Offline protection

[Willard 245]

7 minutes ago, Deadbones said:

1. Why on earth you have 20 ships on sea at the same time if you don't have 0-24 coverage? You realized that you are not supposed to have that right? Servers can't support infinite numbers of ships just because each and every member of yours want to play jack sparrow on their own black pearl. You are supposed to build up an infrastructure that can replace ships fast. Not one to have them all out at the same time.

2. If protection defends you from smaller tribes, the same protection in a larger count would defend you from medium ones. You don't solve the problem, you just shift it to a larger scale grind. Ark is the perfect example for that. Large tribes will always break smaller defense. Smaller always break solos. And solos (aka newcommers, aka the renewing playerbase), would be targeted by literally everyone, since there is no retalation upwards in the hierarchy. If you are not an alpha, then this would literally mean, that you would be never protected from alphas, since they would always outpreform your defense with their sheer playercount, and materials from taxation, and they WOULD go after you, since you would simply bounce off from their autodefence without any further need to do anything, so you would be just ... a fancy pinata for them.

3. You seem to misunderstand Atlas/Ark pvp pve difference. In pve you grind for stuffs to HAVE them, but you can't do much with them. In pvp you work to get gear to DO THINGS WITH them, not to HAVE THEM forever. Imagine it as a battle royale game, where your base/ship is your character. You can get sniped from a forest in a battleroyale, unfairly. You can be offline raided here too. Part of the game. Building and punching trees nakedly for crafting your first bed, is not an early game stuff that you can leave behind. Just maximize fun value between two wipes, make raiding your base as annoying as possible, for as small loot as possible (= use up your stuff instead of bulking them up). These are your goals. Your lawless bases will mostly stay intact anyways, it cant be stolen, it will have some holes on them, but it would suit for fresh starts, since you just need to replace some walls,where they break in, a bed and a smithy max. Just don't store anything in it, once you built your ship, upload the remaining materials into the ship you made.

 4. For god sake.... They made a Captain's log series. They tries to connect community as much as they can. They gave taxation to claim holders. Realize it already, that you don't supposed to own a territory, they are spoonfeding you the fact that you should cooperate with mega-companies, and live on their territories. They'll protect their own claims, with their different time zone players, and their sheer numbers,  so noone will steal your bases, and they patrol their seas, lands for offline protection. Thats your offline protection / revenge force. You don't need anything else.

1) 20 ships for a 120 member tribe really isn´t a lot, is it? 

2) This isn´t about tribe size at all. Even alpha tribes are griefed like this because there is no offline protection. Once you are offline your ships are easy target no matter what. That has to change or game population simply dies. We were griefed by !2! people with 1 cannon bear because we were offline.

3) You seem to misunderstand what Sandbox MMO means my friend. 

4) 120 member company isn´t supposed to have land?  Are u real? You know even mega-companies have problems with offline griefers? IVANARMY for instance keeps losing entire fleers by random offline griefers. 

Stop pretending this state of the game is ok man, just stop. If u care about this game, it´s developement and it´s population, just stop. 

[Elokil 0]

21 minutes ago, Willard said:

3) You seem to misunderstand what Sandbox MMO means my friend. 

 

and for you what is a Sandbox MMO? Is a game where you loose all your progression because you go at your work ? (isn't aggressive, just a question)

[Willard 245]

6 hours ago, Elokil said:

and for you what is a Sandbox MMO? Is a game where you loose all your progression because you go at your work ? (isn't aggressive, just a question)

Right the opposite m8. I am actually the one who wants some kind of offline protection. Read that post I was reacting to. It was writen by someone who thinks this offline bullshit is completely fine. It´s not. 

[labatts 44]

If you are in a 120 person company and cant build adequate enough defenses to protect your ships / building against 2 people and a bear you are doing something wrong. 

[Willard 245]

2 hours ago, labatts said:

If you are in a 120 person company and cant build adequate enough defenses to protect your ships / building against 2 people and a bear you are doing something wrong. 

