@uhndeth said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@ENF0RCER
I've had countless scenarios where this would have been outrageous

Since you listed 3 i can only address the 3 and i will do so independently.

I've filled a boat and opened the crew to give out free money only to be brigged and told to leave. Should I have not gotten a share of what I collected?

Frist off let me just say How nice you were to do that and hope we get to sail with eachother somday. Now Second did you even get the loot from this senario? I'm going to assume you did which in that case i have to assume they didn't just brig you for the loot. Lastly I'm going to have to assume you were soloing a brig as i doubt you would solo a gally and it is impossible to be brigged in a Sloop. So this must mean that a premade crew of 2 joined on your open brig which is an issue caused by the matchmaking system. As it's highly unlikey you would get 2 random trolls to come in independently only to work together. Anyway you did a nice thing and it bit you in the rear. That's why you can't trust a Pirate, But remember you took that risk. It was entirely your desion under your control. Althou this is another reason why Captiancy is needed. I personally would have used LFG to hand out Loot instead relying on Open Crews as i can also make sure i give my loot to Low Lv player who need it the most as i can clearly see there stats before inviting them. While avoiding a Pre-made Group.

I've had crewmates switch out mid-voyage and new ones brig me and drown me repeatedly by flooding the lower deck to try and oust me

This is just variation of the frist point. Now it's hard to say what their intent was. But worst case senario is you agian got a pre-made group of players that were communicating. Did you join the chat? Did they even send you and invite? Could you communicate with them? I have found that player would normally try to get you to leave if they can't communicate with you thru voice chat.

I've joined crews of three and helped finish voyages. On the way to turn in they received word that a fourth friend of theirs wanted to play. I said I wouldn't mind leaving if we turned in what we had collected so far. This was unacceptable. Their friend deserved the reward and I deserved nothing. I was brig'd. When I attempted to make my case they sailed straight out into the red sea so no one could have the treasure. What kind of monster am I to have expected a share or reward for hours of work

Well this is a differnt senario which i agree was not your fault but theirs as they should not had let you join in the frist place. But at the end of it all did the brig save your Loot? No. You admit that. All that ended up happening is both sides wasted time. You got hosed agian by a premade team that just wanted to play with there freinds. The brig system didn't solve this and a kick system would have not made it worst. Infact it could have saved you some loot as adding an actual proceedure to have some one Walk the Plank, Which gives you some compensation might have been a better alternative. As at least the players on that ship knew there was a way to oust you instead of going on your word that you will leave. I mean why should they trust you? They don't know you. They might look at you as the troll.

In the three examples I've listed, would it have made sense that I get nothing just because I, alone, am not a majority? That people could just kick me out because they wanted to? Do you not think that people would exploit this and grief teammates more than they already do?

People Grief Now and so far by your own admission you still got nothing. Players already use the brig system as a way to boot players. It really doesn't solve anything except waste players time. I agree that a simple majority vote won't work. Thats why the kick system should be remanded to the Captian of the ship which is the person who has the most invested. The insta brig could still remain a majority vote with a captian having an extra say so if players are off the boat they could still stop a potential troll quickly and hold him till he could make his case then it be up to the Captian to decide if he learned his lesson or not. It should also not be possible to insta brig the Captian as he is the least likely to be the troll as he would effectively be sabotaging himself and if he were a troll the other could ethier be given the chance to oust him or merely leave as they have the least to lose.

It's real simple why should you want to play with people who clear don't want to play with you? This is not good from a team perspective. We should have better in-game tools to find crew and socialize with players.

@solestone563412 I prefer to stretch the idea to it's limit before toning it down instead of an underwhelming solution that needs more tuning.

@captain-arcanic said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

Another spitball idea:

1st Time Brigged = Warning.
2nd Time Brigged = Alliance Share of profit. (50%)
3rd Time Brigged = 20% of Profits.

Crew can vote to reset a crewman's privileges.

Would this curb bad behavior, make players leave a game without needing to kick them, or cause players to get even more salty?

