Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November

@the-old-soul800 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

Until Safer Seas allows all content, especially captained ships, and without a rep cap (slower rep & gold gains is fine), it's existence is just an insult.

To whom?
SS is aimed at a safe space for children, or for new players to learn the game, right?

@smuntface a dit dans Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November :

@the-old-soul800 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

Until Safer Seas allows all content, especially captained ships, and without a rep cap (slower rep & gold gains is fine), it's existence is just an insult.

To whom?
SS is aimed at a safe space for children, or for new players to learn the game, right?

yes, yes, but not only...
Safer Sea is also designed for experienced players, for wandering, making fables, fishing, creating content...
Please stop limiting Safers Seas. This mode isn't just for families and beginners!

@zeyrniyx said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@smuntface a dit dans Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November :

@the-old-soul800 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

Until Safer Seas allows all content, especially captained ships, and without a rep cap (slower rep & gold gains is fine), it's existence is just an insult.

To whom?
SS is aimed at a safe space for children, or for new players to learn the game, right?

yes, yes, but not only...
Safer Sea is also designed for experienced players, for wandering, making fables, fishing, creating content...
Please stop limiting Safers Seas. This mode isn't just for families and beginners!

And it is still meant to balance risk vs rewards, even with the upcoming adjustments, and whatever the experience level of players.
People refusing to play HS and get access to the extra perks obtained for the extra difficulty are the ones limiting themselves, it's a choice people make, not a punishment from the devs.
People insulted by those limits just don't understand basic game design concepts like layered reward systems, and devs shouldn't trash the concept of their game to preserve these player's hurt feelings.

@bloodybil It's funny that you should mention the benefit/risk balance, because the most popular request from Safers Seas players is the captain's office. But I don't see any risk in the captaincy.
Let's talk about emissaries, let's talk about the Athena faction, let's talk about the forts of the damned, let's talk about certain rewards that are directly linked to risk.
Then I'd agree with you. However, to come back to the captaincy, the most requested thing, remains blocked even though it has never been promoted, on any support as being a benefit/risk factor.
You're telling me that developers shouldn't throw away what they've built based on player demand, well I say: HOPEFULLY developers listen to players! It's a good thing they don't just listen to the noisy minority who cause a monumental scandal when there's an announcement for X reason!
As I said in a reply to this very message, people here are complaining about the changes planned for December, but you don't have any data, unlike the developers! So what are you complaining about?
I can be very harsh towards the developers on certain points, but as far as Safers Seas is concerned, I'm grateful that they've finally understood an important part of the players, and whether you like it or not!

@zeyrniyx a dit dans Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November :

@bloodybil It's funny that you should mention the benefit/risk balance, because the most popular request from Safers Seas players is the captain's office. But I don't see any risk in the captaincy.
Let's talk about emissaries, let's talk about the Athena faction, let's talk about the forts of the damned, let's talk about certain rewards that are directly linked to risk.
Then I'd agree with you. However, to come back to the captaincy, the most requested thing, remains blocked even though it has never been promoted, on any support as being a benefit/risk factor.
You're telling me that developers shouldn't throw away what they've built based on player demand, well I say: HOPEFULLY developers listen to players! It's a good thing they don't just listen to the noisy minority who cause a monumental scandal when there's an announcement for X reason!
As I said in a reply to this very message, people here are complaining about the changes planned for December, but you don't have any data, unlike the developers! So what are you complaining about?
I can be very harsh towards the developers on certain points, but as far as Safers Seas is concerned, I'm grateful that they've finally understood an important part of the players, and whether you like it or not!

I think the change planned for December is just right!
They're trying to encourage new players to go to the high seas without penalizing families, for example.
They've found a good compromise.
And yes, I'll say it again on this forum, I wouldn't be surprised to see the harbour master's office move to Safers Seas in the future. Because it's the most popular demand, because there's no benefit/risk factor.
The problem is mainly technical, in my opinion, because the captaincy is now linked to the guilds, and I fully agree that guilds should not be available in Safers Seas.
When we read here and there: it's impossible, when moderators publish copy/paste of the same answers about the fact that there would be no change etc.... I seem to remember that the announcement made at the end of last year proved that the word 'never' is no longer acceptable here...

@zeyrniyx said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@bloodybil It's funny that you should mention the benefit/risk balance, because the most popular request from Safers Seas players is the captain's office. But I don't see any risk in the captaincy.

