I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.
[Mega Thread] - Death Cost
@crash4654 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones the concept of loss and actual penalty is the subject, not the games themselves. I could also bring up borderlands, dark souls, Mario, monster hunter, 7 days to die, cuphead, I could go on. The point is that there's some sort of penalty in all of them for death, some worse than others. That penalty is your incentive to not die. You don't want bad things to happen to you, so you get better to avoid death and keep your progress.
those games have set objectives to set out and accomplish. sea of thieves has missions, but more so than not it's just an emergent story pirate generator. which is a great part of it. think about you and your friends having dumb drunken Olympics in game that will likely end up in somebody's death. well now those made up games that people have come up with to goof off with friends are now being punished for having fun if somebody dies during a drunken cannonball contest.
@doctorviolet3 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
The reason i liked this game was the very fact there was no penalty. You could die from something stupid but funny like a friend launching you too high and it would get a big laugh aboard the crew. Add this and not only will it ruin those fun moments and make forts not feel worth the endless deaths but it will also be abused by those who will just sit at outpost wanting to kill the first person who spawns or shows up loot or not just cause they can make someones day miserable. It will also make this game feel like a grind. I want sot to BE about what it WAS ADVERTISED TO BE. "Be the pirate you want to be" No matter what. Not "Be the Pirate you want to be unless it means dying alot". #Bemorepirate not #Bemoregrindy
it's hard to be more pirate when you are being punished for living a larger than life pirate life.
@weegee-x17 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.I have literally hit a point where i dont have enough gold to even purchase a voyage so Im now going to have to go look for random chests until i can get enough gold to actually afford a mission again. all because i bought a new shirt. that being said if im running into this now in normal play a death penalty would only masseffect3 ending the whole thing.
For the love of Neptune.
Please do something about the PVP death punishment .
For a game rewarding a play how you want style for PVE. A death tax is very silly. There needs to be a tax for people taking advantage of the respawning system and coming storming back at you every time you sink them.
This is really not hard to figure out.
If your ship gets sunk you spawn at the furthest island from the one you are closest too.@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@weegee-x17 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.I have literally hit a point where i dont have enough gold to even purchase a voyage so Im now going to have to go look for random chests until i can get enough gold to actually afford a mission again. all because i bought a new shirt. that being said if im running into this now in normal play a death penalty would only masseffect3 ending the whole thing.
I've been there penniless and ashamed. You gotta reach the bottom before you can start the climb back up.
@shaggiedo said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@weegee-x17 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.I have literally hit a point where i dont have enough gold to even purchase a voyage so Im now going to have to go look for random chests until i can get enough gold to actually afford a mission again. all because i bought a new shirt. that being said if im running into this now in normal play a death penalty would only masseffect3 ending the whole thing.
I've been there penniless and ashamed. You gotta reach the bottom before you can start the climb back up.
Im aware. what im saying is that if missions cost money to obtain and you lose money when you die then it's just going to perpetuate the issue of broke bored people.
@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@shaggiedo said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@weegee-x17 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.I have literally hit a point where i dont have enough gold to even purchase a voyage so Im now going to have to go look for random chests until i can get enough gold to actually afford a mission again. all because i bought a new shirt. that being said if im running into this now in normal play a death penalty would only masseffect3 ending the whole thing.
I've been there penniless and ashamed. You gotta reach the bottom before you can start the climb back up.
Im aware. what im saying is that if missions cost money to obtain and you lose money when you die then it's just going to perpetuate the issue of broke bored people.
Sorry that was my pathetic attempt at humour, sorry you missed it.
@shaggiedo said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@shaggiedo said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@weegee-x17 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
I can see why this feature would make sense, having done skeleton forts and running in like a lemming over and over until i win. However i think a death cost is severe.
If anything should cost you, it should be letting your ship get sunk. That in addition to respawning you on the furthest outpost from your position.I have literally hit a point where i dont have enough gold to even purchase a voyage so Im now going to have to go look for random chests until i can get enough gold to actually afford a mission again. all because i bought a new shirt. that being said if im running into this now in normal play a death penalty would only masseffect3 ending the whole thing.
