[Mega Thread] Alliances

@pharaohcreator Insert sea of thieves not sea of friends post

The distribution among ships needs a nerf hard. 100% to the main ship and 50% to all alliance? treasure has multiplied by a huge amount of worth. Needs to be an even split among all ships in the alliance. That will keep alliances in check and stop them from becoming server wide.

Change the color on alliance member's names. Sure i get it, we can still hurt them, but when you have an alliance of several ships and a non alliance ship comes in, i have no idea if the guy with the white name on my ship is in my alliance or not.

I love the back and forth on the alliances. You can see what type of player a person is based on their love or hate for the system. The players that strictly believe this is a pvp game seem apposed to it, and those that believe this is a pve or even a pve with the risk of pvp game are for it.

I for one am for the the alliances. I have played a ton this past week, which is fairly normal for me, and I have had good and bad experiences with the alliances feature. For me, the best results ended in new friendships of like minded people.

I find it very funny that the pvp peeps insist that the devs meant for this game to be a pvp game. As if to suggest it had no other purpose. But yet this game is packed with tons of pve content. So it is not strictly a pvp game. Conversely the pve peeps believe they should have the option to avoid pvp, in a pirate game.

I see arguments from people that pirates attack everyone, this simply is not true. Some were ruthless, but most lived by a pirate code that included not attacking each other. Stealing from each other was ok, but attacking wasn't. In fact most pirates rarely sunk any ships because it was bad for business. They would simply raid the ships of loot and let the ship and crew go, so they could get more loot from them the next time they sailed.

I think both sides of the pvp vs pve need to recognize this game is a mixed bag of both. Alliances are great for some people, and not for others. But it is a mechanic of the game I personally believe enhances the experience and fun factor of the game. PvP peeps need to recognize this is not solely a pvp game. It has pve content and there are people that want to do that content. And pve people need to recognize that there are pvp people out there that want a fight.

As was suggested earlier and often in many threads, I think the devs need to make an option to either invite a ship/crew to your server, or during the start up screen have that as an added option. Maybe limit it to only one ship to try and not make the server too unbalanced, but make it so you can play with your friends, especially during these special pve events.

We all chose to play this game, good and bad. And yes there are going to be people that do things that only enhance their own game play by making others miserable. People are what they are, simply move on, leave the server and let them do their thing. I for one will not let the few people that try to ruin the game for everyone else get under my skin.

I would suggest to pvp people, if you are on a server where others simply don't want to engage in pvp, why not server hop to find others more interested. It seems the only ones server hopping are the ones trying to avoid the pvp. Wouldn't finding others that want to put up a fight be more fun than simply overtaking a crew that just wants to stay away from you?

In general, I have to say that I love the Alliance system. I like the friendly fire aspect, and appreciate the name's remaining white, to force you to legitimately learn WHO you're sailing with, to avoid....cough...accidents.

Being able to legitimately work together, while not removing the potential for danger or betrayal is excellent, and perfect with the Cursed Sails events. I have now accomplished my goal of end running across 5 ship decks, without touching the water.

As for needed improvements:
Server Fleets: This content really highlights the need for pre-server fleet building. Over at the Fleet of Thieves, we've managed to build multi-ship fleets (by manually buying out slots) and keep them sailing over days at a time, by rotating people in and out. But when we're trying to get one started, or there is a server crash/issue, it is insanely frustrating to have 10+ plus people all ready to go, and no way to deliberately join together on the same server.

Fleet/Alliance controls: This one is mainly just a polish/control issue. It would be great to have more granular control over our fleets. For example, kicking a ship that we didn't want to join. (Making it more evident when the "Join Alliance" flag is up, would help as well)

Some simpler way to "divvy up the loot" would be cool as well, thus far my fleets have simply done this manually. Heck, I'd rather the loot simply be even across the board regardless of turn in. Possibly a slight reduction in payout to reflect this, and potentially encourage shenanigans.

@upinyohole said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

its a little ridiculous you expect us to complete our update with people who are completely unaware.

I would legitimately recommend seeking out like minded sailors on the Sea of Thieves Discord, or join one of the Player run Pirate Unions. This way, you're not entirely going in alone.

