Empy Lobbies And How To Fix?

Imagine a server of 10 galleons on the current sized map. It wouldnt work and is a stupid suggestion. Where would they all spawn in for starters? The current level of 6 is fine...I dont notice dead servers very often. You occasionally have to look for another ship but thats the whole point. Thats what gives the balance of allowing some people tp PvE and others to PvP. 10 ships would be carnage and nothing would ever get done. It wouldnt even be worth PvPing as the other ships wouldnt have been able to get any loot to steal. Then on top of that you would be giving alliance servers even more power to make more gold and rep

As someone who quit 6 months ago because of this being some of these reasons I agree with this entirely. I remember adventure I would go around stealing stuff and maybe doing some PvE and there would be no one to contest me because they were scared or no one was on the server. From what it seems, it doesn't filter out servers to queue in very well and people can join a server thats been empty for 2 days. It should always close or hibernate those servers that are empty and put players in the active servers that have players in them to make it more likely to get contested for a fort or to just find others to PvP. Say all servers fill up then it can open one of the servers that were closed which there are probably tons and it will let players fill into there causes more interaction between players such as alliances, stealing, PvPing, defending your loot, etc. WIth that said, the excess servers open with no one on them running everything probably causes the servers people are on stress. We don't need a bigger ship cap, we just need servers to be filtered correctly so it fills up the open servers with spots before actually taking players to an empty server. Along with the content they put out, it seems they put in patch notes on some bugs they fix but that isn't always the case. If you could take some time off or have someone take time off working on one thing to fix a bug that has been reported that's a way it can be done. Make sure you test them too I have a feeling you guys do something but not test it and you don't know if that exactly fixes it. This also should decrease the hitreg issues and make the servers more stable so there are not all of these excess servers.

I agree, but I feel testing needs to start at 8 ships, see how things go with that. I'd love 10 don't get me wrong, but 8 should be a good starter.

@danhoax There is no denying that the servers are dying. Anyone can see that. I hardly ever see boats and when i do they are almost always open crew or very unexpireced players.

@xxcaptmichaelxx That is a good point and i agree. I was using 10 as an example since most Ive talked to seem to think 10 would be a good number.

Another thing someone said that i forgot to mention was to lower the total lifespan of one lobby. This will also help circulate players bteween their servers.

I think this plan would hasten the end of the game rather than delay it.

Primarily PvE players have stopped playing for 2 reasons - they ran out of stuff to do and they were excessively hunted by primarily PvP players who's sole interest is killing other players. The primarily PvE players who have stayed now flee almost instantly because they are in a no-win situation. They can fight back, sink you, gain nothing, then have to be warry of you continuously throwing your ship at them with stock supplies, or they can run. Either way, the end result is they get sunk or they get... what they already have. Running is safer and better.

This, in turn, has lead to primarily PvP players playing less.

The solution is NOT forcing PvE players into more interaction-which is the only thing increasing the ships on a server would do. The solution has to be something that puts stakes on the attacker, and makes losing still a "fun" experience rather than a "F this, I just lost 4 hours of work" experience.

In the current version of the game it's like playing poker where only one person at the table has to put up stakes, but everyone can win them.

Edit: Basically it comes down to giving players a reason to come back and a reason to stay, rather than trying to force the players that have stayed to play a game they don't want to play.

@cptphteven I see what you are saying and i can agree to some of it. But then on the other hand the whole point of this game is it is supposed to be a PVEVP game. Meaning there is supposed to be a risk of losing all your loo whether you like it or not.

I see what you mean when saying "something that puts stakes on the attacker" i agree with that statement because as of right now they don't have anything to lose and it doesn't seem like an issue at first but what they are risking doesn't need to be gold or rep instead something entirely different. What that is Im not sure and i would have to give more thought to that idea.

Reading through this post has been a terrible experience, it is beyond convoluted. This is an extremely unproductive conversation. You can say they are dead all you want but try sailing for even 2 hours without seeing another player. The other day I played for about an hour on what seemed to be an empty server, we sailed around and saw nobody. Then we started FotD and within minutes saw 3 ships approaching. Everything people have suggested has already been suggested and turned down because it is flawed. And don’t act like this game is on its last legs when it continues to grow massively with each update and gains more players. Just because the ocean is big and you don’t see a lot of people, doesn’t mean the game is dead.

@vanccel said in Empy Lobbies And How To Fix?:

@cptphteven I see what you are saying and i can agree to some of it. But then on the other hand the whole point of this game is it is supposed to be a PVEVP game. Meaning there is supposed to be a risk of losing all your loo whether you like it or not.

I see what you mean when saying "something that puts stakes on the attacker" i agree with that statement because as of right now they don't have anything to lose and it doesn't seem like an issue at first but what they are risking doesn't need to be gold or rep instead something entirely different. What that is Im not sure and i would have to give more thought to that idea.

I'm not sure why it doesn't seem like an issue, on it's face it looks like a HUGE issue, and then in practice that plays out to be true.

There needs to be stakes on the attacker. Period. On reddit recently there was someone complaining that not enough people were starting fort of the damned for them to steal. But, why should they? Why should I put 30 min into getting the resources / lights, another 30 into the fight, for the benefit of other players?

The problem of stakes is the fundamental PvP imbalance problem in the game, and needs to be solved. It's too easy for PvP players to get what they want out of the game, and too hard for PvE players to get what they want.

You are right about if they minimalize the total servers, and merge all the open crews It can be a good start, but the Arena is broken form the bottom to the top.
If somewho leave with hardquit, his spot will remain to 10 minutes, witch mean this spot will be empty to 10 minutes.
and also, when I crash Demarco will suspend me, but no problem I can get 1 warning before the ban, but when I rejoin and i got (alt+tab)beard I got a ban for 30 minutes, and my spot still remain 10 minutes. WHAT, rare how did you think about it?

It is easy to see to noone care about the arena in the Rare HQ, it means nothing will change, the 10 minutes save time basically killed the last remains of the quality arena.
(i dont understand why am I in a same lobby with the sailors, not fun to me, because they are not enemy, not fun for the sailors, where is the point of no rank system?)

@tdogcrocky434 Pretty sure when i spend 5 hrs server hoping and find 0 ships means the lobbies are pretty empty. Everytime i start a FOTD people avoid me... 14 FOTD stack 1 ship came lm ao