@personalc0ffee said in Enough is enough, part 2.:
@lotrmith Don't be rude. All I'm asking people to do is look at how it might be abused or exploited.
Rude? If you'd read up you'd see that has been done already in this thread. You take stuff way too personally.
@personalc0ffee how is quoting you supposed to be a strawman? You are fighting an argument nobody made. Literally nobody asked for a way to go back to an old session, people just want a grace period of 5-10 minutes to return to a session they were in due to technical server problems or connection issues.
The ship sinks due to a simple line of code that is probably something like this: "if crew size = 0, then scuttle". Implying that it is more complicated than that is just grasping at straws.
So what someone leaves the ship during a pvp encounter? What do they accomplish by not defending themselves? They lose their ship and loot, that is what happens, but you know what is frustrating for players? Losing a fight due to some outside the game factor like a d/c or a power outage.
What the hell is even the argument here, "I don't like that players get a reconnection tool that exists in almost every other modern multiplayer game, because I think players would use that to exploit the game in a way I don't know how or can prove that could happen"
btw what I did above was a strawman, just so you know the difference. There are a couple of people in this forum I genuinely discard the posts of that person regardless of quality due to them proving to be absolute tools, but you are not one of those people you are not a tool, I don't care who you are as a person, the "account" tied to the post is meaningless to me, I only care about what is posted, if you post garbage I will reply with the apropriate response.
@personalc0ffee Wow! It's amazing how veteran players can completely change your perspective on things. You see, I had no idea all this had occurred in the past because I wasn't there.
Thanks for sharing your earlier experiences and providing some insight into past battles and the way RARE and the community tried to combat them and provide solutions.
@evasive-envy well actually now that i think about it never once during my tech alpha playthroughs or the scale tests or the betas the missions worked differently, you would start a voyage in a session and it would stay in that session, you wouldn't be able to bring it over to another one.
I may be misremembering this, but as an alpha player I did all I could to test the systems, I do remember voyage descriptions from the tech alpha with rumored haul and voyage duration, but those descriptors weren't present in the release build, that is the only difference I remember. If some pioneer would go ahead and debunk me, I would be happy to learn something new.
@urihamrayne Ahh ok. I get what you mean. So voyaves were tied to the server in which they weres started. That's interesting stuff.
I'm wondering whether it's as simple as voyage loot being predetermined the moment the voyage is started, rather than when a chest is dug up or captain killed etc....
Though what's a simple idea might not be so simple to code and implement.
@evasive-envy yeah it used to say how much gold you could make on that voyage, so I would imagine that it was predetermined, or still is. In any case it really doesn't matter, the moment you dig it/kill the captain and the moment you start the voyage are interchangable for the game to decide what is the item that will be uncovered.
The point is, I am 80% sure the tech alpha did not save voyages from session to session, 100% on the betas and scale tests not having that feature at all, but 0% on how the pioneer sessions worked, because i wasn't called for them.
Not sure how to do block quote, but you wrote:
I think people would just utilize this as another means to avoid PvP and other exploits. Yes the ship and loot are there, but you are not. They can't kill you if you aren't in the game. Then you just pop back in and bam, all is good again on your new ship?
What "new ship"? No one here is suggesting a new ship. Your old ship stays where it is (or sails on, with no-one at the helm) until you get spawned back on board (as if you used a mermaid). If you are unlucky, it may be pillaged or sunk while you are away. In which case, you might find yourself on a new, restocked ship, parked someplace.
You also wrote:
All I'm asking people to do is look at how it might be abused or exploited.
Many of us are looking for possible exploits, and cannot think of any. If you can think of one, please tell us what it may be, so we can suggest an improvement to this idea to remedy it.
@personalc0ffee a dit dans Enough is enough, part 2. :
I have said multiple times voyages used to resume in the betas. It was removed.
Let's think about why they removed that.
Do tell us why ?
The way you ask your question makes it seem as if there was a logical reasoning behind removing such function, though I must admit I cannot clearly see it. Please enlighten me.