1st Time Brigged = Warning + Alliance Share of profit. (50%)
2nd Time Brigged = 0% of Profits for current voyage
3rd Time Brigged = 0% of Profits for current voyage + the option to vote kick them out of the crew is enabled.

@straw-hat-blake I don't have to be a blatant apologist for terrible business practices or dev favoritism. I have a list of nearly 50 items that Atlas has on release that SoT only managed to put into the game after a lot of kicking and screaming months after release, I will never stop being right, this game is half finished and I won't shut up about it until it gets completed.

@urihamrayne said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@straw-hat-blake indeed why should we expect effort put into matchmaking and crew management on a $60 full release AAA game from a major publisher like microsoft

You have me mistaken. I want Rares effort put into the most important things is what I meant. I agree the first sloop player should be able to brig the next person actually when I think about it.

But if you’re going to try and say Rare isn’t putting enough “effort” into SoT you’re kidding yourself.

And about the $60.. they’ve had 4 updates 8 months. I get that the gaming community is on edge because we are getting sold out. But Rare certainty not the problem. So just stop it.

@straw-hat-blake indeed why should we expect effort put into matchmaking and crew management on a $60 full release AAA game from a major publisher like microsoft.

I have to say this sounds like a lot of work for a simple problem. There will always be trolls with matchmaking.. they thrive on it. The ONLY way around them is to find a good crew. Don’t roll the dice if you don’t have to. And disconnects are all on your connection. I’ve got Xbox on WiFi and NEVER get kicked idk what people are talking about

@uhndeth you must be a horrible person to sail with, and I've had this happen also but not often cause...

I'll solo a galleon and open crew half way done to see if I can get some good crew members. people will join to throw me in brig cause they see I have 8 capts chest and they wanna go to outpost when I'm 1 island away from the next map so I tell them no and boom I'm in brig, SO I came up with a plan when people try to go to the outpost with my loot and I dont want to, I simply grab my loot and chuck it over board and dance till they get to outpost and ask them who's loot did u want to turn in??

Its the law of the seas! Captain's need recognition

@uhndeth said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@ENF0RCER
I've had countless scenarios where this would have been outrageous
I've filled a boat and opened the crew to give out free money only to be brigged and told to leave. Should I have not gotten a share of what I collected?
I've had crewmates switch out mid-voyage and new ones brig me and drown me repeatedly by flooding the lower deck to try and oust me
I've joined crews of three and helped finish voyages. On the way to turn in they received word that a fourth friend of theirs wanted to play. I said I wouldn't mind leaving if we turned in what we had collected so far. This was unacceptable. Their friend deserved the reward and I deserved nothing. I was brig'd. When I attempted to make my case they sailed straight out into the red sea so no one could have the treasure. What kind of monster am I to have expected a share or reward for hours of work
In the three examples I've listed, would it have made sense that I get nothing just because I, alone, am not a majority? That people could just kick me out because they wanted to? Do you not think that people would exploit this and grief teammates more than they already do?

I think these issues are solved with my afore mentioned idea of the Captain game mechanic. It can be implemented either by voting, locked or disabled. Players can join SoT without being subject to the rank system they don't like.

@enf0rcer said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

Since Kick features are present in other games that allow for that senerio means SoT is not special.

Name them. I want to hear how many multiplayer open world sandbox games possess a votekick that isn't tied to the session or server moderator and is instead tied to the party and boots the player off the game.

@ENF0RCER
I've had countless scenarios where this would have been outrageous
I've filled a boat and opened the crew to give out free money only to be brigged and told to leave. Should I have not gotten a share of what I collected?
I've had crewmates switch out mid-voyage and new ones brig me and drown me repeatedly by flooding the lower deck to try and oust me
I've joined crews of three and helped finish voyages. On the way to turn in they received word that a fourth friend of theirs wanted to play. I said I wouldn't mind leaving if we turned in what we had collected so far. This was unacceptable. Their friend deserved the reward and I deserved nothing. I was brig'd. When I attempted to make my case they sailed straight out into the red sea so no one could have the treasure. What kind of monster am I to have expected a share or reward for hours of work
In the three examples I've listed, would it have made sense that I get nothing just because I, alone, am not a majority? That people could just kick me out because they wanted to? Do you not think that people would exploit this and grief teammates more than they already do?

