On the pace of post-wipe RvR and Timezone disparity

[Anolytic]

This wipe has made evident some notable problems with the current RvR-model. Especially about early expansion after release.

• One of the problems is the connection between regions putting unnatural restraints on the direction of expansion. 
• Another problem is the rate of expansion. The map gets gobbled up by the nations with the most large clans that can fan out over the map and capture every region adjacent to default territories or Free-ports. 
• Last but not least (of the problems addressed here) is the problem of no luck for the US-timezone.

The first problem, created by the way hostility missions are now linked to the closest regions, was addressed somewhat by the expansion from 2 to 3 regions being available. But in return it created new problems and I plan to address this whole mechanic further elsewhere.

However, the other two problems persist in full. That after wipe/release, it is first come-first serve, and since maintenance/wipe usually happens after US primetime and before EU primetime, by the time US players come online again after a wipe, the map is already divided between European clans. Every nation that has the ability, through sheer numbers, will fan out immediately after a map-wipe and grind everything that can be grinded.

My suggestion consists of two recommended changes. 

First is a limitation on how many regions can be under attack at the same time by a nation, and the rate of outward expansion.

What we are going to see clearly tomorrow, when nations for the first time take full possession of county capitals they have so far conquered. Is that it is strongly in the interest of clans and nations to largely ignore capturing ports that are not regional capitals, and instead to secure the largest territory possible by proceeding to attack the next county capital from where they have now reached with their expansion. We will see regions where a few, or even most, of the ports beyond the county capital, will not have the controlling faction even bothering to claim them. As long as they are within a region held by the nation, they are impossible to claim by other factions, and therefore can be left neutral with little threat save from enemies creating outposts and hunting there. Instead nations will be seeking to secure as many regional capitals as possible, and leave it to lesser clans to fill in the gaps of undesirable smaller ports.

My suggestion is this:

Allow each nation to only be engaged in the conquest of 2 regions per day. And also, make it so that until a nation controls at least 60% of the ports in a region, they cannot take hostility missions from that region to an adjacent region.

So not only will you need to take a county capital anymore, a nation also needs to be in possession of most of the ports within that region before they can use that region as a staging ground to go for any adjacent region. 

And nations can only attack 2 regions at once, meaning that if they have attacked 2 regional capitals, they cannot attack any further regional capitals until they have control of those two regions. Meaning they should control a majority of ports (60%) in the regions.

So for example if Pirates on day 1 attack Baracoa and Pitt’s Town. They cannot attack any third region until they have captured those regional capitals, plus 1 further port in Baracoa County and 2 further ports in Crooked County.

This will slow down the initial expansion somewhat, and allow the map to develop at a more natural and steady pace in the beginning. With more nations being able to secure some initial territory, and with nations needing to cooperate to prioritise what counties they should attack first as well as in finishing up all of the smaller ports within each County.

So what about the US timezone population?

My opinion will always be that the game would benefit from having two regional servers. However, let us put the lid on that idea for the purposes of this discussion. 

My suggestion for the resolution of this issue is to consider each 24 hours as 2 12-hour days. One EU-timezone day, followed by one US-timezone day. The division being at, say, midnight UTC time (server time). 

Going by the system proposed above, that means that EU-timezone players would be able to attack 2 regions before midnight (server time), and US timezone players would be able to attack a further 2 regions after midnight (server time). 

Meaning also that in 24 hours a nation can engage in 4 different regions. So conquest will be slowed down a little bit, but not a lot and the division of the map not unnecessarily hampered. Nor will lack of coordination within a nation be too harshly punished with 4 chances to get the most important regions on the first day.

Of course, SEA-timezone players will, given the current maintenance times, be caught somewhat in-between two chairs, neither being able to fully compete initially in the EU-timezone, nor the US-timezone. But if they were to find themselves in nations with less of a US-timezone contingent of players they would be able to take almost the same benefit from the proposed system.

So in short:

2 regions attackable simultaneously per day per nation.

60% of ports in either regions needs to be controlled before the next regions can be assaulted.

