Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal

@angrycoconut16 said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

@nquarter said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

I have to completely disagree. I don't think a Reward should be given, when you haven't actually "finished" a Voyage by handing in the items you were sent to retrieve. It kind of contradicts the purpose of the Voyage... well what vague purpose they implemented within their Story anyway.

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with Risking a Reward for Success. It is much more rewarding [not talking about Rep, or Gold], but a sense of accomplishment of actually making it to the end without losing a single piece of Item, whether that be by running, or by standing your ground and fighting back.

Some people already run when they have Loot on board, and some fight back. This will not change regardless of if we get Rep for Completing a Voyage, or handing in a Voyage. It will still be the same, but there will just be that added "Risk" aspect to be able to receive something a little extra at the end by handing in the Items.

I play Solo quite a bit, because I enjoy that Risk of dealing with Duo Sloops, or Galleon's, and coming out on top. Yes sometimes I don't, and I do lose everything, but hey, that's just the nature of the Game. I just shrug it off and start another Voyage.

I think giving free Rep before the Items were handed in, would create another form for the Community to purely grind for Rep. They will do full Voyages, yet care not if they lose their Items, because the Risk of their Reward will be completely washed out to Sea... so to speak.

They would have a sense of carelessness, because they are given what they desire, which is Rep, surprising enough, is what the Progression in SoT is all about.

The Game needs to make ways to allow players to WANT to play the Game correctly, by doing Voyages, succeeding in the Voyages, and earning their Rewards and Bonus afterwards. This will be the incentive Players need.

We are not asking for a full reward, most of the reward should still come from an outpost we completely agree. The vast majority of players do NOT turn and fight when they have loot I can assure you :P

What we are suggesting is a BONUS on voyage complete. This will give players more encouragement to make riskier game decisions as if it goes badly, they won't walk away with 0. I agree with the feeling of accomplishment, I also feel great when I successfully run from an enemy, and it is so thrilling to be chased, and naval combat is really fun. These experiences can all be retained with our suggestion, as most of the reward will STILL come from handing in loot at an outpost. It's just if a player is bested, or makes a decision which results in their demise, they don't have such a crippling loss and waste a significant amount of their time, as they have still gained SOME exp.

You can't say the risk of their reward will be washed out to sea, that depends on quantity. If for instance you were given 5% of you reputation up front and your loot was worth 95% would you not care about your loot? I don't think so, I'm sure you'd want to cash in and get that 95%. If you were given 80% up front, and your loot was worth 20% would you care? Personally I wouldn't so much. I do agree it is an important thing to consider, but that's why quantity is so important. It is very feasible to implement this idea whilst keeping the value and risk element in the game however. This is the exact reason I support the incentive of this thread while being 100% against the OP suggestion of ALL loot on voyage complete, you are correct, that removes far too much risk from the game.

Also, be careful when you say 'play the game correctly', the devs specifically want players to play the game how they want. I do agree that all players should be encouraged to participate in the 'full game experience' (PvPvE) but Rare want to support people who prefer PvP or prefer PvE too. This suggestion will primarily encourage PvE, and healthy PvPvE interactions. (If people have received some rep and know they won't walk away with 0 they are more likely to be up for PvP combat, which is healthy for the game)

Yes, and I understand the want of a Bonus, although I'll always state that the Bonus should be by handing in the Items you were requested to retrieve, because that is the actual purpose of the Voyage in the first place. The NPC didn't ask you to go "find" them only, so why get a Bonus for that? Gaining the Items is a breeze to do. Completing a Voyage is where the Content is.

If a player makes a wrong move, then that would just be a lesson. I've made bad decisions that I've regretted, but I've never made that same decision a 2nd time while I had a Haul.

Sea of Thieves is all about the Roll of a Dice. I've been doing Level 40+ GH Voyages, and 95% of Chests I dig up, are Castaway, and Seafarers. So to state that I would care about Items that give next to no Rep at that Level would be a Risk for us, is kind of laughable.

Having a System in place, that grants Rep on handing in required Items would give these worthless Chests a Value, there-for, would increase the Risk.

Yes the Devs do want people to play how they want, but if the Devs implement features into a Game, then it is to be played in the way they envisioned. Of course though my comment[s] was obviously aimed at the Rep Grinders, who half do Voyages, and take away the enjoyment of achievement. If that's the way they want to play, then by all means, go for gold, but implementing a System that makes these players want to finish full Voyages successfully from start to finish, would be a achievement for Rare to create something that people enjoy for how they created it.

@angrycoconut16 It’s not at all a contradiction. The willingness to choose to turn and fight when someone engages you has nothing to do with the paranoia. You’re not in a state of paranoia when someone is actually after you.

I simply made reference to how human nature works. No, I can’t definitively say this will happen for everyone, but neither can you say that many will take more risks. So, you have a relative few people claiming that they will take greater risks, and then you have human nature. I’m more willing to bet on human nature than a relative few people’s claims made now... when it’s easy to make such a claim. And, with regard to your claim of many, there is another interesting fact about human nature: people are more likely to communicate with a company about a negative than they are about a positive.

And, yes, a developer may take feedback and come up with a solution that works. The feedback from you is that the current mechanics for saving progress are dull, their idea for crew coordination as a means of protecting your stuff is dull, and, because you don’t want to do those dull things, the resulting feeling of loss (because of a choice you made as a player) is too great. That’s feedback. Fair enough. But, you’re taking it one step further and trying to suggest a solution yourselves. Now, there’s no real problem with that - it is “Feedback & Suggestions”, after all. But, whether or not game design solution is necessary to address your feedback is debatable - hence, the debate. And, if you are trying to present a solution, you should also be trying to work out the negatives inherent in your solution.

@angrycoconut16 I directly addressed what you said. How on earth is that “dodging?” It’s like you guys have a limited vocabulary and are spinning a wheel to decide which word to use even if it doesn’t apply. What, exactly, did I dodge? “That word, I don’t think it means what you think it means.”

@angrycoconut16 No, you said it was dull after I rejected your reductio ad absurdum fallacy. It’s not simply about going from A to B to A to C to A, it’s about risk assessment: how much am I willing to put at risk on the open seas or while I am trying to tackle another island? And, if I’m willing to risk more while on another island, am I willing to take steps to protect myself from loss. If you carry more loot around with you, you make a choice to increase that risk, but with increased risk comes the potential for greater loss. That’s how the game is designed. You can describe that as “casual” til the end of time - it is anything but. Go big, you risk losing big.

You want to change from a low low to simply a low. You want to be able to increase your risk of loss, but lose less. You want the game to be easier. You want to diminish the tension and paranoia the devs want to create - you want to affect that. Stop trying to claim that these aren’t the aims of this idea.

@angrycoconut16 said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

@entspeak Game which was marketed at casual players and kids aged 12+? I'd say it's very casual.

Our system would still entail risk. Perhaps slightly less AT risk as you would have gained some rep, but still plenty at risk to have to make careful decisions and still want to consider your decisions carefully.

I have never and will never debate how the game is designed. If you live in the present all the time, you will never move forward. We all know what the game is. We are suggesting a system which would improve player experience whilst retaining the current game design. Anyway you don't really understand what we are trying to address. This really is my last reply as our conversations yield nothing constructive.

Marketing a game to kids 12+ doesn’t equal casual game - unless you’re trying to imply that 12 year olds are incapable of playing anything other than casual games. What marketing language was aimed at casual players? Perhaps, like your perceived definition of “dodge”, you have a different definition of “casual.” What do you mean by “casual”?

Re: risk... shift in goal post noted. We are now moving away from no affect to - perhaps, a slight affect and it’s only taken over a thousand of posts to get there.

If you believe the game is a casual game, then you don’t appear to know what the game is. And figuring out what the game is is crucial to understanding how it needs to be fixed. Why? Because, if you are under the mistaken notion that this is a “casual” game, the solutions you try to suggest will stem from that mistaken notion.

You want to make the game a casual game.

@entspeak said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

I’ve already discussed what I would change in the reward system... in a post to you. If you didn’t “hear” that, the problem most likely was that I wasn’t listening, I suppose.

I echo this sentiment.

@angrycoconut16 said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

@entspeak You literally just contradicted yourself...

1. Oh and giving a cushion to loss will diminish the tension and paranoia
2. Oh but people will STILL not want to take risks because they still want their loot!

Right... so apparently people are going to be less worried about losing their loot, but they're still going to be worried about it?

Less worried implies there is still some degree of worry.
Less != none

@angrycoconut16 said in Give us our XP for finishing a voyage, not turning in the chest/soul/animal:

It isn't just the fact you've lost 100% of the loot you have on board, it's the fact it was stolen so now another player has them and is sailing away with them...

So we finally get to the meat of the argument... and it is that players such as yourself have misinterpreted what kind of game this is and don't like that there are Thieves in Sea of Thieves. You face a herculean task convincing anyone that's actually a problem and needs addressing.