Forthcoming patch information

[Lukas97Austria]

30 minutes ago, admin said:

How did not we think of the 24 hour hostility window. This is amazing, players will be then able to gain hostility while enemy is sleeping, can even flip the port right after maintenance.

Make the amount of grind needed higher? Right now you did need 2 missions in only 10 first rates...  If you denie screening as whole let gain some action there.  Make the window 24 hours and let it need to be atleast 10x the pb fleet to reach 100% with out losing an ship for the aggressor. 

So from Asian to european to Americans everyone could be involved in one pb preparation.  For me it sounds great. If someone grinds there will be 100%pvp because they need to grind it again and again.  Right now as we had it. If you hadn't an spy or an alt in that nation and you had no information about enemy's it looked like this. Blablabla reached 95%. So you got exactly a bit of reaction time where most clans nations etc failed. 

With the method of needing more hostility missions nations can react to it. Also as "random". People will become the feeling of being needed or active in the war. 

But either way. It was just my mind play. In the end its your decision how game play and mechanics fits in your game or not.  

[admin]

23 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Make the amount of grind needed higher? 

So from Asian to european to Americans everyone could be involved in one pb preparation.  For me it sounds great.

Higher how? 1000 First rates? 100 East Russians can grind this in 20-30 mins after maintenance without anyone having a chance to defend. Even higher? Calculate the number of required ships and ask yourself what would smaller nation achieve.

Please post your ideas in the idea suggestions threads they will be considered if they are good and highly voted.
 

[admin]

40 minutes ago, Timberjac said:

First, thanks for your answer.

Ok, I can get that point…  maybe with one of 12 hours or 16 (really, there players of lots of countries, any closed timing may be always Will go against some players).

Got it. Timers.
I see you are starting to see.
 

How about 3-4 hours timer. Not small but not too big. We can even make them cost some money and allow the defender to decide on the timezone.  I can deploy it just like that, will take a second. 

[Kpt Lautenschlaeger]

Would it be possible to make it SLOWER, rather than HIGHER?

So, within that 12hr (or whatever) window, there is a cap on the hostility that can be gained per hour (say: 10%). That way, we would get around the brute-force-30-mins-flip, and allow the defenders to organise something?

[Nixolai]

45 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Make the amount of grind needed higher? Right now you did need 2 missions in only 10 first rates...  If you denie screening as whole let gain some action there.  Make the window 24 hours and let it need to be atleast 10x the pb fleet to reach 100% with out losing an ship for the aggressor.

 

22 minutes ago, admin said:

Got it. Timers.
I see you are starting to see.
 

How about 3-4 hours timer. Not small but not too big. We can even make them cost some money and allow the defender to decide on the timezone.  I can deploy it just like that, will take a second. 

3 hour timers are great.

remember this is a game we play in our free time, if this game requires us to be online for half a day each day, we might aswell quit our real life.

[Lukas97Austria]

32 minutes ago, admin said:

Higher how? 1000 First rates? 100 East Russians can grind this in 20-30 mins after maintenance without anyone having a chance to defend. Even higher? Calculate the number of required ships and ask yourself what would smaller nation achieve.

Please post your ideas in the idea suggestions threads they will be considered if they are good and highly voted.
 

There are ways like. Limit active hostility missions. It's only allowed that 3 are open for one port. So any other hostility mission grinder need to wait or jump the ongoing one if there is space open. 

If you don't count that into it. If course it wouldn't work 

Also thanks for communicating with us. It can be hard sometimes to be a dev or in the dev team /game team 

Edited May 26, 2020 by Lukas97Austria

[Timberjac]

24 minutes ago, admin said:

Got it. Timers.
I see you are starting to see.
 

How about 3-4 hours timer. Not small but not too big. We can even make them cost some money and allow the defender to decide on the timezone.  I can deploy it just like that, will take a second. 

