after ship sink you should respawn on a new server

Another QoL suggestion that's been requested for years. It can be debated whether it's after 2 sinks or 3 sinks of 4 sinks or whatever...but either way it would be an improvement to the game. A simple server merge and boom.

@sweetsandman I think two chances to come back and try again is more than enough. Any more than that, and it just gets to be needlessly annoying.

@xdragonman15558 It's totally fine to want your stuff back after sinking. I'm completely fine with having two chances to try again - maybe you had bad luck and got Rare'd by megs, skeleton ships, etc - that's chill.

But if a player gets sunk three or more times and it's clear who the better crew is, the sunk ship needs to be migrated off the server.

@xdragonman15558 If it's within those two respawns, sure.

I don't really think players should just have infinite chances to come back and continue to terrorize a crew who's already sank them multiple times. It's already bad enough if someone is abusing the Skull of Siren Song tactic, to spawn close-by.

I agree with @WolfManbush:

1st sink - close-by respawn
2nd sink - farther away
3rd - you get migrated to another server

@wolfmanbush Agreed 100%.

New player sinks to PvE, gets put on new server and loses all progress in their Veil/Fleet. K. Gotta look at all aspects that change would affect and not just salty griefers coming back.

Also as a tucker I let my boat go, would I just auto get rolled into a new sea or would I need to take a merm? What happens when I tuck and I now need my ship after a play?

This one change gives you one life basically and ruins the player driven experience.

@skelcurseirl That's why I suggested a 2-sink parameter.

First sink? Things happen, people get Rare'd.

Second sink? Oof, but this is the final chance.

Third sink? You're off to another server.

@valor-omega too many situations and quick moment judgement calls. Griefers just sink anyways and have no clue to play. This change would be more disruptive to experienced sailors and their plays than protecting new players from other new players.

@xdragonman15558 I think two sinks is pretty generous, especially and again how people routinely use and abuse the SoSS tactic to come back within 1-3 islands of where they sank, currently.

I understand that getting sunk is frustrating, especially if it's not entirely of your own doing (getting third-partied, getting Rare'd by PvE, running over kegs, etc).

But imagine how frustrating it is for a crew who's sank the same ship multiple times, and they just keep coming back over and over. It's not fun or exciting.

I've personally had multiple different occasions where my crew and I have sank the same crew 5+ times, because they just keep coming back. Each time we sank them in a matter of seconds. If there was a reward for sinking the same crew over and over, maybe it wouldn't be so bad. But as it is, the consistently returning crew stands to gain everything, while the defending crew stands to lose everything; their time, the loot, their supplies.

@skelcurseirl I'm sorry, but I just simply don't agree. Experienced crews are going to sink griefers/persistent returning crews regardless, but their time and supplies continued to be wasted by these types of player, meanwhile these player stand to lose nothing, and gain everything, potentially.

If NOTHING else and there's no change to respawns, then sunk players need to be spawned on the other end of the map at the outskirts/farthest away point from their previous sunk location, and the SoSS exploit needs to be patched out.

@captdirtyoar Yes, I am aware of that. And what about the people on the receiving end of repeated come backs, who are clearly better than the players they keep sinking? They should just deal with it?

When a ship that's been repeatedly sunk keeps coming back, they historically don't care about supplies - they keep coming back to be a nuisance. Your argument only benefits the people who repeatedly come back, not the other people who have to deal with them over and over.

It's not really hard to understand - if you sink twice to the same crew, you get merged to a different server to stop being a nuisance. Three strikes you're out.

Do you at least agree that it's only fair to put repeatedly sunk crews on the farthest away portion of the map, in relation to where they were sunk, and to get rid of the SoSS exploit?

And what about some noobs doing a tall tale? You're gonna kick them because they got sunk more than once?
That's brutal.

The main group that a griefer/cheater really effects are alliance servers, as they're not wanting to leave that server at all.
Anyone else can just dive, tall-tale portal etc. to get away if you've grown tired of dealing with it.

This change isn't needed when you have the dive mechanic.

This was a fun concept I created years ago.

More relevant now than ever.

I also (still) think that ships should respawn with ZERO supplies when sinking to PvP...at least after the second sink. That alone would deter most crews from coming back a 3rd time.

@smuntface Tall Tale checkpoints exist for a reason, but I would say that if a change were to be made, it doesn't merge players onto a new server if they sink by non-player means.

It's really not though - people regularly and consistently come back to world events after being sunk, and abuse the Skull of Siren Song exploit to spawn within 1-3 islands of where they sank.

So to be clear, crews who have sunk a pesky crew multiple times are expected to what... dive out of the server if they're being constantly harassed by the same crew over and over, despite sinking them multiple times, and lose everything? Or the other solution is just deal with it? No thanks.

@th3-tater This is pretty disingenuous. I love PvP, and having interesting/enthralling fights with skilled crews. What I don't love is effortlessly sinking the same slur-spouting crew 5+ times, because they don't know when to quit, and abuse the SoSS exploit to come back over and over and over again.

you have become a nuisance

Good. Means you are bound to get messy and make mistakes.

Its no fun fighting you anymore

It not fun always losing, but if your willing to put up a fight, your worth fighting over and over.

at that point you have become a griefer.

Not exactly. It part of the overall gameplay, to be contested.