I've been there penniless and ashamed. You gotta reach the bottom before you can start the climb back up.
Im aware. what im saying is that if missions cost money to obtain and you lose money when you die then it's just going to perpetuate the issue of broke bored people.
Sorry that was my pathetic attempt at humour, sorry you missed it.
no worries. lol
Id hate to see a death cost, due to the fact that people did a lot of effort to gain it in the first place , how ever ,i do see the potential of it creating more of a challenge . Why not make it an option to pay the ferry man to lower your spawn time ? A ratio of 100g per second ? Perhaps a fixed amount to skip the wait ? Or perhaps a health decrease / drunk punishment ? ( ressurection sickness )? More ways to punish then to take gold .
@stormblooper said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
Id hate to see a death cost, due to the fact that people did a lot of effort to gain it in the first place , how ever ,i do see the potential of it creating more of a challenge . Why not make it an option to pay the ferry man to lower your spawn time ? A ratio of 100g per second ? Perhaps a fixed amount to skip the wait ? Or perhaps a health decrease / drunk punishment ? ( ressurection sickness )? More ways to punish then to take gold .
paying to bypass the respawn time would give advantage to players who dont have jobs/lives which is why the game is designed the way it is to avoid that kind of upperhand.
I like the bounty idea.
Potential Solution: what if we had banks? Gold deposited is safe from any death cost, whereas undeposited gold can be subject to a percentage fee upon death
The way I imagine it, there would be two modes of currency. You would have (1) gold on hand, and (2) deposited gold. When gold is deposited, it goes to your deposited gold count. It doesn't matter if there are multiple banks/locations, all deposited gold goes towards your deposited gold total, which could be renamed something more pirate-y, like booty. Deposited gold is safe from everything (charges, robbery, etc.)
Gold on hand, unlike deposited gold, can be charged/taken under certain circumstances. Many of those circumstances are being discussed in this thread. I don't know what they should be or what percentage because that isn't the point of this post. Pretty much, gold on hand should be subject to whatever charge the developers/community ends up agreeing on (for instance, all deaths, deaths only when enemy player deals killing blow, only pve deaths, etc.) A bunch of people have mentioned how funny teammate related deaths are less fun when it has a cost and I think at the least those kinds of things should be preserved. Personally, I'm not a fan of increased respawn timers. I want to play the game and waiting around is unfun imo even if it would take longer to get back what I lost.
Gold Withdrawal: I would not be in favor of requiring players to withdraw these funds from the bank in order to spend them. There is enough risk involved when depositing gold on hand, and it would be tedious going back and forth to withdraw, spend, deposit change, etc.
They don't have to be called banks. They could be called something more pirate-y, like a treasure cove, stash, buried treasure, booty, etc. Regardless of the appearance or label, the main idea is that any bank you deposit gold at will add to your deposited gold total, and that total is safe from any kind of charges.
I think this proposal strikes a good middle ground. I think it would make the game exciting because there is something on the line and incentivize to deposit your gold, increasing depending on how much is on hand. On the other side, having a safe account and reasonable death charges will ensure that players don't feel as if they're completely wasting their time when they die.
Ship Destruction Cost Co-Existence: I am not sure how this proposal would co-exist with that one. It might be much to hit players with two types of death costs, since they will often take place around the same time. Nonetheless, there is something big about losing a ship and it should feel weightier.
At the end of the day, though, there is something very pirate-y about hiding/depositing your plunder
edit:
Post under me has a good point on how gold is received at outposts so would be a bit redundant. I wonder this proposal could still be meaningful in light of that or what others means there are to achieve a middle groundTo think of it, right now pretty much chest = gold on hand and actual gold is deposited gold. This whole thing is probably unnecessary, oops
@waxysteak69424 i feel this sort of thing wouldn't make since unless you just opened the chest on the island , the gold dropped into your inventory, and then had to deposit it to the gold hoarders as your bank when you got to the island otherwise you would drop gold when you died. which would rewrite the gold hoarders entirely and im not a fan of it. because in the situation you describe we would have to get the chests bring them to the gold hoarders and then deposit all of our gold into the bank (which is on the same island as the gold hoarders) this would just be an assbackwards and redundant way of just not having a death penalty at all.