Perhaps, that time window would fall too short, maybe 8 hours, would be more appropriate... After all, I think there are players from many places, and the narrower the time slot, the more players who feel injured, there may be. Also, it might be good, to keep track of everything done by each player in that time slot, in that zone, and for the PBs, each individual's efforts were taken into account, rather than a clan mission (the clan he wants, he will already coordinate to do it more effectively). So anyone who enters, in a PB, is because he deserves to be there, above others, who have not worked so much in the area. Of course, once the list of invited people is finished (or that some of them may even reject the invitation by the system), other people can join.

[admin]

4 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

There are ways like. Limit active hostility missions. It's only allowed that 3 are open for one port. So any other hostility mission grinder need to wait or jump the ongoing one if there is space open. 

If you don't count that into it. If course it wouldn't work 

Also thanks for communicating with us. It can be hard sometimes to be a dev or in the dev team /game team 

The game is good. Most mechanics were born out of necessity and solve problems. Just like plane eject systems they might not be perfect and might break a leg or two but they work. 

[Lukas97Austria]

4 minutes ago, Nixolai said:

 

3 hour timers are great.

remember this is a game we play in our free time, if this game requires us to be online for half a day each day, we might aswell quit our real life.

You are right about this. But if I am allowed there is one game where 3 "country's" try to regain control of an planet. It's open for 24 hours 24/7. If you go to sleep others fight. And the home Spot can't be lost anyways. It works there also and nobody cares that others can regain control in the region you conquered with your squad when you where online. 

Well I see that not everyone will like that or enjoy it. I just pointed out there are some ways it could be. Here the devs and only the devs will decide what they can Programm. Test. And want. 

We are only here to play the game and give some feedback/wishes. 

[Lukas97Austria]

1 minute ago, admin said:

The game is good. Most mechanics were born out of necessity and solve problems. Just like plane eject systems they might not be perfect and might break a leg or two but they work. 

Hey. The game is playable. And I do enjoy it.  Also a game will never be perfect. Always there are ways to improve and make it better and better 👍 

 

[Frosty]

4 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Hey. The game is playable. And I do enjoy it.  Also a game will never be perfect. Always there are ways to improve and make it better and better 👍 

 

That's true. But logging in and finding 290 players online in a morning (usually there were like 600...) is discouraging and people just log off because they can't hunt anymore.

[Lukas97Austria]

Just now, Comrade FrosT said:

That's true. But logging in and finding 290 players online in a morning (usually there were like 600...) is discouraging and people just log off because they can't hunt anymore.

Before wipe their was a time with 300 max at EU time. Still had some brilliant pvp. Also there is the PZ zone. There is always someone there. 

 

Otherwise ask for an coordinated pvp fight. I am sure some are willing to do 

[Frosty]

1 minute ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Before wipe their was a time with 300 max at EU time. Still had some brilliant pvp. Also there is the PZ zone. There is always someone there. 

 

Otherwise ask for an coordinated pvp fight. I am sure some are willing to do 

I used to play before wipe. I was pve'ing because casual PvP was not even a possibility. If you think it's fine that a released game should have 300 players online, then you might have a problem.

@admin Can you do anything to get back some players? Instead of removing hostility without saying when we'll be able to RvR again and removing screening with the new patch... or maybe something like making RvR total wars less exhaustinging (increasing cooldown maybe) or finding a way to prevent huge multiflips.

[Lukas97Austria]

1 minute ago, Comrade FrosT said:

I used to play before wipe. I was pve'ing because casual PvP was not even a possibility. If you think it's fine that a released game should have 300 players online, then you might have a problem.

@admin Can you do anything to get back some players? Instead of removing hostility without saying when we'll be able to RvR again and removing screening with the new patch... or maybe something like making RvR total wars less exhaustinging (increasing cooldown maybe) or finding a way to prevent huge multiflips.

