Jump to content

SilkBD

solution Problems with PvE Changes, and a Proposed Solution

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Argh! said:

^^ YES!! ^^

The land-grab mentality would become irrelevant if the game didn't force the "need" for permanent land bases... 

Here are my thoughts on how to address the broader land ownership and PVE issues:

  1. Allow building anywhere, but it decays naturally over (x) amount of time. *bear with me 🙂
  2. ALL "abandoned" structures decay -- but you can combat this with a "settlement" (see below).
  3. Add in temporary buildings that can be packed up (also decay over time)  -- Tents and base camp equipment -- These could be limited use light versions of all the basic needs --> hammock/spawn point, sawhorse/crafting, camp-stove/cooking, portable resource chest for gathering, taming cages ... 
  4. The Bank becomes the new flag (town square) for a "Settlement" -- requires a goodly amount of resource to build one, but once you do, you own a physical settlement -- Players can then request through an interface on the bank to build (a residence, trading post, port, etc).
    • Upkeep, taxes, resources to repair, all still apply.
    • Post jobs in the bank, (gold for resources, or items needed for the settlement) -- this becomes a center for trade and commerce.
  5. Structures in settlements decay VERY slowly, and can be destroyed by Settlement "admins".
  6. If you park your ship in a settlement (you are not a member of) longer than two days, the settlement will begin to pull money from your resource chest (dock fees)... If gold runs out, an abandoned ship will become "unclaimed", and available for claim or salvage. <-- this could work for abandoned buildings as well. 
  7. Settlements are not Companies, but can be owned by one (or more). Base the success of a settlement on trade volume (leader boards).
  8. Allow all members of a settlement the ability to use all basic crafting equipment.
  9. Resources for crafting are pulled from your own personal or a public resource chest that's within the towns radius (like a lockable resource trough).
  10. Players can buy and sell settlements (deeds) -- the value set in game, and based on the resources and amenities within the banks radius.
  11. Increase crew and weigh limits on ships to a reasonable level so they could be used as a mobile base --> encourage exploration and trade between settlements.
  12. Turn select zones in to PVP "lawless zones" -- Encourages piracy <-- which would be far more lucrative if there is strong trade. Going in is a choice, and might cut time off of lucrative trade routes, but you go in at your own risk. ALL PVP rules would apply in these zones.

These are just "brainstorm" ideas wandering down a slightly different path. I know these are rough.
his thought exercise riffs off the goals of simplifying (where possible), using existing game systems, adding healthy PVE tension, while attempting to decoupling players from obvious grief systems.

Thoughts??

Some very good ideas. I can see how this could work in practice.

The ship resource chest can hold a large amount of resource. Change it so that the weight of items in it are reduced instead of increasing the amount of weight a ship can hold. Make it like 1/10 normal weight. 

You pull in to a settlement on your ship and anchor or moor to a dock. Once anchored or moored, you ship resource chest is available for pulling resources for various things. For instance for trandes at the settlement, using crafting benches, and purchases there. Instead of having to haul gold or resources for buying NPCs or the resource trader, they come from your ship resource box.

You are out exploring, and want to collect some resources. You anchor your ship nearby and locate the resource. You place a structure to "store" the resource. You gather and deposit the resource into it. The structure transfers the resource to the ship resource chest. When done, you pick up the structure and go back to the ship.

Would be cool if your ship would always be the center off all activities.

Currently I have a mess hall on each ship and then also one at my base. Why all the redundancy between the base and the ship? Mainly because the ship just can't be made that secure in PvP (or even PvE). I can imagine a different type of game where that would not be the case. Not going to go into it, as I don't see that happening here.

The big problem with any concept like this one where the ship is a mobile base, is that the game needs to change from one where you ship could be sunk at any moment or make it easier to retrieve all the resources from a sunken ship. Simply dropping anchor can be enough to damage a ship to where it is sinking a few minutes later the way the game is currently designed. Ships are just too easily destroyed, from typhoons, hitting a rock, to SotD destroying it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rapier2012 said:

Youre doing the mat a bit wrong. Its not that one person needs the same amount of space as 7 people, its that 7 people can use the same amount of space as one person without losing anything, since the minimum required space for crafting stations(smithy, loom tannery) wont change much for a handful of players.

