This game is all about PvP?

[Bis18marck70]

Why ganking is brought to this discussion?

Get a friend, join a clan build a fleet, buy an escort, move to Mexico: multiple options exist, as a last resort you can almost always run. 

 

The question discussed is different.

There are players who have no interest whatsoever in pvp, but do want realistic age of sail experience - what we hear is that you guys want them to play windward, or ac4. That is not nice. 

 

Realisitc Age of Sail Experience does not only imply PvP, it is based upon it. Likewise there have their been mulitple instances in which it was either implied or directly said that PvP is the basis of the game.

 

Three easy examples:

 

General

 

It's a sandbox. There are no classes. There will be no privateer fleet or a pirate fleet. It's just a player fleet. 

Because it's a sandbox you can go out and show them who is the boss if they are sailing ships you don't think they should be sailing.

 

Hunt them, sink them, burn their cities and hear lamentations of their women.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/1846-fleet-commander-gameplay/?p=39332

 

About piracy:

 

In the faction warfare (organized X vs X) battles pirates won't matter to anyone including pirates themselves. It's just group of ships against group of ships. 

 

Regarding Piracy.

• Piracy or national allegiance is a way of life. It's not a flag. Like in Eve - Goonswarm or Test could be considered pirates to certain parties. But those are just well organized groups of people fighting for their cause.
• On the open world we don't see any reason to limit certain groups of people from organizing into something big. In real life pirates were disorganized. I think if they wanted to they could easily capture couple of archipelagos, instead they decided to serve nations (Henry Morgan example). 
• So if a certain Navy want's pirates out of the game they can go and try to "crush them, see them driven away and hear the lamentations of their women". 

To recap all this. on the open world there will be no pirates - there will be groups of people who decided to fight against all and raise their own flag over a group of ports (instead of British or Spanish). Players with national allegiance can do whatever they want with those pirate ports, capture them or burn them or leave them alone.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/558-questions-to-developers/?p=706

 

 

Specific reference to PvP:

 

Smaller groups and solo players will sink you, capture your ships and listen to lamentations of your women. Potbs Times when a group could control a zone forever are gone. Or you can run, meet up with your friends and get back.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/4668-open-world-prototype-rules-of-engagement-ship-loss-and-spawning/?p=90685

 

This is why we support this game and you as the developer. Because we trust you for this. A challenging game in which the player has to build himself up, learn and adapt as a captain in order to survive.

 

The player, when buying the product, needs to decide whether the product is for him or not. Should he have bought it without thought and now realises that the product turns out to be completely different than expected even though multiple ways of information told him otherwise (Forum, YT, Twitter), that is the problem of the consumer and his own mistake. I can't go to my local PC store and tell them to transform my notebook into a desktop because when I bought it I thought it was a desktop. I should have informed myself and be a responsible customer.

 

None of us wants to punish someone simply because they prefer PvE. But all of us came to this product because of what it said on the box and what we saw from its developers and that was an immersive and well-developed game, made at a steady pace with plenty of community interaction, providing a realistic experience (as far as a PC game can) that naturally by its realism entails PvP. If someone prefers PvE, be my guest, but then this product is not for you.

 

I like to play my bagpipes i.e. a trumpet is not for me.

 

Edit:

Why ganking is brought to this discussion?

Get a friend, join a clan build a fleet, buy an escort, move to Mexico: multiple options exist, as a last resort you can almost always run.

 

 

This is exactly it! Adapt and overcome! Find ways to beat/avoid others by outsmarting them or by outfighting them or highering escorts etc. PvE is not the answer.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bis18marck70

[Justme]

As long as game mechanics allow it "douchebaggery" is going to happen.

Nothing wrong with that. If "rakish" behaviour gets your blood boiling enough to cause a reaction it promotes PvP and that is a good thing for a PvP environment, yes?

To believe restraint and respite from "honourable" PvPers would be a solution for the PvE crowd is wrong, however. They just don't want to have any part in it.

It can be a problem when groups of 3 or more single out solo ships run by newer players. The types that do this typically run grom fair fights and generally make life miserable for newr players. Its made worse when said groups brag about how good they are,make challenges then run when its accepted.

[Chustler]

I am generally against server splitting, but I can not be sure of the outcomes in either case.  I am fairly sure that people who want to avoid pvp will have many places on this vast map that are seldom visited by pvpers.  How many pvp people are really going to go all the way west into the gulf of Mexico for example?  Impossible to say at this stage, but I think everyone can have a good time in the same server environment.