No, we are not. In Atlas there is nothing you can do about it with current state of the game. Thats the problem. Puckles/swivels/cannons are all useless. Even balistas are useless because NPCs don't register tames/players on full range which means cannon bear can shoot while balistas don't.

There is no way currently.

Edited February 13, 2019 by Willard

[Rovalis 15]

Lmao this is ridiculous. It's the same jerkwads over and over just pouring over every thread trying to fight off ORP in any way, shape, or form. BULLET FORCE and Itsme and LABATTS and DOCHOLIDAY. Surprise surprise.... If you fools wants Ark mechanics, go play fucking Ark. I'm sick of beating the same dead horse. You guys have nothing to counter the arguments points, you simply just spew off the same nonsense I've heard in Ark for ages. "PVP bro, it's PVP! PVP or gtfo! Omfg you killed me im calling my russian megatribe broz! PVP qqqqqq"

[Rovalis 15]

On 2/12/2019 at 10:10 PM, labatts said:

If you are in a 120 person company and cant build adequate enough defenses to protect your ships / building against 2 people and a bear you are doing something wrong. 

How many times are you going to say this rinse/repeated garbage? You literally contradict yourself in half your posts anyway.

It's early access. People are pushing the edge of the mechanics to discover the META. The developers are made aware of this because that's the entire purpose of early access, and then the developers decide if it's working as intended or if it is in need of a change or fix. Very few things are set in stone during early access, and the fact you think offline base raids are the content they are going to keep is insane. You've got to understand this isn't how the game is intended to be, what's going on here is temporary. Everybody crying about it fails to realize this as well. I'm only annoyed at the sheer numbers of genuine pricks trying to go to bat for this broken system, not the system itself. If you could kindly shut up and let the game take its course that'd be great... all you're doing is creating roadblocks and pit falls for the community and hampering the communication.

[labatts 44]

8 hours ago, Rovalis said:

Lmao this is ridiculous. It's the same jerkwads over and over just pouring over every thread trying to fight off ORP in any way, shape, or form. BULLET FORCE and Itsme and LABATTS and DOCHOLIDAY. Surprise surprise.... If you fools wants Ark mechanics, go play fucking Ark. I'm sick of beating the same dead horse. You guys have nothing to counter the arguments points, you simply just spew off the same nonsense I've heard in Ark for ages. "PVP bro, it's PVP! PVP or gtfo! Omfg you killed me im calling my russian megatribe broz! PVP qqqqqq"

Lmao it is ridiculous because I could say the same thing if you want EVE mechanics go play EVE. Also I never said I was against ORP in all forms. I am just against 100% immunity to damage when a company is offline.  I really like the new addition to the game where anchored ships have a 300% damage resistance which is what I have been mentioning as a form of ORP for a while now. The only one that sounds like they are "QQ" in here is you because you have not gotten your way. 

[Rovalis 15]

3 hours ago, labatts said:

Lmao it is ridiculous because I could say the same thing if you want EVE mechanics go play EVE. Also I never said I was against ORP in all forms. I am just against 100% immunity to damage when a company is offline.  I really like the new addition to the game where anchored ships have a 300% damage resistance which is what I have been mentioning as a form of ORP for a while now. The only one that sounds like they are "QQ" in here is you because you have not gotten your way. 

I haven't proposed any particular solutions so I don't have any agenda. Every post I make talking about it mentions the fact that these are early access issues for an early access game. I don't recommend duplicating EVE's mechanics, I've only used them as an example of systems that work that aren't flat-out ORP. I expect something new and different and I'm sure that will happen before a full release. 300% damage resistance on anchored ships is a step in the right direction to be sure.

I've been over this with you. You just ignore it and keep on keepin on.