I get that. But your not addressing why the solo player would have more then enough room to build 4 ships if they felt like it...but a 10 person company wouldn’t if each person wanted 4 ships. We all paid the same amount, give or take a few dollars, we should all be given the same amount of claims. The math has been done on other posts....there’s plenty of land to make that happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, UDO said:

10 per player ? where did u get that from ,? 6 flags for companys up to 10 players in size , 12 for companys of 10-25 players , and so on 

 

and u misunderstood if u only give players 2 flags first few place there flags and claim the coast areas , next few only areas left on the islands are further inland so they place their 2 flgs inland on top of resources  effectivly blocking them first scenario.

 

second scenario ,toxic players usually have more than 1 in their company so u go giving 2 flags per player say a 10 strong company has 20 flags to place , so the first 5 memebrs place flags over resources and build , the other 5 place their flags for their new base , normal players are starved of resources , u move to new island they remove their buildiongs blocking resources , 

 

flag claims have to be limited per company depending on member numbers

 

 

Easy fix. You can’t put any flags or any buildings within resources set range. It will only applies to reasources like metal nodes, crystal and so on.

 You need to describe with more information. How many player you need to form company? Because with current system you can form company with one player. You get the point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

6 hours ago, Argh! said:

^^ YES!! ^^

The land-grab mentality would become irrelevant if the game didn't force the "need" for permanent land bases... 

Here are my thoughts on how to address the broader land ownership and PVE issues:

  1. Allow building anywhere, but it decays naturally over (x) amount of time. *bear with me 🙂
  2. ALL "abandoned" structures decay -- but you can combat this with a "settlement" (see below).
  3. Add in temporary buildings that can be packed up (also decay over time)  -- Tents and base camp equipment -- These could be limited use light versions of all the basic needs --> hammock/spawn point, sawhorse/crafting, camp-stove/cooking, portable resource chest for gathering, taming cages ... 
  4. The Bank becomes the new flag (town square) for a "Settlement" -- requires a goodly amount of resource to build one, but once you do, you own a physical settlement -- Players can then request through an interface on the bank to build (a residence, trading post, port, etc).
    • Upkeep, taxes, resources to repair, all still apply.
    • Post jobs in the bank, (gold for resources, or items needed for the settlement) -- this becomes a center for trade and commerce.
  5. Structures in settlements decay VERY slowly, and can be destroyed by Settlement "admins".
  6. If you park your ship in a settlement (you are not a member of) longer than two days, the settlement will begin to pull money from your resource chest (dock fees)... If gold runs out, an abandoned ship will become "unclaimed", and available for claim or salvage. <-- this could work for abandoned buildings as well. 
  7. Settlements are not Companies, but can be owned by one (or more). Base the success of a settlement on trade volume (leader boards).
  8. Allow all members of a settlement the ability to use all basic crafting equipment.
  9. Resources for crafting are pulled from your own personal or a public resource chest that's within the towns radius (like a lockable resource trough).
  10. Players can buy and sell settlements (deeds) -- the value set in game, and based on the resources and amenities within the banks radius.
  11. Increase crew and weigh limits on ships to a reasonable level so they could be used as a mobile base --> encourage exploration and trade between settlements.
  12. Turn select zones in to PVP "lawless zones" -- Encourages piracy <-- which would be far more lucrative if there is strong trade. Going in is a choice, and might cut time off of lucrative trade routes, but you go in at your own risk. ALL PVP rules would apply in these zones.

These are just "brainstorm" ideas wandering down a slightly different path. I know these are rough.
This thought exercise riffs off the goals of simplifying (where possible), using existing game systems, adding healthy PVE tension, while attempting to decoupling players from obvious grief systems.