 

I say a strong NO to the pvp flag idea though.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

My only point remains that a brand new player in a Basic Lynx, with no money, no friends, and who will always appear in the same place because "that's the starter port for new British/French/what have you players", will be subject to people who thrive on griefing camping outside their port, and people like that will do it 24/7 - just look at all the "free stuff" cans outside of high-sec stations in Eve.  That new player can't call friends, can't hire an escort because they have no money, and may not even have enough knowledge to run properly and leave the instance.  They're going to get discouraged very quickly if they get jumped nearly every time they leave the port.  Perhaps some helpful people in larger ships will swing through and sweep the port entrance from time to time, but I think they'll often be off in their own areas doing their own thing - the lack of high enough targets in the vicinity of that starter port ensures that.

 

Eventually maybe they can escape and take up residence in a less populated area, but there really needs to be a way for them to have a chance at getting started in the game before they get pummeled by experienced people in larger ships.  

[RAMJB]

You are referring to non-existent issues. Lets clarify which things would need fixing or tuned etc.

If PVE server happens it will be exactly the same as existing one with one difference. You can't attack other players. 

 

That's the issue here. The mere nature of things demand things to be different, yet I'm worried that you're not realizing it.

 

I'm a trader who does a trade run from Puerto Rico to Havana.

 

In PVE I'll be able to do a milk run and I'm certified to reach destination. I'll make a guaranteed profit (unless I mess up in unspeakable ways and somehow get myself sunk along the way because a storm I don't know how to handle. For instance)

 

In PVP I'll have to face the gauntlet of possible player interception so there's a much bigger risk of me losing my ship and cargo. I might even want to hire escorts. Which means that if I'm intending to do the same profit as in PVE, I'll have to charge much higher prices for my haul, or I'll be wasting my time. As a result prices will soar, and that will have far-reaching consequences. Hence, the whole economy system in the PVP server already is guaranteed to be different than in PVE.

 

 

That's only one instance and only one example of the MANY differences that will be seen between both modes - from economy to a lot of mechanics, there are a lot of things that must be different between both servers. You might think that working within the same phisical frame of sailing mechanics will mean that the only difference is that in one you can be tagged by players, in the other one not...but that difference spreads a spectacular branch of gameplay differences on itself, that will forcefully cause wide differences between servers. It -will- be a different game in many ways. With different problems and priorities which will need adressing in different ways and shapes, leading for further server differentiation (and more problems down the lane). Just keep that in mind.

[braginator]

As a player who leans rather towards PvE (Planetside and M&B Napoleon and the like are counter examples, though), I can clearly see some.. challenges in form of the offen mentioned ganking and newbie-bashing.

What keeps me off PvP are generally these two issues, combined with the fear of losing your gear completely because you are beeing caught by a newbie-basher.

 

So, what solutions can be provided? As mentioned above, I can think of

 

- Some "Dearmed zones" wherein a newie can do a little practice at least

- Making a certain range of levels invulnerable to PvP (not the best solution, though.. depends on general progression curve of the player)

- Good escort system

- and I strongly suggest, already presented by Bismarck, a mechanic which simply disencourage players from engaging newbies. This can include no rewards up to penalties of various sort. I do not assume that the vision of NA went in the direction that a group of strong players constantly ganking newbies, so it wouldn't harm, I guess.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Greetz

b

[Guest raat]

Ganking is brought up in this thread simply because ganking is the number 1 issue why people who don't like PvP...don't like PvP.  They fear losing their time and effort that they put into the game when (to them) inevitably their will be a group waiting to gank them and they will be helpless.  That's the perception at least.

[admin]

 

General

 

It's a sandbox. There are no classes. There will be no privateer fleet or a pirate fleet. It's just a player fleet. 

Because it's a sandbox you can go out and show them who is the boss if they are sailing ships you don't think they should be sailing.

 

Hunt them, sink them, burn their cities and hear lamentations of their women.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/1846-fleet-commander-gameplay/?p=39332

 

About piracy:

 

In the faction warfare (organized X vs X) battles pirates won't matter to anyone including pirates themselves. It's just group of ships against group of ships. 

 

Regarding Piracy.

• Piracy or national allegiance is a way of life. It's not a flag. Like in Eve - Goonswarm or Test could be considered pirates to certain parties. But those are just well organized groups of people fighting for their cause.
• On the open world we don't see any reason to limit certain groups of people from organizing into something big. In real life pirates were disorganized. I think if they wanted to they could easily capture couple of archipelagos, instead they decided to serve nations (Henry Morgan example). 
• So if a certain Navy want's pirates out of the game they can go and try to "crush them, see them driven away and hear the lamentations of their women". 