And divide the day into two 12-hour blocks to allow the US-timezone players to also attack 2 regions per day, even when the EU-timezone population used up the 2-region quota in their timezone.

Edited April 25, 2019 by Anolytic

[Socialism]

I like it.  I would also add that a release of this magnitude really should hit on a friday at the very least....weekend preferably.  Though boo to your regional servers comments.  

I was also thinking about wood/resource availability with a staggered release.  

Let's say that at launch there is still 1 LO / WO / Carta (insert whatever meta material port) and it opens right away.  What if we were to create 2 LO (or whatever) ports and place them strategically in 2 different areas and unlock them during different prime times.  A EU time / US time.  This would perhaps lessen the timer monopoly on woods/whatever and allow 2 different communities to still battle on the same server with less crossing of the timer streams.  As it stands the US marches down to San Augustin with impunity and zero chance for any other nation to catch up.  Not really fair for the EU guys.  Though I guarantee the US will put a daytime timer on it.  Same with say a port like little harbor or carta but for US players.  

There's plenty of ports out there to use.  Having 1 LO or Carta or WO port seems a bit absurd with a global type of server and locking regions as they currently are.

[Guest]

2 Servers and all problems are solved. Its very easy

[Vernon Merrill]

There are 2 servers.  In fact, you can play on both of them!

[Nick the cursed]

1 hour ago, El Patron said:

2 Servers and all problems are solved. Its very easy

And got only 100/150 players on each servers? Nah, this isn't a solution. I'm from EU time and sometimes i play late with my US time friends and vice versa (and AUS time zone too!). We're happy to see some ppl at any time, EU/US time.

've to work on mechanics, not split server.

3 hours ago, Anolytic said:

 

What 'bout a cooldown for the timers, for some weeks or a month after the wipe? Once port capped or recapped, alliances/arrangements made, introduce timers and US 'll 've their ports like EU or AUS? (just a suggestion, need rework for sure)

Edited April 26, 2019 by Nick the cursed

[toblerone]

Odd you did not note also the HUGE advantage that GB has with this new RVR game mechanic due to the fact that it is right in the center of the map (so having a lot of" adiacent", yet very far, regions in all directions) and being the most populated nation of the server.

 

[Vizzini]

If we don't get enough players for 3 separate time zoned servers, then I would seriously worry about the longevity of the game. We would just bleed out slowly

 

Many of the known issues we suffer from only having 1 server cannot be solved in a way that makes everybody happy, they just tolerate the problems

5k at release, there will be queues and nobody will queue happily for long , knowing full well content will be locked when they get onto the server.

 

Night flips and timers cause so much grief . Ping times...     maintenance being done during Oceanic prime time.

All the most serious issues would be solved by having regional servers. Time gating will cause apathy

Edited April 26, 2019 by Vizzini
clarity and spelling

[Guest]

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Anolytic said:

 

So in short:

2 regions attackable simultaneously per day per nation.

 

thats a bad idea. 

its ok with 500 players online but not with 1k or more players.

when you have 200 players active in your nation than its not possible to join the pb. 

 

[Hawkwood]

About "regional" servers... Why not making a  whole "Spanish Bay", the area between let´s say western Florida coast and west END of the map( Esteros, Vera Cruz) a "non EU/RUS" time zone, means all players from US or other parts of the world would have enough regions, and if admin gives them enough resources there, a reason to play in that particular zone.

If needed, whole US coast can be added to this area. This area named above, between west Florida and the westernmost free port(and the only 1 by the way) is mostly unpopulated, not much happens up there, and adding the US coast to that "another time zone", would save the poor US players from being farmed day after day by euro/russian players..( they just need to fight US gankers eh:-)

Edited April 26, 2019 by Hawkwood

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 hours ago, El Patron said:

thats a bad idea. 

its ok with 500 players online but not with 1k or more players.

when you have 200 players active in your nation than its not possible to join the pb. 

 

Why would I let some random join my port battle my clan or friendly clans flip?   You want to join a port battle than get in a clan that is flipping them.   That works with 100 players or 1000 players.   There is a reason for the friendly clans list after all.