Thoughts??

This is PvE server so why this discussion about PvP system. I disagree

Edited by Robotukas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

1 hour ago, Robotukas said:

 

This is PvE server so why this discussion about PvP system. I disagree

The only PVP suggestion in the whole list, is that we could have specific zones that are set aside for PVP (piracy)... This game is not designed for PVE at all, and they are trying to shoehorn PVE rules on to a PVP core. SO In this example, the majority of the servers would be PVE... MANY really good PVE games allow for limited (controlled) PVP (as long as it's the player's choice) -- All this addition would do, is add another style of game-play to the PVE server cluster -- we loose nothing. that's why I like the idea. 🙂

Did you like any of the other ideas?

Edited by Argh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I was actually thinking the war dec and ocean lawless pirating was for the PVE servers and was excited as a result. My bad. 

J

Edited by hands solo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Rainy said:

I get that. But your not addressing why the solo player would have more then enough room to build 4 ships if they felt like it...but a 10 person company wouldn’t if each person wanted 4 ships. We all paid the same amount, give or take a few dollars, we should all be given the same amount of claims. The math has been done on other posts....there’s plenty of land to make that happen.

Why couldnt they? Only takes one shipyard to build ships, and with 10 people working you can pump em out quick as hell. They certainly do have more than enough room to build it, even an advantage over a solo player.
Now if you mean to say they dont have enough room inside that bubble to park 40 ships... well you would be correct. But whats your point? Doesnt change anything if the ships are in your zone or not when anchored.

Edited by Rapier2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My solution would be a hard limit to flags, around 5, I think. With possiblity an ability to buy/earn more. I like the company tier system for earning more flags, since it encourages people to play together to unlock more flags, Though not sure how Id break it down. The main system would include claiming like we do now, except the timer begins at 5 days, and can increase to a maximum of 14 days by spending time in that area. Time gained should be greater than time spent, something like a minute played would gain 2 minutes on your claim timer. And the ability to buy more time with gold, incase a longer break is necessary.

Could the time increase in blocks as well, to prevent people just idling. Every 2 hours spent in zone gains 4 hours for example. One for two might work, though Im fairly sure 2 hours would certainly kill someone just afk'd in an area.

Edited by Rapier2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Argh! said:

 

The only PVP suggestion in the whole list, is that we could have specific zones that are set aside for PVP (piracy)... This game is not designed for PVE at all, and they are trying to shoehorn PVE rules on to a PVP core. SO In this example, the majority of the servers would be PVE... MANY really good PVE games allow for limited (controlled) PVP (as long as it's the player's choice) -- All this addition would do, is add another style of game-play to the PVE server cluster -- we loose nothing. that's why I like the idea. 🙂

Did you like any of the other ideas?

So you want to say that PvP players will have more advantages than PvE players? Guys you want have PvP so play in PvP servers. You have already. I don’t play EvE because is PvP but on advert they say is also PvE. People trying to make PvPvE style but they don’t realise that is PvP just only. Best example for PvPvE is World of Warcraft which they introduce War Mode in BfA.

Share this post


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

Best example for PvPvE is World of Warcraft which they introduce War Mode in BfA.

Well -- you seemed to understand in the end. situations like the BfA in WoW is exactly what I'm talking about... PVP by choice, not forced on the player. You are entitled to your opinion, and I can certainly understand being a PVE purists -- I am a PVE player as well. I typically don't do PVP unless it's with friends that I trust.

I did try Eve Online, and I had some pretty interesting interaction with PVP players. shortly after I started, I was killed by a pirate while I was mining... lost everything I had worked for. I messaged him, and congratulated him on being the first person to kill me. After a polite and earnest conversation, he transferred me enough credits to replace everything he had destroyed, plus a million more for upgrades. I made e new friend that day. It's not all bad. <-- I'm not suggesting that this is for everyone.

The point I was hoping you would see/read, is that my post was all about PVE ideas and solutions -- focusing on the one PVP comment/idea doesn't further the conversation.

