New Tag System bug: Player can escape while sinking

[Anolytic]

This morning we came across what appears to be a serious flaw in the new tagging system.

It used to be that if a ship had any crew in survival, whether it was dousing fire, plugging a leak or manning the pumps, this would count as a continuous tag and the ship could not leave. This prevented such situations as a ship 50% filled with water escaping. This appears to have been neglected in the new system. 

An enemy ship was able to escape battle from right under our nose, while taking in water and being on fire all the way up until its escape. Oh, and don't think we neglected to shoot at it all the time until its escape. 

I recorded the instance here:

And I sent an F11 report from the battle instance later: NAB-101635

At 4:25 you can see the ship disappearing from the instance. And the smoke from the fire is hanging in the air where it vanished. 

At 3:36, less than 1 minute before, I ask @Redman29 to confirm the ship is still on fire which he does.

The ship had 1 bar of structure left and would have been taking water. Any ship with less than 2 bars of structure will be taking water, although until it goes below 1 bar it will usually be enough to have 30-70 crew on survival to continuously pump that water out. Still, this on top of the fire should have most definitely kept the ship tagged while we did our tack going back to finish it off.

On top of this the fire, if we disregard the survival-crew-equals-tagged rule from previously, the fire burning away armour plus the repeated stern rakes we aimed at the target, should have easily been enough of a percentage damage on the ship to keep it in battle. This percentage damage needs to be calculated from remaining HP and not base HP or this is going to be a repeat frustration with the new tag system. 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Anolytic

[admin]

No. Your example was investigated and was NOT CONFIRMED.

To not be able to exit you have to take more water than you can pump out. If you take less water than you can pump out you will exit.  The player exited because he could.

AND The % damage is calculated on the remaining HP not the overall HP. It is actually indicated in patchnotes: the more damaged target is the easier it to keep it in battle.

[Despe]

3 minutes ago, admin said:

To not be able to exit you have to take more water than you can pump out.

this is interesting, and it need to be fixed i guess. Imho player could not able to exit in battle if they need survival crew. The rest of new tag systen i think that works correctly, and is better than the older system.

Best regards and thx for your work!

[admin]

1 hour ago, Anolytic said:

 

And I sent an F11 report from the battle instance later: NAB-101635

At 4:25 you can see the ship disappearing from the instance. And the smoke from the fire is hanging in the air where it vanished. 

 

but we will recheck again with survival switched off just in case.

[Anolytic]

39 minutes ago, admin said:

No. Your example was investigated and was NOT CONFIRMED.

To not be able to exit you have to take more water than you can pump out. If you take less water than you can pump out you will exit.  The player exited because he could.

AND The % damage is calculated on the remaining HP not the overall HP. It is actually indicated in patchnotes: the more damaged target is the easier it to keep it in battle.

So what you're saying is that this is not a bug, but working as intended. 
But then the intention is wrong. It is neither realistic, nor reasonable that a ship that is on fire, with hardly any structure, low sails, and no way of running away, should be able to magically disappear from 250 meters away, while being constantly shot at.

What is the purpose of this mechanic? Is it "griefing" that we have to tack our ships before we can finish him off? Should he be allowed to escape just so he doesn't have to wait 2 more minutes to sink? Even if the water coming in didn't keep him tagged (it should be, even if pumped out), then the fire should have. 

I called it a "bug" in the title (I only mention the word bug in the title) to be nice, but I acknowledge that it might simply be a bad mechanic.

I encourage anyone to look at the video and decide for themselves if this is a realistic or reasonable conclusion to a battle. As anyone can see, the target ship is literally dead in the water when it escapes.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Anolytic

[admin]

24 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

So what you're saying is that this is not a bug, but working as intended. 
But then the intention is wrong. It is neither realistic, nor reasonable that a ship that is on fire, with hardly any structure, low sails, and no way of running away, should be able to magically disappear from 250 meters away, while being constantly shot at.

The intention is to give the chance to exit if you can survive (you can reverse the process - put down the fire, pump out water). If are certain to die (once the process is irreversible) - you wont exit.

it was like this since forever and not going to suddenly change. If you just damaged someone to start leaks its not enough. You have to make those leaks irreversible. Otherwise it will be repaired and will be back in action (and even make it to Cadiz)
 

[Lt Sekiro]

23 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

So what you're saying is that this is not a bug, but working as intended. 
But then the intention is wrong. It is neither realistic, nor reasonable that a ship that is on fire, with hardly any structure, low sails, and no way of running away, should be able to magically disappear from 250 meters away, while being constantly shot at.