On the other hand, if you know what to do, and the crew doesn't, then don your Captain's Hat and start teaching the lubbers! (Nicely o' course, nobody likes a sanctimonious Captain.)

Personally, I love the alliance system, to a point. That point is where it comes to cashing in and betrayals.

I think a solution would be that if a ship leaves an alliance whilst carrying loot earned while in an alliance, the loot they are carrying should decrease in value by 50% as a penalty for betrayal.

I like the idea of "all loot collected during an alliance should count for any ships in said alliance", in spite of breaking from the alliance also. The benefit of this is that if you break an alliance, you still receive loot from those ships still in the alliance PRE your leaving. And those still in the alliance will benefit from the loot they helped to secure. However, I think this mechanic is a bit too convoluted and not the right move.

With the 50% decrease of the loot on the betraying vessel, there is more motivation to stay in the alliance. You aren't LOSING anything by being in an alliance, and only gaining, so the point of a betrayal is really lost on me.

Why not just stay in an alliance, earn 100% of the loot and rep you cash in, and earn 50% of everyone else's in the alliance? Its a win / win scenario, and leaving only showcases your ability to be a jerk.

• For special events like Cursed Sails, where there is a very large threat like skeleton ships, leave the Alliance crew limit uncapped.
• For normal play, limit Alliances to a 2-3 ship maximum. There’s no reason to be in a six ship Alliance during normal play, there are no big enough threats in the world to justify it, and it accelerates reward gain to a crazy degree. I believe 2 ships is the most elegant and eliminates the most potential problems, but 3 ships is the minimum so you can feel like you have a fleet.
• Improve the Alliance flag tooltip. Let players know they get 100% of the reward for their own turn-ins, and communicate the possibility of betrayal. This will (hopefully) result in less crews breaking alliances, and keep players on guard. "When in an Alliance, you get full rewards for your own turn-ins, and half rewards for Ally turn-ins. Alliance members are not official crew members, and can still betray you!"
• Remove the spawn changes for Alliance ships. The current spawning encourages players to break alliances after a betrayal so the betrayed crew won’t spawn close. It also makes alliances too powerful in PvP fights because they’ll have constant reinforcements.
• Add the ability to place a green circle on the map (maybe with the X button) that other Alliance crews can see so players can signal for help. You can only place 1. Or maybe the ability to click on your boat on the map, and it lights up, indicating you need help instead.

@potentanarchist An alliance system in a game based around the concept of theft needs an incentive to break the alliance. By reducing the value of loot, you are disincentivizing the breaking of an alliance. Alliances shouldn't be iron-clad and betrayal should be dealt with by players and not by the game.

Currently, there is no reason to break an alliance unless you intend to attack other ships in your alliance to get their loot. That's as it should be. There's no benefit - and, indeed, there's a detriment - in leaving an alliance if you aren't going after another ship's loot. That should be enough. Anyone who is simply leaving an alliance because they have loot is cutting off their nose to spite their face - and would you really want to be in an alliance with such fools?

@bran-the-ent said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@potentanarchist An alliance system in a game based around the concept of theft needs an incentive to break the alliance. By reducing the value of loot, you are disincentivizing the breaking of an alliance. Alliances shouldn't be iron-clad and betrayal should be dealt with by players and not by the game.

Currently, there is no reason to break an alliance unless you intend to attack other ships in your alliance to get their loot. That's as it should be. There's no benefit - and, indeed, there's a detriment - in leaving an alliance if you aren't going after another ship's loot. That should be enough. Anyone who is simply leaving an alliance because they have loot is cutting off their nose to spite their face - and would you really want to be in an alliance with such fools?

SHOULD be. But it's not. A majority of betrayals are simply happening where they are arriving at outposts and breaking the alliance. Which is pointless as anything more than simply being a jerk to others in your alliance. You aren't gaining any value in your loot by doing so.

@potentanarchist They will learn eventually... or not. And, such peaceful betrayals - while annoying, mean little. Worry about betrayal when your alliance pulls up next to you and sinks you.

