I mentioned this last year but I'll mention it again. Create an Alliance faction where you get points and commendations for cashing in treasure, skulls, merchant stuff under an Alliance. That would totally transform the game for the better. Much mote teamwork with still an ocassional betrayal.
Create an Alliance faction
I am not against this, but doing something like this could also have an adverse affect in the economy side. Depending on the rate of gold / doubloon growth per player, prices in shops may increase at the same time to counter it. Server alliances could be used to farm and may be the closest thing for people to have their "PvE" server.
I only came up with the cons, however i enjoy this idea!!
Good Hunting!
There are already benefits to maintaining an alliance, if you can maintain it. Adding more incentive would disrupt that balance in favor of keeping the alliance going. This is not necessarily a good thing. There needs to be an incentive to betray an alliance, and if there no longer isn't, then we'd no longer be sailing the Sea of Thieves.
I don't think it would be a good idea, alliances already earn more money than they should, 150% is too high, and alliances also have low risk. I would only be in favor of this if the alliances had a huge change, where the gold received was divided by the number of ships, 6 ships earn 16% of the total gold, for example, and if that faction had anything really useful besides selling alliance items, if it was necessary to do the missions really together, like it was during the Hungering Deep.
@targasbr There is a reason why alliance bonuses are not based upon the number of ships. If you're in an alliance that you intend to betray and leave, for example, why would you leave, only to reward them with a higher percentage on their loot? It's like you're paying them to be betrayed!
It only works if all other ships receive an equal cut, regardless of who stays and who leaves.
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@targasbr There is a reason why alliance bonuses are not based upon the number of ships. If you're in an alliance that you intend to betray and leave, for example, why would you leave, only to reward them with a higher percentage on their loot? It's like you're paying them to be betrayed!
It only works if all other ships receive an equal cut, regardless of who stays and who leaves.
The idea is that each ship should take an equal slice of the whole. Supposing that we have 100% of a loot, in an alliance with two ships each would take 50%, with 3 ships each it would take 33%, with 4 ships, 25% and so on. The more ships in the alliance, the lower the risk, the less the reward should be, making alliances only when they are really needed, and not for people to be farming on closed servers without any real risk.
@targasbr Except the risk has always come from within the alliance, not from outside of it. Therefore, the number of ships actually increases risk. Furthermore, you have still failed to address my previous point - that you de-encentivize potential betrayal with your method because leaving an alliance would reward those you attack with more gold, which I would argue makes the alliances even safer, doing the exact opposite of what you intend, making alliances one-sided where pirates want to join, stay in, and not betray each other. In essence, there would be no reason not to do alliances, and you inadvertently get Sea of Friends instead of Sea of Thieves.
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@targasbr Except the risk has always come from within the alliance, not from outside of it. Therefore, the number of ships actually increases risk. Furthermore, you have still failed to address my previous point - that you de-encentivize potential betrayal with your method because leaving an alliance would reward those you attack with more gold, which I would argue makes the alliances even safer, doing the exact opposite of what you intend, making alliances one-sided where pirates want to join, stay in, and not betray each other. In essence, there would be no reason not to do alliances, and you inadvertently get Sea of Friends instead of Sea of Thieves.
That's because your point doesn't make any sense... the point at which a ship decides to betray is surely the same moment they have attacked the other ship(s) and stolen the loot, henceforth, when they sell the loot they will leave the alliance in order to gain 100% of the value. I'm not sure how you see that as rewarding them with more gold?
@octopus-lime Not those who betray, but everybody else! With the OP's idea, If I leave an alliance of 4 ships, their alliance becomes an alliance of 3 ships, and the percentage they earn goes up. It's more profitable to be in a smaller alliance, and I have therefore rewarded them, and effectively punished myself for leaving the alliance. And remember, betrayal of an alliance isn't a guaranteed thing - it may not be profitable for you; it could easily end in disaster if they destroy you.
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@targasbr Except the risk has always come from within the alliance, not from outside of it. Therefore, the number of ships actually increases risk. Furthermore, you have still failed to address my previous point - that you de-encentivize potential betrayal with your method because leaving an alliance would reward those you attack with more gold, which I would argue makes the alliances even safer, doing the exact opposite of what you intend, making alliances one-sided where pirates want to join, stay in, and not betray each other. In essence, there would be no reason not to do alliances, and you inadvertently get Sea of Friends instead of Sea of Thieves.
When in alliance, you know exactly where each ship is, reducing the "a ship come from nowhere" surprise factor. If a ship betrays, you know exactly which betrayed, and in large alliances there are rare cases of ships that decide to betray. The idea is precisely to increase the chance of betrayal of the alliance, the greater the reward for betraying, the greater the chance, making the alliances to be made for teamwork, not to earn gold with less risk.
@targasbr said in Create an Alliance faction:
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@targasbr Except the risk has always come from within the alliance, not from outside of it. Therefore, the number of ships actually increases risk. Furthermore, you have still failed to address my previous point - that you de-encentivize potential betrayal with your method because leaving an alliance would reward those you attack with more gold, which I would argue makes the alliances even safer, doing the exact opposite of what you intend, making alliances one-sided where pirates want to join, stay in, and not betray each other. In essence, there would be no reason not to do alliances, and you inadvertently get Sea of Friends instead of Sea of Thieves.
