Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Tina Toothpick

"Top companies" are NOT "Top companies"

Recommended Posts

Could i just ask.. How does having more claimed land make one company better than another?.. By what real metric are they "superior" ?

Claims aren't difficult for companies with huge numbers. To claim they're somehow superior because of land claims is completely false.

I myself am part of a smaller company, and we've completely ruined these so called "top companies" on several occasions, in several altercations. But just because we claim no land, we're not better than them?...Are you joking?

Claims should not be used to measure which company is the best as it excludes smaller companies who might otherwise be superior. Infact.. If i were you.. I'd remove the whole "top company" thing altogether, as there isn't really a way to measure who truly is the top company.

We need representation for smaller companies, who go for quality over quantity. Companies with large numbers are often the worst players out of everyone, because the game is significantly easier when you have more people working together.

How can you have people playing on a harder difficulty represented under people who just amass claims?.. It is totally ridiculous, and i suggest you come up with a new way to measure the top company, or remove it altogether. Or atleast do not proclaim them as "top", when they quite clearly are not really.

Edited by Tina Toothpick
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, not sure what metric is best for this though. Could even just have multiple Top 10 metrics. Top 10 Land, Top 10 Players, Top 10 tames, etc etc could probably track lots of metrics like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not hard to raid as a small company. We’ve done it of plenty of times (we’re in a large company but we barely play with more than 6). Thing is, if my company wants you blasted, I’m pretty sure you’re blasted within a day. Especially since the stone nerf 😉 . But I can see your point, I don’t think they’re gonna recode everything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would honestly like to see the sea claims removed and only have land claims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thor Ragnarock said:

I agree, not sure what metric is best for this though. Could even just have multiple Top 10 metrics. Top 10 Land, Top 10 Players, Top 10 tames, etc etc could probably track lots of metrics like this.

Anything that is easier for greater numbers will never be fair.

It needs to be scaled proportionally with the size of the company. 

For example.. Sinking a galleon should be near worthless for a huge company.. Sinking a galleon for a small company should be worth a LOT.

You accomplishments would then have to be scaled down the more people you recruit to your company so that you couldn't just drop people in and out of the company to cheat the system.

People who play on a harder difficulty (smaller companies), should be more thoroughly rewarded for it.

4 minutes ago, LSG said:

I would honestly like to see the sea claims removed and only have land claims. 

Everywhere should be lawless, and they should implement a structure limit to prevent pillar spam.

Edited by Tina Toothpick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HATE the structure spam in lawless, I don't mind the claim system. I just don't think the sea claims add any worth to it other than spamming them all over the place for top 10. I would much rather top 10 be based off some type of pvp point system, amount of damage dealt, ships sunk. Something other than spamming flags down lol..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LSG said:

I HATE the structure spam in lawless, I don't mind the claim system. I just don't think the sea claims add any worth to it other than spamming them all over the place for top 10. I would much rather top 10 be based off some type of pvp point system, amount of damage dealt, ships sunk. Something other than spamming flags down lol..

Yes but those things can be exploited. Just make another company, give them a lot of stone structures and start kiting. 1 player company can be on the top of the list. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Percieval said:

Yes but those things can be exploited. Just make another company, give them a lot of stone structures and start kiting. 1 player company can be on the top of the list. 

Then don't use structures as a metric.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LSG said:

I HATE the structure spam in lawless, I don't mind the claim system. I just don't think the sea claims add any worth to it other than spamming them all over the place for top 10. I would much rather top 10 be based off some type of pvp point system, amount of damage dealt, ships sunk. Something other than spamming flags down lol..

just make a bear with cannon and destroy this pillars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tina Toothpick said:

Then don't use structures as a metric.

Same with players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It needs to be an accumulation of a lot of things. Like sailing distance, average powerstone amount, harvested items, damage dealt. This way solo players can gather lots of points when finding all powerstones and other things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a game about dominating the world, how would not owning the most land make you the "top company" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Knivet said:

Its a game about dominating the world, how would not owning the most land make you the "top company" 

Well one company may have all the land but another one controls all trade, for example, and another one just has more friends.

But yeah, land is just simple and easier to implement as a metric, instantly visible on the map too.

Edited by LaiTash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tina Toothpick said:

Could i just ask.. How does having more claimed land make one company better than another?.. By what real metric are they "superior" ?

Claims aren't difficult for companies with huge numbers. To claim they're somehow superior because of land claims is completely false.

I myself am part of a smaller company, and we've completely ruined these so called "top companies" on several occasions, in several altercations. But just because we claim no land, we're not better than them?...Are you joking?

Claims should not be used to measure which company is the best as it excludes smaller companies who might otherwise be superior. Infact.. If i were you.. I'd remove the whole "top company" thing altogether, as there isn't really a way to measure who truly is the top company.

We need representation for smaller companies, who go for quality over quantity. Companies with large numbers are often the worst players out of everyone, because the game is significantly easier when you have more people working together.

