PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.

  • Hi all,

    So first off, I've played this game for a decent bit but I won't say that I'm some legend or related.

    I'm making this post after reading another post concerning the progression of gameplay changes, the comments on "sweats" (tryhard PvP players) in the community, and the issue around the FOV.

    The main issue I've seen popup is multi-ship raiding crews which have become much more prevalent as of late.

    For those who don't know, the idea is to have 6-8 people (brigand and/or galleon) queue up simultaneously and attempt to get two people into the same session in different ships. The others then join those two and form an allegiance and then go around raiding other ships.

    The issue here is that unlike PvE multi-crew (ie. Merchant Alliance or PvP quests), fighting two voice-comm co-ordinated ships is unavoidable. By the nature of PvE quests and the limited map area, you can never really escape because they will either follow you on the inner side of the circle of the map (shorter distance) and/or follow you to the outpost/island you have to visit.

    You must either sink them or quit.

    Honestly, there needs to be a change in mechanics to allow smaller solo ships an avoidance strategy that overcomes being followed. For those who say to sail against the wind, this will only work until you reach the limits of the map.

    For those who say, fighting is part of the game, that is true but fighting multiple coordinated ships as a sloop or brigand is not fair in the slightest. If this was a rare occurrence, then it'd probably be okay, but it's becoming a much more common occurrence on desktops because of low-delay voice communication (ie. Discord).

    To be honest, I would like to see a game system design that allows for multi-ship crews. I think there is an opportunity here for small fleet battles
    (2v2, 3v3, etc) as this game's mechanics actually suit this extremely well.

    Second of all, there needs to be a mechanic to allow smaller ships to explicitly avoid a PvP encounter. For example, if a player sails to the edge of the map, the current mechanic means that the chaser can just hover at the edge of the limit and attrition the ship they are chasing.

    Obviously, there is the issue of limiting the escape opportunity window. Otherwise, people would just run away indefinitely and PvP players would lose out. It is part of the game to allow PvP ships to raid PvE-centric ships, that's the whole concept of Piracy! At no point should pure PvE be an option.

    Also, on that front, there are significant differences in the playability for desktop clients versus console clients. Some of this is unavoidable but a lot of the playability issues in this game are coming from having a centralized "experience" for all platform types.

    For example, there is the issue of FOV and nausea versus performance limitations for consoles requiring it to be clamped and the related animation and first-person camera space issues.

    Another one is the in-game menu navigation not having certain functions that you expect from other games with similar interfaces (like the inventory UI).

    Sensitivity limits for desktop controls are another. This one does not make sense because high DPI mice will overcome this issue, meaning that people with "gaming" hardware will have a much larger advantage over people without it.

    There are other issues, many of which I may not be aware of or agree with necessarily and many of you may disagree with my assessment.

    The fundamental summary of the issues can be described as portability issues. They have arisen from the game's support for desktop clients. Many game design decisions and systems are showing these issues because they were never really designed to operate outside of a console environment.

    The reason to compel me to make this thread is that Rare has been awfully quiet in addressing the portability issues between desktop and console clients. Either just taking a hard stance against mods or other changes to address portability issues (like the FOV changes for wide-aspect ratios and nausea symptoms) or just ignoring it outright.

    I will not condone people attempting to cheat and many client-side mods for desktops are just for that, they are not to fix portability issues, they are there because players want an unfair advantage.

    But the truth of the matter is that many mods exist because of these portability issues and both of these mod categories are getting conflated and grouped together as "cheating" (in a malicious connotation) and are dismissed outright.

    And I've seen people saying that extended FOV has no place whatsoever. I'm sorry but just because you don't have an issue doesn't mean others' issues are suddenly invalid. Nausea is not a "small issue", end of discussion.

    It is fine to take the stance against client-side mods for the sake of fairness, I can understand and agree with that position. However, in that circumstance, Rare has an obligation to address significant issues with their game.

    And for anyone who says otherwise on specifically portability issues, tell me what avenues Rare has for offering a refund. Because if there isn't one, then it's effectively selling a defective product to customers with no warranty.

    Obviously, I'm still playing the game. I enjoy it and have no intention of refunding at this point in time. But if Rare wants this title to continue to grow on the desktop market, then these issues have to at least be addressed. Many games out there with cross-platform play have different UI and control schemas for different platforms because they understand that each platform has different advantages and user experience requirements and that applies here too.