@gonnableedya said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

• Improve the Alliance flag tooltip. Let players know they get 100% of the reward for their own turn-ins. This will (hopefully) result in less crews breaking alliances. "When in an Alliance, you get full rewards for your own turn-ins, and half rewards for Ally turn-ins."

THIS.

Could there be a distance beyond which your alliance crew no longer shows up on your map? It's a bit odd to be able to keep tabs on your alliance even if you can't see them.

I understand how it can help in battle, but it would help the intrigue and uneasiness of alliances if, after they got a certain distance away, you couldn't see them on the map. My suggestion for a distance would be 1 square shy of being out of eyesight. But, definitely, if you can't see them in the distance, you shouldn't be able to see them on the map.

Add the ability to place a green circle on the map (maybe with the X button) that other Alliance crews can see so players can signal for help. You can only place 1. Or maybe the ability to click on your boat on the map, and it lights up, indicating you need help instead.

I don't like this idea. If you can hear cannon fire, you can currently check the map and see where your alliance ships are to know if they are in trouble. Beyond that, an alliance member should be on their own.

@bran-the-ent

@bran-the-ent said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@potentanarchist An alliance system in a game based around the concept of theft needs an incentive to break the alliance. By reducing the value of loot, you are disincentivizing the breaking of an alliance. Alliances shouldn't be iron-clad and betrayal should be dealt with by players and not by the game.

Currently, there is no reason to break an alliance unless you intend to attack other ships in your alliance to get their loot. That's as it should be. There's no benefit - and, indeed, there's a detriment - in leaving an alliance if you aren't going after another ship's loot. That should be enough. Anyone who is simply leaving an alliance because they have loot is cutting off their nose to spite their face - and would you really want to be in an alliance with such fools?

My thought is that (perhaps after the event) is to limit the alliance size to say 2-4 ships and make all treasure turned in an even split. it rewards players who wish for teamwork and still offers a benefit to betray and has that risk which is part of what people love about this game. the even split will lower the number of ships people have in alliances so they can gain maximum profits. this will also stop the alliance wide servers that are boosting peoples levels.

@dazed898 This eliminates the incentive to join an alliance. You could end up with less reward than if you weren't in an alliance - particularly if you have a large voyage while another crew has a one-and-done. The way the profit share is set up now provides an incentive to keep an alliance while also leaving open a door to betrayal. If it becomes one giant loot farm, I'm hoping the devs will step in and make a good tweak - maybe a middle ground between 100% for those turning in and what you're suggesting. But, there should always be more for the crew turning in - otherwise the incentive to join is lost.

"Spawn Distance - If a crew in the alliance is sunk, they will have their ship spawn in closer proximity to the rest of the alliance."

Okay this wasn't the case last night. We finally had an alliance together to try and get the Wilds ships done with a brig and sloop. It was going okay until our brig was stuck between the two skeleton ships, all three crew members were dancing while there were about 7 new holes in our ship from being rolled on. We sank, but somehow the sloop was holding on. We expected to spawn close to Marauder's arch, maybe a few islands away as had happened before. Nope. Because there was a newly spawned player galleon at either Daggertooth or Galleon's outpost, our brig was respawned at PLUNDER VALLEY. We literally had 15 minutes left from the 1st and by the time we got the brig back to the fight, we had just minutes to fight the captain wave and the water was at the 2nd deck and then all the ships despawned. Needless to say we were p****d off. This wasn't my first attempt to do the wilds. I tried with one brig, this alliance crew, and it didn't work out.

It's bad enough the Wilds ship schedule is from 4:00 (am or pm) to 8:00 (am or pm) EST. I'm in the EST time zone, I have to rush home to try to get this done and people living on the west coast barely had a chance to do this on a weekday.

You guys should add "looking for an alliance" feature on the actual servers that can be accessed via a poster board at the outposts, and those listings can be seen at all outposts. These would be for people looking to form alliances strictly for these type of events and not for regular things like doing voyages and skull forts. The parties can meet up at a particular location around the region they need to be in and take it from there as far as doing party chat, etc.

I hate the Wilds.

