@wrstplyerusw I'll just hit repeat agian shall I?

..... If you have any issues with and Moderation actions, you can submit a support ticket via Rare Player Support.

@look-behind-you

But not going to do anything about this?

The funniest thing is that we have a Pirate Code, but nobody knows the entire thing, and you don't ever get people like this guy:
[mod removed]

Sea of Thieves has nothing to do with historical piracy. Spiritually, it is more comparable to Grabbed by the Ghoulies than anything historically Piratical.

Sea of Thieves is a cartoon pirate themed extraction sandbox game.

Thank you mod for that quick clean up :)

whatever One Piece makes them think of.

This.

Piracy was actually organized nautical crime

Yup.

If I had to find a root cause as to why people just don't get this game, it's probably because they don't really understand what piracy was. When they think about it, they either think of simple theft (like with pirating music) or whatever One Piece makes them think of.

Piracy was actually organized nautical crime, coupled with being extremely clever and knowing what you're doing, and took a LOT of well-organized work. It took two people to work a helm (sometimes), it took 8 people to man a single cannon, your captain usually had a pirate code that you'd be killed if you didn't follow it, and you had a life expectancy of 2-3 years. You'd have other ships that would sail with yours in an fleet, so there'd be no need to figure out alliances.

The funniest thing is that we have a Pirate Code, but nobody knows the entire thing, and you don't ever get people like this guy:
[mod removed]

I've been in contact with Rare support for a while now. :)

@WrstPlyerUSW If you have any issues with and Moderation actions, you can submit a support ticket via Rare Player Support.

Please avoid engaging in personal arguments and derailing the topic of the thread. It is fine to debate the content of the post, and the viewpoints therein, but disrespecting any of your fellow pirates personally is against the pirate code, and our forum rules.

@wrstplyerusw said in Suggestion:

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
Minecraft lets you wander around aimlessly doing whatever you want until you find out there's a dragon you have to behead, but take your time building a dirt house. THIS is a sandbox game. SoT is like Minecraft.

You can't just redefine things based on your opinion. [Sea of Theives has always been a Sandbox,](Like I said, it's a Sandbox game. Read. )
Sandbox does not mean "you get to build things" (I never said it was) it means unstructured.

Also why are you arguing? What point are you trying to prove? (That you have no idea what you're talking about)

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
This "forced PvP" thing is hilarious to me. No one is obligated to shoot anyone else.

It sounds a it bit more like it's gone over your head entirely since you keep repeating yourself. The reason Vet players complain about "Forced PvP" is not being forced to PvP, (I'm a "Vet Player", that's not something I complain about)

But, like you said, players have a choice not to shoot, right? (Obviously) So the giant beacons and map markers are attempts (No, they're voyages. You're 100% free to ignore them) to get Pirates to behave a certain way... thus... "Forced PvP." Get it? (Yes. You're saying that grouping people together forces them to fight each other, which isn't necessarily true) The problem is that instead of creating content that players will PvP for naturally, instead a lazier more coercive approach is taken. (if you got high, watched "The Matrix" too much and don't understand the concept of choice, agency, and consequences) It is reflected in the number of active players not engaging with this content that this sentiment must be shared among the playerbase.

This is again, relevant to OPs post since all players have reduced engagement overtime because of Forcing. I think Reducing the amount of "forcing" would greatly increase the player engagement as a whole, especially new players. SoT needs new those players as much as it needs to keep its core playerbase happy.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:

Huh? No. Clearly this Fella is looking to be in Seas around his level (double Pirate Legend? ). He isn't asking for Safer Seas, he's asking for High Seas with other pirates that aren't gonna double gun with perfect animation timing or out boat fight him.

I don't know where the idea that "Safer Seas teaches you the game" comes from (people learn by doing) but it really needs to end here. It won't teach you to PvP, that's only going to come from playing against other players around your skill level (and I'm supposed to find them...how? ). Conversely, getting stomped only teaches you what being bullied feels like (or joining a forum).

What offerings then does by that logic Safer really have other than being a place for first timers to get the wrong impression of the game? (The description isn't hiding, nor are the differences, so unless you're one of those people who popped up the red/white skull "because I thought it looked cool" and didn't read the description about making you visible to everyone like a noob, then I honestly don't know what to say. It doesn't hide what it is)

It doesn't teach players about Emissaries, it doesn't allow them to use their Captained ships so no incentive to buy from the store for first time players, it doesn't allow you to sell to Sovereigns so first timers think selling is tedious, (there's a section for Emissaries, Captaincy, and Sovs in the game's guide. Seriously, read) and again you dont learn to PvP. (not everyone wants to, dude)

So, let's put away the "learn about the game" aspect there.