When in alliance, you know exactly where each ship is,
Not necessarily - just because it shows on the map table doesn't mean that everyone tracks it; besides, even if they did, it'd be impossible to track all of the time while doing numerous other things. In any case, I doubt anyone would take the job of dedicated map table watcher.
reducing the "a ship come from nowhere" surprise factor.
Not really, as stated above - it can still hsppen.
If a ship betrays, you know exactly which betrayed,
Many crews don't even learn their allies' names. You really think they would know this?
and in large alliances there are rare cases of ships that decide to betray.
This much is true, as the risk in doing so is greater, but even so, if they're spread far apart, it's entirely possible to pick them off 1 by 1 and sow Discord among the group.
The idea is precisely to increase the chance of betrayal of the alliance, the greater the reward for betraying, the greater the chance, making the alliances to be made for teamwork, not to earn gold with less risk.
You lost me here - please rephrase.
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@targasbr said in Create an Alliance faction:
When in alliance, you know exactly where each ship is,
Not necessarily - just because it shows on the map table doesn't mean that everyone tracks it; besides, even if they did, it'd be impossible to track all of the time while doing numerous other things. In any case, I doubt anyone would take the job of dedicated map table watcher.
The chance of not knowing where the ship is is less than if it didn't show on the map.
reducing the "a ship come from nowhere" surprise factor.
Not really, as stated above - it can still hsppen.
We always knows where he ships are, just go to the map and see, if the person doesn’t know, it’s their problem, not the alliance system.
If a ship betrays, you know exactly which betrayed,
Many crews don't even learn their allies' names. You really think they would know this?
Even without knowing their names, it is possible to know in several other ways who betrayed the alliance, seeing which ship was sunk, seeing which players were killed. Gamertag is a mere formality.
and in large alliances there are rare cases of ships that decide to betray.
This much is true, as the risk in doing so is greater, but even so, if they're spread far apart, it's entirely possible to pick them off 1 by 1 and sow Discord among the group.
Even so, the risk is less than compared to those who are playing alone against 5 other ships on the server, not knowing where they are and not knowing what to expect from them. In alliance we are not sure whether we will be betrayed or not, but we have much more control over who attacks us.
The idea is precisely to increase the chance of betrayal of the alliance, the greater the reward for betraying, the greater the chance, making the alliances to be made for teamwork, not to earn gold with less risk.
You lost me here - please rephrase.
Many players close servers with alliances, this players usually form the alliance before entering the game, in different groups on different social networks. In this way, the risk is zero, as these players know each other before and manage to win a lot more gold without any concern. We have the environment, but it is not even a risk, as it is predictable. As I exemplified above, alliances will continue to be made, but the gold received will be proportional to the risk: the lower the risk, the lower the reward. And of course, knowing that, for example, I am earning only 25% of the total value, I would think about betraying the alliance and taking everything to get 100% of the value. Currently, betraying the alliance does not pay, even if another ship sells all the loot, I still earn without any concern.
The current system of alliances is very flawed.
It’s one of those things that’s nice, in theory, but is far too exploitable because of how it’s designed.
In theory, you would have players working closely together to tackle a larger task - both getting to reap the rewards from it, while placing themselves at a higher risk of betrayal by playing closely with another crew. This is why the alliance system was created.
Instead, what you have is fly-by alliancing and server takeovers where people farm maximum rewards at very little risk. Pirates getting credit for something that’s happening all the way across the map. There is no actual cooperation with that, and it is a very common use for alliances - why should they ever make a trading company based on this?
@chronodusk I don't think that they should have an alliance-based company. It should be, IMO, completely pirate-controlled.
I also believe the alliance system to be perfect in its implementation. Because of how it's set up is why we can have drive-by alliances, server-takeovers, or actual and honorable alliances that legitimately help each other out and/or protect each other. It's all part of the sandbox.
@galactic-geek said in Create an Alliance faction:
@octopus-lime Not those who betray, but everybody else! With the OP's idea, If I leave an alliance of 4 ships, their alliance becomes an alliance of 3 ships, and the percentage they earn goes up. It's more profitable to be in a smaller alliance, and I have therefore rewarded them, and effectively punished myself for leaving the alliance. And remember, betrayal of an alliance isn't a guaranteed thing - it may not be profitable for you; it could easily end in disaster if they destroy you.
Yes but then they have 1 less ship earning loot for the alliance. Allow me to break it down into math and make some artistic assumptions.
Assume a 4 ship alliance as you suggest and also assume each crew is 'pulling their weight' and earning the same ammount of gold, lets call it 100k each over the session, total 400k for the alliance.
Now that's obviously 100k split back to each crew, so they don't earn anymore than they would have if they were not in the alliance, however they get the safety net of knowing that they have reduced their chance of being attacked by 60% (as 3 out of the potential 5 other ships on the server are now 'friends').
If they leave the alliance, they still get their 100k gold they would have earned, and the alliance now has 300k gold split three ways. So no one gains or looses any potential gold, it is just the safety factor.
1 sur 17