That's because it's a reward, that brings extra perks like the Sovereigns faster selling method, and extra cosmetic goodies, therefore it's obtained by playing the harder mode ;)

@bloodybil said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

I think the changes are still fair and balanced considering the load of incentives still remaining in HS, plus the rep/gold balance cap are still reasonable enough. As long as players are happy all around, I still support the devs decision whatever they think feels best. (Current season troubles also probably warranted throwing a bone to players too).
Anywho, I am pretty sure there is enough motivations for people to have fun and whether people decides to leave SS or not, better having players that play there than not at all. Personally I will still play both sides for the same reasons I used to, carrots or not!

Here's what I said about the change by the way since you didn't read past posts and went straight to consider me an anti-safer-sea unhappy with the changes.

I use both seas and still will, I am simply advocating to keep a good balance of incentives between them, as they always did and keep on doing. Hopefully i will see your Captain ship on the High seas if we meet there!

@zeyrniyx

captaincy, the most requested thing, remains blocked even though it has never been promoted, on any support as being a benefit/risk factor.

Rare never said it's unavailable due to benefit/risk factor. It's unavailable as a bonus incentive to go to HS mate, nothing more to it.

So as our dear beloved Jack would say, let me lend a machete to your intellectual thicket (as someone who loves SS and often plays there as well) - at the start of each session, especially if you plan longer ones, ALWAYS first search for the harpoon rowboat. It's a must have to save you immense amount of time. Exponentially higher with the amount of times you feel a need to sell, with the ideal scenario being once per session.

The more you play, the more loot you're gonna have, and the longer it's gonna take to sell since you can't use Sovereigns. If you have a harpoon rowboat you can:

1. park ship on the regular dock (to quickly sell merchant loot, keep your merchant loot on the bow, to drop it as near as possible to the merchant)
2. park rowboat on either side of your ship (depending on which side the rest of your loot is)
3. drop all the remaining loot into the water
4. hop on your rowboat and quickly harpoon it
5. row to the coast
6. use harpoon to drag the boat while standing on it, onto the land (ideally between GH and OoS) - you gotta pay attention where the shore is closest to GH/OoS, depending on the outpost
7. quickly sell loot.
8. bonus tip - pay attention to how many small loot pieces you have, and depending on that (don't) sell treasure chests (or any of the unlockable ones). You can use those chests for quick-storing and quick-selling, again saving time

It will take some practice for moving with harpoon boat/learning outposts, but I guarantee you it pays off (no pun intended) in the end.

You'll have to explain something quite simple to me about the captain's office: why having a name on your ship and stastics would be a problem in Safers Seas.
When I'm told that it's an incentive to go to HS, I'm all for it, but don't sell skins specific to the captaincy in the Emporium. Not to mention the fact that console players have to pay a monthly subscription fee to have this feature (I am one of the few, if not the only one here to clarify this point which I consider to be important).
When we talk about the Captaincy and Safers Seas here, the main reason cited on this forum is the Sovereigns. Sovereigns have NEVER been implemented based on any kind of benefit/risk balance, but mainly on the sales time, which was becoming long due to the multitude of new loots being added and the players' demand for a solution. I have NEVER seen a post on this forum about wanting to drive players away to sell faster.
And even if this were an incentive to go to the high seas, I find it extremely clumsy, even unfair, because as I said, the Emporium.

It's simple: emissaries, BB, Reaper, Athena, Fof, FOTD deactivated in SS it's fair, it's accepted by everyone, because the SS must not be a refuge especially since all this is linked in PvEvP. But how would the captaincy be a “refuge”? How would having a name on a ship relate to PvEvP?
When people talk to me about incentives, I find that there are enough restrictions in SS to encourage players to go to HS.
To conclude, I will take the example of families: here we are blocking an interesting functionality, not linked to PvP, to players who play with family who seek to protect their children from proven and verifiable toxicity, and that I do not understand. not.
I no longer want to monopolize the subject here, especially since knowing the moderators here I am not looking for them to close the very interesting subject, I have done that enough, but the most important thing here is not the presence or not of the captaincy in SS, is that many speak here, give lessons to others while putting aside points that could disturb them. Once again, I think we will have to accept other changes in the coming months, because everything is possible and nothing is impossible as we have been taught ;)

@astralenigma said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

Honestly, I would love captaincy to come to SS of course it should have limitations like sovereigns being disabled and maybe even not being able to save a rowboat but the later might interfere with high seas.
I believe it is important to bring captaincy to SS as that would open up more of the pirate emporium for the PvE crew and honestly, as long as people buy cosmetics the servers get paid and game development is justified.
That translates into more resources into development and better update quality.

I've bought multiple sets of ship liveries and weapon skins that I can apply without issues in SS. Somehow I doubt that a few nameplates would warrant unbalancing more the incentive aspect of the game but that's just my opinion.