    I would like to hear your feedback on this and hopefully Rare's if they are reading this. Thank you for your time.

    Regards,

  • 8
    Posts
    7.0k
    Views
    questionwindows 10feedbackgeneral
  • @perfidious6751 so first. this is a shared world adventure game. solo players do not deserve the ability to avoid pvp by any means other than sailing away.

    As for the mods and stuff on desktop vs console. Rare designed the 1st person fov layout like this on purpose. they have no obligation to change it, nor should they.

  • @perfidious6751

    You have correctly identified many issues and their cause that has plagued this game from the begining however you have not actually given and workable solutions. Saying to just add a mechnic doesn't solve anything. Infact you might not be aware of this but the sloop and brig are mechnics that where added in as the game was designed to only be played in Galleons with a crew of 4. The reason why raiding ships are possible is due to the Closed Crew mechnic that was also added Later as the original design was Open crew only.

    What I'm getting at is simply adding new mechnics also creates issues. As for the Portability issue, well that is simply differences in hardware that can't realy be addressed the Xbox now allows you to play with Kb/m setup and pc can use controllers and SoT tries to sort players based on imput device already as for FoV i personally think you should set the setting to whatever is best for you just like sensitvity Having higher senstivity or the abilty to instantly change sensitivity has been on argueblity huge advantage for years in PC gaming but we never complian about that in other multiplayer games why is it a issue in this one?

    Basically Hardware advantages will always exist due to the fact better hardware gives a better experience it makes no sense to force Players who own better hardware to have a worse experience just on the notion of fairness/balance. Instead the focus should be given all players the best experience possible. Console these days are just mini gaming PCs the hardware and software architecture are not that different from a standard desktop pc in fact in some areas they are identical.

  • @enf0rcer said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @perfidious6751

    You have correctly identified many issues and their cause that has plagued this game from the begining however you have not actually given and workable solutions. Saying to just add a mechnic doesn't solve anything. Infact you might not be aware of this but the sloop and brig are mechnics that where added in as the game was designed to only be played in Galleons with a crew of 4. The reason why raiding ships are possible is due to the Closed Crew mechnic that was also added Later as the original design was Open crew only.

    What I'm getting at is simply adding new mechnics also creates issues. As for the Portability issue, well that is simply differences in hardware that can't realy be addressed the Xbox now allows you to play with Kb/m setup and pc can use controllers and SoT tries to sort players based on imput device already as for FoV i personally think you should set the setting to whatever is best for you just like sensitvity Having higher senstivity or the abilty to instantly change sensitivity has been on argueblity huge advantage for years in PC gaming but we never complian about that in other multiplayer games why is it a issue in this one?

    Basically Hardware advantages will always exist due to the fact better hardware gives a better experience it makes no sense to force Players who own better hardware to have a worse experience just on the notion of fairness/balance. Instead the focus should be given all players the best experience possible. Console these days are just mini gaming PCs the hardware and software architecture are not that different from a standard desktop pc in fact in some areas they are identical.

    In case I wasn't clear, my argument was in favor of splitting the user experience design for desktops and consoles. The reason the FOV and many other design choices were made is because of a console focus and my argument is that they need to retool various sections of the game for the desktop market.

    The FOV issue is actually that the maximum FOV in the settings is not high enough for desktops. I'm all for personal FOV controls, the argument here is that FOV required for some is not available.

    I was only underlining the point that fairness does need to be taken into account since people have been bringing up that point constantly.

    Also, I didn't know that SoT did matchmaking using input devices. Where does it say this?

  • @captain-coel said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @perfidious6751 so first. this is a shared world adventure game. solo players do not deserve the ability to avoid pvp by any means other than sailing away.

    As for the mods and stuff on desktop vs console. Rare designed the 1st person fov layout like this on purpose. they have no obligation to change it, nor should they.

    They designed it like this originally because of consoles. My fundamental point is that different platforms/control schemas/setups require their own design focus.

    Also, just to re-iterate, the FOV issue is related to nausea and other related symptoms that render the game unplayable for many. Saying that they shouldn't address the issue is just brushing off the issues that many users on this forum are reporting. That's not a valid response. Why shouldn't they address portability issues? Every other game does when they do ports.