How can you have people playing on a harder difficulty represented under people who just amass claims?.. It is totally ridiculous, and i suggest you come up with a new way to measure the top company, or scrap it altogether.

The maps have been down for 3 days, Maybe they are scrapping it...
I agree that land owned is a very strange metric right now, but in 18 months when the game has had a chance to settle it, I could see it being more valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, LaiTash said:

Well one company may have all the land but another one controls all trade, for example, and another one just has more friends.

But yeah, land is just simple and easier to implement as a metric, instantly visible on the map too.

Just because you own wallmart, dont make you the president 🙂

 

Edited by Knivet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Knivet said:

Just because you own wallmart, dont make you the president

- you can be a medieval Pope and own asses of almost every king in Europe while owning a just tiny piece of land

- you can be a banker in one of the merchant republics and decide the fates of whole countries from the safety of your cabinet

- you can own google and have an effective wold-wide mind-control machine and there's nothing a president can do about it. He's using google too.

Who cares about some guy who has the power for 4 or 8 years and can't even fuck a girl working for him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Atleast big companies in PvP have more land to be top companies, top companies in PvE have just spammed more seaflags literally no point in having seaflags.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skyroguen said:

It's a pirate game. the only real measure of a company should be GOLD.

So when there are companies investing enormous amounts of gold into raiding, kill everyone,  they will be at the last place? 

Edited by Percieval

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Percieval said:

So when there are companies investing enormous amounts of gold into raiding, kill everyone,  they will be at the last place? 

why raid if not to get more gold

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Skyroguen said:

why raid if not to get more gold

For the fun of raiding? When we raid we don’t necessarily hunt for gold. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tina Toothpick said:

Could i just ask.. How does having more claimed land make one company better than another?.. By what real metric are they "superior" ?

Claims aren't difficult for companies with huge numbers. To claim they're somehow superior because of land claims is completely false.

I myself am part of a smaller company, and we've completely ruined these so called "top companies" on several occasions, in several altercations. But just because we claim no land, we're not better than them?...Are you joking?

Claims should not be used to measure which company is the best as it excludes smaller companies who might otherwise be superior. Infact.. If i were you.. I'd remove the whole "top company" thing altogether, as there isn't really a way to measure who truly is the top company.

We need representation for smaller companies, who go for quality over quantity. Companies with large numbers are often the worst players out of everyone, because the game is significantly easier when you have more people working together.

How can you have people playing on a harder difficulty represented under people who just amass claims?.. It is totally ridiculous, and i suggest you come up with a new way to measure the top company, or scrap it altogether.

I can appreciate where you are coming from however...while your post criticizes the present system, it offers no useful or meaningful alternative. You complain about a system which is a pretty standard and commonly used sort of metric in games like these, provide reasonably useful subjective arguments for why evaluating things in a different way *might* be a better idea, although it tends to be predicated on the subtext that you think your company should be recognized  for being superior, yet you offer no suggestion yourself for how superior might be defined or measured. 

Measuring who controls the greatest amount of territory might not be your preferred method, but it is not "totally ridiculous" to most people. Totally ridiculous would be rating top companies by which company owns the most tamed rabbits, or has collectively slaughtered the most fish. To me, the system is less unreasonable than say, someone coming onto the forums, complaining about a straightforward system that measures things in an objective way, then rather than offer an alternative, putting it on the developers to come up with something better (because they clearly don't have anything more important to do right now than rethink metric systems so they don't bruise certain players egos just by not recognizing them for being awesome) or calling for said system to be scrapped. To me this amounts to whinging.

If you have a realistic suggestion for a system which you think would be better and solid arguments for why, then I am all ears. Until then, your post sounds a lot like Jamaica complaining that no one takes their bobsledding team seriously just because they don't actually win any races.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Percieval said:

For the fun of raiding? When we raid we don’t necessarily hunt for gold. 

Well you're taking away from someone else's fun (esp. when it's an offline raid with no fun for the defender) and i honestly don't see why it should be encouraged even more. You have your fun, a company with most gold have their place in top 10, everyone's happy. If getting gold via treasure hunts hopefully gets a much needed nerf one day, it would also incentivize trade via gold.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skyroguen said:

It's a pirate game. the only real measure of a company should be GOLD.

Hmm... I like this idea.. Mainly because you can steal gold much easier than you can land. Also it should be labeled "richest company", not "top"

Also.. On another note.. It shouldn't be "top companies", it should be just "most land claimed"; or something like that.. "Top company" implies they're superior, which as i've already covered, is false.

Edited by Tina Toothpick
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tina Toothpick said:

Hmm... I like this idea.. Mainly because you can steal gold much easier than you can land. Also it should be labeled "richest company", not "top"

Also.. On another note.. It shouldn't be "top companies", it should be just "most land claimed"; or something like that.. "Top company" implies they're superior, which as i've already covered, is false.

I can agree this is a reasonable suggestion. I also like the idea of a metric that measures companies by gold held.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×