save alot of money and time and just dont put in a death penalty....@deadactionjones That's a good point. Can you even get gold outside of using the gold hoarders? I have no idea personally, but I feel like islands should have a little more loose gold laying around. I suppose banking would require removing/changing the gold hoarders to have any sort of meaning
I don't really know. I like the idea of there being some kind of risk and urgency, but also having some type of separate safe fund. I wonder if other people feel the same way. I'm sure there has to be a way to achieve some type of middle ground if that's the case
@waxysteak69424 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones That's a good point. Can you even get gold outside of using the gold hoarders? I have no idea personally, but I feel like islands should have a little more loose gold laying around. I suppose banking would require removing/changing the gold hoarders to have any sort of meaning
I don't really know. I like the idea of there being some kind of risk and urgency, but also having some type of separate safe fund. I wonder if other people feel the same way. I'm sure there has to be a way to achieve some type of middle ground if that's the case
you get paid gold from bturning chests, skulls, or whatever animals the merchants require. but none of them are just laying around. its all random find or mission based.
I would like to know the logic and reasoning behind this decision as well as the costs.
As several people have mentioned, a lot of the fun in the game can result in death - such as firing yourself out of a cannon competition and the who can last the longest on Snake Island before being poisoned to death.
We've been given a playground in which to create our own entertainment, we should not be punished for that.
The biggest issue at the moment is the line between piracy and griefing. I don't want the PvP toning down, but there are situations (such as forts and outpost camping) where the game heavily favours the campers. Solo players are likely to have the most complaints about ganking, but solo play is hard mode.. well, really hard mode :)
terrible idea specially with the lag and sword issues for example doing order of soul quests where u get 5 or six skeletons spawning at once get them all pooled together and lunge only to lag lose your positioning and then you're pretty much instantly dead then the sword problem when you go to do a swinging attack only to be found going into a lunge when you know you don't have time get out of the way from the blunderbusses and bam dead again...that's frustrating enough then to have to pay when that happens total nonsense
@knifelife I am all for the idea of sink tax. Something along the lines of having multiple spawn locations and cost to spawn your new ship there. For example: If you want to spawn extremely close (one island away) to where you sunk, then you pay a large fee. If you want to spawn three islands away it is a smaller fee. If you want to spawn 4 islands away its free. I think this would also help to alleviate the issues of people constantly coming back to Skull Forts seemingly two mins after you sunk them, just to hopefully sink them again. All while not making much progress on the waves of enemies.
Argument Against:
Devs have stated PvP deaths wouldn’t be cause this fee to be assessed but I feel PvP may be this instance where something needs to be done the most about. Though, I disagree that gold loss is the best option.
If you want to encourage players to explore your world, search for treasure, and enjoy everything that you (the devs) got us so excited about regarding this game then penalizing players for doing so is counterproductive to your stated intent. This is exasperated by:
• the fact that your PvE enemies are uncannily accurate (in some skirmishes to a broken level), can clip through your character model to score frustrating hits, mob despite the number of players in group, have unlimited ammo, etc.
• these tougher enemies may require the use of gunpowder to take down the large, tough, and oft cheap tactics of the PvE enemies which is guaranteed to take down players unless they opted for a rifle.
• There’s no way to determine if a gun powder death was the result of carelessness, a weird/hidden spawn, etc. This is complicated by the fact that the game would been to track if the explosion happened during PvE or PvP to hold true to the promise in your announcement.
• you have publicly stated that once merchandise has been turned in that your gold is safe.
• the option to take on “safer” quests is no longer available once you progress in a Trading Company. This means the more you play, the harder your voyages become. Thus, your risk and probability of death increases.On the other hand though, PvP combat can become a protracted series of, from my experience, besting a crew in face to face or ship combat only to have them respawn at a nearby island and return with a fully loaded vessel to take down the ship that won with the advantage of having more resources necessary to make a fair stand in combat. I do feel that crews should be given an opportunity or two, if the battle is competitive, for revenge but perhaps at the penalty of being moved further, and further, from the site of their defeat with each loss. Though, even that plan isn’t really optimal.