To recap all this. on the open world there will be no pirates - there will be groups of people who decided to fight against all and raise their own flag over a group of ports (instead of British or Spanish). Players with national allegiance can do whatever they want with those pirate ports, capture them or burn them or leave them alone.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/558-questions-to-developers/?p=706

 

 

Specific reference to PvP:

 

Smaller groups and solo players will sink you, capture your ships and listen to lamentations of your women. Potbs Times when a group could control a zone forever are gone. Or you can run, meet up with your friends and get back.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/4668-open-world-prototype-rules-of-engagement-ship-loss-and-spawning/?p=90685

 

This is why we support this game and you as the developer. Because we trust you for this. A challenging game in which the player has to build himself up, learn and adapt as a captain in order to survive.

 

 

So what has changed suddenly?

All above mentioned statements are true and pvp experience is exactly like that if not harder. . You want black car you get black car.

Someone else will get a yellow car - why is it a concern? We never said it is going to be only pvp.

 

We received a letter recently - an 77 year old player who served in the Navy, and whose ancestors participated in Napoleonic wars.

And he thanked us for making a game of his dream, a game he always wanted, and nobody before made properly. He is just happy sailing and shooting bots in the sea trials.He will be as happy enjoying his long voyages across ocean on a PVE server without being called a bitch/pussy for running. He is just not into that thing. 

 

He read the same message on our website that you read (we suggest everyone to go check it out). You want to tell that guy exactly what?

Anyways. We will make it right. We have not given a reason to doubt it. 

[mouse of war]

Re: gangking

 

If the port interface let a player know who was also in the port they could chat and organise to sail out in a group

If it also told them the time of day they could leave at night to avoid being seen

[RAMJB]

about the problem of ppl being stuck in a port with people waiting outside, well we're going to have a nation chat. Tell others there, and they'll come in superior numbers to gank THEM!

 

usually ganking is not a big problem in a game like this. It was in POTBS because of the way interception and PVP areas worked (the infamous red areas). with this model it'll be a much lesser problem, I think.

[Bis18marck70]

So what has changed suddenly?

All above mentioned statements are true and pvp experience is exactly like that if not harder. . You want black car you get black car.

Someone else will get a yellow car - why is it a concern? We never said it is going to be only pvp.

 

We received a letter recently - an 77 year old player who served in the Navy, and whose ancestors participated in Napoleonic wars.

And he thanked us for making a game of his dream, a game he always wanted, and nobody before made properly. He is just happy sailing and shooting bots in the sea trials.He will be as happy enjoying his long voyages across ocean on a PVE server without being called a bitch/pussy for running. He is just not into that thing. 

 

He read the same message on our website that you read (we suggest everyone to go check it out). You want to tell that guy exactly what?

Anyways. We will make it right. We have not given a reason to doubt it. 

 

What has changed is that you apparently went away from a clear cut idea which appealed to all those that have supported you along the way to pleasing the masses. You are trying to make it right for everybody, which, as much as I salute you for the effort, simply doesn't work. Instead of pleasing everyone, you will end up upsetting everyone and have already done so to many of the people that have supported you this far.

 

The PvE server will not help you nor the players. It will cause friction and a fraction between the community, it will cause you to having to split your resources along two different gamemodes, you have to build up two different gamemodes from the ground up and that's just scratching the surface.

 

Profanity filter and harsh but fair punishments for people then let their tongue go lose. No exceptions. Cut it of right when it starts.

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

Looking through this thread, there are very few supporters of a separate

PVE server. Therefore, why are the devs going to cater to the minority? Why should they cater to anyone, when they specifically stated that they would NOT do that? But, if you must cater to the masses, take note that the majority of the playerbase, "the masses," is against PVE servers.

[Chustler]

Looking through this thread, there are very few supporters of a separate

PVE server. Therefore, why are the devs going to cater to the minority? Why should they cater to anyone, when they specifically stated that they would NOT do that? But, if you must cater to the masses, take note that the majority of the playerbase, "the masses," is against PVE servers.

In all fairness, The people that post on the forums will never represent the majority.  The majority don't post on game forums.

[Guest raat]

In all fairness, The people that post on the forums will never represent the majority.  The majority don't post on game forums.

 

True.  But how can you gauge the opinion of someone who doesn't speak?

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

In all fairness, The people that post on the forums will never represent the majority.  The majority don't post on game forums.