An game can only so many players have as the product finds costumers. Not many players prefer sailing games. That's why shooters and mmos have so many players.  As long as I do have content and others too it doesn't matter how many players are in the game. Even when there are only 20 players left and we do each day 10vs10 battles I am fine with this. 

[Slim McSauce]

12 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

As long as I do have content and others too it doesn't matter how many players are in the game. Even when there are only 20 players left and we do each day 10vs10 battles I am fine with this. 

You can have it, NA will long have a successor by then. It will take years for this game to drop below 300 active, depending how it ages it can still grow from here.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Slim McSauce

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

7 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

An game can only so many players have as the product finds costumers. Not many players prefer sailing games. That's why shooters and mmos have so many players.  As long as I do have content and others too it doesn't matter how many players are in the game. Even when there are only 20 players left and we do each day 10vs10 battles I am fine with this. 

sorry lukas, but that argumentation is plain nonsense! we have a huge and great world, splendid ships, physics and stuff, thousands of people willing to participate... nonetheless numbers frighteningly drop form time to time. i for my part do not want an enormous sandbox "filled" by two dozen people fighting barbie-naval-battles!

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

47 minutes ago, Kpt Lautenschlaeger said:

Would it be possible to make it SLOWER, rather than HIGHER?

So, within that 12hr (or whatever) window, there is a cap on the hostility that can be gained per hour (say: 10%). That way, we would get around the brute-force-30-mins-flip, and allow the defenders to organise something?

Very good! In different steps! First attack causes the "incident" like an advertising for a hot zone. A pvp-active zone might evolve! Feels good doesn´t it?

[Lukas97Austria]

Yeah but look. People blame devs. While I am now in the 2nd nation that has a capitol area. Still vets in superior ships having fun to punish new players. 

The new players mostly don't want anymore after being ganked nonstop. We as "challenge" will get outrun or they don't even want to fight us. 

Day in day out.  People quit.  Yes if WE as community act like this of course we can't get more people into the game. Because the new people don't even have time to learn! 

 

Next example. Frost you are Denmark. How many ports do you take from pirates while they struggle? Wtf away. Rhb not able to hold it due skill gap. So the players can only watch as there nation crumbles into ashes. 

 

If I look to the south of French I can only say that Russia is very good opponent. Sure they win alot but. They give us time. Doing a slow ongoing war instead of rushing in.  Downside. They come to gank new players. As mentioned earlier. 

 

We as player have also alot of impact on player base.  But if everyone does what he likes and prefers sure others will not like it or can't keep up with this. 

We losing players not only by game mechanics but also on actions we do in the game. Think about it before saying it's only devs fault. There are always two sides of each medal. 

[Nixolai]

46 minutes ago, Timberjac said:

Perhaps, that time window would fall too short, maybe 8 hours, would be more appropriate... After all, I think there are players from many places, and the narrower the time slot, the more players who feel injured, there may be. Also, it might be good, to keep track of everything done by each player in that time slot, in that zone, and for the PBs, each individual's efforts were taken into account, rather than a clan mission (the clan he wants, he will already coordinate to do it more effectively). So anyone who enters, in a PB, is because he deserves to be there, above others, who have not worked so much in the area. Of course, once the list of invited people is finished (or that some of them may even reject the invitation by the system), other people can join.

Example REDS have their main playerbase in EU time, how will an 8 hour window be fair, if we dont have a substantial amount of people to play all of those hours?

In a normal weekday i have 4 hours max to play.

[Nixolai]

4 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

If I look to the south of French I can only say that Russia is very good opponent. Sure they win alot but. They give us time. Doing a slow ongoing war instead of rushing in.  Downside. They come to gank new players. As mentioned earlier. 

Tbh i like the current war with the french, no multiflips and one PB per week. But besides that, we are doing other fun stuff like privateer fleets, PvE or PvP.

[Lukas97Austria]

1 minute ago, Nixolai said:

Tbh i like the current war with the french, no multiflips and one PB per week. But besides that, we are doing other fun stuff like privateer fleets, PvE or PvP.