What is the purpose of this mechanic? Is it "griefing" that we have to tack our ships before we can finish him off? Should he be allowed to escape just so he doesn't have to wait 2 more minutes to sink? Even if the water coming in didn't keep him tagged (it should be, even if pumped out), then the fire should have. 

I called it a "bug" in the title (I only mention the word bug in the title) to be nice, but I acknowledge that it might simply be a bad mechanic.

I encourage anyone to look at the video and decide for themselves if this is a realistic or reasonable conclusion to a battle. As anyone can see, the target ship is literally dead in the water when it escapes.

I check video and maybe this is a bug.

when a ship got low on mid structure ( +- 1 tik) , you can't make dmg anymore to hp, you need to shoot side hull for finish the ship ( everyone already test it i think).

In this situation you got only stern to shoot , so you can't make any dmg to him from moment he don't launch any hull repair.

With 1 tik you can pump easy withou taking water yes , but the Fire @admin should block the timer in this situation.

 

So maybe bug about the Fire.

For the low structure this can be easy become a exploit if you can't be tagged in this kind of situation.

 

Maybe i'm wrong @admin, but i give my opinion about lot of battle i done 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Lt Sekiro

[William Death]

Regardless of whether or not he was sinking due to fire/structural leaks, his tag timer ought to have been reset, given the number of hits (13 sail hits in quick succession from a broadside) he sustained into rig. A player who can land 13 hits from 24 and 36lb cannons into your rig whilst you're on fire and leaking is not trolling you--not the way a ship kiting at max range keeping you in battle is trolling you.   

59 minutes ago, admin said:

The % damage is calculated on the remaining HP not the overall HP. It is actually indicated in patchnotes: the more damaged target is the easier it to keep it in battle.

Is there a published number available about how much % damage needs to be done in order to keep a ship tagged?

Is there a time limit to do this % damage? (EX: 5% damage within 20 seconds.) 

Can we get a more detailed description about how this mechanic works with the numerical thresholds?

 

[mexicanbatman]

we need an visual qeue to know if enemy is tagged in then this will make more sense 

[Anolytic]

13 minutes ago, admin said:

The intention is to give the chance to exit if you can survive (you can reverse the process - put down the fire, pump out water). If are certain to die (once the process is irreversible) - you wont exit

it was like this since forever and not going to suddenly change
 

But you changed the mechanic for keeping ships in this situation in battle until finishing it off.

Before, shooting this ship with even one ball in the stern or mast would keep him tagged until you can reposition to shoot his side one last time. Now it is impossible to keep him tagged because he can sterntank entire broadsides without taking enough percentage damage to tag, because when you get down to 1 bar of structure you don't loose structure through the stern anymore, only masts if lucky (which is a reasonable restriction to sterndamage in most cases, introduced because we didn't want ships to be killed entirely through sterndamage without even damaging the sides).

Again, I challenge anyone to watch that video and determine for themselves if his escape is realistic or constitute a reasonable mechanic. 

You say that this was like that forever and isn't going to "suddenly change", but you specifically just "suddenly changed" the tagging mechanic - which affects this situation and created this problem. So then either you need to reverse the new tagging mechanic or make additional changes to adjust for unintended consequences. Or we have to live with broken combat mechanics.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Anolytic

[Christendom]

The ship vanishing but the fire remaining for a second is a nice touch.....

[admin]

37 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

. Or we have to live with broken combat mechanics.

Not sure what you mean
Your report said

• Target escaped while sinking
• Target damage % should depend on current hp

We investigated and found that target had 23% structure and was not leaking enough
Target damage % already depends on current HP (lower HP will need less damage to keep in battle)

We also see that you let the target sail far far away. You cant damage stern below certain % through stern (you know it). You should have shot at his sides (you could not from far) thats why target escaped (at 23%). You just needed another shot into broadside probably. 

 

Verdict
From El Matador perspective the mechanic was not broken at all. 

We can discuss % of damage required (can be tweaked) in a separate topic. But we are keeping the system, as it solves real problem of time wasting and passive agressive pew pew from 1.5km.

 

[z4ys]

What the video does not show is did the fire went out in the moment he left (sometimes youre still smoking while fire went out)? A buring fire should not allow to leave a battle. Regarding the rest he was not in any threat by near enemies nor his middlebar was low enough for sinking

[admin]

5 minutes ago, z4ys said:

What the video does not show is did the fire went out in the moment he left (sometimes youre still smoking while fire went out)? A buring fire should not allow to leave a battle. Regarding the rest he was not in any threat by near enemies nor his middlebar was low enough for sinking

what fire are you talking about?

irreversible fire (that cannot be put out)
or just any fire (that is under control?)