This isn't about my thread, that I can tell you did not read (thankfully), and despite it's relevance here. Let me say this.

By fully featuring a single player mode, while offering bonuses for playing on populated servers, you incentivize players to return to the game. "Oh man we got blown up, dang, well okay, guess we can go do Safer Treasuries instead" sounds so much better than giving up for the night for a new player (a skeleton sloop can still jump you while you're down there. I know, because I've surfaced to find a pile of barrels). Likewise, you are bound to have those players return to Fullplay if you incentivize finding servers with more players. (It's called a "server merge"; quit complaining)

Brings us back to OP. Its much more preferable to pack servers with new players (that sounds like a noob-hunter talking) and give them a bonus (there is. They're called Emissaries) for being on a more populous server than it is to encourage playing on Safer Seas. Safer Should be a fallback. (for what? Sometimes, I just want to float out and check out a new feature by myself without a server full of blood-thirsty sweats blasting my boat to matchsticks)

If we're throwing our cards on the table, it just sounds like you hate the idea of Safer Seas, and want to hunt noobs. Why? "Its much more preferable to pack servers with new players ". They get a bonus in the form of Emissaries, Captaincy, Guilds, and a multitude of features to come over to High Seas, so there's incentive both ways.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
Let's look at 3 games: Contra (god, I'm old), LoZ: Majora's Mask, and Minecraft. Contra has you run from Point A to Point B, shoot something until it dies, then repeat in the next mission. This is NOT a sandbox game. Minecraft lets you wander around aimlessly doing whatever you want until you find out there's a dragon you have to behead, but take your time building a dirt house. THIS is a sandbox game. Majora's Mask lets you run around doing errands for people until the moon crushes the Earth. Or not, it's up to you and your musical instrument. This is in between. SoT is like Minecraft; there is no plot. There's lore, but not a plot like Contra or LoZ: MM that you need to follow.

You can't just redefine things based on your opinion. Sea of Theives has always been a Sandbox, and continues to be one.
Sandbox does not mean "you get to build things" it means unstructured. Runescape is a Sandbox. Eve Online is a Sandbox.

Also why are you arguing? What point are you trying to prove?

Can we get back on OPs topic, please?

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
This "forced PvP" thing is hilarious to me. No one is obligated to shoot anyone else.

It sounds a it bit more like it's gone over your head entirely since you keep repeating yourself. The reason Vet players complain about "Forced PvP" is not being forced to PvP, it's complaints about game design that the playerbase wants nothing to do with. A good example is, map markers and giant tornados that say:

'I'm right here come get me!'

But, like you said, players have a choice not to shoot, right? So the giant beacons and map markers are attempts to get Pirates to behave a certain way... thus... "Forced PvP." (Even though, when the content is more than 3+ months old, people stop messing with you) Get it? The problem is that instead of creating content that players will PvP for naturally, instead a lazier more coercive approach is taken. It is reflected in the number of active players not engaging with this content that this sentiment must be shared among the playerbase.

This is again, relevant to OPs post since all players have reduced engagement overtime because of Forcing. I think Reducing the amount of "forcing" would greatly increase the player engagement as a whole, especially new players. SoT needs new those players as much as it needs to keep its core playerbase happy.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
Currently, the "big buff" between High Seas is two-fold: Safer Seas lacks both Captaincy and (logically) Emissaries. Why? Think about it: if it doesn't have Emissaries, and Guilds are an Emissary, and Sovereigns run the stand for both Captaincy AND Guilds...why would it have Captaincy? That's like if it had Reaper chests, but you couldn't turn them in at Reaper's or anywhere else. Look, you do Maiden Voyage to learn the basics, then Safer Seas to learn the game. Then you set out into High Seas to see if you're any good. So in a way, they already made what this guy is looking for by making Safer Seas as a counterpart to High Seas and Monkey Island. As for the idea about playtime, you can just dodge that, too by having a different account. They already have a system that lets you start from square one with another pirate. Your skill level is the same, though.

Huh? No. Clearly this Fella is looking to be in Seas around his level. He isn't asking for Safer Seas, he's asking for High Seas with other pirates that aren't gonna double gun with perfect animation timing or out boat fight him.

I know where the idea that "Safer Seas teaches you the game" comes from but it really needs to end here. It wont teach you to PvP, that's only going to come from playing against other players around your skill level. Conversely, getting stomped only teaches you what being bullied feels like.

What offerings then does by that logic Safer really have other than being a place for first timers to get the wrong impression of the game?