@zeyrniyx

but don't sell skins specific to the captaincy in the Emporium

Don't buy them. It's that simple. You know you can't have captaincy in SS, so if you mainly wanna play in SS, there is no reason to buy Emporium skins specific to captaincy in the first place

why having a name on your ship and stastics would be a problem in Safers Seas.

Alone, wouldn't. There is still a question how much Rare wants to spend time and resources unlinking/locking everything else related just to be able to accomplish this, while keeping rest of the Captaincy HS incentives you mentioned. So I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it's improbable, at least in the near future. I'm not even saying I'm against it. I'm actually very indifferent about it.

It's simple: emissaries, BB, Reaper, Athena, Fof, FOTD deactivated in SS it's fair, it's accepted by everyone, because the SS must not be a refuge especially since all this is linked in PvEvP. But how would the captaincy be a “refuge”? How would having a name on a ship relate to PvEvP?

Again, the previous point I've made. At the same time, I gotta ask you - why is it so important? The only point I'd argue regarding Captaincy are Ship Decorations, because you cannot place any of them in SS. You still can change ship cosmetics (skins, sails, wheel, etc) the same way you can in HS. But still, Decorations (as well as Sovereigns) are one of the major reasons why Captaincy remains as a HS exclusive, at least for now that is. Most people don't care about Captaincy related stats nor the ship name.

They do care about Decos and Sovereigns, hence it's locked. Pure incentive. Nothing to do with PvEvP, or "refuge".

Regarding faster selling in SS, I gave a very detailed tip. Regarding this topic, I'll say the same thing I said several times over in this thread:

Would I love having PvE servers? Yes.
Would it affect HS? Definitelly.
Just because I'd love pure unlocked PvE experience, it doesn't mean it wouldn't affect and potentially harm the main community that's been playing this game for several years before me. Let alone till SS introduction.

@misterfiction86 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

People have been going on for years that a private server/Safer Seas would "kill the main game". Anyone with common sense knows that those that want to fight PvP will stay on High Seas no matter what and Safer Seas will attract either a different type of gamer or PvP players that just want a breather to play around with friends. Was COD ruined by having an offline single player story mode? No. For the same reason. Quite frankly, anyone that has any issues with further opening up Safer Seas to more options are just bummed they won't have a ready supply of newbies they can grief. Rare will come to their senses eventually and give in to what most of the users want, in spite of the hateful backlash and claims "this game of dead". They were saying that before Safer Seas even came in. They just like to complain and Rare should stop taking them seriously

With all honesty, Rare very often doesn't listen to insiders, let alone people complaining on the forum. There are so many examples of Insiders pointing out stuff, and Rare going different direction.

Every choice and change Rare has ever made, was mostly relying on their own statistics, business preference and vision. People were asking for years for PvE mode, but only got it recently, and it's not even an actual PvE mode. People weren't asking for it less back then when the game got released, than let's say 2y ago.

I still firmly believe that not even this latest change to SS has anything to do with with just people adamantly asking for it (and/or some being opposed to it). Only with Rare's stats and business goals, not their "senses".

If they believe giving in more to PvE side of things will earn them more cash, they'll do it, no matter how much PvP(vE) community is vocally against it. If not, the entire PvE-only side of forum can cry about it for the next 5y, they won't move a finger.

Time will tell.

@dominusnic said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

The only people who care about or want safer seas nerfed are the PvP players who aren't good enough to beat other PvP players and want there to be nubs they can bully. xD

Nope, not just them. Actually, majority of people who spent months grinding for stuff with the risk of all the other players around them are the ones against this. And these are not pure PvP players. Some of them are even pure PvE players, or at least leaning more into PvE and peaceful encounters. Big difference.

@dominusnic said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

The only people who care about or want safer seas nerfed are the PvP players who aren't good enough to beat other PvP players and want there to be nubs they can bully. xD

There is also the people who understand the concept of layered reward systems and appreciate having rewards scaling with the difficulty chosen.

People who demands equal rewards and perks while refusing equal challenges and risks while trying to shame others for embracing it all always seems so weird.

@the-old-soul800 and have the ability to invite your friends onto the same server as you and be on their own boat and can pvp with them if they want as if you were both on high seas i agree with you. and if someone throws down the hourglass they dive to a high seas server and can't go back to safer seas unless they reload.

@drachern said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

Dumpstering the faction level limit down to 25 is, frankly, a horrible idea imo, it's just punishing players even harder for if they're not wanting to deal with pvp-ers but still want a bit of chill progression while they sail around.