@dazed898 said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@bran-the-ent

@bran-the-ent said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@potentanarchist An alliance system in a game based around the concept of theft needs an incentive to break the alliance. By reducing the value of loot, you are disincentivizing the breaking of an alliance. Alliances shouldn't be iron-clad and betrayal should be dealt with by players and not by the game.

Currently, there is no reason to break an alliance unless you intend to attack other ships in your alliance to get their loot. That's as it should be. There's no benefit - and, indeed, there's a detriment - in leaving an alliance if you aren't going after another ship's loot. That should be enough. Anyone who is simply leaving an alliance because they have loot is cutting off their nose to spite their face - and would you really want to be in an alliance with such fools?

My thought is that (perhaps after the event) is to limit the alliance size to say 2-4 ships and make all treasure turned in an even split. it rewards players who wish for teamwork and still offers a benefit to betray and has that risk which is part of what people love about this game. the even split will lower the number of ships people have in alliances so they can gain maximum profits. this will also stop the alliance wide servers that are boosting peoples levels.

Where's the benefit to betray?

@potentanarchist the benefit would be to gain the 100% turn gold and rep.

@dazed898 said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@potentanarchist the benefit would be to gain the 100% turn gold and rep.

they gain that anyways if they turn it in...... Im talking about people who just leave alliances without actually attacking to try and steal the OTHER loot. Anything YOU turn in, you get 100%. Anything the other teams turn in you get 50%.

For people worried about, and upset with, allies breaking their alliance when they arrive at an outpost:

One thing you are missing is it is your fault if you allow an alliance ship to travel, with treasure you feel entitled to, to an outpost without your presence.
Don't leave your treasure in the hands of other pirates!

This isn't a guarantee... it's a temporary alliance between pirates. Treat all loot that you have earned as loot that you have earned.

Would any of you have allowed another pirate vessel to sail off with YOUR loot before alliances came about?

Here's a hint... be very wary of doing so now. You need to protect your investments.

@sten-whik said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

After several pointless mutinies by ships with loot on I'd suggest that there be a slight bonus, say +10%, to those handing in the loot so that they might reconsider. Or better yet some sort of negotiation system where the ships in the alliance can vote on how the reward percentage gets handed out (so for example the ships get a pool of 150% and vote to split it 75%/75% between those that hand it in and the rest of the other members of the alliance) that way they could have a better measure of the value of the alliance and have actual reason to mutiny.

Um. There is a benefit. A 50% benefit.

@sten-whik said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

@potentanarchist

I'm talking about any ship handing in the loot. Currently they get 100% so with this alone on paper there isn't a reason for a ship with loot on to mutiny but equally there also isn't a reason for them not to mutiny. Because of this I keep seeing ship crews missing that there is a long term benefit to sticking in the alliance (the 50% gained from other ships) or don't care because they are about to go offline before they can benefit and breaking off the alliance for their own enjoyment.

I had this debate last night with the alliance crew I was in. One guy was like "I don't want them benefitting from our gold, lets break the alliance" and I was like "Dude, they are running a skull fort, about to turn in upwards of 12K+ in gold, why the hell would we NOT want half of that for FREE?' I don't understand the logic of A LOT of players.

@ratfanz said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

Please change the colour of peoples names on alliance ships, if you end up fighting enemies it gets very confusing!

Meh..... I mean, I agree with you. But maybe changing the color of your name to match the alliance flag color?

We need a My Alliance tab under My Crew tab so we can message or invite alliance members to party chat. Gamer tags don’t pop under recently met players. So this would help when your not close to each other and can’t remember their gt.

@xxzalfenxx-0341 said in [Mega Thread] Alliances:

We need a My Alliance tab under My Crew tab so we can message or invite alliance members to party chat. Gamer tags don’t pop under recently met players. So this would help when your not close to each other and can’t remember their gt.

THIS. Also, Make the gamertags of your teammates and alliance mates visible when emoting. I ran up on one of my teammates last night sitting amongst our 50 GP barrels in the crows nest and was all "Uh Guys, I think theres an enemy in our crows nest" I couldn't sword him or shoot him, as he was sitting in the barrels.....I think hiding enemy names when they are sitting, or when you are sitting on an enemy ship is fine, but for your crew or alliance mates, keep them visible.