You pretty much proven to be someone of great PvP skill, they want to keep it up until they win at least.

I really think when your ship sinks you should reload on a new server

Be sure to sink you multiple times until your forced to switch servers, preventing you from doing anything else. That more griefing.

What if the implemented some sort of distance meter sink.. from the crew doing the sinking..
Sounds complicated, i know.. specially to code im sure..

But say i sink a ship.. They will respawn withing say.. 8 squares..
i sink em again.. now they can spawn up to 12 squares away..
3rd sink.. anywhere on the map..

a possible solution? kinda

@li-jratt-li said in after ship sink you should respawn on a new server:

What if the implemented some sort of distance meter sink.. from the crew doing the sinking..
Sounds complicated, i know.. specially to code im sure..

But say i sink a ship.. They will respawn withing say.. 8 squares..
i sink em again.. now they can spawn up to 12 squares away..
3rd sink.. anywhere on the map..

a possible solution? kinda

This reminds me of debate when people suggest how to determine attackers vs defenders in an adventure (when suggesting penalties for PvP crews with no loot, attacking PvE crews), and nobody can figure out how the game would decide who's an actual aggressor out of 2 ships - because you can ram ships, board their ship to shoot the first cannon to your ship, etc.

So, in this case - let's add a meg (or a skeleton ship) to your suggestion, damaging the crew that's chasing you as well.

I'm not so sure devs would go that much distance to code the game to recognize which hole on the ship (yours, or NPC's, or even environmental) added the last amount of water that sank their ship.

I'm not picking anyone's side here, just re-stating issues. This is just way too complicated to add to an already complex game.

@r3vanns

whom shot first or whos ship took more damage wouldnt matter.. Nor would PvE involvment.
It would be determined by who sank..
If ship A sinks in proximity to ship B.. Then Ship A spawns at a minimum of X distance from ship B.
X increasing if ship A continuously sinks to ship B.

They already have No spawn zones around other player ships.. So its not that far of a stretch.
But i dont code.

@li-jratt-li said in after ship sink you should respawn on a new server:

@r3vanns

whom shot first or whos ship took more damage wouldnt matter.. Nor would PvE involvment.
It would be determined by who sank..
If ship A sinks in proximity to ship B.. Then Ship A spawns at a minimum of X distance from ship B.
X increasing if ship A continuously sinks to ship B.

They already have No spawn zones around other player ships.. So its not that far of a stretch.
But i dont code.

It matters. What then if there are 2 ships in vicinity, not fighting at all, but one of them sinks to a PvE encounter (very possible for new players)? Using your logic that would count as a first sink simply because another player was nearby.

Again, it just makes no sense to try to workaround something so complex. There are so many more scenarios I could think of as a reason why this is almost, even if possible to implement, impossible to balance and make it fair. Can only be a downgrade from the current system in place.

That said, I'm just leaving with this comment, since I anyways wasn't picking sides here, and can't contribute more to the discussion.

@r3vanns

Im not thinking of sides here..
Just a good convo on a possability.. no biggie. its alllll good my friend.

If they sank to a PvE i wouldnt expect that it wouldnt qualify for this.. And they would get a normal spawn location.
I know it was a tad complicated, as i said.. but it COULD work.. If sorted out correctly. imo*

What would you suggest for a solution for the OP?

@lI-JRATT-lI

Just a good convo on a possability.. no biggie. its alllll good my friend.

Appreciate this mate!

What would you suggest for a solution for the OP?

Sadly, that's why I said the previous comment was my last because "can't contribute more to the discussion". Other than what some other people already said, which boils down to Rare fixing the spawn exploit / bugs and calling it a day.

I get the frustration due to the SoSS exploit, and it should've been patched out 100% a long time ago. I'm also sure game just bugs out sometimes and spawns some people way too close. But I also agree with people stating that if you're an aggressor, and decided willingly to take someone else's loot, you gotta keep fighting for it/defending it till you sell it.

Because that's the whole premise of the sandbox - your loot is not yours until you sell it to a trading company. Whether you're an attacker or a defender.

Regarding OP itself - people are using term "griefer / griefing" too loose. "Griefers" that keep coming back for their loot are the same ones believing OP is a "griefer" for taking their loot in the first place.

It's a never-ending cycle on the forum that got boring a long time ago.

@th3-tater Ah yes, the "go to safer seas if you don't like x aspect" remark - that solves everything...

Do you at least agree that the SoSS exploit needs to be fixed so people can't spawn 1-3 islands away, and that sunk ships should spawn farther away?

I like the idea of respawns getting further and further away. I think that's more balanced and should be implemented into the Siren voyage too. Not a fan of the idea of merging them off of the server as many have stated there are other variables in play. For example, players who tuck often will have their ship sunk multiple times because they're not on it.

One scenario that popped in my head is when a crew is stacking. If crews get merged after sinking a couple of times that may create a server where all the players are non-pvp because the pvp focused players got merged off of it. There should always be a risk vs reward aspect to high seas and if you want to stack an event then you should be constantly challenged for it. I think that's where the further respawns after each sink is more than fair for both crews.

Before someone mentions it, yes I'm aware there will not always be a risk on the high seas due to the majority of players who actively avoid pvp, which is why those crews willing to stand and fight shouldn't be forcefully removed from it (merging servers).