It doesn't feel great to "waste" effort by not gaining any progression at all from activities, this was already an issue with ss beforehand and with a change like this that'll only get worse, it'll add a sour undertaste for a lot of people, and there is zero guarantee this will overpower any dislike people have of the pvp mode with a 've' on the end.

In short, it either changes nothing or just pressures ss players even harder to go to high seas whether they want to or not, which will inevitably lose players for a game that's already been having a downwards player trend for ages.

That's nice and all but why totally ignore the 100% gold reward that got boosted? It's plainly false that you are not gaining any progression from activities, plenty of commendations can still be achieved and renown also gets the same rate as HS.

At some point people really need to stop playing victim for not wanting to partake in activities that grants extra stuff. Do what you want to do, and get rewarded accordingly.

@drachern said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@bloodybil

If you bothered to read, you might have realised I was talking about not gaining progression with the factions that make up the sea of thieves, yes reaper and athena should probably stay high seas only for being, well, pvp-excuses essentially, but limiting the others is just dumb and punishes people for not being interested in pvp.

I read fine, you can always try to express yourself better though.
Being a PVEVP game, it's unfortunate people don't want to partake in all the game has to offer (which is perfectly fine), but then you don't get access to all the reward has to offer either. There is no punishment whatsoever here, if anything people are rewarded for playing the game as intended.

Not sure how anyone would count gold gain as progression anyways, that's been uncapped this entire time anyhow, the only limitation to gold was the speed due to the gain nerf.

Progression towards any goal is progression regardless, whether its reaching a certain commendation to unlock a cosmetic, or gaining enough gold to buy it. Again, you were moaning about SS not rewarding your big big efforts and not having 'any progression' (your words). Plenty of things to progress even without rep.

To simplify it as much as I can for you, my issue is that the level cap for faction progression exists at all on safer seas, once you're past 40 or, if this update happens, 25, you gain literally nothing in terms of reputation if you are on safer seas.

I see no issue there at all, it's by design and quite balanced. How come you still don't understand that those restrictions are by design and made to encourage people to step to high seas? Pretty simple indeed.

@drachern said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@bloodybil

I'm taking it you're refusing to see safer seas as anything more tham a stepping stone towards high seas then?
We'll never agree then, I think. For me it seems so glaringly obvious it's an excellent way to appeal to peoole who want the non-pvp parts of a fantasy pirate adventure without the frankly exhausting constant vigilance and the constant risk of losing everything you've gained during your playtime of the day through no fault of your own unless you wanna grind pvp for weeks to be half-decent at it.

I see safer seas as a more chill alternative to the main game, that still rewards players - according to the adjusted difficulty level of the game mode chosen by the player.

In short, I aee it as being an option for those who don't like the pvp aspects, which is a good thing because that's wider appeal to pull in mire people AND means high seas would only have people who want to engage in the pvp aspects.
With the reputation level limits though, that potential's completely kneecapped as it just screams that those players aren't valued, that the only ones that are really cared about are pvp players.

Face it, what do almost all "pvpve" games have in common if there's no options of separation? That's right, an overwhelming proportion of people who only are there for pvp, doubly so when, as is the case here, pvp is inherently parasitic of the pve, it doesn't contribute anything, besides tension that some may not want oe like, and only steals the products of a other player's work.

The rep cap doesn't prevent anyone from doing voyages, events, tales like anyone else which is what the game is about. All players are valued, and are given the choice of what kind of action they want to take part in, but again it's normal that riskier/harder settings rewards additional stuff, that's pretty much basic game design.

I play both SS and HS, and when I do play SS when I feel like I wanna play a more calm session watching movies and stuff, I enjoy the game just the same and get access to the same activities I would partake in when playing HS. I understand the limitations, just as I understand them in other games when I choose to play on a lower difficulty for the same reasons.

I love helldivers, and sometimes I feel like a quick solo match on a lower difficulty because I'm not that good, and I accept that I won't get as much xp, medals or none of the rarer samples from higher difficulty where I have a greater chance of failure. I chose to play it a bit easy, and get reward accordingly.

I used to play WoW, and was more on the casual side yet I understood that mythic raids were a lot harder than LFR ones, ranked PVP was sweatier than casual modes, and both mythics/ranked activities gave much better+nicer loot, and exclusive mounts only available for that difficulty. Players choose the difficulty level they want (both in PVE and PVP), and got rewarded accordingly.

Doesn't mean people are being punished for not having access to all rewards and that they arent valued as players, the people who take the time and effort to reach those levels ore take more risks are being reward more.