@urihamrayne said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

I'd like to remind you all that the playstyle SoT proposes does not favour a votekick system. Unlike games where you enter a match where there are rounds and everything that is at stake is k/d or scores it's reasonable to implement a punitive system that removes the player with no warning out of the game. SoT's goals are mixed due to the sandbox nature of it, therefore proposing a kick out of the crew or out of the session is not feasable because it would be more harmful than benevolent. In all cases of abuse players would come out empty handed from long playsessions, something that doesnn't happen as often with the current brig system, which is why is important to not suggest a votekick system, since it pointlessly adds a layer of punishment on top of a system that we have, therefore we should instead make the brig more interesting.

I would have to respectfully dissagree with you here as the only actual senario that has been presented that is agianst a voting system is when a player is kicked upon loot turn in. Which would be ghe equivalent of being booted out of game before the winning point was scored denying that player the victory. Since Kick features are present in other games that allow for that senerio means SoT is not special. Just cause it is a sandbox game does not exempt it from having a kick system.

Infact Because it's a game that is heavly Co-Op focus is why it require a vote to kick system as it requires players to be able to work together, If you brig someone your effectively handicaping your team while another player or troll benifits from your work. Therefore your effectively rewarding the troll for trolling you.

Since there is no way to kick an unwanted player your forced to troll them untill they leave. This is just a waste of time to all party instead of the one. Not to mention the senario that isn't talked about as much even thou it's far more likely to happen where a crewmate ends up being Dced at the end of the voyage only to have another player join to take their spot and sit there till their crew cashes in the goods.

Another spitball idea:

1st Time Brigged = Warning.
2nd Time Brigged = Alliance Share of profit. (50%)
3rd Time Brigged = 20% of Profits.

Crew can vote to reset a crewman's privileges.

Would this curb bad behavior, make players leave a game without needing to kick them, or cause players to get even more salty?

This is more exploitable by the captain as it is with the current system. The people that are already out in the Open Crew system that are only looking to grief other players would be able to start their own ship and make themselves captain and open it up to troll randoms. Except in this case there's literally nothing the three other people can do.
I've already had tons of issues with other players joining my crew, killing my livestock, purposely sinking or being put in the brig of a ship I have filled with treasure, I've had my treasure thrown overboard. And yes, it's frustrating and I wish there was a way to stop it. But it needs to be balanced
A majority vote can still be exploited but more often than not if three people decide one person should be in the brig, that person should be in the brig. You think one special snowflake shouldn't be allowed to take the helm if they want to, but you should be the one special person that should be allowed to take the helm...
If everyone decides that person shouldn't be doing what they're doing, you brig that one person as a group.
Sure a captain might streamline things. But that person should still be held accountable by the rest of the crew. That person should be able to be removed from power under a separate majority vote. This just makes it extra, unnecessary steps. Now instead of voting on a voyage everyone wants, we have to vote on a captain who chooses the voyage, but if two out of the three people on a Brigantine don't want that voyage they need to oust the captain just to vote against the voyage.

I'd like to remind you all that the playstyle SoT proposes does not favour a votekick system. Unlike games where you enter a match where there are rounds and everything that is at stake is k/d or scores it's reasonable to implement a punitive system that removes the player with no warning out of the game. SoT's goals are mixed due to the sandbox nature of it, therefore proposing a kick out of the crew or out of the session is not feasable because it would be more harmful than benevolent. In all cases of abuse players would come out empty handed from long playsessions, something that doesnn't happen as often with the current brig system, which is why is important to not suggest a votekick system, since it pointlessly adds a layer of punishment on top of a system that we have, therefore we should instead make the brig more interesting.