[labatts 44]

11 minutes ago, Rovalis said:

I haven't proposed any particular solutions so I don't have any agenda. Every post I make talking about it mentions the fact that these are early access issues for an early access game. I don't recommend duplicating EVE's mechanics, I've only used them as an example of systems that work that aren't flat-out ORP. I expect something new and different and I'm sure that will happen before a full release. 300% damage resistance on anchored ships is a step in the right direction to be sure.

I've been over this with you. You just ignore it and keep on keepin on.

What exactly am I ignoring here lol ?? 

[DocHolliday 366]

21 hours ago, Rovalis said:

Lmao this is ridiculous. It's the same jerkwads over and over just pouring over every thread trying to fight off ORP in any way, shape, or form. BULLET FORCE and Itsme and LABATTS and DOCHOLIDAY. Surprise surprise.... If you fools wants Ark mechanics, go play fucking Ark. I'm sick of beating the same dead horse. You guys have nothing to counter the arguments points, you simply just spew off the same nonsense I've heard in Ark for ages. "PVP bro, it's PVP! PVP or gtfo! Omfg you killed me im calling my russian megatribe broz! PVP qqqqqq"

Before you start tossing my name around take a look at my suggestions.  If you expect me to support every single word out of your mouth and wipe your arse then take a hike.

I support ways to mitigate offline raiding.  Naval engagements are a lot of fun and I'd prefer to see more of them so if ships need to be better protected while companies are offline then I support it.  Allowing companies complete and utter ship protection is NOT something I want.  You think mega's are bad now.  Imagine them if they could pump out an endless supply of ships that can be protected.  I shudder to think about it. 

"Oh look we sunk 10 of little Jimmy's brigs and here he is with number 11.  He only sinks 1 ship for every 10 of his lost, but we just can't keep up with those numbers."

300% bonus to anchored ships is a start.  Again look at my drydock suggestion.  The biggest thing is the ships HAVE to stay ingame and take up room, require resources to maintain/protect.  They have to be put somewhere and they all cannot be protected.  Mega's would simply stockpile hundreds of ships and anyone fighting them would simply succumb to the endless onslaught of protected ships even if their company is superior in PvP tactics.  I don't want to see that.  I want to see smaller companies use superior tactics and skill to beat larger companies.  Need to find that balance. 

Edited February 19, 2019 by DocHolliday

[Itsme 16]

22 hours ago, Rovalis said:

Lmao this is ridiculous. It's the same jerkwads over and over just pouring over every thread trying to fight off ORP in any way, shape, or form. BULLET FORCE and Itsme and LABATTS and DOCHOLIDAY. Surprise surprise.... If you fools wants Ark mechanics, go play fucking Ark. 

Wow, you seem angry... 

I am curious Rovalis, have you ever created a post without name calling that contains legit points? I ask because you never address any of mine, actually the opposite where you ignore them or twist them to the reverse of what has been said. I think you would be taken more seriously and people might actually read your entire post and a real discussion might result if you stopped the name calling and actually addressed valid points and/or made one? Well, unless you are just here for the over-the-top bravado and name calling not actual productive discussions….

Although I have come to expect the childish name-calling in all your posts, I didn’t expect to be called out by name in a thread I have never posted in. And for the record, I do not pour over all the threads looking for anything as you stated in this thread. I am sure there are a ton of threads on the topic of large companies and offline raiding on this forum and I have only posted in a few threads and have only a few less posts than you. But hey, actual facts and things like credible statements appear to mean little to you so it shouldn’t surprise me that you continue to skew and twist while calling names, even in threads I have not been a part of.  

As far as generically lumping me in with others implying I like Ark mechanics and should go play it, I never cared for the game and have not played it for over 3 years so your assumptions and assessment of others is as off as your replies.