My request:
If you insist on doing this, don’t penalize new or lower skilled (possibly younger players) for exploring a big, fun world by taking gold from them for doing what we all love doing aka playing your game. Instead, focus on breaking up the PvP new ship spam-fest which are described above. If you can’t be dissuaded from your announced plan, scale gold lost by the fee to gold “on hand” and implement a bank at the outposts which players can use to conserve the money needed to buy these expensive player and ship upgrades.“PVP combat can become a protracted series of, from my experience, besting a crew in face to face or ship combat only to have them respawn at a nearby island and return with a fully loaded vessel to take down the ship that won with the advantage of having more resources necessary to make a fair stand in combat.”
That said, some of the most exciting bond building moments for a crew and awe-inspiring stories I enjoy telling/hearing from friends IRL and other crews about as well sail from destination to destination are about those white knuckle battles that the current system allows to happen.
@crash4654 said in [Mega Thread] - Death Cost:
@deadactionjones the concept of loss and actual penalty is the subject, not the games themselves. I could also bring up borderlands, dark souls, Mario, monster hunter, 7 days to die, cuphead, I could go on. The point is that there's some sort of penalty in all of them for death, some worse than others. That penalty is your incentive to not die. You don't want bad things to happen to you, so you get better to avoid death and keep your progress.
The pitch of the game was an opportunity to be a fun, light hearted game with an exciting world where you could #BeMorePirate Do you know what games aren’t fun and light hearted? Dark Souls, 7 Days, Cuphead, etc. These were games that require a certain type of player and their grindy nature and/or hardcore difficulty turn off a larger audience.
Have you guys thought about a consumable, for ease sake will call it the Riskit Biscuit, that increases how long it takes for you and the people you kill to respawn? Or maybe the bigger your crew the longer the spawn? Biggest issue I've noticed is how long it can take to sink a the big ship with how quickly they can repair even if you are consistently killing them. Just my two cents, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the matter
@alan7481 I understand the feeling behind this. People want to tailor their gameplay to however they enjoy playing. However it will end up splitting the player base which makes matchmaking less reliable. Since the frequency of player interaction is so central to the game SoT will live or die on it's matchmaking so I don't think it's worth putting that at risk. I'm honestly against a death cost at all. I don't know what problem it's trying to solve in a game that thrives on fun stories and ridiculous shenanigans. Players will be less likely to try dumb (but funny) nonsense if there's a cost.
How about ABSOLUTELY NOT?
There is enough penalty in time spent. Ex: my crew spends an hour working on a long quest chain, we get in a fight and lose AND you want us to pay the ferryman? No, sorry, that is complete BS.
@seenplastictruk yeah that is a good point probably should let the game go on for a while before talking about death cost it might not ever be a problem down the road.
@alan7481 Agreed. This game has a thin rope to walk. There's a lot of people that want a lot of different things from SoT and the core mechanics are SO GOOD. I want them to focus on more ways to interact. Introducing a death cost disincentivizes experimentation.
@shaggiedo I'm just playing devil's advocate. Everyone's quick to judge without even experiencing the topic at hand and without knowing any of the costs. It could literally be like 50 at most. The point is no one knows.
I've played many a fun and light hearted game, far more light hearted than sea of thieves that have harsher penalties for death. Mario, sonic, Kirby, Minecraft, for instance. Hell, go back a long time ago to a game called bubble bobble about two adorable bubble blowing dinosaurs that had penalties for death.
You know what those penalties did for us back then? They taught us how to play better.
In borderlands you lose a percentage of your money, it's real easy to go from wealthy to broke just because you decided to be stupid and do something you probably shouldn't.
In gta, you pay a hospital bill if you do something stupid and die.
The point is is that death in video games has penalties, sometimes it's time, sometimes it's money, sometimes its a life, sometimes it's your experience, and more often than not it's a combination of time and another.
Admittedly skeleton forts are rather rough at the moment. It took 4 shots from the rifle to kill one skeleton. That's a little much in my opinion, especially when they have ridiculous accuracy with every gun they use, including the cannons. But as it stands right now you don't have to employ any strategy for any pve stuff. Just run at it til it dies eventually.
419 out of 631
Available on:
