Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak this is why I’m done with all of you Bc your reply’s are plain pointless.

Assuming both players engage in PvE they would both earn $1.50. bolded in case you had trouble reading it before. If one chooses to engage in PvP and wins their total reward is $2.50. If the lose their total reward is $0.50. I’ll write it out for you to help you understand.

1.50+0.00=1.50 (no pvp)
1.50+1.00=2.50 (win pvp)
1.50-1.00=0.50 (lose pvp)

So there you have it. Simple math

Condensing doesn’t add sense to it. Voyaging is not stealing, therefore, to say stealing gets you 2.50 makes zero sense. Stealing gets you 1.00.

@entspeak said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak this is why I’m done with all of you Bc your reply’s are plain pointless.

Assuming both players engage in PvE they would both earn $1.50. bolded in case you had trouble reading it before. If one chooses to engage in PvP and wins their total reward is $2.50. If the lose their total reward is $0.50. I’ll write it out for you to help you understand.

1.50+0.00=1.50 (no pvp)
1.50+1.00=2.50 (win pvp)
1.50-1.00=0.50 (lose pvp)

So there you have it. Simple math

Condensing doesn’t add sense to it. Voyaging is not stealing, therefore, to say stealing gets you 2.50 makes zero sense. Stealing gets you 1.00.

@i-am-lost-77 And the trade-off is that you stopped voyaging to PvP, so now one crew has done two voyages for a guaranteed $1.00 and, if they make it back, another $2.00 making $3.00 total.

Someone else who did a voyage for $0.50 then turned aside to PvP stands to only finish with $0.50 if they fail and only $2.50 if they succeed.

Why? Because doing PvP includes the opportunity cost of not doing PvE. You can't suggest two crews do identical PvE runs with their time and then give one of those crews extra time to accomplish a little PvP and do a payout comparison without giving the other crew some extra time for PvE. And then the points where they differ will strictly be the PvE bonus that the PvP crew missed out on for that one length of time.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak total reward Do you disagree that at the end of the section you will have earned a total of $2.50 in the scenario? I never once said that stealing earns you the total $2.50 I said it is your total reward for engaging in both PvE and PvP compared to a player engaging in only PvE

@I-Am-Lost-77 : “Stealing earns you $2.50. Your $1.50 from your voyage and $1.00 from the other player...”

Voyaging and stealing is not stealing, it is voyaging and stealing.

I do agree that if you do two things in a section, voyage and successfully steal, the total is 2.50 if you get it all to an outpost. If you don’t, you get .5. Those two things both take time, effort, and resources.

However, if the two things you do in a section are voyage and another voyage, you get 3.00 when you turn it in at an outpost, with a guaranteed 1.00 if you don’t. So, why put time, effort, and resources into stealing? There is much greater reward and a larger guarantee if you just Voyage. That’s the disincentive this idea creates.

EDIT: ninja’d by @lotrmith. :)

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak total reward Do you disagree that at the end of the section you will have earned a total of $2.50 in the scenario? I never once said that stealing earns you the total $2.50 I said it is your total reward for engaging in both PvE and PvP compared to a player engaging in only PvE

@I-Am-Lost-77 : “Stealing earns you $2.50. Your $1.50 from your voyage and $1.00 from the other player...”

I do agree that if you do two things in a section, voyage and successfully steal, the total is 2.50 if you get it all to an outpost. If you don’t, you get .5. Those two things both take time, effort, and resources.

However, if the two things you do in a section are voyage and another voyage, you get 3.00 when you turn it in at an outpost, with a guaranteed 1.00 if you don’t. So, why steal at all? There is much greater reward and a larger guarantee if you just Voyage. That’s the disincentive this idea creates.

Voyaging and stealing is not stealing, it is voyaging and stealing.

You are correct. However PvP should be much shorter compared to a regular voyage. So the reward/time would be in fact greater than doing 2 missions. If your PvP battles takes a long time then even in the old system this is not incentivizing PvP as your reward for time would not have been as great if you just did another voyage no?

There is no guarantee how much time a PvP encounter will take, nor a guarantee of loot (you might not get your $1.00 at all). These are all factors in risk assessment, and yes, currently PvE is already far more lucrative and favored in nearly every assessment.

There is thus every reason to not implement suggestions that further exacerbate this relationship.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@entspeak total reward Do you disagree that at the end of the section you will have earned a total of $2.50 in the scenario? I never once said that stealing earns you the total $2.50 I said it is your total reward for engaging in both PvE and PvP compared to a player engaging in only PvE

@I-Am-Lost-77 : “Stealing earns you $2.50. Your $1.50 from your voyage and $1.00 from the other player...”

I do agree that if you do two things in a section, voyage and successfully steal, the total is 2.50 if you get it all to an outpost. If you don’t, you get .5. Those two things both take time, effort, and resources.

However, if the two things you do in a section are voyage and another voyage, you get 3.00 when you turn it in at an outpost, with a guaranteed 1.00 if you don’t. So, why steal at all? There is much greater reward and a larger guarantee if you just Voyage. That’s the disincentive this idea creates.

Voyaging and stealing is not stealing, it is voyaging and stealing.

You are correct. However PvP should be much shorter compared to a regular voyage. So the reward/time would be in fact greater than doing 2 missions. If your PvP battles takes a long time then even in the old system this is not incentivizing PvP as your reward for time would not have been as great if you just did another voyage no?

There is no guarantee how much time a PvP encounter will take, nor a guarantee of loot (you might not get your $1.00 at all). These are all factors in risk assessment, and yes, currently PvE is already far more lucrative and favored in nearly every assessment.

There is thus every reason to not implement suggestions that further exacerbate this relationship.

And thus you miss the point of the thread. It’s not about incentivizing PvE or rewarding PvE more. It is about rewarding players for time invested.

Based on the current gameplay, and as you just stated, PvE is already much more efficient to achieve PL and this suggestion would not really change that drastically so I don’t see why you guys are using it as a reason against it. You make it seem like we are trying to remove everything from PvP when in reality we are adding a small bonus to PvE.

This suggestion is not to give PvE more. it’s to improve the overall gameplay. You guys treat this suggestion as though the goal is to rid of PvP in SoT which is why this thread continues to go off track. We have already shown the benefits and consequences of this system and you guys take it to extremes.

This suggestion does little to alter how a player will engage in their regular activities. It will change the risk vs reward in a positive way and better encourage players to keep playing after a loss.

Your problem is that all you look at is your intent, but constantly ignore the results.

Yes, you intend to reward players for their time invested. The result is you would reward PvE players for their time more than they already are without any additional reward for PvP players.

Yes, you intend to improve overall gameplay. But you would attempt to do so by giving PvE more, again without any attempt to give PvP more.

No, this suggestion would in fact alter the way players engage in activities. How could it not, when they would be rewarded a full 50% more, guaranteed without any risk, for spending their time on PvE as opposed to PvP?

How is a 50% boost to PvE rewards anything if not drastic?

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith there is no balance between PvP and PvE so what balance is required to keep? You agreed PvE is favored in every aspect so why does this suggestion need to keep the balance if there is none to begin with? I’m not against PvP and I believe there should be a system that rewards it. but as of now this game does not encourage PvP so adding this will not suddenly make people stop PvPing, that’s ridiculous.

There is not an equality but there is a balance. People engage in PvP from time to time, how else would people manage to lose their loot and why else does this thread exist?

The little PvP that we have now is critical to the aesthetic of the game and far better than the even less PvP we would have if this suggestion went through.

Also do you have anything to say that actually addresses what you're replying to?

@i-am-lost-77 There is currently a balance between voyage and theft in that the rewards are exactly the same. This keeps theft opportunistic, while providing an incentive to take that opportunity. This effect of this idea would be the disincentivization of theft, because the reward for stealing a chest would be less. If I can get a captain's chest that ends up getting me more by voyaging (and some of that reward is guaranteed), why would I bother trying to get one by theft? It's not worth the time, effor, or risk (since you get nothing if someone ends up stealing it off you.)

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith that’s the point tho. it won’t change the mind of anyone who currently engages in PvP. You literally get the same amount of loot as before. yes you get more rep during PvE but pretty sure most PvP is done opportunistically for an easy sink and go or Bc they want to battle and don’t really care as much about the loot. No one who cares about the loot is gonna chase someone for 30+ minutes unless they are leaving from a fort. There’s already no incentive to do that if you want the loot.

The way you believe PvPers think when they decide to engage is flawed and disproved by the following:

1. Ships at outposts are targeted far less than ships at sea. Why else except for the fact that a ship at an outpost either has no loot or has already turned in?

