It be pretty neat

Reapers is a risk reward design that is designed well for the organic experience so I disagree on that.

Player's ships dropping supplies makes sense but it incentivizes unnecessary sinks. Sinks that should be allowed but not incentivized. Risk/reward should lean towards opt-in. Incentivizing killing or sinking where the players have not opted into more risk shouldn't exist imo.

They could implement hunting quests that would add fun to the game. I agree

Repairing boat damage for gold is a perfect gold sink. Hurts no one or the environment, gets gold out of the system, brings qol to a significant amount of people.

@wolfmanbush said in It be pretty neat:

Reapers is a risk reward design that is designed well for the organic experience so I disagree on that.

Player's ships dropping supplies makes sense but it incentivizes unnecessary sinks. Sinks that should be allowed but not incentivized. Risk/reward should lean towards opt-in. Incentivizing killing or sinking where the players have not opted into more risk shouldn't exist imo.

They could implement hunting quests that would add fun to the game. I agree

Repairing boat damage for gold is a perfect gold sink. Hurts no one or the environment, gets gold out of the system, brings qol to a significant amount of people.

If the is risk being "No Content and sailing a dead server because everyone saw a lvl 1 reaper" then yes I agree. Or being hunting by a bored streamer jumping from server to server because again. No content.

People will sink each other regardless so it doesnt really matter. The least we can do is get some cannon balls, food, and wood out of it.

@burnbacon said in It be pretty neat:

pretty neat if Reaper's didn't appear on the map for everyone to see.

Why?

Me and wolfmanbush have been over this one all your 'counter points'. Come on now.

Nothing wrong with a new gold sink, nothing wrong with a little extra pvp supplies, and scuttling is a terrible answer.

@sweetsandman said in It be pretty neat:

I definitely don't agree with not being able to see Reapers on the map. It's part of the risk/reward. HOWEVER...

As it stands, it is WAY too easy for players to choose the "safest" server to do their voyaging as an Emissary. People switching servers before leaving the dock when they see a Reaper is on the map is the reason portal hopping is justified. People complain about Reapers all the time for various reasons...yet when they're trying to do their emissary ledgers, they'll hop as many servers as they have to in order to find one without a Reaper on it.

Here's my idea. I've suggested it before so I'll just copy/paste it...

-1) Get rid of the little ships on the Reaper emissary table at the outposts.
-2) Crews can only see a Reaper on their map if they are running an Emissary of any kind and are Grade 3 or higher. The logic here is that crews would be invested enough in a server that they'd at least consider continuing with their risk even if they end up seeing a Reaper on their map after they've hit Grade 3. Sure, some people would still immediately sell, lower, and abandon the server, but those are the folks that aren't going to fight anyways. At least with this, their rewards/time would be impacted accordingly.
-3) Grade 5 Reapers can only see ships on their map that are Grade 3 or higher. The logic here is to complement the above rule so that you don't have a tactical advantage on low grade emissaries.
-4) Reapers can only see other Reapers once they've achieved Grade 2 or higher.

All of these things together would make the risk/reward of emissaries on every server way more organic and high stakes.

I kind of like not being able to see anything below tier 3. Its kind of lame running up on a emissary ship thats only tier 1 and having to let it go since it wouldnt even be worth the cannon balls.