All in all, I really like the ongoing discussion about this matter and am happy to see all of your suggestions and debates.
I hope Rare takes this into consideration and/or give us some updates about how this situation will be treated, or why no fix to this problem can be implemented for something that we might not understand or know.
@therealgiac Agreed! Ive lost tons of stuff till I got my net fixed. It would be nice if we could go back to the last game played, in case of a crash
@personalc0ffee the pioneer program is still in effect, there is a NDA with them right now, however those sessions from way back are no longer under nda, those that existed before the founder tech alpha.
@urihamrayne
@katttruewalker said in How can someone be a pioneer ?:
So.. here is how things worked pre release -
The NDA is still in force, even though these groups no longer exist.
Insiders - were a group of invested community members who signed up to gain a chance to take part in the alpha programme during development. They had their own forum section, emails, some surveys and the monthly insider reports as well as access to greater information around how Rare were developing the game via live question and answer sessions etc.
Alpha testers - these were cohorts of Insiders who were invited gradually over time, in increasing numbers to take part in alpha testing of the game, content and mechanics on a regular basis. They had their own, very active part of the forums and gave a great deal of varied feedback. They had regular surveys to complete after each test session.
Pioneers - much later, this group was chosen to test unpolished features that were felt to be too early to release to the larger alpha tester group.
Who
arewere the Pioneers?
The Pioneersarewere a small group of previous Technical Alpha players who have been selected to provide feedback and data on work in progress, unpolished features.Why does Rare need the Pioneer Programme?
The purpose of the Pioneer Programme,iswas to test features that are work in progress and unpolished in a test environment. Theydodid not test the full game, they test-ed a version of the game filled with work-in progress features.This is taken from one of the FAQ posts about the Pioneer programme.
I think that any long term member of the forums will recall the topics we discussed, the concerns that were raised and the suggestions made in great detail by all groups of testers, insiders and general community members.
This is what the system was.
We don't know yet how the new group will work, how they will be selected, what the format will be nor when they will be asked to participate.It is fairly fruitless to look back and suggest the community could have done this, that or the other. We existed and worked within the parameters and information that Rare gave us. As a game still in development we were fortunate to be able to participate in the insider and alpha programmes in the first place.
Long term members of the community are fully aware of all that went before, yet we're here where we are now and we need to look forward rather than backwards.I'm looking forward to learning more about how this new testing group, however it is organised, will work and continuing to see the game grow.
@personalc0ffee a dit dans Enough is enough, part 2. :
@surveyorpete Your old ship would be sunk surely, if they loot and board you. It is definiltely not going to be left in the state you left it when you return to the game. You would have gotten away from being killed, as you aren't in the game now and the 2 min timer has begun. Your pursuer can not find you and sinks your ship and steals all your loot. Now you pop back into the game, denying your pursuer the ability to kill you with your fresh respawn at an island.
That's one right there. You robbed the pursuer of their rightful victory kill and yes that's important to the PvP. Could you imagine engaging in PvP where you can't kill the other person, only sink the ship?
This argument is totally invalid because right now, if someone comes and attack me, I can simply log off and not only will they not have the satisfaction to kill me, but they will also not be able to sink my ship as it will sink itself, leaving only loot in the water to pick up.
They are too many or I am too scared to fight ? And so I will abandon my loot ? I can if I am that discouraged restart a game and re-roll new voyages because anyways I abandoned my loot in the prior session.
If the PvP community in this game gets satisfaction off of killing someone and seeing their ghost slowly going away from this world, and not from looting the person's loot, than we have a PvP community that play this game purely for grief, which in my opinion is not what this game was intended for.
I can also tell you that I have lost at least 100k+ off of disconnects, which might not seem like a lot but actually is in terms of hours, and EVERY single time there was no one around me. So in the event that it happens and someone was going to attack me, as an experienced player I guarantee I would not disconnect myself and try my best to beat the guys or flee away from that Legendary Galleon. If people want to log out when being attacked, so be it and heck let it be an easy loot for those people who feed off the 2-3 boats floating in the server with roughly 3k-5k of loot on them at most.
