Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended. As for the part about sot never being the cartoony pve pirate game you wanted, it was never intended to be a pve game in the first place, you bought a pvpve sandbox, not a pve rp game.

If you want something pve oriented i have heard that salt 2 is simalar to a pve sot, though i dont know the details of it or if it is multiplayer, i have heard a lot of people recommend it. So if you dont like pvp and thievery in your pirate games, that may be a better fit from what i have heard of it.

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended.

This is exaggerated, innacurate and highly contradictory messaging in a game that is filled with spite play and win conditions

it wasn't toxic or even an exploit, it would be an exploit now after they patched it.

It was the whole "tools not rules" thing up until they decided to change it. Older red sea threads clearly show that.

People are free to support it but rewriting history about it is flawed messaging.

There was literally nothing wrong with it going by the rules and spirit of the game at the time. Same goes for the anchor change.

There was technically nothing wrong, but it was absolutely an act of toxicity. Kegging some one after losing is an act of spite is fair, but saying "if i cant have it then no one can" and trying to strand it somewhere you think is impossible to get it back from is absolutely toxic in the same way as flipping a chess board just because you dont want the opponent to win.

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended.

This is exaggerated, innacurate and highly contradictory messaging in a game that is filled with spite play and win conditions

it wasn't toxic or even an exploit, it would be an exploit now after they patched it.

It was the whole "tools not rules" thing up until they decided to change it. Older red sea threads clearly show that.

People are free to support it but rewriting history about it is flawed messaging.

There was literally nothing wrong with it going by the rules and spirit of the game at the time. Same goes for the anchor change.

There was technically nothing wrong, but it was absolutely an act of toxicity. Kegging some one after losing is an act of spite is fair, but saying "if i cant have it then no one can" and trying to strand it somewhere you think is impossible to get it back from is absolutely toxic in the same way as flipping a chess board just because you dont want the opponent to win.

Misusing toxicity here is no different than when pvers come in here and call typical pvp toxic.

I would say that trying to strand loot where its impossible to get does fall under grounds of toxicity and is not a misuse of the term. Not only that but seeing the reaction of the community when ever it happened and how people rejoiced when it was removed, i would say that MANY people agree.

@wolfmanbush I think this is one point that we will just have to disagree on my friend.

Wow a troll! Lol i'm glad people like you aren't able to do this anymore. Don't like the spawn camping? Scuttle ship. Don't want to? Well, that's your problem. Instead of trying to make the game better, commenting on the issues with balancing you go on to become part of the problem. And that solves what? You lost the battle regardless of the strat u used, run or fight, you sunk. Treasure never belongs to anyone; it's been clearly stated roughly 10 times per person that has the same toxic mind set as you. That's a lot of re- statements btw. You sink, another player sinks, treasure is out in the sea for all to grab. Even lore wise, the game disagrees with you, if the sea of thieves was so secretly protected why is treasure floating away from the shroud in the first place? It's funny how you try to excuse this play style, when really it all condenses down to doing it all out of spite. Red sea strat is still there, for those that play it well, they may use it to their advantage to pressure their opponents or completely sink them. And your reward for masterful gameplay? Their treasure, congrats.

But that's not what you want is it? No, what you want is "If I can't have it, then no one else can". Same shtick that little kids tend to exhibit when mommy and daddy spoil them.

@potato-lemming Arr matey, ye must have awoken by now to the spirit of this here pirate adventure. Sea of Thieves is all about promoting the treachery, back-stabbing and looting of your fellow opponent pirates. There can be no mercy or compassion here. Pirates that strike first take home the gold!

Not sure if that pirate on the horizon has ill intent? That's the best part of these waters, your reputation is a secret! No need to worry about consequences or being hung by the community for your insidious play. The pirate lifestyle rewards sponging off other's hard grind!

So, you find yourself out-gunned and out-matched, eh? Want to run and possibly deny your overly aggressive pursuer the satisfaction of gaining reward for chasing you across the seas? You want them to reconsider their persistent pursuit because they possibly may not get rewarded? Rare would have your throat! The Pirate lifestyle will ALWAYS reward dastardly behavior. There can be no solace for you! Pirates that hunt players will find all the loot... Pirates that show pity will only find the bottom of the sea

I've generally come to terms with the change, though I do still wish they had addressed some imbalances between ships (mainly speed in a sloop v brig chase) first. The Red Sea was usually the resort of folks who saw no other option in an unbalanced scenario and were unwilling to give up an easy win for the opposition. But, if you got your kicks out of it, there's still very much the option to run indefinitely... if you're a good enough sailor and if that's your bag.

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

If you want something pve oriented i have heard that salt 2 is simalar to a pve sot, though i dont know the details of it or if it is multiplayer, i have heard a lot of people recommend it. So if you dont like pvp and thievery in your pirate games, that may be a better fit from what i have heard of it.

Salt 2 is a good alternative for PvEers, yeah. It's like a mix of Sea of Thieves (which they openly admit is an inspiration), Minecraft, and Raft. But it currently lacks a lot of stuff that makes Sea of Thieves great - such as naval threats, properly crafted locations, and memorable characters.

It doesn't have multiplayer right now but they are planning to add it. I can see it becoming a lot more popular when they do. It's Early Access, and certainly one to keep an eye on.

@potato-lemming
Because pvp "predators" want easy marks and the red sea was a definite equalizer. Plus content creators and partners whined about getting outsailed by "bad" players.

You got outsailed. qq.

@goldsmen

You got outsailed too.

@pithyrumble said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen

You got outsailed too.

I dont mind if some one sails better, thats all fine and totally different from trying to keep anyone from getting loot just because you think you will lose it.

@goldsmen

How is it different than about 857 other ways I can deny you loot?

You flubbed your ambush otherwise I (solo sloop) wouldn't have been able to get the lead on you (a Brigantine) to make it to the red.

Outsailed.

Ambush better. I still have checkpoints so go do your mandatory pve. We go back to the old metas instead of actually improving the game. My suggestion to eliminate the despawn wall and increase red sea damage was ignored for listening to cry babies who can't ambush or sail properly.

Floating out loot...Bilge and barnacles. Just teleport it directly into their banks if they follow for more than 5 minutes now instead. Such a crybaby move.

Yes. I'm mad about it. Insult me.

@pithyrumble said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen

How is it different than about 857 other ways I can deny you loot?

You flubbed your ambush otherwise I (solo sloop) wouldn't have been able to get the lead on you (a Brigantine) to make it to the red.

Outsailed.

Ambush better. I still have checkpoints so go do your mandatory pve. We go back to the old metas instead of actually improving the game. My suggestion to eliminate the despawn wall and increase red sea damage was ignored for listening to cry babies who can't ambush or sail properly.

Floating out loot...Bilge and barnacles. Just teleport it directly into their banks if they follow for more than 5 minutes now instead. Such a crybaby move.

Yes. I'm mad about it. Insult me.

The main difference is every way there is, the loot can be claimed in some way by either the chasers or the person who denied the loot.

I never play brig if i can avoid it and tend to be solo so im not sure if you mean me in specific, or just a broad "you". Only one time ever have i chased some one and they decided to red sea the loot, but regardless of the lack of running into it my self, i always saw it the same as flipping a chess board.

@goldsmen

Broad you.

No one is flipping the chessboard. I moved my king 10x and you couldn't check me. No one flipped the board. That's a stupid analogy. I played within the (former) "rules".

You took stalemate out of chess because you couldn't chase me down with a queen. Or 2 rooks.
Or a bishop and a knight.

Flipping the board is a crybaby argument. I took your victory and turned it into a stalemate and all the Partners, Content Creators and PvP Lords couldn't handle a tie.

Because it's the equivalent of kicking the ball over the fence because you were losing a match of backyard soccer.

Because it bred further toxicity in the community than if someone were to just take the loss and go write a vent post on the subreddit or discord, as this thread perfectly proves.

Because it was done to harm the experience of others with no personal benefit, it's just like spawncamping.
It was only done out of... spite, that someone else took part in the other half of the game, and spite is not healthy for any environment, let alone a game like this.

@pithyrumble said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen

Broad you.

No one is flipping the chessboard. I moved my king 10x and you couldn't check me. No one flipped the board. That's a stupid analogy. I played within the (former) "rules".

You took stalemate out of chess because you couldn't chase me down with a queen. Or 2 rooks.
Or a bishop and a knight.

Flipping the board is a crybaby argument. I took your victory and turned it into a stalemate and all the Partners, Content Creators and PvP Lords couldn't handle a tie.

The draw analogy doesnt really work because in chess you dont decide from the start of a match "this person dared to be my opponent, so i will force a draw!", and if you do think that way when playing chess then you really misunderstand the goal of the game.

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended.

This is exaggerated, innacurate and highly contradictory messaging in a game that is filled with spite play and win conditions

it wasn't toxic or even an exploit, it would be an exploit now after they patched it.

It was the whole "tools not rules" thing up until they decided to change it. Older red sea threads clearly show that.

People are free to support it but rewriting history about it is flawed messaging.

There was literally nothing wrong with it going by the rules and spirit of the game at the time. Same goes for the anchor change.

When The hourglass came into play and a lot more loot was gonna be released. They had to start forcing players to pvp more often. Too many streamers I say complained about the Red Sea & too many using the anchor block. That is really it.

Still chasing ships for hours is still a complaint, no way to fix that. And players complain about spending 30min in an hourglass battle...it weird.
If they are fixing these "exploits" I am waiting on the Sword Dash to be fixed. It a very minor and liked exploit but so was Anchor block. Fix one you might as well fix them all. Dont favor one.

I believe it is because Rare viewed it as un-sportsman like. Also because people found ways to get loot behind an invisible barrier that would despawn any player that tried to swim to the loot, which is definitely an exploit.

@pithyrumble
I guess people that their job is to play SoT and at the same time promote it, people who play the game for fun, and even the people who made the game and decided red sea needed to change are all wrong. You are completely right and i have to say calling people crybabies, PvP lords, predators and especially the phrase 'you got outsailed. qq.' make for some pretty impessive and well founded arguments. Bravo! If only everyone could behave in such a respectful manner when presenting some hard facts.

@potato-lemming

No they wanted easy pray that had little chance of besting them the way they wanted to play the game.

In a lot of cases, you're probably right...They wanted that easy 'W'.

So, why give it to them? Why give them the satisfaction of stomping out a solo who's not interested in the fight?

Just leave and let them wonder what happened. Wondering why they didn't get the opportunity to dunk on you with a camp and RODL ending. Don't give them that satisfaction.

Ego and spite get in the way? Well...that's on you.

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended.
This is exaggerated, innacurate and highly contradictory messaging in a game that is filled with spite play and win conditions

There was technically nothing wrong, but it was absolutely an act of toxicity. Kegging some one after losing is an act of spite is fair, but saying "if i cant have it then no one can" and trying to strand it somewhere you think is impossible to get it back from is absolutely toxic in the same way as flipping a chess board just because you dont want the opponent to win.

I've been on both sides here. For me, red-sea running was almost always tactical.
Nothing toxic about it.
Quite a few times I've been endlessly chased whilst trying to do an adventure, tall tale, athena's etc. So I would red sea run, as far away from where I wanted to be, preferably the corners. Reason being, when my ship respawns, the boat chasing me is now 20-30 minutes away from finding me again, so I have time to go dig up my athena's chest etc., and sell it.
I've even told some of these crews what I was doing. Most would chase me to the corners anyway.
I really don't see this change affecting this tactic, the only difference being they'll get some supplies for the effort before having to sail back from Z26.

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

It was an act of toxicity and poor sportsmanship done to spite people for playing the game as intended.

This is exaggerated, innacurate and highly contradictory messaging in a game that is filled with spite play and win conditions

it wasn't toxic or even an exploit, it would be an exploit now after they patched it.

It was the whole "tools not rules" thing up until they decided to change it. Older red sea threads clearly show that.

People are free to support it but rewriting history about it is flawed messaging.

There was literally nothing wrong with it going by the rules and spirit of the game at the time. Same goes for the anchor change.

There was technically nothing wrong, but it was absolutely an act of toxicity. Kegging some one after losing is an act of spite is fair, but saying "if i cant have it then no one can" and trying to strand it somewhere you think is impossible to get it back from is absolutely toxic in the same way as flipping a chess board just because you dont want the opponent to win.

Misusing toxicity here is no different than when pvers come in here and call typical pvp toxic.

Except that red seaing was never supposed to be an intended game feature whereas PvP is.

Think of it this way, if Sea of Thieves was a traditional board game that you played with other people in the same room together. You start heading towards another player's square on the map in order to engage them in combat for their treasure. But instead of using the game's many intended mechanics to either avoid you or attempt to defeat you this player moves their ship off of the map thereby removing treasure from the game board so that nobody can get it. No matter how you swing it that feels cheap and going against the spirit of the game. You certainly wouldn't be inclined to have that player around for board game night again.

Of course depending on your definition of toxicity you might not want to call it "toxic" but it certainly isn't a very sportsmanlike attitude to say the least. And to extend the analogy a little further, the game developers have since released an updated rulebook for their board game which now states that any treasure taken to the red sea will now always spawn back at the edge of the map because they themselves felt that removing treasure off of the game board is against the spirit of their game.

Personally, I think now that the developers have finally taken a firm stance on the red sea matter it's time to stop justifying it as anything other than an unsportsmanlike exploit that got patched out.

@pithyrumble said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@goldsmen

Broad you.

No one is flipping the chessboard. I moved my king 10x and you couldn't check me. No one flipped the board. That's a stupid analogy. I played within the (former) "rules".

Not really. It's more akin to taking your king and placing them on the edge of the chess board so that they are out of play and become inaccessible to the other player's pieces. You're technically not flipping the chess board over but the intention behind it is all the same; I don't want to lose so I'll make it impossible for you to win.

If only Gary Kasparov thought of that tactic in the rematch against the DeepBlue :)

Flipping the board is a crybaby argument.

And ranting about red sea being removed complete with immature name calling and blaming all partners, content creators and PvP "lords" is very mature and adult behaviour.

I took your victory and turned it into a stalemate and all the Partners, Content Creators and PvP Lords couldn't handle a tie.

I don't know, I think at least some of those people can definitely handle putting on a tie :)

@wolfmanbush said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

@vakrisone said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

Misusing toxicity here is no different than when pvers come in here and call typical pvp toxic.

Except that red seaing was never supposed to be an intended game feature whereas PvP is.

Think of it this way, if Sea of Thieves was a traditional board game that you played with other people in the same room together. You start heading towards another player's square on the map in order to engage them in combat for their treasure. But instead of using the game's many intended mechanics to either avoid you or attempt to defeat you this player moves their ship off of the map thereby removing treasure from the game board so that nobody can get it. No matter how you swing it that feels cheap and going against the spirit of the game. You certainly wouldn't be inclined to have that player around for board game night again.

Of course depending on your definition of toxicity you might not want to call it "toxic" but it certainly isn't a very sportsmanlike attitude to say the least. And to extend the analogy a little further, the game developers have since released an updated rulebook for their board game which now states that any treasure taken to the red sea will now always spawn back at the edge of the map because they themselves felt that removing treasure off of the game board is against the spirit of their game.

Personally, I think now that the developers have finally taken a firm stance on the red sea matter it's time to stop justifying it as anything other than an unsportsmanlike exploit that got patched out.

Older red sea threads clearly show different messaging.

Them changing their mind to get involved in something they previously stayed out of does not retroactively make the action toxic or wrong. At the time people were doing it the messaging was that it was acceptable and a part of their tools not rules philosophy.

What happened is they tried to play both sides in the end, it was tools not rules up until they changed it and then they switched to "hahaha runners" to pander to content creators and their communities.

Maybe Rare changed their minds because they themselves saw that it wasn't right for their game? I could be wrong but the last time I checked content creators and their communities don't own controlling shares in either Rare or Microsoft. So they can't force them to do anything that Rare themselves don't want to do.

And changing one's opinion and/or game design priorities is not inherently malicious by default. Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

Those that were doing it at the time were doing nothing wrong by any standards in the game at the time.

Sure. But here's the thing about unsportsmanlike conduct, you can do it in a way that doesn't technically break any established rules of the game. Until of course the game designers make it against the rules and/or close a loophole that allowed it to exist.

Organised alliance servers occupy such a territory for example. And many people feel that server hopping also is unsportsmanlike. Even though the developers have as yet not indicated a firm stance one way or the other on either subject.

and it's laughable when people try to do the "unsportsmanlike conduct" thing in this game on gameplay specifically. If it's not a violation of the rules people get to play how they want to play, that's how pvpers justify all the things they do and that applies to others as well.

If that's laughable then surely it's also laughable when people try to defend red seaing via the logical fallacy loophole of, "but the developers didn't say anything against it back then". Even though most logical thinking people know that silence is not by default admission and the developers have since come out and firmly said that it doesn't belong in their game.

@scheneighnay said in Why did they take out Red Sea running. It was hilarious.:

Right now I'm leaning more into the "just start tossing loot overboard" strat.
They can either keep chasing you and get nothing, or they have to slow down to gather up jetsam while you widen the gap to make more tactics possible.
I only care about the merchant ledger when I'm solo, so I keep a pile of skulls and gh loot for situations like that.

and yes I really wanted to use the word jetsam

oooh nice I get to pick up loot just for chasing, don't even have to do the hard part! And I get to do it with the improved quick harpoon too!