[z4ys]

1 minute ago, admin said:

what fire are you talking about?

irreversible fire (that cannot be put out)
or just any fire (that is under control?)

any fire

I check one of my videos and it always shows cannot leave and the fire was under control

 

[Anolytic]

17 minutes ago, admin said:

Not sure what you mean
Your report said

• Target escaped while sinking
• Target damage % should depend on current hp

What about the fire? It should have reset his timer (realistically), but didn't. 

You're taking specific points out of context rather than responding to what can be seen in the video and is described in my post. Ignore what I wrote in the F11-report. I wrote that in a haste, as I was hurrying to get on with playing with my clanmates (the game is released, and F11-reports are no longer a part of the game exerience, but a courtesy), and only to give a reference point to the battle where this happened. What this is about is what can be seen in the video and is described in the post. 

Target was "sinking", maybe not technically the way you define it, but realistically, if I have holes in my boat that are so severe I cannot plug them, and I have to constantly pump it out to keep afloat, then my ship is sinking and I'm just delaying it. By this definition it would be impossible for a ship in sufficiently shallow waters to be considered sunk, because eventually the water on the inside will be as high as on the outside and will cease coming in, and we should be able to ground our ships to keep them alive and escape.

And we didn't "let" the ship sail far away. We were tacking - while shooting entire broadsides at it. And Redman was still quite close to it.

1 minute ago, admin said:

irreversible fire (that cannot be put out)
or just any fire (that is under control?)

We were shooting at his stern, which is where his fire was located.

How it is an anti griefing mechanic, that a ship can leave which is on fire and has people desperately trying to douse said fire, has to man the pumps constantly and urgently to keep the ocean on the outside from coming inside, and also has so low structural integrity that it can hardly move.

Maybe it was always a flaw, but the new tag system has highlighted that ships with crew on survival should be considered tagged. Until you can repair your ship back to an integrity that will keep the water out of its own.

42 minutes ago, admin said:

Verdict
From El Matador perspective the mechanic was not broken at all. 

 

The mechanic was meant to protect from griefing. In what way did El Dictator get protected from griefing?

Sure, the mechanic let him escape when he realistically shouldn't have. Good for him, but that doesn't make it not broken.

[admin]

10 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

What about the fire? It should have reset his timer (realistically), but didn't. 

 

 

13 minutes ago, z4ys said:

any fire

I check one of my videos and it always shows cannot leave and the fire was under control

 

Fire is damage
 

Previously any damage (even 1 damage hit to topsail from 1.5km) could stop you from exiting. So fire (dealing even 1 pt of damage) stopped player from exiting
Now you require a % of damage. Fire is dealing damage. If fire + all other incoming damage is below threshold, exit timer does not renew.

I don't see issues with fire in the new system. If your fire is weak, you will put it out eventually (if not under fire from outside). If this is true we are no longer going to keep you in battle, saving your precious time for another day.

Please keep all other discussions (realism, perception of realism) outside of the topic
 

[Lt Sekiro]

1 minute ago, admin said:

 

Fire is damage
 

Previously any damage (even 1 damage hit to topsail from 1.5km) could stop you from exiting.
Now you require a % of damage. Fire is dealing damage. If fire + all other incoming damage is below threshold, exit timer does not renew.


I don't see issues with fire - sorry.

Can you give us 2 information.

What % dmg we need for retag a ship

What dmg of a fire for 1M²

[z4ys]

8 minutes ago, admin said:

...

Problem solved its a missmatch in player assumption and dev insight. Player had the assumption that fire "regardless of the dmg means a ship is tagged like water pulling in (does no dmg)" while it actual was the dmg

[admin]

26 minutes ago, Anolytic said:

 

Target was "sinking", maybe not technically the way you define it, but realistically, if I have holes in my boat that are so severe I cannot plug them, and I have to constantly pump it out to keep afloat, then my ship is sinking and I'm just delaying it. By this definition it would be impossible for a ship in sufficiently shallow waters to be considered sunk, because eventually the water on the inside will be as high as on the outside and will cease coming in, and we should be able to ground our ships to keep them alive and escape.

 

I answered this above - what is unsatisfactory about the answer that you keep asking?