You wrote:
You robbed the pursuer of their rightful victory kill and yes that's important to the PvP
A Trusty Mango and TheRealGiac have already demolished this argument, so I will only add: If it's not enough to sink my ship, and take all my loot, but also make sure you send me to the Ferry one time, I just hope I never meet you on the high seas.
@personalc0ffee a dit dans Enough is enough, part 2. :
@therealgiac They aren't talking about abandoning their loot but I get what you are saying.
Oh no 100k off a dc, yah that'd hurt. I"d feel that for a few days. I've lost 5k plus before because I don't keep huge amounts on my boat.
I still don't want a resume function though. Just eat the loss. We all do it, they can too.
There is always another voyage, server, or fort.
As the OP of this thread I must disagree with your point of view on the matter, but I do appreciate the effort you put into trying to show the other side of the story. I still don't understand why you would not want to be able to rejoin a session if you play solo and get disconnected, but I guess you have not experienced it as much as I did.
The 100k+ I lost is on the course of many disconnects, sometimes it will not happen for a day, sometimes it will happen every 30 minutes. Last Sunday I played 4 hours in 3 separate sessions, and you might say I am very unlucky but the entire loots were lost within those 3 sessions due to disconnects. At the end of the third session I posted my first post, Enough is Enough, which was closed since I had wrote it in rage. And then I wrote this post.
Once again, drop the anchor, let the boat there and let your fellow matey continue his journey in this epic game because he had a 5 minutes (or whatever amount of time) buffer to reconnect.
I would say 5 minutes, at least. I have been in a situation where my game and PC froze completely, and nothing short of a reboot would work.
Maybe 5 minutes for an empty ship (which would be the case, if you were solo-ing) and more if you have crew-mates still online. In fact, with closed crews, there really need be no time limit if your crew has not already recruited someone else to fill your spot.
@personalc0ffee said in Enough is enough, part 2.:
@surveyorpete If we were to consider some sort of system like this, it would have to be unexploitable, period.
If you went on a voyage to an island, that island is now removed from that voyage recovery if you disconnect, so you can't exploit the rewards.
As for loot recovered during a disconnect? Absolutely not.
I also think these systems are much too complex for SoT to consider in an shared world and is going to add to server overhead.
I dont see how it could be exploited. You're just leaving your ship anchored, a sitting duck. I dont think OP is calling for the loot to be protected until you come back, only for your ship to remain on the server, and have the ability to respawn in the same instance. Only "exploit" i can think of is a player could disconnect/reconnect to reset the island's resources/skeletons, but it'd be faster to just kill your self and respawn.
I don't think this is too advanced for SoT, but then again there are alot of systems that really should just be granted in a modern game that we're just now getting (closed lobbies, ability to adjust sensitivity, etc)
Most games have a reconnect feature. If you disconnect from a match, and try to start a new one, usually a message will pop up saying "The last match you quit is still in progress, would you like to rejoin" and from there you can rejoin if it was a legitimate disconnect, or look for a new one if it was a rage quit. I think that would be nice for SoT. I barely solo anymore because I get worried about disconnecting and losing everything because I like to turn in loot every 2 hours or so.
@personalc0ffee said in Enough is enough, part 2.:
@surveyorpete Your old ship would be sunk surely, if they loot and board you. It is definiltely not going to be left in the state you left it when you return to the game. You would have gotten away from being killed, as you aren't in the game now and the 2 min timer has begun. Your pursuer can not find you and sinks your ship and steals all your loot. Now you pop back into the game, denying your pursuer the ability to kill you with your fresh respawn at an island.
That's one right there. You robbed the pursuer of their rightful victory kill and yes that's important to the PvP. Could you imagine engaging in PvP where you can't kill the other person, only sink the ship?
You need to think about things beyond how they may just affect your side of the story.
So, let's think about another example for your side. You are going along, you have loot, you get allmondbeard, you come back to that game. You are happy. You did not lose loot or active voyages. In this example, the most pure of examples, only one person is affected.
