I agree, as someone who's mostly played solo I'm not a fan of PvP. Only today, I was part of a 3 man Galleon and took on a skull fort, when a 2 man sloop said they were friendly and then blew up our ship. We managed to get a few cannon shots off before we going down and actually sank their ship too. We got the reward for the fort in the end, and it was a very thrilling adventure so I understand the need for PvP, but when you spend all that time and go through all that trouble, and to have all your work go to waste so easily is actually heartbreaking... giving players some kind of reward, like reputation, for the work they do is a great idea, and the money itself would be the reward for holding onto it until the end.
Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.
@lotrmith We know you disagree mate, and we all respect that. But I think there comes a point where you have to agree to disagree. You are not going to change any of our minds any more than we are going to changes yours. It is important that you voice your opinion, and you have.
But you don't need to worry - Rare will not implement this if they think it will ruin the vision they have for the game, perhaps they will release a video saying 'look this is the game we want and this is how we like it' (similar to how they made a video for solo players), perhaps they will implement some other system which simultaneously solves this, they did say they wanted to introduce new ways to get reputation.. or progress, can't remember how they phrased it.. perhaps they will implement this idea with some adjustments.. I have no clue. But I do agree with you, the discussions between yourself and those who agree with the idea are probably going to end up going circular again and I don't want a repeat of what happened with the previous thread, so lets just say that you have one view on the subject matter and everyone else has their view. :)
@raphaeloh01 The thing is, my idea would apply to voyages. Forts are a different thing altogether. Voyages apply to that individual crew whereas forts are open to everyone. By their very nature they are a hot area for PvP and include a lot of risk, but the rewards are supposedly worth it.. (can't comment I've not done many forts myself).
But yea, like you said, 'heartbreaking', it's very demoralising! And it feels like quite a few players have been feeling the same way. That's what this thread is about, I don't mind that I lose a ton of stuff, but please give us SOMETHING.. I don't mind games which are harsh (dark souls, or games where you have a set number of lives and then you're dead for good and have to start over), but in my eyes SoT has opened its doors to a much wider demographic, not just players who are used to playing games with a significant amount of loss.
Thus, going forward I think it would be a healthier and more encouraging system with something similar to this in place... loss is a part of the game but no player wants to feel like all of that time they spent thinking about the riddle, walking around the island, working it out, digging up the treasure, killing the skeletons... has suddenly been for nothing? And it's not even just the fact it's lost, it's the fact that you know another player is now handing in loot gained by YOUR hard work.. now I don't mind players taking my loot if they've done a great job ambushing me or besting me in PvP, but what about the stuff which I did?? By the very definition of this game that loot wouldn't even exist if I hadn't spent the time starting the voyage and undertaking the tasks required to earn it... The loot can STILL be the most valuable part of the game, but at least you also receive some reward for other tasks you successfully completed.
@greaseman85 To be fair, attack on sight happens because they don't know what you have on board. so, one of two things are going on here. either they are rolling the dice and hoping there is something there, or they are just a murder crew that gets the "LOLz" out of attacking. either way is a c****y situation. Which is exactly why I fall back on having the reputation awarded on the Voyage Complete screen. The argument you will hear is the PvP "oriented" players feel it would be taking away from their rewards. In a sense I suppose it is. But honestly, I don't care. 100% of what I am carrying, plus the time I invested....No, thats not cool at all, not fun, and not entertaining. Its not griefing either, because the game is made that way. But it can sure feel like it sometimes, the developers can adjust it. I have faith they will.
@greaseman85 and @AngryCoconut16
Yes- I think the two ideas share a vein, hence me bringing it up (wasn't trying to cut your sails Coconut.)
Certain voyages it would make sense to reward rep w/o a turn in (skull voyages, after all you just defeated a mini boss, should be worth some klout)
I don't think chests should count before turn in though, if you lose the chest (my ship sinking in a storm analogy) you never got the goods back to the guild, the treasure is still 'lost'.
Soooo because of this- your idea is sound. If I get sunk running a merchant mission (easiest example) then the attackers should take a rep hit (minor).