@genuine-heather said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@x-crowheart-x said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

The captain of the ship should be the person that launches the ship. It should never come down to a vote period. The right can be earned in game if not a implemented as the default. I think it is something that should come with becoming a Pirate Legend if it has to be earned through playing the game. I have several ideas on what it means to be a captain, but here are the basics.

I disagree. What if you have an established captain in your crew already? What if the captain isn't the first to get to the ship in a given session, or isn't a PL yet? Historical pirates elected their captains. The vote system is the only fair way to go.

With my simple idea, as long as you got to the ship first you'd have the option of electing yourself captain (as you'd be the only member of the crew at that point). Of course, as other crew members arrived, they could always vote to change captains. But if you're a good captain, they'd be motivated to keep you. That's how real pirate ships worked, and it can work in SoT as well.

I understand how pirate captains came to be historically. A method that tried to simulate this would only work well with family and friends. The open crew format that Sea of Thieves has is to much like a slot machine that almost always rolls lemons.

If you start the game and select the ship you are the default captain. I believe this should have been there on day one. However, as I said it would be understandable to sail the sea becoming a Pirate Legend to have the right to be the default captain. I am ok with Rare just giving it to any player starting a new ship to be the starting default captain. My preference would be you are always the starting captain if you are the one who launched into the game selecting the ship and inviting crew to load onto a server.

Once the ship is on the sea he or she can choose to step down as captain. The role if you started the ship should not be allowed to be voted away. However, the captain could pass it to another crew member as selecting a new group leader in a RPG or MMO. That choice can be open to a vote. That is if anyone can become a captain at any rank. If it is a right earned in game, then it could only pass to a player who qualifies. If the captain role is not passed on to another crew member when a captain logs off, they crew either sails the ship without one if no one qualifies, of if anyone can be a captain, the elect a new one.

I just feel if you are the person selecting the ship at the lobby/game menu, you should always start as the default captain.

The label of a Captain for the ship sounds like a good one, but so far all suggestions sound overly complicated. I'd propose the following:

Three options for a ship Captain: Voting, Locked and Disabled.

Voting: the crew can vote on the Captain player, or not have one at all, and the crew can also vote on demoting the Captain back to a crewman. Implemented just like the brig voting system.

Locked: a player who starts a crew (open or closed) is the Captain by default, and that player can decide if Captain voting is enabled or disabled for the ship for the duration of the session before getting in game. Upon resigning as Captain or disconnecting, the ship automatically goes to a voting state for the Captain if there is still other crew on the ship.

Disabled: there is no Captain option at all.

Captain abilities: Can unanimously put any crewman in the brig and can kick any player from the crew, sending them off to find another session if they want to keep playing. The only other option the Captain has is to resign as Captain. Visually, the Captain simply has an additional tag/label above their name "Captain". There's also the possibility of adding a Captain's hat cosmetic, that is optional for the Captain to wear if they choose. And you can only equip that hat if you are in fact the Captain.

That's it. Nothing else fancy, no special abilities other than the brig and removing any potential toxic/unwanted players. All players joining any session will have info/option on whether it's a Voting/Locked/Disabled Captain ship or not, and can choose one or any option when setting sail for online play.

This would effectively make a Captain player an 'admin' of the ship, nothing more, and the three options for getting into the game ensure no one is forced to play any Captain game mechanic they don't want to deal with.

@x-crowheart-x said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

The captain of the ship should be the person that launches the ship. It should never come down to a vote period. The right can be earned in game if not a implemented as the default. I think it is something that should come with becoming a Pirate Legend if it has to be earned through playing the game. I have several ideas on what it means to be a captain, but here are the basics.

I disagree. What if you have an established captain in your crew already? What if the captain isn't the first to get to the ship in a given session, or isn't a PL yet? Historical pirates elected their captains. The vote system is the only fair way to go.

With my simple idea, as long as you got to the ship first you'd have the option of electing yourself captain (as you'd be the only member of the crew at that point). Of course, as other crew members arrived, they could always vote to change captains. But if you're a good captain, they'd be motivated to keep you. That's how real pirate ships worked, and it can work in SoT as well.