Well, it's their loss. But if they are willing to accept the game in whatever shape or form it finally takes, then so be it. If it really is that unimportant to them, then the fact that they are the majority is irrelevant.

[Guest raat]

What has changed is that you apparently went away from a clear cut idea which appealed to all those that have supported you along the way to pleasing the masses. You are trying to make it right for everybody, which, as much as I salute you for the effort, simply doesn't work. Instead of pleasing everyone, you will end up upsetting everyone and have already done so to many of the people that have supported you this far.

 

As much as I agree with you on separate servers (I do feel they do more harm than good for a small player base game), perhaps the problem with this statement is that what you perceived the game to be or the dev's vision for the game to be is not the same as what the dev's vision for the game actually was.

 

That can't really be an indictment of the developers "changing their vision".  Perhaps, your idea of what they intended was never their vision in the first place.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Raatha

[Bis18marck70]

As much as I agree with you on separate servers (I do feel they do more harm than good for a small player base game), perhaps the problem with this statement is that what you perceived the game to be or the dev's vision for the game to be is not the same as what the dev's vision for the game actually was.

 

That can't really be an indictment of the developers "changing their vision".  Perhaps, your idea of what they intended was never their vision in the first place.

 

Possible, but then why did so many people stream to this thread surprised at the announcement and urging the developers not to go PvE + PvP but staying PvP only? The thread didn't even start as an official announcement but the non-chalant way we were told PvE is going to happen has taken many by surprise. It's the first time we hear of this. If this was a personal mistake on my side, people would be flocking to this thread saying 'Bismarck, what are you on about, we knew PvE-only was going to be a valid option'.

 

Instead, they are doing the opposite.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bis18marck70

[Justme]

http://www.pcgamer.com/finally-a-naval-combat-sim-that-gets-sailing-ships-right/

Checking the comments section there is already people stating they have no interest due to it being a PVP game. Not that I agree with them.

As far as tanking, it will happen, probably more than people realize. It won't be hard to do, might not get them right out of port but there will be a " sweet spot" distance. Once it's figured out it will be an issue and there's really not that can be done about it.

[admin]

What has changed is that you apparently went away from a clear cut idea which appealed to all those that have supported you along the way to pleasing the masses. You are trying to make it right for everybody, which, as much as I salute you for the effort, simply doesn't work. Instead of pleasing everyone, you will end up upsetting everyone and have already done so to many of the people that have supported you this far.

 

 

Apparently? No.

We have kept almost every promise to players and will continue to do so (except for some dates)

• Potential to have several servers were mentioned in November and December and caused quite a stir - this is not new. Ramjb was furiously objecting then as well. 
• We said we are going to make The Best Age of Sail PvP. But we never said it is going to be only PvP
• http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=259130636 it is still valid. The fact that we talk a lot about PVP on forums is because you guys want to talk about it. Most devs are all pvp players from multiple games and know that we will make it right. But.. again. we never said PVE servers will not happen.

Your comments about gamemodes and huge difficulty of changing 1 parameter, are probably based on other developers who have no idea how games should be made and have nothing to do with us and our processes. We are developing 3 games at the same time with just 20 people. Already launched one and received wargame of the year (pcgamesn) and top 20 strategy games of all times (pcgamer) and is one of the highest rated indie strategy games on Steam. And this was our first game as a studio.

 

There will be no game-modes. If PVE server happens it will be exactly the same with one difference - you can't attack players. Developers who say it is hard to change settings to test something quickly are just lazy.

 

What has changed is that you apparently went away from a clear cut idea which appealed to all those that have supported you along the way to pleasing the masses. You are trying to make it right for everybody

 

Again we are going to please everybody. Apparently we have started from you  .

[Justme]

Ganking is brought up in this thread simply because ganking is the number 1 issue why people who don't like PvP...don't like PvP.  They fear losing their time and effort that they put into the game when (to them) inevitably their will be a group waiting to gank them and they will be helpless.  That's the perception at least.

Would you want to lose all your durabilities on a ship you worked hard for due to being ganked? Just like any other PVP game it will happen.

[Bis18marck70]

Apparently? No.

We have kept almost every promise to players and will continue to do so (except for some dates)

• Potential to have several servers were mentioned in November and December and caused quite a stir - this is not new. 
• We said we are going to make The Best Age of Sail PvP. But we never said it is going to be only PvP
• http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=259130636 it is still valid. The fact that we talk a lot about PVP on forums is because you guys want to talk about it and help us make it better want to talk about it as well. 