My suggestion to you…. take a break and go outside for some exercise and fresh air as you are coming across as exceedingly angry and stressed in your recent posts. The constant name calling and put down of others appears to conflict with the forum agreement to be respectful and not cause disruption on the forum and perhaps may even border on personal harassment by calling people out by name in threads they are not even involved in and referring to them with derogatory names like ‘jerkwad’?  I would hate to see you and all your high quality posts being tossed overboard into Davey Jones locker due to what appears to be exponential growing anger. 

As far as this thread is concerned (there was no put-down or name calling so I actually read the OP), I like your attitude Willard regarding the fact that your boats were wiped when you were offline so you of course will rebuild and wipe theirs. Aarrr! Give no quarter Matey!

[DocHolliday 366]

You could have just called him a name back and gotten the same effect. 

Edited February 19, 2019 by DocHolliday

[Rovalis 15]

5 hours ago, DocHolliday said:

Before you start tossing my name around take a look at my suggestions.  If you expect me to support every single word out of your mouth and wipe your arse then take a hike.

I support ways to mitigate offline raiding.  Naval engagements are a lot of fun and I'd prefer to see more of them so if ships need to be better protected while companies are offline then I support it.  Allowing companies complete and utter ship protection is NOT something I want.  You think mega's are bad now.  Imagine them if they could pump out an endless supply of ships that can be protected.  I shudder to think about it. 

"Oh look we sunk 10 of little Jimmy's brigs and here he is with number 11.  He only sinks 1 ship for every 10 of his lost, but we just can't keep up with those numbers."

300% bonus to anchored ships is a start.  Again look at my drydock suggestion.  The biggest thing is the ships HAVE to stay ingame and take up room, require resources to maintain/protect.  They have to be put somewhere and they all cannot be protected.  Mega's would simply stockpile hundreds of ships and anyone fighting them would simply succumb to the endless onslaught of protected ships even if their company is superior in PvP tactics.  I don't want to see that.  I want to see smaller companies use superior tactics and skill to beat larger companies.  Need to find that balance. 

You're right, I apologize for lumping you in with that blanket statement regarding the others. At the time of my posting that I think I got my names mixed up. I went back and checked out some of the things you've posted and I realize I made a mistake. I agree with you 100%. I'm not in favor of offline invulnerability, nor am I really in favor of anchored ships having built-in defense buffs... It's definitely a step in the right direction but I don't think that's a lasting solution. I'm not looking for an echo chamber by any means. The difference in opinion is what creates the dialogue that leads to that lasting solution and I'm not egotistical enough to pretend like I've got all the answers.

 

3 hours ago, Itsme said:

Wow, you seem angry... 

I am curious Rovalis, have you ever created a post without name calling that contains legit points? I ask because you never address any of mine, actually the opposite where you ignore them or twist them to the reverse of what has been said. I think you would be taken more seriously and people might actually read your entire post and a real discussion might result if you stopped the name calling and actually addressed valid points and/or made one? Well, unless you are just here for the over-the-top bravado and name calling not actual productive discussions….

Although I have come to expect the childish name-calling in all your posts, I didn’t expect to be called out by name in a thread I have never posted in. And for the record, I do not pour over all the threads looking for anything as you stated in this thread. I am sure there are a ton of threads on the topic of large companies and offline raiding on this forum and I have only posted in a few threads and have only a few less posts than you. But hey, actual facts and things like credible statements appear to mean little to you so it shouldn’t surprise me that you continue to skew and twist while calling names, even in threads I have not been a part of.  

As far as generically lumping me in with others implying I like Ark mechanics and should go play it, I never cared for the game and have not played it for over 3 years so your assumptions and assessment of others is as off as your replies.

My suggestion to you…. take a break and go outside for some exercise and fresh air as you are coming across as exceedingly angry and stressed in your recent posts. The constant name calling and put down of others appears to conflict with the forum agreement to be respectful and not cause disruption on the forum and perhaps may even border on personal harassment by calling people out by name in threads they are not even involved in and referring to them with derogatory names like ‘jerkwad’?  I would hate to see you and all your high quality posts being tossed overboard into Davey Jones locker due to what appears to be exponential growing anger. 