So I politely ask again -- did you like any of the other ideas? 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Argh! said:

So I politely ask again -- did you like any of the other ideas? 🙂

I did, but I'm also not the one harassing you about one of the suggestions.  Honestly I thought some of the suggestions were good, for the most part it sounds like you are advocating for the same basic principle as the PvP server with a single claim and it making the island into a settlement which I am a huge fan of.  The hard part about PvE is the incentive to build on another companies Settlement and I don't think the "to stave off the decay" is enough.  Hear me out.

In PvP the settlement system comes with both the tenant and the landowner having to donate time and resources for each other's benefit.  The tenant pays some of the resources he gathers and has to blindly trust that the landowner won't rob/destroy his stuff without cause.  Meanwhile the landowner has to spend his time and resources setting up defenses, protecting/policing the island from random raiders every day, and moderating his tenants if there is any land/resource disputes.  If he doesn't then his tenants will leave and he'll be forced to work even harder to maintain an island without their help.

In your scenario the tenants are still donating resources and blind trust to a Settlement "admin" which is basically the landowner (same as in PvP's concept).  In the meanwhile the landowner or "admin" has to do nothing extra.  He has the power to boot anyone that's on the island and besides for the upkeep has no incentive to shit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2019 at 6:05 PM, SilkBD said:

If you have a company of 5, then you have 5 claims.  1 player should not be able to claim a huge expanse of territory, that's exactly why we're in this mess.

Are they doing that now?
 

There's plenty of claimable land right now, and if they open up all Lawless to be claimable, as well as all the new islands their adding, things should be no worse than now unless you're expecting a huge playerbase increase.

Claimable land my a55 everything has at least a 10 day protection currently...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CoopedUp said:

I did, but I'm also not the one harassing you about one of the suggestions.  Honestly I thought some of the suggestions were good, for the most part it sounds like you are advocating for the same basic principle as the PvP server with a single claim and it making the island into a settlement which I am a huge fan of.  The hard part about PvE is the incentive to build on another companies Settlement and I don't think the "to stave off the decay" is enough.  Hear me out.

In PvP the settlement system comes with both the tenant and the landowner having to donate time and resources for each other's benefit.  The tenant pays some of the resources he gathers and has to blindly trust that the landowner won't rob/destroy his stuff without cause.  Meanwhile the landowner has to spend his time and resources setting up defenses, protecting/policing the island from random raiders every day, and moderating his tenants if there is any land/resource disputes.  If he doesn't then his tenants will leave and he'll be forced to work even harder to maintain an island without their help.

In your scenario the tenants are still donating resources and blind trust to a Settlement "admin" which is basically the landowner (same as in PvP's concept).  In the meanwhile the landowner or "admin" has to do nothing extra.  He has the power to boot anyone that's on the island and besides for the upkeep has no incentive to shit.

I figured you could potentially have more than one settlement on an island (3-5 maybe?)... They would have a radius like current claim flags, but with far less restrictions to build... the value of the settlement could be based on both what is built as well as how many different companies you include. The benefits to sharing would be faster resource and character growth.

I can totally see the issue you are highlighting... I imagined that joining a settlement would be a bit like joining a guild in other MMOs -- with ranks and privileges... you can't get away from having owners/leaders -- If the health and wealth of a settlement is tied to attracting settlers, doesn't that still constitute a reciprocal agreement?? <-- This could also be solved through "stock" in the settlement... new members get a cut of the riches, distributed to their resource chest via the bank, and could set quests for needed items?

I imagined Admins having a lot less power than land owners do now - maybe with a line of succession so settlements don't end up in limbo. They could also be subject to claim if abandoned. I would have to sit down and do a real design exercise to work out all the kinks. <-- of course isn't that Grapeshot's job. 😉

I've seen systems like this work in other games... I did another post "This game is missing the RIGHT kind of conflict.",  one of the issues that makes this a harder design challenge is that the PVE is really light on the "E" -- We still need ways to be pirates or merchants in the PVE version of this game. There are tons of SOTD, but no NPC pirate/merchant ships or NPC ports to plunder and take over. AC Black Flag did a pretty good job of NPC port battles.