Your comments about gamemodes and huge difficulty of changing 1 parameter, are probably based on other developers who have no idea how games should be made and have nothing to do with us and our processes. We are developing 3 games at the same time with just 20 people. Already launched one and received wargame of the year (pcgamesn) and top 20 strategy games of all times (pcgamer) and is one of the highest rated indie strategy games on Steam. And this was our first game as a studio.

 

There will be no game-modes.

Gamemode will stay the same. If PVE server happens it will be exactly the same with one difference - you can't attack players. Developers who say it is hard to change settings to test something quickly are just lazy.

 

 

Again we never said we are going to please everybody. Apparently we have started from you. 

 

PvE/ PvP are two different gamemodes. If you don't like that word, we can call them whatever you want. Servers, experience, whatever. Yet, they play 100% different and are thus different gamemodes. Yes, the sailing and shooting will be the same etc etc. but the fact that a player does not have to account for the fact that he might be set up by another player totally changes the equation of just about everything (from the fighting, to economy to guilds to nations). The change of that single parameter, as you call it, creates something entirely different.

 

If this whole PvE thing was so obviously going to be included in the game, how come we (and yes 'we' because looking at this thread and the reaction of many prominent forum goers) are so surprised. PvE-only option for the release version was never in the equation.

 

I understand your data suggests a huge PvE crowd. I get it. Many people that showed of your game never - not even once - made any attempt to explain what this game was actually going to be. To this day I have to clear up the confusion for some of my new viewers that come to my channel first time. They, having watched one or two videos on other channels seem to be under the impression that this game is supposed to be a 'World of Warships' with sails etc. Many of these - not all - bought your game without a single second thought and when they realized the gaming experience was more challenging than the run-of-the-mill F2P and that in fact the whole game was never going to be like that, they stuck to PvE because it gave them the quick action they craved with no need to learn anything.

 

These are not the people that have supported your game or your vision. They do not come to the forum, they do not give feedback, they do not care about behaviour, they do not in a single moment ever care about the success of the game. They care about their own little bubble, fast instant action and now that they check out OW they realize it is PvP and panic, coming here for a PvE option. (Some time ago Ram and me - others too - advised you to turn off the PvE option in Sea Trials to avoid multiple issues, this being one. Had any of us heard that NA will have PvE-option, we would never have bothered to give that advice)

 

And yes, indeed, you have never said that you were going to please everybody - up to this point. That is why we supported you because that was proof to us that you have a set vision enshrined in stone and will stick to it. But now with PvE-option happening, that is no longer the case. Now you do go the way to please everyone.

 

By spliting the community and your resources you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bis18marck70

[Guest raat]

Would you want to lose all your durabilities on a ship you worked hard for due to being ganked? Just like any other PVP game it will happen.

 

Yes, because with that risk, the reward of winning battles (or just fighting them in general) is all that more exciting.

[RAMJB]

I think we're losing a bit of objectivity here and taking things from our respective subjective view. Let's put things in perspective-

 

-there's a numerous audience of mature players who want immersion as much as any of us here, yet they don't wish to play a game where they have to face the potential of being engaged by other players. Not because they're casuals or not, but because they simply don't enjoy the idea. A lot of those potential players could give a lot to this game (as much as I think they should not be so scared of other players, I'll be the first to admit that some of the best econ players/manufacturers/traders are what we'd call "carebears"). That's true and anyone who played POTBS know it.

 

Instead of just answering their pleas of a game without the "danger" of other players engaging them with a "then go somewhere else", GameLabs seems to be trying to find a formula to give them access to the game aswell in an enjoyable way. That I think we all will agree, is a positive stance. I mean, I'm the first one that when a 14 year old who only wants to derp around starts crying about the game not being enjoyable, the answer should be just that - go to other game because this one is not for you. But a lot of serious players deserve better than that.

 

 

What we're in disagreement (some of us) here it seems to be in the way that could be achieved. My personal approach to it would make a game where yes, you can be attacked by other players, but also you can plan your sailing to deal with that threat and minimize it. Things as hiring escorts, or bringing friends along on the trip to protect you - enhancing the multiplayer approach of the game. Also giving ample feedback in more or less real time of which are the "hot" player areas lately so people who want to stay clear of danger can plan accordingly. Gameplay mechanics that prevent exploit/Gank/griefing. And of course an economy system that rewards the higher risks involved with very rewarding profits.
 