Only other way I see it making sense is if we could steal the voyage from eachother but that is a can of worms I'll leave alone. (However many a pirate tale in literature works exactly like this, even Goonies).
Again, I agree in a fashion.
@angrycoconut16 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith We know you disagree mate, and we all respect that. But I think there comes a point where you have to agree to disagree. You are not going to change any of our minds any more than we are going to changes yours. It is important that you voice your opinion, and you have.
But you don't need to worry - Rare will not implement this if they think it will ruin the vision they have for the game, perhaps they will release a video saying 'look this is the game we want and this is how we like it' (similar to how they made a video for solo players), perhaps they will implement some other system which simultaneously solves this, they did say they wanted to introduce new ways to get reputation.. or progress, can't remember how they phrased it.. perhaps they will implement this idea with some adjustments.. I have no clue. But I do agree with you, the discussions between yourself and those who agree with the idea are probably going to end up going circular again and I don't want a repeat of what happened with the previous thread, so lets just say that you have one view on the subject matter and everyone else has their view. :)
Your safest bet is to offer up sound logic and discourse, and accept that both sides are free to continue to do so.
@greaseman85 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
I would say gain experience upon finding loot and/or completing voyages, but only get gold upon turning the loot in.
Skull forts should probably remain strictly PvP, as in it doesn't matter if someone did all the work, if another player takes the loot from you, tough luck. They get all the XP and gold.
However regular voyages, message in a bottle, shipwreck, etc. should give XP since you were exploring
@greaseman85 This is the best solution they could implement and would be best for all. There really isn't a downside to it.
@skyewauker said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@greaseman85 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
I would say gain experience upon finding loot and/or completing voyages, but only get gold upon turning the loot in.
Skull forts should probably remain strictly PvP, as in it doesn't matter if someone did all the work, if another player takes the loot from you, tough luck. They get all the XP and gold.
However regular voyages, message in a bottle, shipwreck, etc. should give XP since you were exploring
@greaseman85 This is the best solution they could implement and would be best for all. There really isn't a downside to it.
I fully second this...or third it. Simple, to the point, and makes sense. Keep the OP upvoted, best way to get it seen. Keep the conversation alive, don't fall for the trolling!
I am all for some reputation upon voyage completion, but nothing as high as 50% of the reputation. I think turning in the treasure needs to maintain a high level of value, otherwise what's the point? It could just be quicker to complete voyages than take the time and risk of turning in loot. Sure, it may appear to be quicker to turn it in as well, but if you factor in the various ways it can cause delays, on top of walking a ton of loot up to the turn ins an item at a time, it could feasibly be actually quicker to just complete voyages for 50% rep gain, throw down new ones and just ignore treasure. After all, why would your reputation go up if you dug up and lost treasure that the factions want? Wouldn't they in fact deem that as a negative, in terms of lore/logic?
I think something like 10-20% of the reputation rewards makes more sense. This still provides SOMETHING to people who get robbed, maintains incentive for turning in loot and adds up a nice but not overwhelming advantage to completing a voyage.
@greaseman85 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@savagetwinky said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@angrycoconut16 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@savagetwinky He wasn't referring to people purely because they disagree, he was referring to the people in the last thread who were arguing and caused the thread to be closed, of which I was one. Mentioning potential toxicity is clearly important because of what happened in the last thread. I'm going to learn from my mistakes because I do not want my thread closed again.... :) Don't take it so personally man. I want to keep this open so please don't be so confrontational as that can also start arguments.
I don't care what he meant. I pointed out what was said in this thread.
And what makes you think I took it personally. I thought it was a poorly thought out comment and pointed out why.
Calm down. You're gonna get the thread locked. If you can disagree with people here in a civil manner, go right ahead. If not, refrain from commenting.
I did disagree in a civil manner. What makes you think I didn't. I pointed out someone saying something that clearly was targeted to a particular viewpoint without any point of clarification about what he was referring to.
I don't go around commenting on every idea/suggestion I disagree with in a dismissive manner.
And now your slightly attacking me. I have not been dismissive, I have backed up my concerns with examples or additional info as to why I think an idea is bad or wrong.