Thanks for the feedback!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

damn... you guys came up with a bunch of complicated convoluted new things.
 

If we keep things simple... that means less bugs.  Simple is best.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Argh! said:

Well -- you seemed to understand in the end. situations like the BfA in WoW is exactly what I'm talking about... PVP by choice, not forced on the player. You are entitled to your opinion, and I can certainly understand being a PVE purists -- I am a PVE player as well. I typically don't do PVP unless it's with friends that I trust.

I did try Eve Online, and I had some pretty interesting interaction with PVP players. shortly after I started, I was killed by a pirate while I was mining... lost everything I had worked for. I messaged him, and congratulated him on being the first person to kill me. After a polite and earnest conversation, he transferred me enough credits to replace everything he had destroyed, plus a million more for upgrades. I made e new friend that day. It's not all bad. <-- I'm not suggesting that this is for everyone.

The point I was hoping you would see/read, is that my post was all about PVE ideas and solutions -- focusing on the one PVP comment/idea doesn't further the conversation.

So I politely ask again -- did you like any of the other ideas? 🙂

If idea like EvE online I disagree. If idea like WoW Bfa I agree but it will be impossible to do in this game because game engine and mechanic is different . As PvE player should able explore everywhere without forced to fight with players. I don’t mind to have friendly duel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2019 at 2:23 PM, Winter Thorne said:

  But that implies a group of equals, each owning land, voting for who's going to administer the next higher level of cooperation for a town or city, and there's some recourse if it turns out badly.     I'd be against even a town group being able to vote someone off the island, because I can see a situation where the group has a friend they'd like to get a claim there and gang up against an outsider to get rid of him for that...

... And if it's a real griefer or toxic player issue, they already have rules about that and should take some action, although it may take a huge player outcry to get them to do that.  I guess we both know full well the toxic ones will be out there.  I just don't think having an elite class of ruling landowners based on who could grab the land first fixes that.

 

 

That's not the only issue.  You've seen nationalities pitted against nationalities.  If I were Chinese and named my ships with box-box-box, would I be given a fair shake or would I be lynched by a Euro-American coalition and run off the island?  You don't even have to be a toxic player to get booted, you just need to be a different nationality.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Argh! said:

I figured you could potentially have more than one settlement on an island (3-5 maybe?)... They would have a radius like current claim flags, but with far less restrictions to build... the value of the settlement could be based on both what is built as well as how many different companies you include. The benefits to sharing would be faster resource and character growth.

I think that would get us in the same situation as we are in now, sort of.  You'd have a lot of little companies looking to put to down endless settlements and since it's a radial area like the claim flag eventually they'd start crowding each other or whining about it's location and everything else.  Not to mention it would be another settlement system, but operate completely differently between PvE and PvP servers so people transferring between one server and the other might get confused.

I say stick with the same settlement system that they are proposing for the PvP server, simply come up with an alternative to PvP raiding that the settlement owner would be responsible for controlling.  I suggested somewhere that in PvP they have player raiders, in PvE they incorporate some sort of Undead Crew island invasion that happens periodically.  This would give the settlement owner something to protect his tenants against, and it would give all the islands some fun PvE events to participate in or prepare for.

A lot of your other suggestions like tents, docking fees, trade and other such items can be added into the settlement system for both PvP and PvE servers at a later date as well.  Just for now they need to decide on and implement a new basic system for the servers that is somewhat common between both play styles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My company held a territory of about 3 flags.  We also had 3 sea flags to protect our coast. Our company had 6 people in it. I feel this was very reasonable. I think 1 flag per person is the way to go. a Company with 10 people could have 10 flags. A large company of 200 could plant up to 200 flags. this would be enough to take control of entire islands. the catch should be that this limit is applied across all sever grids. one flag means one flag per game world, not 1 flag per grid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 10:05 AM, UDO said:

 

 

flag claims have to be limited per company depending on member numbers

 

 

Ah, but the number of players in a company is fluid.  They come and go.  For the sake of discussion, say we allow one claim per person in a company.  When that person quits the company or is booted, does the Company lose a claim flag at random?  Grapeshot kills off characters who don't log in within what, three weeks?  So what if your brother decides to quit playing, gets erased by Grapeshot and you're faced with giving up the claim that you placed your shipyard/stables/base on?

I thought about alts being a possible issue too, but decided it's not really a problem because they bought legit copies of the game - they're entitled.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raine said:

Ah, but the number of players in a company is fluid.  They come and go.  For the sake of discussion, say we allow one claim per person in a company.  When that person quits the company or is booted, does the Company lose a claim flag at random?  Grapeshot kills off characters who don't log in within what, three weeks?  So what if your brother decides to quit playing, gets erased by Grapeshot and you're faced with giving up the claim that you placed your shipyard/stables/base on?

I thought about alts being a possible issue too, but decided it's not really a problem because they bought legit copies of the game - they're entitled.

if they quit playing then even though they have no body and are waiting at the re-spawn screen they are still a part of the company and thus the company keeps the flag. the problem comes when the player quits the company. the company would need to give up a flag. of course if the  player is required to place the flag and thus owns the flag then when he quits the company that flag leaves as well. the player now has a small chunk of land that the company no longer has.

To deal with overlap issues i feel that the land should be own based on first come first serves. if two flag overlap the the flag put down first owns the shared area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Skyroguen said:

if they quit playing then even though they have no body and are waiting at the re-spawn screen they are still a part of the company and thus the company keeps the flag. the problem comes when the player quits the company. the company would need to give up a flag. of course if the  player is required to place the flag and thus owns the flag then when he quits the company that flag leaves as well. the player now has a small chunk of land that the company no longer has.

So really, all a company needs to do to get massive island points is to keep recruiting members.  If those members stop playing, and the company is reduced to a handful of active players, it really doesn't matter.  They still get to keep their points and their claims so long as none of their defunct players logs in and leaves the company.  Somehow, I think that can be easily gamed.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, part of the problem is that claiming an island is simply being there first after the wipe.

There's no effort or real competition besides being there first after the wipe, and then winning the battle of attrition if it's contested (aka: staying online for days so you don't lose the attempted claim)

With everyone logging in to claim an island, this is unreasonable.

Share this post


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

Now, part of the problem is that claiming an island is simply being there first after the wipe.

There's no effort or real competition besides being there first after the wipe, and then winning the battle of attrition if it's contested (aka: staying online for days so you don't lose the attempted claim)

With everyone logging in to claim an island, this is unreasonable.

this is true first one on island claimsit beore anyone else logs in , all about who is going to be able to patch fastest and log in to their chosen island 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, this newest idea is just terrible. From a bad landlord arrangement to a bad landlord arrangement.  

This does not have to be so complex.

Why not build anywhere (normal or lawless). Use the structure repair item they spoke of. Use that same structure repair item to create a no enemy build zone around it. 

No landlords, no one can delete your things and no one else can build in your area.

The repair structure device prevents any enemy object placement within 75 meters and enemy repairs structures within 150 meters. Limit the number of repair structure devices you can drop to 4 or 5. They would work much like a claim flag. They work until you stop feeding it. When you stop feeding it, it and all your objects start a delete timer. Solved.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, UDO said:

this is true first one on island claimsit beore anyone else logs in , all about who is going to be able to patch fastest and log in to their chosen island 

Maybe, but who cares?  So you claim an island, what's different then if you don't claim the island?  You get a short period where you can destroy other settlers stuff, but now have to manage an upkeep to maintain your island, settle tenants disputes,  and police your island from griefers and trolls.  Meanwhile John Pegleg will just find a nice location on the island and settle down to start building.  No extra fuss or responsibilities.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 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

×