I think all that can be achieved within the same server for everyone. (I know there are going to be multiple servers to deal with player numbers and load, but what I mean is that servers would be the same otherwise) but it seems that the devs think separate servers is a better idea. Well, granted, is an easier one (that, we can't deny) and also a more immediate one, and could be implemented sooner (given that anti-grief mechanics don't need to be refined before making those servers go up, and coming up with such mechanics that work will be a looooong thing to do). But I see a lot of disadvantages with it, the smallest of them not being that maybe, just maybe, those players who are so against fighting other players, would come here anyway if the game mechanics themselves make them hard targets if they put enough planning and effort into it (coordinating with other players) so the risk of them being engaged in the fights they fear so much would be much smaller (If you sail alone ofc anyone will jump you. If you sail with 3-4 friends in combat ships, then it'll require an actual fleet to tag you!).

 

I think easy solutions are never the good ones, because what's good in the short run usually produces big trouble down the line. I also think that "mouthfeeding" people who are just a bit scared of losing a number of pixels is never a good idea - you never require them to rise up to a challenge, they never will. That's my take on it, and most of those who have posted here share that idea. Well, in the past this developer team has proved that they have open ears to good suggestions and that they're not afraid of introducing ideas that weren't the ones they initially had based on player feedback.

 

So instead of focusing on "you said this, you promised that" or "we never stated that, we always said this other thing", I would say that from now on we should focus on a more proactive and constructive debate: the problem exists (serious players who are scared of being attacked, yet they could add a lot to this game). The idea is on the table to deal with that problem (provide pve-only servers) but lots of us disagree with it.

 

So - lets start focusing on which are our alternatives, and how the game could be made inclusive for that kind of player. I'm sure if we come with very good ones the devs will consider them and if they find those ideas are better than their owns, they will go with them instead. Doesn't mean that our ideas are better however, always remember that. Maybe we end up with PVE servers anyway. But at least I'll accept that better if I know they have actively weighed our opinions and taken them seriously, even if at the end they decided to go for something different. And for all I know thus far, this devs are the best I've ever seen at accepting player feedback, ideas and suggestions.

Personally I have a lot of trust on this guys - they're doing a great job so far and I have no doubts they will keep on doing so in the future, so whatever they go with in the end I'm sure will be good stuff.

Lets be constructive here, folks .

[Justme]

Yes, because with that risk, the reward of winning battles (or just fighting them in general) is all that more exciting.

Sadly not for everyone. I gave no problem with pvp, but a lot of people don't like the fact they can work hard, then lose it because others decide it's fun to ruin the experience for others. Its not worth it to work hard for something in game just to lose it, especially if their play time is limited and they gave to work twice as long to get things. That's why people want PVE. Myself I just find most PVE dull and predictable.

[RAMJB]

Sadly not for everyone. I gave no problem with pvp, but a lot of people don't like the fact they can work hard, then lose it because others decide it's fun to ruin the experience for others.

 

That I plan to sail in the servers and actively engage other players in battle and, if I can, sink them, doesn't mean I've decided "it's fun to ruin the experience for them". Sorry but a lot of this trouble starts with abysmal concepts as this. This is a multiplayer game where battles happen and are part of the game. That someone beat you doesn't mean he enjoys "ruining your experience". Means he wants to have success and part of that success of this game will be based on beating other players (the same way there will be other ways to have success in the game that don't involve fighting such as hauling, trading, manufacturing, diplomacy, politics, RvR, etc).

 

And if that particular player didn't want to be engaged, well, up to him to find ways to make hard to happen, right?. If he's got the proper tools to decide wether a sailing run is too risky, and if he has a perfect chance to brings some friends alongside the ride instead of sailing alone, then if he's caught alone by three pirates, and sunk or captured, it's his own fault in the end for sailing in a dangerous area, and because he was sailing alone to begin with. I plan to do a lot of solo hunting in open world and I know that I'd run like hell from a convoy of a couple merchants and 3-4 combat ships, because I can't deal with those numbers. If you wish to NOT to fight, then force those who want to fight you and capture you give up because the risk is too high. Or just don't give them the chance by not sailing into dangerous areas .

 

 

But summing up: Stop producing arguments that present people who want to take an active role in fighting as "ruiners of other's fun". I've already sailed in open world. I've sunk others. I've been sunk by others. I've never done the first to ruin anyone's fun, and I still had fun when the second happened. It's part of the game. It's a granted that there are going to be some players whose only objective will be that - extracting pleasure just by making other's experience less fun. But it's a minority, and as big as scumbags those dudes are, you can't extrapolate that into all the rest of players who just enjoy sailing and fighting for the fun of it.