@touchdown1504 There was another thread about this with more than 200 votes if i remember well. What happened to it?
@skyewauker I'm not going to give my opinion of this again as it's in the main post, but I honestly feel like this would go from one extreme to the other and is a bit extreme, just like some people are saying 10% should be the value as 50% is too high, I think all rep is too much, but oh well it's always going to be subjective. At least we are both for the same principle! :)
@happyalbe It was locked because it resulted in people arguing, something I'm trying very hard to prevent for this thread.
@angrycoconut16
Dang, that thread had 297 votes! That's a lot, I'm very very sad, i really hoped it became a thing.. :(
Wish you tons of good luck, you'll need it.@drunkpunk138 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
I am all for some reputation upon voyage completion, but nothing as high as 50% of the reputation. I think turning in the treasure needs to maintain a high level of value, otherwise what's the point? It could just be quicker to complete voyages than take the time and risk of turning in loot. Sure, it may appear to be quicker to turn it in as well, but if you factor in the various ways it can cause delays, on top of walking a ton of loot up to the turn ins an item at a time, it could feasibly be actually quicker to just complete voyages for 50% rep gain, throw down new ones and just ignore treasure. After all, why would your reputation go up if you dug up and lost treasure that the factions want? Wouldn't they in fact deem that as a negative, in terms of lore/logic?
I think something like 10-20% of the reputation rewards makes more sense. This still provides SOMETHING to people who get robbed, maintains incentive for turning in loot and adds up a nice but not overwhelming advantage to completing a voyage.
Keep in mind it's a 50% bonus, so in essence 33% of the total reputation you would gain if you also successfully handed the loot in. The loot would hold its current worth. Personally I think 66% is still plenty of value for people to want to defend it, who wouldn't want the majority of their reward? My only concern would be what Drunkpunk stated - and if people are going to just farm the first half of voyages then obviously the value is too high... but as far as I'm concerned it would probably be less efficient if players kept completing voyages AND they accumulate more loot on their ship which is far more at risk... (which ties into my speculative thought that after such a change ships would start accumulating more loot)...
As for reputation, I honestly don't see reputation as such, I see it as exp. Reputation doesn't function as reputation normally would, I mean IRL you never have a certain level of reputation which is never able to go down... if you mess up or do something someone dislikes you can lose reputation too...
The reason I chose a bonus is because I want the current hand-in rewards in tact, if you are asking for 10% of the total rep reward then it is in essence also taking some reward from PvPers which isn't really fair. As for a bonus, I myself think 25-35% bonus is the absolute minimum which would have the desired effect.
Quantity will always be subjective but that's my stance on the matter anyway.. I honestly think 10% is far too low.
@happyalbe Thank you mate. There is sort of a silver lining in there somewhere as the OP of that thread also went inactive on the forums... whereas I'm going to keep the original post as up to date as I can so that any new faces know the current state of play. I don't mind if my suggestion doesn't become a thing but I really hope Rare at least acknowledge and address it some how...
@fancypantzmcgee I very much like the idea that you'd get a certain amount of rep for defeating skelly bosses at the time the skull drops to the floor, in a way you'd think the OoS might 'sense' this, seeing as they are more supernatural in nature.
I do think it would assuage a lot of frustration if effort taken to sail miles across the map, solve a riddle, find the X, survive the island skellies if a small portion of rep was attributed on voyage complete.
Would this encourage people to turn in their chests more often, or sail with holds full of loot ripe for the taking? Part of good strategy at the moment, is to sail with a light load and turn in often.
It's an interesting discussion all round and lots of possible variations.
@angrycoconut16 yeah I get how it would work, I just think 50 percent is either a ton or nothing depending on chest rng still. The chest rng sucks, so it should just be a percent of a level and like 10-15 percent would be fair.