In my other example two people are affected.
See how this works?
Wow, that's grasping at straws.
@therealgiac I think we can all get behind this. I rarely suffer disconnects, but it's very frustrating when it happens. Hopefully Rare picks up this feedback and works it in to the game.
Okay, so I have read through this entire thread, and like many of you, I disagree with ☕. His argument regarding the denial of a PVP kill is 100% invalid, because any crew can choose to scuttle their ship and swim to a mermaid if they really don't like confrontations.
That said, I do wonder about whether such a feature should be afforded only to a solo player, where it's mostly needed, or to an entire crew as well, for balance reasons (if for example, an entire crew disconnects for whatever reason). What do you guys think?
Also, if the server drops you, I think this mechanic should only work if you're able to rejoin that same server ("would you like to reconnect?" or "we're sorry; the server is no longer available"). I'd hate to see a fully-crewed sloop or galleon magically appear in front of me out of nowhere near my island because that's where they happened to be on their previous server (on the flip-side, if I see a treasure-laden ship magically appear in front of me that also happens to be anchored, well then that's just easy pickings for me). In that way, I can see where ☕ is coming from...
Good to see the thread being expertly discussed!
I think we’ve come to see that there is no real reason why a grace period shouldn’t be afforded to players (definitely solo players) for a disconnect - to be able to reconnect to their server and ship before being booted/deliberately logging off. No suggestions that actually mean anything anyway for exploitation. Denying a kill? Sure. But easy loot - thanks very much :)
Can’t think of any others.
So the question is, can Rare implement it? (My guess is yes ... fairly easily) Will Rare implement it? (I think it would appease themselves of server issues) and if they won’t add the function ... why?
Another question is how long this period should be? For me 5 mins seems reasonable.
Just to add. This function will only work if you’re put back in the same server. Surely that’s possible?
100% agree with this. We spent a solid couple of hours yesterday on a skull fort, we had the captain and were just seeing off another galleon who then rammed us, all of our machines crashed and we therefore couldn't get back in. As there was nobody left in the game for us to "join".
It's frustrating that for a game where essentially sinking time is the main way to get ahead, it's buddy enough to wipe out hours of effort due to bad programming.
Some way for us to return to our game would have been invaluable here, though admittedly we'd have probably lost the fort anyway, so not crashing is probably a better idea.
@tyburn-ketch said in Enough is enough, part 2.:
I thought that ... but would one shovel dig be exploitable? I think as soon as the chest is revealed (first dig) that’s it. That’s the chest in the world. No amount of disconnecting / reconnecting will change that or reset it.
Yeah I think that it happens that way as well, but these were the only two points I could think of that could be exploitable.
Can't really think of anything else that could be exploited.
And saying that getting the satisfaction of a kill could dissapear when they choose to leave, that's BS. That already happens now, people leave or scuttle before you even get in firing range.
Also if you want to get satisfaction out of kills I would suggest other games, CoD for instance.
@therealgiac I never read your previous post but this post here I agree with you.
I do enjoy a good bit of solo sailing and If for whatever reason I disconnect outwith my control there should be like a 5-10 minute grace period for you to reconnect and continue your journey.
On the downside though. This method can be abused quite a bit.
I hope Rare look at this and take action further down the line.
@phillyreid said in Enough is enough, part 2.:
@therealgiac I never read your previous post but this post here I agree with you.
I do enjoy a good bit of solo sailing and If for whatever reason I disconnect outwith my control there should be like a 5-10 minute grace period for you to reconnect and continue your journey.
On the downside though. This method can be abused quite a bit.
I hope Rare look at this and take action further down the line.
The discussion has talked at length about how this method could be abused. All in all nothing has truely been said of how this could be exploited.
Do you have any suggestions as to how this method could be abused?
@phillyreid a dit dans Enough is enough, part 2. :
I hope Rare look at this and take action further down the line.
I sure hope they do too.
Bump because once again...
Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard Longbeard
45 minutes into a Gold Hoarder voyage, was going to an outpost after Shark Bait Cove. :)