It doesn't teach players about Emissaries, it doesn't allow them to use their Captained ships so no incentive to buy from the store for first time players, it doesn't allow you to sell to Sovereigns so first timers think selling is tedious, and again you dont learn to PvP.

So, let's put away the "learn about the game" aspect there.

This isn't about my thread, that I can tell you did not read, and despite it's relevance here. Let me say this.

By full featuring a single play mode, while offering bonuses for playing on populated servers, you incentivize players to return to the game. "Oh man we got blown up, dang, well okay, guess we can go do Safer Treasuries instead" sounds so much better than giving up for the night for a new player. Likewise, you are bound to have those players return to Fullplay if you incentivize finding servers with more players.

Brings us back to OP. Its much more preferable to pack servers with new players and give them a bonus for being on a more populous server than it is to encourage playing on Safer Seas. Safer Should be a fallback.

@wrstplyerusw said in Suggestion:

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
I'd like to try my hand at fielding this, though.

I'll stick to the parts relevant to this post.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
2. PvP is a choice, and isn't forced. Neither side is obligated to fight the other, regardless of distance.

Correct you seem to grasp some aspect of the issue. This is why many veteran players complain about "forced PvP" because Sea of Thieves is a sandbox game. Many voyages and events by their design set up scenarios that favor a specific gameplay style, which is decidedly not "sandbox." That's why matching players around the same level of playtime might be worth something as OP suggests. By having players who are around the same level of experience you are giving them the chance to experiment and give way to emergent moments, and with some luck they make friends push for greater goals, and ideally; keep playing. When you stick these swabbies with veterans who just crush them, there is as good chance many will simply quit. Again, this another aspect of "Forced PvP"

Let's look at 3 games: Contra (god, I'm old), LoZ: Majora's Mask, and Minecraft. Contra has you run from Point A to Point B, shoot something until it dies, then repeat in the next mission. This is NOT a sandbox game. Minecraft lets you wander around aimlessly doing whatever you want until you find out there's a dragon you have to behead, but take your time building a dirt house. THIS is a sandbox game. Majora's Mask lets you run around doing errands for people until the moon crushes the Earth. Or not, it's up to you and your musical instrument. This is in between. SoT is like Minecraft; there is no plot. There's lore, but not a plot like Contra or LoZ: MM that you need to follow.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
3. Not everything can be on Safer Seas because not everyone is ready for High Seas, among other reasons.
4. Safer Seas is more like a PvE combat simulator without other players (honestly, IMO, it's not much easier).

Look, I touched on this entirely (it was locked, but also very relevant here) in another thread. Safer Seas isn't any "Safer" at all. What I suggested as a big buff to High Seas and bringing Captaincy to Safer. I feel like punishing Safer isn't the way to go, instead, incentivizing High Seas is better for getting players to sail.

Think, the historical approach has always been to AVOID populated servers, what if the opposite was true because the bonuses were worth the risk the more populated a server?

This "forced PvP" thing is hilarious to me. No one is obligated to shoot anyone else. Currently, the "big buff" between High Seas is two-fold: Safer Seas lacks both Captaincy and (logically) Emissaries. Why? Think about it: if it doesn't have Emissaries, and Guilds are an Emissary, and Sovereigns run the stand for both Captaincy AND Guilds...why would it have Captaincy? That's like if it had Reaper chests, but you couldn't turn them in at Reaper's or anywhere else. Look, you do Maiden Voyage to learn the basics, then Safer Seas to learn the game. Then you set out into High Seas to see if you're any good. So in a way, they already made what this guy is looking for by making Safer Seas as a counterpart to High Seas and Monkey Island. As for the idea about playtime, you can just dodge that, too by having a different account. They already have a system that lets you start from square one with another pirate. Your skill level is the same, though.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
I'd like to try my hand at fielding this, though.

I'll stick to the parts relevant to this post.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
2. PvP is a choice, and isn't forced. Neither side is obligated to fight the other, regardless of distance.

Correct you seem to grasp some aspect of the issue. This is why many veteran players complain about "forced PvP" because Sea of Thieves is a sandbox game. Many voyages and events by their design set up scenarios that favor a specific gameplay style, which is decidedly not "sandbox." That's why matching players around the same level of playtime might be worth something as OP suggests. By having players who are around the same level of experience you are giving them the chance to experiment and give way to emergent moments, and with some luck they make friends push for greater goals, and ideally; keep playing. When you stick these swabbies with veterans who just crush them, there is as good chance many will simply quit. Again, this another aspect of "Forced PvP"

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
3. Not everything can be on Safer Seas because not everyone is ready for High Seas, among other reasons.
4. Safer Seas is more like a PvE combat simulator without other players (honestly, IMO, it's not much easier).

