| Welcome Guest | Login |
Index
| Recent Threads
| Register
| Search
| Help
| 
| View Unanswered Threads
|
 |
Forums » List all forums » Forum: Game Design » Thread: Obsidian Building Idea: Navy Yard to provide protection from sinking PvP |
|
Thread Status: Normal Total posts in this thread: 9 |
[Add To My Favorites] [Watch this Thread] [Post new Thread] |
| Author |
|
|
HiimEric2001
Joined: Aug 17, 2003 Posts: 3232 Status: Offline |
I think this would either be an Infrastructure Building or count as an Island Attraction if the current building rules stay the same. If a Navy Yard is constructed on an island then the Navy is reinforced around the island and protects ships in the allied faction from sinking PvP. There's a lot a variables as to how this could be implemented. I'd say that for it to be reasonably worth it, the protection should extend from the island in all directions, either full routes or up to say 5 leagues or until it hits another island. The protection could either disable all sinking PvP a la the Greywaters Arch, or, as I think I prefer, grant protection only to the allied faction, for battles initiated by the enemy faction. So if Island A is controlled by a Defiant Armada flag and they build a Navy Yard, then within X league points if a Shadow Fleet ship attacks a Defiant Armada ship, the battle is non-sinking, but if a Defiant Armada ship attacks a Shadow Fleet ship it would be sinking, as normal. Perhaps as part of the Island Attraction angle the same protection could be purchased by someone in the enemy faction. I'm thinking a special "chart" or "forged documents" that could be permanently placed on a ship's chart table. If a ship has that chart the Navy will protect it from sinking PvP as well around that island. The chart will decay after however many days and when it dusts the protection is gone until a new one is placed. I think it's important that within a battle both sides are equal in regards to risk of sinking. A battle where one side could be sunk but not the other would be bad I think. I think this would really contribute to the theme of the ocean. It makes factions matter more, and it would create (relatively) safe zones scattered around the ocean. It would help create a feeling of being in friendly waters vs enemy waters. It would also offer some relief to local merchants and those who just want to play without risk of sinking but don't want to be stuck in the Greywaters Arch. And since it's up to the governor whether to build it or not it is a social answer to people turned off by sinking. ---------------------------------------- Cire Purple Squid Brigade, Inglorious Fandango
|
|||
|
|
bahaakbu
Joined: Jan 4, 2007 Posts: 41 Status: Offline |
Hmm. I really like this idea. But what happens when there are navy yards in the adjacent islands? Also, building on this idea, how about a chance of a heavily equipped ship spawning when a opposing faction ship engages a ship in allied waters (a nerfed El Pollo Diablo style) instead? Something that can be defeated/evaded, but powerful enough to deter people from attacking unprepared. This would better simulate having navy patrolling the waters as well. Also would be easier to tweak when and if there are navy yards in adjacent islands. But I would love to have sinking protection as well, price preferably scaling to ship size. Edit: Something along the lines of this might work too: https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/System_security Maybe depending on your distance to the nearest navy yard, reduce the amount of turns you need to disengage? This option would be less chance based, and more hard numbers. This system is working quite well in EVE already, I don't see why an implementation wouldn't work, with some tweaks. ---------------------------------------- Cheesemighty on Obsidian. I'm trying to compare the opinions of people on obsidian ocean, and see if the difference is statistically significant. It's anonymous and takes less than 5 minutes: https://goo.gl/forms/6icpkudNjlb1PmcF3 ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by bahaakbu at Oct 12, 2017 9:19:57 AM] |
||
|
Jcmorgan6
 Joined: Feb 5, 2015 Posts: 413 Status: Offline |
I think this is brilliantly thought out and well balanced. I'd perhaps make the protection map cost a little even for allied forces, and maybe a little more for the opposing faction maybe? On that note, I realised I had no idea what happens to PoE from attractions currently since I've not governed since their release I'm presuming it goes to the governor because it's not listed here ? I guess if that's true, it would be a pretty big incentive to build one. ---------------------------------------- Jjc & Jice on Emerald CI booty division stats |
||
|
SeaGi
 Joined: Aug 10, 2005 Posts: 79 Status: Offline |
The governor of a island or the faction in control could fund its navy, which would provide navy 'patrols' PvE aggro that travels between the islands routes to other adjacent islands and back. The more invested, the larger the scope of protection, more ships, larger vessels, etc. Have them autoengage, make the AI scary good, and with one goal, to sink the enemy ship like IO AI. ---------------------------------------- "pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall" -Prov 16:18 Jimmyjimjim, Ex-downpressor of Babylon Thankfully Retired |
||
|
|
Nek0jin
Joined: Feb 8, 2004 Posts: 563 Status: Offline |
That's not a terrible idea. Have certain funding levels trigger higher-skilled (or more cheaty) "navy" crews, as well. |
|||
|
|
Steveyohoho
Joined: Jul 26, 2007 Posts: 342 Status: Offline |
+1 to this idea. As a super old veteran navver who's just interested in mostly (outside of blockades) PVE activities, I'd pimp myself out to the faction/flag that controlled an island who's Navy Yard protected a red/yellow pillaging route or nearby SMH maps or flots. I especially like the original idea where it just changes the sinking/non-sinking aspect. That way, you can still be PvPed and lose stuff if you lose the fight, but at least the added part of losing your ship doesn't come into play. To address the comment about Navy Yards on either end of the route, I'd guess the easiest solution would be it protects half the route (which might be a slight incentive for factions to control neighboring islands). I'd add too that it should be a NON-infrastructure building such that it has a real cost to the faction wanting to build it in terms of taking up slots of buildings on an island. Would any faction be dumb enough to put one of these on an outpost and give up having some more useful/profitable? Its probably more reasonable to use this building as 1 of 5 on a medium isle or 1 of 10 on a large isle in Obsidian? I'd disagree with having to "fund" it as there are already many costs and tribulations to owning islands already. As it stood in the oceans I played on in the past, you really didn't make much money from owning an island given what you put in to get it. Even if you could sell plots or were super good at managing the palace/fort. Thats not to say you couldn't get some income, it was just vastly outweighed by what it took to take the island in the first place although if you owned it long enough I suppose.... ---------------------------------------- Steveyohoho That guy wandering the Obsidian ocean |
||
|
|
Lotus_elise3
Joined: Feb 9, 2005 Posts: 2409 Status: Offline |
What is wrong with the current system of everywhere outside of Greywaters Arch being sinking pvp? The whole point of Dark Seas is to encourage pvp and specifically sinking pvp. When the stakes are higher (ship loss instead of booty/stock loss) it encourages more pvps to take place in my opinion. As someone who frequently pvps or looks for sinking pvps - it's already difficult to engage people at the best of times, you already have the protection of a good dnaver which means you can outmanoeuvre the person trying to engage your ship. People can disengage from battle or grapple too. Oh, and you have to try and figure out what route they're sailing on. And on some occasions you get there and it turns out the people onboard are puzzling to work on stats but the ship is actually being swabbied. Adding another level like this to water down the possibility of a sinking pvp is not required. To overcome all of the above issues listed when trying to engage sinking pvps to then find out they have some kind of protection from the navy is going to put people off of looking out for ships. It will do for me at the very least. The OP is structured and well thought out but I personally feel this takes away from the entire point of Dark Seas and factions, rather than adds anything. ---------------------------------------- A Confirmed Basterd, Antix Of Guerrilla Warfare 2018 fame |
||
|
|
Devonin
Joined: Jul 28, 2003 Posts: 3576 Status: Offline |
I wish people would stop insisting on treating Obsidian like one server among many that is the PVP server. At the moment there are 585 total people online of which 68% are on Obsidian. It's not a pvp server. It's THE server. |
||
|
|
Filthyjake
Joined: Jun 14, 2012 Posts: 1115 Status: Offline |
I guess your numbers say it well, PVP isn't a force that is driving away players. I didn't like it at first, but am learning to embrace it. The PVP battles are fun, it does force people to build stronger teams. I have solo meemed the ocean and wasn't pvped once. I also have done many pillages and not been PVPed. Maybe its certain flags targeting each other. I have also been on the winning and losing side of pvp battles not much different then a SMH gone bad or good if you get a eye patch. Its a game mechanic I would much rather see kades come out then a work around for pvp's but that is just me. I love the new ocean flaws and all. ---------------------------------------- Filthyjake all oceans (Obsidian Primary) Filthyjake6145 (discord) ?Retired? On a Break? I found a new love... Casual player or yet another who moved on. |
|||
|
| [Show Printable Version of Thread] [Post new Thread] |
Powered by mvnForum
mvnForum copyright © 2002-2006 by MyVietnam.net