasn’t handled at all.  It’s good they found a big and reported.  It’s bad they exploited it and keep the port.  Devs should of reset it to neutral to be captured by normal in game means.  Just cause you report something doesnt means it’s right to still do it until it’s fixed.  After they test all the crashed port battles so why shouldn't a bug/exploit be reset to? 

I don't think they should "fix" saint mary's without also fixing the timezone issue. We in VCO have been looking for any port to grind up, and there just aren't any available. Even though most the map is still neutral it's already taken, it was really all locked down 3hrs after the wipe. It's so sad we're actually thinking of moving our base back to Mort, a proud RVR clan living out of Mort. 😥

[Sir Texas Sir]

23 minutes ago, --Privateer-- said:

They did, you should have seen all the DLC. Considering how much they seem to care about Saint Marys on the forum, they weren't willing to risk much to keep it.

I don't think they should "fix" saint mary's without also fixing the timezone issue. We in VCO have been looking for any port to grind up, and there just aren't any available. Even though most the map is still neutral it's already taken, it was really all locked down 3hrs after the wipe. It's so sad we're actually thinking of moving our base back to Mort, a proud RVR clan living out of Mort. 😥

Cause they couldn’t stop the PB why not just bring throw away ships.

 

you can flip ports today after reset.  You where just limited by capitals is all.  So go flip ports around your capital like the rest of us instead of using an exploit to put your self in the middle of anouther nations back yard and take the WO port they planes to flip today when savanna isn’t contested.  Now they can’t agro St Marybuntil after the weekend is over and well I’m going to bet with y’all leaving it open y’all will be jumping into every mission they try to flip neural ports and they have to fight y’all and the AI.  

You know it was an exploit and can’t be done now it’s fixed but y’all captured the port any way.  Shouldn’t get special treatment just cause you can’t wait a few days to flip ports like the rest of the game. And as for all the EU taking your capital ports around MT.  Maybe you should of arranged for them to not flip all the ports and let y’all flip some too.  US made arrangements to have our EU, night shift and retired guys flip ports right after server down time.  We made plans apparently y’all didnt with the rest of your nation.

 

i don’t think you understand how front lines work.  Every one else is working out of capitals and freetowns.  Why should your clan. Be any different? Oh and the last port was flipped 9 hours not 3z. As it was 3pm when Cary the last port was flipped and I headed to bed.

Edited April 26, 2019 by Sir Texas Sir

[TheAgend47]

Why do these US nations always howl about players? Ir have the whole north !!!

And what is more important, that is the wrong threat for your little things!

-> Port investments and shipbuilding bonuses feedback <-

[angriff]

The game has created a decided disunion affect between clans in the same country, IMHO.  The scramble for rare woods and resources will crush any unity with clans of the same nation as they steal each others hard work.  One clan takes the capital and another clan steals the rare woods.  

Clan one takes capital and has to wait to take supporting ports.  

Clan two takes supporting ports and possible steals known rare woods in a supporting town.

Possibly exploiting the capabilities of a nation by taking ports from friendlies with fake clans

Rare woods should not be revealed until the county capital is taken - Suggestion.

Remove the ability of a player to flip  a port by his/herself   

Edited April 26, 2019 by angriff
I guess fleets cant go into hostility

[Capsize More]

6 hours ago, --Privateer-- said:

Numbers don't matter if you're trying to tag 12 1st rates with 20 4th-5th rates. The BR limit is put in so you can't tag a real fleet and just kite around with your fake fleet. If you brought a real fleet you could have pulled us easily. Like you said, you had the numbers.

I have to say I agree.  I lost an Aggy and Bellona, if anyone else showed up with Line ships I would have been willing to risk a first rate, on top of those, but its the US and we have a glaring organizational problem.  

[Capsize More]

4 hours ago, TheAgend47 said:

Why do these US nations always howl about players? Ir have the whole north !!!

And what is more important, that is the wrong threat for your little things!

-> Port investments and shipbuilding bonuses feedback <-

You forgot the -> PATCH 31 <-

[OjK]

After looking at investment screen, I'm pretty sure that 90% of clans will go 4-3-3-3-3, with 1 point spare for fort, or 4-4-3-3-2

The Port Points and investments points value should be revisited, so we won't have everyone speccing the same

Edited April 27, 2019 by OjK

[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.

[Angus MacDuff]

There is an investment option and then there is the ship buffs.  You can do the investments and that is safe.  If the owning clan removes you from their list, you lose the ship building buffs.  If I pay into that, its just gone.  

 

[angriff]

Port Investment Screen should not be available to general public.  They should not see if you are building defensive positions or are too far from finishing them.  It is sort of a military secret.

 

[Dibbler (Retired)]

31 minutes ago, angriff said:

Port Investment Screen should not be available to general public.  They should not see if you are building defensive positions or are too far from finishing them.  It is sort of a military secret.

 

 

 How would you keep secret the construction of a shore battery?

 Just curious .

