Getting kicked from the game with 20+ chests aboard can suck. Ships shouldn't sink immediately when people leave and the instance should be up and running for 15 or so minutes so you can get back.
To avoid being stuck in a server with hostile players, when dying you should be able to pay a toll on the ship of the damned, 1 g, to migrate to a new server on respawning. This should have a 15 minute cooldown. Your entire team will need to be on the ship and all pay 1g.
"To avoid being stuck in a server with hostile players, when dying you should be able to pay a toll on the ship of the damned, 1 g, to migrate to a new server on respawning. This should have a 15 minute cooldown. Your entire team will need to be on the ship and all pay 1g."
Wouldn't that be abused? Like if I had like 10 chests and I had someone chase me, wouldn't I just suicide to pay a toll to become immune to theft by other players whenever I felt threatened?
I didn't say the ship would migrate with the players. Your arguing against an implementation detail you injected into the idea.
@UrihamRayne It sounds like it’s two different suggestions, it just wasn’t worded very clearly as such.
@SavageTwinky I agree that ships should persist in a game for 5 minutes or so, which would allow solo sloop players to rejoin their game if they were disconnected. The ship should auto anchor in place upon disconnection.
The idea of migrating to another server I think is just adding unnecessary coding to the game. The option to quit the game and start a new lobby has the exact same effect as paying 1g to migrate servers.
@savagetwinky These are two different suggestions right? You should add a title to each suggestion on your OP so it's clearer.
Do you think your first suggestion could be abused by hackers? I have no idea how easy that is but trying to get someone to dc/leave the game so that there is a non-manned ship for them to loot?.. I like the incentive though. Features to reconnect on any game are always a great addition. Perhaps my concern is a stupid one but it just crossed my mind... Although some suggestions for this idea...
I strongly support your second idea. If people want to make sure they aren't going to be griefed or if they are having trouble with some players this would be a good option. It is essentially another version of scuttling your ship. I think 15 minutes might be too short of a cool down though. Potentially if players find a way to kill themselves this could be abused... 'oh look we are being chased, quick everyone around this gunpowder barrel I'll detonate it and we'll go to a new server'. I know people lose their loot with your suggestion however, so if they have loot they probably won't want to do this, but if you don't have loot then it's just an easy option to escape being attacked at all... Either it needs to be on a 2 hour cool down or something, or the cool down automatically resets when being killed by an enemy player? (or enemy player detonating the gunpowder barrel etc.
@Daddy-Sanctus It shouldn't be too difficult to code though right? I mean it's the same as being on a galleon with 3 people and someone leaves.. yes you can disconnect if you want a sloop but it would be much nicer to do that in game, just quality of life changes. This method for changing server in game would also be a nice quality of life change.
Its one suggest with two components... if we lock people to a server instance we also need to give the ability to leave.
How can this be abused by hackers? It's irrelevant since those are technical details for Rare
For question 1, what happens if the crew leader disconnects now? This doesn't seem specific to the suggestion.
If its that case, then please clarify that its only the crew without their current ship, though, wouldn't swaping servers defeat the purpose of this feature?
You see, you can't really lock people to an instace, though I fully support a reconnect feature (see https://www.seaofthieves.com/forum/topic/55254/reconnect-feature), because we are still dealing with random matchmaking even though we have private crews. Imagine the situation, I am mid session here but then my wife's boyfriend wants to play with me, so he invites me, but I can't join him yet due to how I'm locked in a session for however long the grace period is. Preferably its better to give players the option to abandon a session they can reconect to.
I like how on this thread your argument is 'it's irrelevant as that's for Rare', yet on my thread that reasoning isn't good enough hah.
And these are two different suggestions.. one is essentially a reconnect feature and one is another method for preventing griefing. I don't understand how they are linked in the slightest.
I'm not 100% sure what happens with the crew leader disconnects/leaves now to be fair, so maybe I'm talking about something which is already present in the game. But is your disconnect feature purely for solo players then?
@savagetwinky said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
Getting kicked from the game with 20+ chests aboard can suck. Ships shouldn't sink immediately when people leave and the instance should be up and running for 15 or so minutes so you can get back.
15 minutes feels too long, but this would be a nice thing to have. I’d suggest a slight change:
5 minutes feels better. And, I think this timer should apply to any crew member disconnecting, period. When a crew member leaves, the slot should be held for that player for 5 minutes - allowing them to reconnect before another player can take their spot. If all players are disconnected, they’ve got 5 minutes to get back.
To avoid being stuck in a server with hostile players, when dying you should be able to pay a toll on the ship of the damned, 1 g, to migrate to a new server on respawning. This should have a 15 minute cooldown. Your entire team will need to be on the ship and all pay 1g.
This is unnecessary. Players can do this already. If all the players are on the ferry and want to migrate, they just need to coordinate, quit the session, and use one crew member’s name to join a closed crew on a new server.
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
This is unnecessary. Players can do this already. If all the players are on the ferry and want to migrate, they just need to coordinate, quit the session, and use one crew member’s name to join a closed crew on a new server.
Well they'd also be stuck waiting 5 mins to rejoin. The point of locking them into a server is so if everyone dc's (more for solo players), they don't lose their ship/loot.
@savagetwinky said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
This is unnecessary. Players can do this already. If all the players are on the ferry and want to migrate, they just need to coordinate, quit the session, and use one crew member’s name to join a closed crew on a new server.
Well they'd also be stuck waiting 5 mins to rejoin. The point of locking them into a server is so if everyone dc's (more for solo players), they don't lose their ship/loot.
I’m confused. Is this two different suggestions or not?
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@savagetwinky said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
This is unnecessary. Players can do this already. If all the players are on the ferry and want to migrate, they just need to coordinate, quit the session, and use one crew member’s name to join a closed crew on a new server.
