I know I've seen other people complain in the past about sinking ships during strongholds and they just come back 10 minutes later. I myself have been on both sides of that equation. I'm sure it's been suggested but how about moving players to a different server after their ship is sunk? It would end up feeling a little be more like a 'death' in my opinion since I have no chance to recover my loot or seek revenge.
Moving servers when ship is sunk
@xxyetterxx I like the idea. Especially when you scuttle- there should be a penalty for the scuttle.
@chaos217 Use the mermaid, move to a new server. The way I see it, your ship should be your 'anchor' (no pun intended) to the server. Lose the ship, move to a server.
@xxyetterxx It's been more than a month since I saw anybody return twice. Also this idea is bad for those who like PvP. There are enough people complaining about the lack of enemies already, it would be way worse after that.
@dutchyankee said in Moving servers when ship is sunk:
The idea has some merit (and certainly a lot of community support).
A server "switch on sink" really only has one big negative, and that is the "grudge" aspect. A lot of players (although I am not one of them) really enjoy the PvP aspects of this game. Duelling it out with an opponent for kicks. Or just getting "pay back" when someone "sucker-punches" you.
These aspects of SoT would disappear if you introduced a "switch on sink" policy.
Personally, I am for it. But I can also see the other side of the argument.
Tough call for Rare.If your boat switched server, than any lot on boat would always 100% of the time be lost. What if 1 crew member is alive on one server and then another crew member on another. It makes no practical sense to do this.
It's much easier to introduce a death timer. Have a base amount, same as the respawn timer now..if you die within x amount of time, make the next amount of time spent on the ferry longer. it's not rocket science. Have it reset after not having died in x amount of time.
This would prevent constant back and forth deaths.
@xxyetterxx said in Moving servers when ship is sunk:
I know I've seen other people complain in the past about sinking ships during strongholds and they just come back 10 minutes later. I myself have been on both sides of that equation. I'm sure it's been suggested but how about moving players to a different server after their ship is sunk? It would end up feeling a little be more like a 'death' in my opinion since I have no chance to recover my loot or seek revenge.
would you feel the same way if you cleared a fort, started unloading and another ship came and sank you? Then the game removes you from that server and throws you in another?
@dutchyankee See, I love PvP, I do it all the time but I feel it would be add some actually consequence to losing my ship, and a greater feeling of accomplishment when I sink another ship/ As of now, you just spend 5 minutes sailing at you're back at it again
@enticed-malice I've had that exact thing happen and didn't recover our loot (though we tried). And I'd absolutely feel the same way. I know when a fort is cleared you are most vulnerable because everyone can see the skull vanish. Hell, I've seen several ships just hang out on surrounding islands waiting for this to happen. It's just part of the game and it makes that rush to load everything up as quickly as possible even more exciting.
@dragonsire2016 if 1 crew member is alive on one server and the ship is sunk they are going to have to take a mermaid at some point or they are never going to get back on a boat. And that point they move to the new server where the other member has already spawned a ship.
In my opinion it makes no practical sense not to do this. As of now, your ship has no value
I don't think someone would be sent to another server if they are sunk. I think a big part of the problem of people getting back to Forts after being sunk is taking advantage of the "Scuttle" Option which doesn't put you across the map. In my opinion even "Scuttling" should have you respawn on the other side of the map like a PVP Sink is supposed too.
My thought with the intended use of scuttling was to get away from situations...but...it seems it only spawns you a few islands away...So people use that in their favor...
My experiences tend to be, Roll up to fort sink who is there....They seem to spawn pretty close or within eye sight. They repeatedly come back and get sunk..We get low on supplies and they finally get us sunk.....We spawn on the opposite side of the map....
Now either they are exploiting Scuttle or the kegs I use to sink them don't count as a pvp sink. I honestly do not know if they take damage from the Skele Cannons and then I keg and sink them if that counts as a PVE sink instead of a PVP sink....Which is a possibility...not sure if the game is smart enough to tell the difference.
@xxyetterxx said in Moving servers when ship is sunk:
@dragonsire2016 if 1 crew member is alive on one server and the ship is sunk they are going to have to take a mermaid at some point or they are never going to get back on a boat. And that point they move to the new server where the other member has already spawned a ship.
So a sea monster destroys ship, or storm sinks it, or griefer sinks it... the players looses everything 100% of the time because the loot os on server 1, and his ship is now on server 2? Terrible idea. And bad strain on Servers hoping all the time.
In my opinion it makes no practical sense not to do this. As of now, your ship has no value
Ships have no value, because everything you earn is cosmetic? Why should there be? A timer to prevent re spawning abuse is way more practical.
@dragonsire2016 Not a fan of that idea. When sailing solo, which I do about half the time (and accounts for about 30% of players according to Rare) to tend to die a bit doing OOS and skull forts. Having a timer that gets longer and longer it would get infuriating. Same thing for intense PvP combat, where people are dying and coming back on constantly. If a timer was introduced it would destroy the gameplay balance because it would shift from needing to sink the ship to killing the crew. Kill people enough times and the timer will be long enough they would be powerless to defend their ship. Not sure I support a switch server on sink idea, I don't know how difficult it would be for Rare to track a player cross instance if their ship is not there, but for sure a death timer is not the answer either.
This exact conversation has been going on in another post with a different title. It shows up here worded little differently, but is exactly the same.
So a 30 second death timer/ride on the ferry, losing all of the loot you may have, and your crew's ship relocated somewhere else on the map away from the battle it was just in, isn't enough consequences in this "game" we are "playing"? Why does there need to be more consequence or punishment? A punishment meant to cut off a loser in the encounter from any attachment they had to their play session on a server and guarantee the winner won't be interrupted by the opposing crew that's interested in what was being fought over in the first place.
@xxyetterxx sagte in Moving servers when ship is sunk:
@dragonsire2016 if 1 crew member is alive on one server and the ship is sunk they are going to have to take a mermaid at some point or they are never going to get back on a boat. And that point they move to the new server where the other member has already spawned a ship.
In my opinion it makes no practical sense not to do this. As of now, your ship has no value
If they would do this, I'm already hearing the screaming because of the huge loading times when your ship sunk...
Leave it as it is...
What you're talking about is a penalty for losing and I don't think I would wish to see this in any shape or form.
Forts should be contested, they shouldn't be just for those who arrive first or who sink the ship that's there already - sloop at the fort? Galleon comes along and sinks them, sloop gets switched to new server - rinse repeat for every fort encounter?
At the moment you have a range of possible situations -
Sloop at fort gets sunk, respawns, manages to recruit another sloop or two, heads back to fort and fights.
Ship at fort gets sunk, respawns, comes back and a truce is agreed.
Ship at fort gets sunk, decides it's wise to leave it for the moment and goes about it's business elsewhere.
Ship gets sunk, player decides to switch servers.
Ship gets sunk and comes back repeatedly to challenge the other ship - annoying but kudos to them for their persistence.Etc, etc.
If ships are automatically switched then none of these choices are available to players, the outcome of forts becomes sadly predictable.
As an aside, we had the most epic adventure the other day solely because we were able to return to the fort and contest it, not once but 3 times. There were 2 galleons, 2 or 3 sloops - the whole server population in fact, at one time contesting this fort in one long momentous battle.
1 out of 19