2. Players who "win" a PvP fight at a fort but lose the key, or who don't "win" at all, constantly complain about not getting the loot, despite knowing it's intended to initiate PvP. Why would they engage in a PvP event but complain about not getting any loot if they didn't care about the loot?

3. Still other players complain about running ships into the Red Sea where the loot is unretrievable. They've won the fight; the other ship has sunk. Why complain if they didn't do it for the loot?

4. Plenty of players constantly, even having stated so in this very thread and myself included, make calculated decisions every time we play about whether or not to engage in PvP when the opportunity presents itself, and the primary concern is whether or not we think the ship we mean to engage has loot.

Nevermind that though the loot would be the same quantity, it would not hold the same value. $1.00 for PvP loot vs. $1.50 for PvE loot. $0.50 guaranteed for PvE loot. $0.00 guaranteed for PvP loot.

The value of the $1.00 for PvP loot is unchanged from the $1.00 you earn now, but it is worth comparibly less because of the inflation you'd give to PvE loot.

@i-am-lost-77 Again, it's a risk vs reward calculation that also includes the time spent doing the thing. Time is a variable. I know how long it takes to sail to Island X and obtain treasure. I know how much treasure is on Island X, at minimum. My quest tells me so (there might also be washed up treasure and powder kegs). If I see a ship out of the way, I don't know if they'll see me coming and sail off, or how long it will take to catch and sink them (putting my own haul at risk as well), and also I don't know how much treasure they have.

If you tell me the guaranteed loot that I know is on Island X and that I know how long will take to acquire is worth 50% more (a bonus which I cannot lose, by the way), I can tell you straight out that yes, I am far less likely to go out of my way to chase down a ship that I don't know has any loot, don't know how much time will take, has no bonus, and has no guarantee.

@angrycoconut16 I feel that having some sort of bonus during or upon completion of voyages would be a great addition. However, that would be incredibly difficult to balance the rep, level, and gold gain over time. As the devs have carefully calculated it so that you will gain X levels after X amount of time, as well as reach max level after X hours of average playtime. Similar thing for gold also.

The only way I can see it working, while maintaining the feeling of excitement during chases/battles and the fear of loss, is to lower the overall percentage of gain of everything to accommodate the additional income (which would be a fairly low percentage compared to everything else).

@i-am-lost-77 There is no comparing stopping on a beach to pick up a captain’s chest and fighting to steal one.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 Again, it's a risk vs reward calculation that also includes the time spent doing the thing. Time is a variable. I know how long it takes to sail to Island X and obtain treasure. I know how much treasure is on Island X, at minimum. My quest tells me so (there might also be washed up treasure and powder kegs). If I see a ship out of the way, I don't know if they'll see me coming and sail off, or how long it will take to catch and sink them (putting my own haul at risk as well), and also I don't know how much treasure they have.

If you tell me the guaranteed loot that I know is on Island X and that I know how long will take to acquire is worth 50% more (a bonus which I cannot lose, by the way), I can tell you straight out that yes, I am far less likely to go out of my way to chase down a ship that I don't know has any loot, don't know how much time will take, has no bonus, and has no guarantee.

I also agree that time is a variable. For efficient PvP loot gain the battle should be relatively quick compared to PvEing from island to island. I argue that adding this system will have minimal effect on whether people choose to engage in PvP due to the guaranteed rep gain they could get by voyaging. A player would still need to complete entire voyages which are very time consuming compared to what an efficient PvP encounter should be.

The risk vs reward is the problem but I agree for a different reason. The risk for PvP can and typically is 0. If you have no loot on board you risk nothing but the pursuit time. PvE risks all the loot on board which represents all the time they spend since their last turn in.

The problem is you can turn in often which is time consuming and offers no reward for PvP players who sink them. Or you can risk a lot by not turning in often to save a little time. Most will and do choose option 1 which is bad for PvP and a bigger reason not to pvp.

The proposed system reduces risk which means players will be more willing to take greater risks.

It reduces PvP risk for PvE loot but not PvP risk for PvP loot. It also reduces the comparative reward for PvP loot, and the absolute reward for your time. Keeping in mind, of course, that in the VC-bonus iteration we're referring to at the moment, as you pointed out, completing a voyage takes a nontrivial amount of time and the average player probably has time as their most important consideration (the waste of time is the largest form of the complaint), then the added time of turning aside to PvP stands against your time availability to finish your voyage and get your guaranteed bonus.