Well they'd also be stuck waiting 5 mins to rejoin. The point of locking them into a server is so if everyone dc's (more for solo players), they don't lose their ship/loot.
I’m confused. Is this two different suggestions or not?
They are connected... The second one is necessary because the first suggestion you can't just leave and join a new server.
We could just move the choice upfront and let them rejoin when selecting set sail.
@savagetwinky said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@savagetwinky said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
This is unnecessary. Players can do this already. If all the players are on the ferry and want to migrate, they just need to coordinate, quit the session, and use one crew member’s name to join a closed crew on a new server.
Well they'd also be stuck waiting 5 mins to rejoin. The point of locking them into a server is so if everyone dc's (more for solo players), they don't lose their ship/loot.
I’m confused. Is this two different suggestions or not?
They are connected... The second one is necessary because the first suggestion you can't just leave and join a new server.
We could just move the choice upfront and let them rejoin when selecting set sail.
Yes. I thought that was what was an implied part of the suggestion. Have the option at the first screen to select “Return to Ship.” I didn’t think you were making it automatic. Having it be automatic would be bad if someone didn’t like their crew and wanted to join a new one - they’d be stuck for 5-15 minutes. Lol.
@angrycoconut16 Sorry. Then I don’t get your reference. The only references in your thread that I recall were to exploits, not hacks.
@savagetwinky In some form or another, yes. But, I think it should be a rejoin option at the start and not automatic. Otherwise, players will get stuck for a time in sessions they don’t want to be in.
@urihamrayne said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
If its that case, then please clarify that its only the crew without their current ship, though, wouldn't swaping servers defeat the purpose of this feature?
You see, you can't really lock people to an instace, though I fully support a reconnect feature (see https://www.seaofthieves.com/forum/topic/55254/reconnect-feature), because we are still dealing with random matchmaking even though we have private crews. Imagine the situation, I am mid session here but then my wife's boyfriend wants to play with me, so he invites me, but I can't join him yet due to how I'm locked in a session for however long the grace period is. Preferably its better to give players the option to abandon a session they can reconect to.
Being invited to another game should always work. Why wouldn't it. Your not entering match making now.
@urihamrayne I think that locking them to the instance so that a “Return to Ship” option pops up at the menu would be good. Then they could choose to do that or abandon it. I think a five minute timer would be good. But, I agree that it shouldn’t be a lock that the player has no control over or an automatic rejoin.
I don’t believe that the crew migration part of the suggestion is necessary. They can already coordinate on the ferry, scuttle, and join together on another server.
@entspeak " I think that locking them to the instance so that a “Return to Ship” option pops up at the menu would be good. Then they could choose to do that or abandon it. I think a five minute timer would be good. But, I agree that it shouldn’t be a lock that the player has no control over or an automatic rejoin."
yeh pretty much this, if we are still worried about server hoppers, we need to be real, the real solution is not punishing players that leave a session to join another, that is too broad of a solution. The devs should work on more events for the game that keep players invested in their sessions, players that stick around get more things to do, while hoppers only look for their one especific thing, will eventually get a little more gold/xp efficiency. Again, diversity of activities will go a long way on solving a lot of the problems the game currently faces.
@angrycoconut16 said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
I like how on this thread your argument is 'it's irrelevant as that's for Rare', yet on my thread that reasoning isn't good enough hah.
And these are two different suggestions.. one is essentially a reconnect feature and one is another method for preventing griefing. I don't understand how they are linked in the slightest.
I'm not 100% sure what happens with the crew leader disconnects/leaves now to be fair, so maybe I'm talking about something which is already present in the game. But is your disconnect feature purely for solo players then?
I'm not proposing we change the balance of in game mechanics then saying oh rare should balance them! They are balanced already, in argument I made in that thread, you suggested introducing a new balance. I'm suggesting locking the server to a player, so when he rejoins he'll get back into a server. And players can't match make into his slot for 5 mins while he's offline, so no not just solo players. And since players can be associated with a server, just a more interesting and thematic way of starting on a new server.
The implementation details aren't that important.
@entspeak said in Lock players into a session / ship, allow them to migrate servers:
@savagetwinky In some form or another, yes. But, I think it should be a rejoin option at the start and not automatic. Otherwise, players will get stuck for a time in sessions they don’t want to be in.
one of the benefits to locking them in a session for a bit is to stop server hopping though. Although if you've been with the same crew for 2 hours it should be the default option to rejoin, or even prompt the user.
@savagetwinky I honestly don’t see server hopping as an issue that needs to be addressed given that it’s only done for the sake of gaining reputation and, since reputation leads only to cosmetic progression, who cares, really?
@entspeak you could argue that an issue that server hopping brings would be oversaturated forts, like a bunch of people fighting for the same fort. I don't dislike it, personally because I actually enjoy free for alls and I'm usually in a ship that has been enduring a long session with a lot of supplies, so I'm usually with the advantage compared to hoppers that almost never have 1/3 of the supplies I have, which balances out a bit, in my opinion.
Moslty the problem comes from solos and duoss that feel that a once empty server they felt safe in doing a fort on their own suddenly becomess oversaturated. Its mostly an issue for them, but for me that is either solo or in a full crew I don't mind it.
@urihamrayne Servers still have limits, so it’s not like a server is going to be inundated with server hoppers. IMO, It’s not enough of an issue to do something that would create unnecessary delays for other players who aren’t server hopping.
@entspeak "It’s not enough of an issue to do something that would create unnecessary delays for other players who aren’t server hopping."
I agree with this statement, while there may be issues and players do get a rather quick boost to xp, its not that big of an issue worth a reataliative solution.