As far as this thread is concerned (there was no put-down or name calling so I actually read the OP), I like your attitude Willard regarding the fact that your boats were wiped when you were offline so you of course will rebuild and wipe theirs. Aarrr! Give no quarter Matey!

Words aren't that hard. I'm not sure how you conflate complex sentences with anger but you do you, little buddy. In my previous post the only pejorative term I used was "fool". If Jerkwad offends you then you need friends imo, not sure what to say there... The dictionary is our oyster and it's not hard to build on that if we really want to find some choice adjectives. Don't be offended. I'm fairly certain I've acknowledged every nonsense point you've made on this subject every time I've quoted you. It generally goes the other way where you find one line out of my entire post and just isolate it for some convenient little quip. It's basic psychology and common enough that most people understand what you're doing without any education on the subject whatsoever. Let this go before you tie your brain in a knot.

There isn't constant name-calling in my posts. Maybe there's just a pattern in my responses to you. It's a shame you're not observant or mindful enough to recognize that distinction. I decided you never deserved my respect based on the things you were saying to others before I ever quoted you. I've watched how you talk about this subject and the general attitude and disposition you have regarding it. You take this to the point of completely disregarding the subject matter at hand and dive into multiple paragraphs about feelings. You know if you actually got into a discussion regarding sensible mechanics you'd have nothing to say. As far as personal harassment, you're reaching really far buddy. I have a positive reputation on the forums and I'm generally respectful and considerate. You and the few others are the exception to this. I could have jumped into these threads much sooner and I didn't. I let most of January go just watching the forums and posting nothing. Your patterns made themselves crystal clear and you got judged for it. Don't cry about it. Just move on if you're not happy with what the bad man on the internet said to you.

tl;dr for anyone else... I'm just sick of a choice couple of people digging their heels in as deep as they can to try and stave off the necessary game improvements. I'll sit out of this thread from now on, see ya in the next one!

Edited February 19, 2019 by Rovalis

[DocHolliday 366]

Forums are a crappy place to discuss this stuff.  It always devolves into the same messy crap.  I come here for the info and entertainment for the most part and toss some serious ideas out there once in awhile in the off chance the right set of eyes sees it.  :shrug:

[Itsme 16]

36 minutes ago, Rovalis said:

Words aren't that hard.

I stopped reading here but I have no doubt your reply post was as insightful and rewarding as your past ones.....  Don't forget to get out and get a little fresh air and sunshine my  RP/pve friend. 

[Mike L 71]

I think they just need orp on ship planks, you cant sink it, but you can destroy everything else including sails,beds,boxes and all that. 

This could make it so that ships dont have to always be rebuilt, and may even change ownership through the claim system. 

Before someone says mega tribes would just abuse it, all it saves is a decent portion of the materials required to craft a ship, since it doesnt protect your beds, land, or tames, how bad can that be exploited? 

Mega tribes could try some alt character exploit, but what will that solve when they log the alt in to get those extra ships ready to fight? Orp would be gone off of them since the alt logged in to unclaim them.

Also I still think full offline raid protection would be better than how it currently is no offline protection. 

 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Mike L

[Zlax 41]

On 2/20/2019 at 3:25 AM, Mike L said:

I think they just need orp on ship planks, you cant sink it, but you can destroy everything else including sails,beds,boxes and all that. 

This could make it so that ships dont have to always be rebuilt, and may even change ownership through the claim system. 

Before someone says mega tribes would just abuse it, all it saves is a decent portion of the materials required to craft a ship, since it doesnt protect your beds, land, or tames, how bad can that be exploited? 

Mega tribes could try some alt character exploit, but what will that solve when they log the alt in to get those extra ships ready to fight? Orp would be gone off of them since the alt logged in to unclaim them.

 

The actual ship is usually the least costly part of the ship, cannons, sails ect often run much steeper.