The captain of the ship should be the person that launches the ship. It should never come down to a vote period. The right can be earned in game if not a implemented as the default. I think it is something that should come with becoming a Pirate Legend if it has to be earned through playing the game. I have several ideas on what it means to be a captain, but here are the basics.

When a player who is a Pirate Legend launches a ship, he or she is the captain. The captain can never be locked in the brig. That will prevent the team troll issue. The captain can vote a person out of his crew on a sloop. His vote is the tie breaker on a brig and galleon.

When the captain leaves the server the ship can pass and be ran by the crew like it does now. If another Pirate Legend is a member of the crew, a captain can pass the command to another one who has earned the right to be a captain.

I would prefer that Rare implement a Walking the Plank option. My idea of this gameplay option and how it would work can be found at this link to my Walking the Plank post:

https://www.seaofthieves.com/forum/topic/70576/walking-the-plank

A Walking the Plank option deals with the most common toxic player and troll problem which is a solo bad player. A captain of a sloop can decide to eject the bad player from their crew by making that person walk the bow sprit and the crew can vote on a brig or galleon. If there is not enough crew to vote, the captain always has the kick vote.

If you own the game you should have the right, even if it has to be earned, to be the captain.

If someone is voted captain by the crew as the first step, I think some of the ideas are good.
Having control of the wheel, forcing another player off? Great!
Determining the voyage alone if desired? Good!
Overriding the ship cosmetics if desired? Good!

The rest not so much.

Perhaps they will add ship naming too so it would be what you name it. Also it's "gamertag's crew" in the loading screen and the options menu so they know who's crew it is?

@captain-arcanic the problem is that we are playing russian roullette with a shotgun, and we are trying to see how many bullets miss point blank.

Where other games succeed is by giving us multiple matchmaking filters that allow us to have less chaotic sessions, which I believe is impossible to never happen, you will always have a bad experience playing with people, the thing is that you need something to soften the blow, SoT just lacks it entirely. I propose the extreme solution, its up to the community and the devs to come up with a compromise, the only thing that can't happen is for this whole conversation to be ignored.

I am hoping Atlas shows some interesting systems for us to compare with SoT and learn from their success or mistakes.

@urihamrayne said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@galactic-geek said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

The tools are available

Not once have I been shown in this thread that open crews have tools that provide a consistent "good time", nobody can because I am right, open crews is more or less press a button to play russian roulette on your sanity, I am not talknig about closed crews or forming groups, these are working fine, how often must I repeat this? The captancy system is the only thing suggested thus far that will provide open crews with more consistent play sessions where players that get captain rank will be able to take control of the situation with ease, without requiring any out of game system to aid them. Change it or nerf it however way you want, but the core of the idea stands, someone has to be the shot caller in the crew, else nobody goes nowhere.

Point of order: Even in russian roulette, you win 5 out of 6 times.

While I think the captaincy ideas being discussed here are great, they will only solve the Open Crew problem your pointing to, IF you are the captain, or you can convince the rest of the crew the captain needs to be deposed. If you're not, you could still join an Open Crew and have a horrible time, right?

I join an Open Crew when I'm looking for a random gaming experience. I go into it knowing it could go horribly wrong. This is why I think the captaincy ideas should be a selection choice, even among Open crew. I can see the flip side of the argument, but that's my take.

@galactic-geek said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@captain-arcanic said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@galactic-geek said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

@urihamrayne said in Captancy - Why we need crew captains:

sometimes people just want to press a button and play the game instead of tabbing out to organize a group, but the experience is not going to be good, it's mostly ever going to be bad and chaotic.

If you're not willing to put in the work, then don't expect great results.

Plus, I'd say my success rate is more in the range of 60-70%.

I'm not talking about you, but rather your crew, if you choose to go with an open crew - remember, it's a team effort.

I understand that. I'm saying, when I choose to join an Open Crew, I have a good time and a at least semi-competent crew 60-70% of the time. Of course, when I join an Open Crew, I'm expecting to have to teach new players and do some compromising on mission types. Otherwise I play with friends or go with LFG posts.