Look, I touched on this entirely (it was locked, but also very relevant here) in another thread. Safer Seas isn't any "Safer" at all. What I suggested as a big buff to High Seas and bringing Captaincy to Safer. I feel like punishing Safer isn't the way to go, instead, incentivizing High Seas is better for getting players to sail.

Think, the historical approach has always been to AVOID populated servers, what if the opposite was true because the bonuses were worth the risk the more populated a server?

I'd like to try my hand at fielding this, though.

@wrstplyerusw said in Suggestion:

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
Okay, I used to be an Xbox club Admin and Admin on other Forums, humor me. Name 3 things that I can't write about here.

Three topics that seem to get Autoclosed: Serverside Cheat Detection, PvP "Forcing" (eg the server puts two different crews Voyages close together, High Seas Only FOMO Adventures), and Safer Seas expansions.

Edit: A lot of this sounds like the gripes of a PvEr, its not, I am a hypersweat so I have no motivation to keep things easy for others. Rather, I recognize how this game bleeds players if you force them into adventure with the likes of me.

1 . Cheat Detection is NOT something players are obligated to do.
2. PvP is a choice, and isn't forced. Neither side is obligated to fight the other, regardless of distance.
3. Not everything can be on Safer Seas because not everyone is ready for High Seas, among other reasons.
4. Safer Seas is more like a PvE combat simulator without other players (honestly, IMO, it's not much easier).

If I was running a Forum and these kept coming up, yeah, I'd probably file them under "Well, Duh" and delete them after sending you a VERY generous, polite message explaining what happened to your topic. As for the OP, it kinda reminds me of prison: put the "bad people" in one section and the others in a less harsh section. The problem is if they find a work-around to this, like waiting out a cool-down period, then hopping into the easier section.
It kinda reminds me of Fallout 4; if you go further SW, the game gets notably difficult. I can think of areas like that in SoT, like Reaper's, J10, and the Devil's Roar, but....not in terms of players.

Getting back to to the relevant topic, this one has come up plenty of times before, as others have said. It wouldn't work out the way OP is asking. With regard to distribution, players on the far ends would be on empty servers, players on the middle would have to deal with warzones.

What I think would help is sending players who have repeatedly sank to a different sea, rather than developing an entirely new matchmaking system.
-or-
Slow onboarding using qualitative metrics that the team has been gathering from the beginning. They know the farming patterns of an experienced player vs a Swabbie. You could use these metrics to ensure that there are less players on these servers and less chance of an encounter. It ensures that a player is brought up at their own pace, especially after a lapse in play or something to that effect.

That's fair. The original post, because we all probably forgot.

@dtrouble1979 said in Suggestion:

My suggestion would be, put the players that have high pvp experience levels in a different server than those with low. It has turned into a daily thing now that when I get online when people see an inexperienced player those experienced players will hunt them down to sink them and that is fine. But then there are a bunch of those that once they figure out they can sink a person easily they continue to hunt them down over and over until you leave the server or just give up for the day. Make the experienced players fight each other (for a change) if they want to fight so bad at least then they will have a challenge.

Back on Topic or we are done.

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:
Okay, I used to be an Xbox club Admin and Admin on other Forums, humor me. Name 3 things that I can't write about here.

Three topics that seem to get Autoclosed: Serverside Cheat Detection, PvP "Forcing" (eg the server puts two different crews Voyages close together, High Seas Only FOMO Adventures), and Safer Seas expansions.

Edit: A lot of this sounds like the gripes of a PvEr, its not, I am a hypersweat so I have no motivation to keep things easy for others. Rather, I recognize how this game bleeds players if you force them into adventure with the likes of me.

@wrstplyerusw said in Suggestion:

@unseemlytag said in Suggestion:

@look-behind-you said in Suggestion:
You know, the first time I saw these forums, I noticed that there were only 2 factions: the people who'd been playing forever and wanted things to be harder because they're bored, and new people who simply couldn't catch a break and were begging for things to be easier. What I see is the former telling the latter to be quiet and deal with it, but if they actually just helped them instead, they'd get the higher difficulty they want, because then everyone would be good at the game.

It seems less like they want to keep it hard, more like they want easy prey out there. What they want is the old days when they understood the game better than others. Call me conspiratorial, but I feel like there is a reason certain topics, despite being perfectly within the rules of the forum and formatted for Developers is suppressed.

Okay, I used to be an Xbox club Admin and Admin on other Forums, humor me. Name 3 things that I can't write about here.

Come on now...I have asked nicely (and provided a link if you wish to report any Mod Actions you feel are unjust. Keep the topic on Topic please and thanks.