Ain't no way anyone with a sound mind for PvP would look at this idea and imagine PvP occurring more often.

((Plus, as PvP is opportunistic, even a bloodthirsty pirate crew will have a quest loaded and loot on board when they attack someone. Nobody sails around aimlessly seeking other ships... everyone quests and then jumps on PvP (if they have the mind) as the opportunity arises, and the opportunity doesn't wait around so you don't have time to drop your loot off first. I find your assertion that most PvP occurs with no risk to the attacker to be absurd. ))

@i-am-lost-77 I agree completely. Getting that balance down to relieve loss of treasure, and to make for more aggressive play styles would be exquisite. Though, it would absolutely REQUIRE careful consideration, and thought, and time put into balancing everything.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@i-am-lost-77 Again, it's a risk vs reward calculation that also includes the time spent doing the thing. Time is a variable. I know how long it takes to sail to Island X and obtain treasure. I know how much treasure is on Island X, at minimum. My quest tells me so (there might also be washed up treasure and powder kegs). If I see a ship out of the way, I don't know if they'll see me coming and sail off, or how long it will take to catch and sink them (putting my own haul at risk as well), and also I don't know how much treasure they have.

If you tell me the guaranteed loot that I know is on Island X and that I know how long will take to acquire is worth 50% more (a bonus which I cannot lose, by the way), I can tell you straight out that yes, I am far less likely to go out of my way to chase down a ship that I don't know has any loot, don't know how much time will take, has no bonus, and has no guarantee.

I also agree that time is a variable. For efficient PvP loot gain the battle should be relatively quick compared to PvEing from island to island. I argue that adding this system will have minimal effect on whether people choose to engage in PvP due to the guaranteed rep gain they could get by voyaging. A player would still need to complete entire voyages which are very time consuming compared to what an efficient PvP encounter should be.

The risk vs reward is the problem but I agree for a different reason. The risk for PvP can and typically is 0. If you have no loot on board you risk nothing but the pursuit time. PvE risks all the loot on board which represents all the time they spend since their last turn in.

The problem is you can turn in often which is time consuming and offers no reward for PvP players who sink them. Or you can risk a lot by not turning in often to save a little time. Most will and do choose option 1 which is bad for PvP and a bigger reason not to pvp.

The proposed system reduces risk which means players will be more willing to take greater risks.

It reduces PvP risk for PvE loot but not PvP risk for PvP loot. It also reduces the comparative reward for PvP loot, and the absolute reward for your time. Keeping in mind, of course, that in the VC-bonus iteration we're referring to at the moment, as you pointed out, completing a voyage takes a nontrivial amount of time and the average player probably has time as their most important consideration (the waste of time is the largest form of the complaint), then the added time of turning aside to PvP stands against your time availability to finish your voyage and get your guaranteed bonus.

Ain't no way anyone with a sound mind for PvP would look at this idea and imagine PvP occurring more often.

((Plus, as PvP is opportunistic, even a bloodthirsty pirate crew will have a quest loaded and loot on board when they attack someone. Nobody sails around aimlessly seeking other ships... everyone quests and then jumps on PvP (if they have the mind) as the opportunity arises, and the opportunity doesn't wait around so you don't have time to drop your loot off first. I find your assertion that most PvP occurs with no risk to the attacker to be absurd. ))

while it may not entice PvP players to pvp more i doubt it will turn ppl off PvP. It may however entice PvE players to fight back instead of run.

If you don’t think ppl sail around just to kill people I can tell you you are wrong. I have done so myself lol. Also, from my own experience, most of the people who chase me that I sink have no loot and I only chase other players with little to no loot onboard and I’m sure I am not alone.

You're certainly not the majority. And PvEers, as said in this idea, would need all their time to finish their voyage. If they run out of time they get no VC, hence no bonus, and they risk whatever loot they've already got.

@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith promoting and enticing VC is a highly supported idea. Most players should be able to complete a least 1 voyage in a play session.

By all means support VC in a way that does not devalue PvP. I expect the devs will do something along the lines of a bonus chest like the Athena.

@lotrmith Shifting rewards to something like what is being suggested IS putting more value on PvP. It rewards you by making PvP more likely to happen.

Current System : People are less likely to PvP with any decent amount of loot on board.
Proposed System : People will be more willing to PvP as they won't lose all of their progress if they engage in PvP.

This is Guico bro.