Exactly 

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

23 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Yeah but look. People blame devs. While I am now in the 2nd nation that has a capitol area. Still vets in superior ships having fun to punish new players. 

The new players mostly don't want anymore after being ganked nonstop. We as "challenge" will get outrun or they don't even want to fight us. 

Day in day out.  People quit.  Yes if WE as community act like this of course we can't get more people into the game. Because the new people don't even have time to learn! 

 

Next example. Frost you are Denmark. How many ports do you take from pirates while they struggle? Wtf away. Rhb not able to hold it due skill gap. So the players can only watch as there nation crumbles into ashes. 

 

If I look to the south of French I can only say that Russia is very good opponent. Sure they win alot but. They give us time. Doing a slow ongoing war instead of rushing in.  Downside. They come to gank new players. As mentioned earlier. 

 

We as player have also alot of impact on player base.  But if everyone does what he likes and prefers sure others will not like it or can't keep up with this. 

We losing players not only by game mechanics but also on actions we do in the game. Think about it before saying it's only devs fault. There are always two sides of each medal. 

The developers gave us the best sailing-game ever! But stubborn like children - sorry my beloved nerds in Ukraine - they enforce veterans in superior ships clubbing weaker ones by: abracadabra..... game-mechanics! Many good proposals have been made. Much has been achieved, but much can also be refined. A little example: mission-mechanics. Offer missions FOR certain ships! Give a high reward if one completes them with a Cherubim for instance. (The leader-board-junkey will always sail the meta-ship. Why not throwing the leaderboard in the trashcan where it belongs anyway btw.?) How many wonderfully modelled ships do we have right now? What does the game DO to make them sailed? Best wishes, Gene

[Lukas97Austria]

31 minutes ago, Genevieve Malfleurs said:

The developers gave us the best sailing-game ever! But stubborn like children - sorry my beloved nerds in Ukraine - they enforce veterans in superior ships clubbing weaker ones by: abracadabra..... game-mechanics! Many good proposals have been made. Much has been achieved, but much can also be refined. A little example: mission-mechanics. Offer missions FOR certain ships! Give a high reward if one completes them with a Cherubim for instance. (The leader-board-junkey will always sail the meta-ship. Why not throwing the leaderboard in the trashcan where it belongs anyway btw.?) How many wonderfully modelled ships do we have right now? What does the game DO to make them sailed? Best wishes, Gene

Well it's true what you say. But in other games you can also spawn camp enemy's etc. But it's also the decision behind the player to do it or to let it.  Just because no rule apply doesn't mean you NEED to do it. 

But I guess we getting a bit offtpic. Let the man here posting about what is coming and what not 

Fair winds o7

[erelkivtuadrater]

2 hours ago, admin said:

The game is good. Most mechanics were born out of necessity and solve problems. Just like plane eject systems they might not be perfect and might break a leg or two but they work. 

i believe alot of players would disagree that mechanics were born out of necessity and remove content/immersion solve problems, but we have our own opinions

Edited May 26, 2020 by erelkivtuadrater

[Conte D. Catellani]

2 hours ago, admin said:

The game is good. Most mechanics were born out of necessity and solve problems. Just like plane eject systems they might not be perfect and might break a leg or two but they work. 

The game is great, i like turn around and see the ship details, listen the sound of the sea while the ship has is journey to go to combat or to trade, the sunset over the seam the storms.. is an amazing job.

The combat where you have to turn the sail, brake, look at the wind wait the right wave.. and i could continue for long.

But for a small clan like the one i'm is hard to build up a fleet for PB, or trying to do something all together... the limit of six ship for npc mission is a little sad is not possible to make it dynamic? for many player join it add the same br and rate with a bonus to make it a lil more hard?  we are really planning to go into a suicide mission against a privateer fleet.