@katttruewalker I like the thought as well. Personally, (not speaking for anyone else) I run with two variations I prefer:
-
Reputation awarded on Voyage Complete and the Gold on turn in. Essentially it is separating two different point systems. The player who put forth the effort to obtain loot (Chest or Skull) is awarded for that effort with the repuatation on the "VC" screen. The loot still carries it's Gold Value. Whoever turns the loot in, gets the gold. This insures players progression stays consistent. Loot still carries a value, and in a sense can be viewed for what it is....monetary worth.
-
Reputation for engaging with the world/environment. Simply gain Rep for actually doing things. Killing a skeleton, solving a riddle, defeating another crew, and so on. I strongly suspect this is the type of change we may see in the future. Rewatch the development road map video. They mention more than once new ways to earn reputation, they don't mention new ways to earn gold! If I had to guess my #2 option is where we are headed.
-
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
- Reputation for engaging with the world/environment. Simply gain Rep for actually doing things. Killing a skeleton, solving a riddle, defeating another crew, and so on. I strongly suspect this is the type of change we may see in the future. Rewatch the development road map video. They mention more than once new ways to earn reputation, they don't mention new ways to earn gold! If I had to guess my #2 option is where we are headed.
Finally a halfway decent idea.
@katttruewalker aye, I've just started becoming a hoarder. I wait far...far to long before turn in and oh my do u feel dumb for it sometimes.
@graiis Not trying to sound daft here. RNG? Being seeing that a bit lately in several different threads. Help an old man out....
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@graiis Not trying to sound daft here. RNG? Being seeing that a bit lately in several different threads. Help an old man out....
Random Number Generator, most often used as a synonym for random or randomness.
@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
- Reputation for engaging with the world/environment. Simply gain Rep for actually doing things. Killing a skeleton, solving a riddle, defeating another crew, and so on. I strongly suspect this is the type of change we may see in the future. Rewatch the development road map video. They mention more than once new ways to earn reputation, they don't mention new ways to earn gold! If I had to guess my #2 option is where we are headed.
Finally a halfway decent idea.
Im confused why you agree with this and not on VC
@angrycoconut16 what do you think of the idea of 1% per island of current faction level in rep on VC.
So for example if your a lvl 25 GH and you need 1000 rep you get 10 for each island when you get voyage complete. You get this same 10 per island until you purchase the lvl 30 title. You bonus would be based on your title level to have it properly scale
@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
- Reputation for engaging with the world/environment. Simply gain Rep for actually doing things. Killing a skeleton, solving a riddle, defeating another crew, and so on. I strongly suspect this is the type of change we may see in the future. Rewatch the development road map video. They mention more than once new ways to earn reputation, they don't mention new ways to earn gold! If I had to guess my #2 option is where we are headed.
Finally a halfway decent idea.
Im confused why you agree with this and not on VC
Because it is finally a suggestion that has a real proposal for inclusion of a PvP incentive rather than some theoretical byproduct.
It's not perfect; It still doesn't sit well with me that someone could gain progress without risk... kinda goes against what I feel is the core of the game's environment. But it's a far better idea than the OP's.
A small amount of rep/gold for each map completed. Some of the quests can have many maps, if you only get the rep/gold at the voyage complete the higher quests still won't give you any rep/gold until you have managed to cash in something between maps, still giving the 100% loss factor over time, not forgetting there will be more time spent on the bigger quests.
The more and more I think about it, the more I honestly believe that having a Reputation system in the game was just a bad idea from the start. It should have all boiled down to getting gold for turning stuff in, and that gold being used to acquire cosmetic items. Why do I fully think it was the wrong way to go, a few reasons:
- False illusion of a progression system in a game specifically not supposed to have one
- Pirate Legend is extremely underwhelming to most, should have just been expensive cosmetics (as it would covey the exact same thing)
- Makes people focus on "the grind" rather than "the journey" which was what RARE wanted people to enjoy, the fun of the session and not the payout (and thus losing doesn't have to hurt, cause it doesn't matter)
Basically, if it had just been cosmetics and gold it would have allowed them to do the exact same things they released with, but probably would have better accommodated their proposed desire with the game and installed a completely different sense in most of the community in regards to the vast majority of current proposed issues with the game.
Oh well, that is just my two cents in a nutshell.
140 out of 800