  • @perfidious6751 said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @enf0rcer said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @perfidious6751

    In case I wasn't clear, my argument was in favor of splitting the user experience design for desktops and consoles. The reason the FOV and many other design choices were made is because of a console focus and my argument is that they need to retool various sections of the game for the desktop market.

    Then what your advocating for is a completly seperate client in essesence a complete sperate game which would require a whole sperate team and time while also removing the crossplay experience which is antithecal to the devs goals.

    The FOV issue is actually that the maximum FOV in the settings is not high enough for desktops. I'm all for personal FOV controls, the argument here is that FOV required for some is not available.

    I agree that 120 should be made an option the issue here is Dev have consider the lowest common denominator which oddly enough is not even consoles but potato PC where upping the FoV on some cards would cuase a Fatel Error and crash the Machine plus with the console having the smart delivery system having a slightly better verson based on hardware already exist but only for consoles.

    I was only underlining the point that fairness does need to be taken into account since people have been bringing up that point constantly.

    With that point we are both in 100 percent agreement its your other points and arguments i had contention with.

    Also, I didn't know that SoT did matchmaking using input devices. Where does it say this?

    They have added a setting to pefer consoles with kb/m and PC to just Console with Controllers there was a Mega Thread on this. Basically if your console is detected to have inserted a Kb/m the game will attempt to put you in a PC Lobby this however does not work the oppsite way as keyboards and controllers can be connected simultaneously with no way of determining which you are using. This ofcouse can be circum vent on consoles to a degree but is very difficult and not as effective.

  • @enf0rcer said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @perfidious6751 said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @enf0rcer said in PvEvP Balancing + Multi-Ship Crewing and Playability.:

    @perfidious6751

    In case I wasn't clear, my argument was in favor of splitting the user experience design for desktops and consoles. The reason the FOV and many other design choices were made is because of a console focus and my argument is that they need to retool various sections of the game for the desktop market.

    Then what your advocating for is a completly seperate client in essesence a complete sperate game which would require a whole sperate team and time while also removing the crossplay experience which is antithecal to the devs goals.

    Having different control schemas and rendering changes (which is NOT a "completely separate client") does not stop it from being cross-platform. Many cross-platform console ports even went through PC release delays just to complete this (since they were banking on their graphics as one of the selling points). An example is the cross-play in Call of Duty; the controller input applies an aim-assist.

    Also, one way to achieve a higher FOV (up to a limit) is to change the first-person space camera to have a different scaling rate for the FOV setting. For those who don't know, your first-person rendered models (arms, guns, etc.) are actually in a completely different place, with no environment (no surfaces, etc.), with a separate camera that is then rendered and overlayed over the world camera view. They can adjust this camera to not change its FOV as much compared to the world camera. Granted they can probably only get to ~105 FOV before it'll begin to look weird but it's better than nothing.

    The FOV issue is actually that the maximum FOV in the settings is not high enough for desktops. I'm all for personal FOV controls, the argument here is that FOV required for some is not available.

    I agree that 120 should be made an option the issue here is Dev have consider the lowest common denominator which oddly enough is not even consoles but potato PC where upping the FoV on some cards would cuase a Fatel Error and crash the Machine plus with the console having the smart delivery system having a slightly better verson based on hardware already exist but only for consoles.

    Maybe add a warning when increasing the FOV past a certain number? I don't know the details that caused this, it's a very odd behaviour.

  • The Problem is serverhopping.

    It allows for premade alliances, full Alliance Servers and it caters to pvx only playstyles when they shouldnt exist or at least attractive.
    If you restrict that people need to play the hand they got dealed and cannot controll or pick the Action they want, be it World Event, active FotD , FoF , emissary or no Reaper emissary etc..., PvE or PvP or in other words what is meant to be uncontrolled, unpredictable and random.
    At least this is how it was designed once , how it is marketed etc ... A Pirate Adventure.

    Because Rare allows people to cheese the Game, PvP meta is to exploit , PvE Meta is to Form Alliance Servers and many Cheat the FoV unpunished to have Advantage in PvP .
    The "playstyles" rely on cheesing, exploiting and cheating.

8
Posts
7.0k
Views
questionwindows 10feedbackgeneral
1 out of 8