[Carlos_Condell]

Admin a little off topic here but can i suggest to make the WIND shift in OW as it does in battle instance?? would be nice to have random less predictive wind in OW

this little simple thing would add a lot more fun to our (sometimes boring) sailings

thank you

Edited April 28, 2019 by Carlos_Condell

[angriff]

18 hours ago, Dibbler said:

 

 How would you keep secret the construction of a shore battery?

 Just curious .

Well in real I would have to admit but since they do not appear until they are completed it is a military secret.  you can see how close or far they are from building   Also people will go into ports and see what you are building your ships and economy 

[Hawkwood]

Generally speaking, i think, although the bonuses seem to be expensive, they are much too high. It is a matter of time untill clans have enough resources, and having such ships with such bonuses wouldn´t be a good thing for the game.

Guess lower costs for bonuses, but lower bonuses as such would be better.

[OjK]

7 minutes ago, Hawkwood said:

Generally speaking, i think, although the bonuses seem to be expensive, they are much too high. It is a matter of time untill clans have enough resources, and having such ships with such bonuses wouldn´t be a good thing for the game.

Guess lower costs for bonuses, but lower bonuses as such would be better.

Also, if every ship around is going to same max speed bonus, what's the point of speed bonus?
Without raising the 15,5 hardcap, that will only make heavier ships beeing more ridicoulus.

If someone wants to hit some highest benefit on f.e. speed, shouldn't be possible to max out others as well.

Did You this post of mine?

 

[Angus MacDuff]

We need a speed cap by rate. Simple.

[jodgi]

20 minutes ago, Hawkwood said:

but lower bonuses as such would be better.

I'm going to play the Devil's advocate here.

You say better, but for what would it be better?

Once again we stare down the barrel of terribly unbalancing buffs. This time the buffs are put in place in an attempt to motivate us to go out and conquer.

If the buffs weren't good they wouldn't serve as motivation, would they?

Observing from the side-line it seems to me that RvR won't drive itself (above a meaningful threshold) unless there are really good rewards. Either it cools down because people don't like to lose their shit or they can't be assed to do the needed bot grinding to set up a PB.

So we blindfold and hogtie fighting mechanics balance and start abusing it in the hope that it will give meaning to RvR. It may or may not work as far as making PBs happen but in either case ship class balance, demasting vs. pen, speed vs. tankiness and other balancing pivots will remain out of whack.

Le plus le Sigh...

Some anti-DLC posters have long argued that paying for cosmetics should be enough. I wonder if those guys would be happy with cosmetic rewards for the RvR endgame?

Fighting mechanics balance is the most precious thing we have in this game but we seem happy to throw it under the bus again and again. 

pls halp!

[Zlatkowar]

4 minutes ago, OjK said:

Also, if every ship around is going to same max speed bonus, what's the point of speed bonus?

This is quite a valid point.

I hate the clan based port investment idea. And the one thing I don't understand is that you have probably spent hours creating and tuning those individual ship upgrades and skill books only to completely ditch them in favor of that unique thing owned by one clan that applies to all. One big bland mix of "all the same". I really don't get the benefit of doing that.

I get the general idea, I can see where you wanna go with that, on PvP server. But this is not real life, and all the clan powerplay and alliances and resistance and such will never ever be as fierce as IRL, because IRL it is a matter of life or death, and death in this game means people quitting and moving on to something else. And this is what is likely to happen. I see however that the idea is generally well received by the PvP crowd. We have yet to see how this will work out on PvE.

You should update game description on Steam and make it clear that the game is clan based and that solo players can gtfo. This is an important piece of information.

[Angus MacDuff]

On ‎4‎/‎27‎/‎2019 at 1:02 PM, Routan said:

Didn’t admin said if you first have paid, even if you no longer is in that alliance, you would have acces as long you are in the same nation?

So basicly owning clan can sell slots. Make s clan, get invited. After that they can remove you again. Not sure it goes both for clans and players. But I think so. Do think you will be removed from acces to rare woods.

I'm still very concerned with the idea that the owning clan has ownership of the advantages in a port and can invite (or un-invite) whom they choose.  I heard my first threat on the weekend.  A leader gave instructions to non-clan players and said (paraphrasing) "Follow these instructions or you will be removed from the friends list".  The ability of players to threaten other players with expulsion from a feature in the game is not healthy.  I believe that this sort of thing can get out of hand and become very poisonous.

Edited April 29, 2019 by Angus MacDuff

[Vernon Merrill]

Human nature being human nature, the players who do RvR will ALWAYS play the rvr game as long as there’s a chance to gain even a small advantage    

I personally think that RvR will be fine even if they nerf the bonuses....

On a related note, it might be more “equitable” to leave the mods alone and just do far more reasonable hard caps.  

That way, clanplayers can get their mod fix through RvR and improvements while solos go the old fashioned route of perms and books.  

Either way, there should NEVER be more than a 10% difference between ships in ANY characteristic.