Like I've said before, people need to stop acting like victims because they don't want to earn the same rewards as others. The game is not all about the rewards, it's about the adventures and fun you have in the world available to us.

@eastthread51441 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@drachern

Rare is one of the most stubborn studios in existence and they also aren’t very smart either.

Stubborn ?

AFAIK it started out as a game with 3 or 4 person crewed galleons, they added sloop for smaller crews and even a solo-sloop.

They added Safer Seas for new(er) players to get their bearings and to allow for families to play without the risk of the possibility confronting their kids with toxic players or who might not eb able to deal with loss of loot or sinking.

To expect even more from a game that is sold as a PvPvE game or calling them stubborn and not smart is IMHO unjustified. Some might even argue that Rare has adjusted the game to please the PvE exclusive crowd too much already.

Random matchmaking in an adventure game so new players can be absolutely demolished and demoralized by veterans making them weary of and averse to PvP. Say hello to poor retention of new players.

All crew sizes are mixed together even solo players. I do not recommend playing solo. Say hello to poor retention of solo players.

I play solo loads, and have no problem turning in the loot I gathered 9-out-of-10 sessions. Even in the sessions I get into a fight or a chase, I have turned in most of the loot before that confrontation.

Artificial progression wall and content restrictions for those who wish to use safer seas because they do not enjoy PvP. Say hello to poor retention of PvE only players.

Not surprising for a PvPvE game.

For years people complained that it’s not fun spending hours doing PvE and collecting treasure just to lose it all in five minutes after being attacked by a skilled crew.

For years those people have been gfiven the advice to turn in more often - if you spend hours to gather loot, it's not that difficult to go to an outpost and turn every hour or so. Perhaps some peopkle should start heeding that advice.

So what does Rare do?

They decide to overhaul the PvE to make it as easy and fast as possible to complete rather than focus on the three glaring issues mentioned above.

Rare cannot accept that forced PvP, random matchmaking and mixing all crew sizes together negatively affects the experience. All of those factors make Sea of Thieves a niche game in a saturated market.

So, should they make a game that's the same as several other games ? Perhaps it's the niche-ness that gives them this market share as opposed to an even smaller share if it was "just like other games".

@eastthread51441

“Don’t like the game don’t play it.” - Typical response from veteran forum users.

Perfectly valid response tbf. You’re more than welcome to play another game and take a break from SoT if it’s frustrating you it’s not going in the direction you personally want.

@eastthread51441 said in Changes to Safer Seas announced in Developer Update 12th of November:

@lem0n-curry

Are you a new player? No you’re not. You’re a part of the niche.

Niche game which is now what 6 years old in a saturated market.. enjoy the lowest level of active players of any point in the game’s history.

Want to ignore the actual reasons SoT suffers poor retention? Fine reap what you sow.

Who needs players in a multiplayer video game anyway?

“Don’t like the game don’t play it.” - Typical response from veteran forum users.

Be careful what you wish for.

End of discussion.

Part of the niche ? I prefer part of the target audience 😁.

Why should I want to have this game changed into what will evolve eventually in simply two modes: PvE only and PvP only ? I am not interested in neither and wouldn't have bought the game for a premium price if it was advertised as such.

What would a pure PvE mode offer Rare ? A bunch of new players who will get bored with the PvE quite quickly - as you said, "Is Sea of Thieves a great PvE game? No. The PvE in Sea of Thieves may seem difficult when you’re new to the game but to veterans it’s mindlessly easy".

Probably even less retention than they have now (of which neither of us has the actual numbers) and the loss of "veteran" PvPvE players. Now, that would be not very smart, as you put it.

@sombermako This is just my opinion/experience, so don't take it as the gospel or Rare's vision or anything more.

PvP is a very small portion of what makes SOT unique.

PvE is an even smaller portion of what makes SOT unique.

Player Interaction is what I feel makes SOT special. The ability to team up, chat, work together, betray, battle, sneak, prank, have a grog, play a shanty, go on an adventure, and any combination of those things and so much more. Getting those tingles wondering what those sails on the horizon will bring...there's truly nothing else like it.

Safer Seas could serve as a gateway if Rare did it right. Make it Free-to-Play. Make it an area where you get your feet wet - get a taste of what the game has to offer - what their vision for a pirate world is. Make it an area where you wish there were other players to adventure with.

Instead, they introduced it many years too late and tried to play it off as an enhanced tutorial, but it kinda always seemed like they were really just pandering to a minority of the playerbase.

They can still course correct. They just have to get back to focusing on what makes SOT special.