There are reversible leaks - you have full crew, green pumps, good mods, you have low structure but your crew still can pump it out or keep stable even if you do not repair
There are irreversible leaks - you have low crew, broken pumps - you have low structure and your crew wont pump it out whatever you do (if you dont repair)

Your delaying comment relates to irreversible leaks - you can pump but you are just delaying death.

But in your bug case target was NOT sinking, there were no irreversible leaks, nothing was delayed. What you dont get in this answer? 

[Frosty]

Probably we all want you @admin to be aware that the new system does not only prevent griefing (which it does impressively well), it also creates situation like this. People that just sail upwind, to delay their death and annoy the enemy that sooner or later will get them. The problem, since the guy was basically dead, is that with the new mechanic he could leave, even with FIRE! Which is honestly a wrong thing in my honest opinion. If we know what the parameters  (% of damage) required to tag are... we wouldn't be complaining about it this way, but you have to be aware that if someone is already low on everything (like this enemy in Anolytic's battle), you can't provide any more damage to have him tagged, but you SHOULD be able to!

And that is the main problem with the new mechanic, they were shooting stern rakes over stern rakes, yet no tag because the poor guy was already completely damaged lol... is it the effect you were looking for when the new mechanic was introduced? I don't think so.

[Anolytic]

54 minutes ago, admin said:

What you dont get in this answer? 

I understand your answer completely. I'm speaking respectively in descriptive terms about what happened in the battle, and about how the mechanic should be improved. I'm saying the current mechanic is not working good and leads to a lot of unsatisfactory battle results with defeated enemies escaping under our noses. 
You're implying we were neglectful in that battle for making a tactical tack in the course of a hard battle 2v2 against heavier opponents with more BR than us so that we could reengage and finish off a target that we just completely disabled, kept shooting throughout, and had an extremely reasonable expectation would not be able to escape given he was on fire and pumping water and getting shot at. You're saying we should have been at his broadside. But this was a 2v2, not a linefight. PvP involves manoeuvring. Are we back to bow- and stern-tanking being a thing which we changed so much to remove before? Do we have to keep track of (guess) how much damage a fire is actually making, because it might not be enough to keep him tagged?

Besides this being a completely new system that we have not had time to experience or learn, there used to be a premium on systems being intuitive. Defeated ships escaping is not intuitive.

How will new players react to defeated enemies magically despawning right in front of their eyes after a half hour hard fighting? 
How does this case have anything to do with anti-griefing?

What's the point of PvP when we have magical escapes?

54 minutes ago, admin said:

Your delaying comment relates to irreversible leaks - you can pump but you are just delaying it.

No. I'm speaking about if my boat is leaky but I have a really powerful pump that keeps up with the inflow of water. If all that's preventing the outside ocean from becoming the inside of my boat is a really powerful pump then my boat is not a very good one and I would buy a new one. 

Some who play this game have only time to do PvP once per day or less. How will they react if their battles conclude in the same way as you see in the video.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Anolytic

[Never]

Not sure if being on fire should force you to stay in battle. Fires occur randomly, so it's not anything to rely on. Plus why would, for example, a fire that requires 4 crew members to control keep you in battle? In that case it should require a large fire not just any fire. Same for leaks, should 1 leak force you to stay in battle. If your ship is 60% damaged you can leave, but if your ship is 10% and has 1 leak you can't leave? 

I think OP is understandably frustrated but the new mechanics seem quite good. But as others suggested it would be nice to have some icon to indicate when a ship is tagged. 

[Tiedemann]

 

55 minutes ago, admin said:

I answered this above - what is unsatisfactory about the answer that you keep asking?

There are reversible leaks - you have full crew, green pumps, good mods, you have low structure but your crew still can pump it out or keep stable even if you do not repair
There are irreversible leaks - you have low crew, broken pumps - you have low structure and your crew wont pump it out whatever you do (if you dont repair)

Your delaying comment relates to irreversible leaks - you can pump but you are just delaying death.

But in your bug case target was NOT sinking, there were no irreversible leaks, nothing was delayed. What you dont get in this answer? 

Side note. Please consider making it impossible for players to leave when in nick/name view range of an enemy player. I find these new tagging mechanics very confusing.

I have had 2 separate battles where ships I have basically killed and I'm right next to them, just holding my broadside for a perfect last shot and then they leave! While I'm still tagged unable to leave. Ships magically disappear was always and issue, but this changes has made it worse!

Just make the control perk standard ROE for all = BOOM -> This issue is fixed and those that are held in battle by just by mast sniping 1000+ meters away can leave.

[Redman29]

Not even going to bother.

Post deleted.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Redman29