@skyewauker said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith Shifting rewards to something like what is being suggested IS putting more value on PvP. It rewards you by making PvP more likely to happen.

Current System : People are less likely to PvP with any decent amount of loot on board.
Proposed System : People will be more willing to PvP as they won't lose all of their progress if they engage in PvP.

This is Guico bro.

I just don't believe that will be the case. Players don't risk $1.00 now because the reward and time requirement are unknown (and to put it bluntly, proponents of ideas like this are simply unlikely to win). Giving them $0.50 they can't lose doesn't change the $1.00 they put at risk, doesn't change the unknown time requirement and unknown reward, and doesn't make them any more likely to actually win. (In point of fact, it lowers the comparative value of any actual reward, because a PvP reward in this scenario doesn't come with any bonus guarantee like the PvE reward does).

@skyewauker said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith Shifting rewards to something like what is being suggested IS putting more value on PvP. It rewards you by making PvP more likely to happen.

Current System : People are less likely to PvP with any decent amount of loot on board.
Proposed System : People will be more willing to PvP as they won't lose all of their progress if they engage in PvP.

This is Guico bro.

It depends on the type of players but I do not thing that will happen.

Either
A) People ignore the loot because its faster to burn through voyages by not even stopping at an island (fire people over to do the voyage while 2 others go else where)

B) It will still be a heavy loss

The primary people this is targing to encourage PvP are the ones that think rep is paramount to their experience... all rep loss for their work will be a problem. In fact I see more people suiciding in the red see over anger of being disrupted in their voyage to deny someone their loot, it's a much easier choice when you've already made rep.

Alternatively the people that gank on sight will still gank on sight regardless of value proposition, angering the above people.

The people in the middle probably don't care a lot not and won't care later and engage in pvp the way the game is designed, opportunistic but taking consideration of the risk depending on what they have on hand.

@lotrmith I think you grossly underestimate the value of progression. It is literally the whole game. Id give all of my gold from voyages to not lose my progress. I wouldn't bat an eye.

So its not risking losing $1.00. Its risking losing $1,000 in the current system.

People are focusing too much on PvE, PvP, or PvPvE. The mechanic of experience loss is what needs to be discussed. No matter what clever analogy or counter argument / discussion point you come up with, it will never change the fact that losing everything in a game where the grind is extremely steep in the first place NEVER feels good. It leads to people quitting the game.

Trust me, I'm one of them. There are others in this thread that have done the same. We are the vast minority here on the forums, yet you see multiple people here and in the old thread leaving the game around these kind of issues. Its not good, not good at all.

PvP Rewards : This shouldn't have anything to do with loss of progression. They need to make a PvP faction and implement rewards accordingly. Lets be honest here. If you are PvPing for progression, you might as well uninstall the game. You will never reach legend.

"X"beard : This is one of my biggest issues. I dc'ed 4 times in the span of about 6 hours played. Each time I would go do 2 quests, go to turn in, and crash. 2 of the 4 I disconnected without turning in anything. The 3rd time I got a quest done, went and turned in (highly inefficient) , went out and did another quest. Dced right when I was about to complete the last chapter. The 4th was during a fort.

6 hours of play time, nothing to show for it.

A change like this is NEEDED for the overall health of the game. Its beyond contestation.

@skyewauker said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:

@lotrmith I think you grossly underestimate the value of progression. It is literally the whole game. Id give all of my gold from voyages to not lose my progress. I wouldn't bat an eye.

Why would you think that. It doesn't represent much of the game at all. Between each session the voyages are the same except they have more targets for you to complete the higher the rank. From a functional standpoint its literally one of the least important parts of the game. Only really being a ceremonious achievement. Otherwise you could play this game for a year the way it is and not need to grind a day and get everything the game is offering. And... the grind is getting easier this week.

@savagetwinky The 50/50/50 grind IS the game. Its the only form of progression the game has atm. What do you mean i t doesn't represent much of the game at all?

In WoW , you have 1-110. You have your levels.
In League of Legends, you have your mastery levels
In a game like CSGO , you have your ranking system.

In Sea of Thieves, you have your legendary pirate status.

And the castaway change is like putting a bandaid on a .50 cal bullet wound. There is hardly a difference between a castaway and a mauraders. The whole system is flawed atm.

Oh look. Yet another thread about this very thing lol.

https://www.seaofthieves.com/forum/topic/58729/4hr-haul-lost