Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode

@galactic-geek said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@mentimjojo You don't see how using outside means to speed up the very goal of the game is bad? Okay... 🙄

Its not "outside means", outside means implies third party software, server hopping is facilitated by the game.

Quitting and rejoining a session is not using outside means, its just using the tools given to you by the game to get what you want, people use it for many many different purposes such as fleet/alliance building, avoiding conflict, avoiding certain players etc etc, it isn't just about looking for a fort.

This rubbish about gaming the system is ridiculous, it isn't the fastest method of getting something done at all, if people wanted to get the forts done quicker they would stack ritual skulls and grind the fort over and over. "Fort hoppers" aren't looking for profit, they're looking for their particular brand of fun that only an active fort can provide. Its hardly a shortcut to advancing progress, if its a form of "cheating" or "boosting" it is a very bad one and people who don't hop are the ones with an advantage.

@galactic-geek said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@elchu86 It's like not beating lvl. 1, quitting out to the main menu, and starting lvl. 3 without ever having completed lvl. 2; you know what they call that?

A cheat code.

...and how can you have any kind of advantage without a moment's respite?

Again with the ridiculous comparisons, there are no levels in sea of thieves, there are just different worlds in different states, attacking a crew at an active fort is not a cheat code, its not a shortcut, its not a boost, its not gaming the system, it is just playing the game in one of the many ways its meant to be played.

As for being attacked at the fort, either once, or many times, winning it is all about a mixture of skill, tactics and decision making just like Every Single Other PVP encounter in this game.

EDIT: There is no difference in getting killed and/or looted and then scuttling and leaving to a new server AND server hopping,

Well, on the other hand, if people getting pirated would just stop giving up and scuttling at the very first sign of pirates in a pirate game, I am sure that could help too. But, hey. Giving up without even trying is an option.

As for me, I will continue to server hop, when I feel like it, as it's an option and fighting all the time is an option.

SoT is about options. Stop trying to take away player's options. Let people play how they want to play.

@sweltering-nick

There, i made this a FOTD problem for you... happy now? xD

Let's be quite clear here. First, I never said it wasn't a problem. Second, I merely stated that op in question has zero correlation that determines hopping is the cause. We can look back in time when conditions were closest to what op described. Now granted some conditions are different, but their is nothing closer for comparison. Its mostly heresay. If Rare is trying to tackle it, "Go for it!" I say. I just highly doubt its for the reason op describes.

Finally, how would I react? I would move on with my life. Unlike many people in this game, I grasp that this is a game, you win some you lose some. As long as I had fun, which I probably did with your described fighting scenario, I would still leave happy. I don't base when I have fun solely on the condition of whether I succeed or not. It is stupid to do otherwise, when some person can just swoop in and take it all. This concept isn't new and found in other games.

It is just a game, why do people get so mad?

@bugaboo-bill said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

1. We dont know if it helps.

Yep, but I am open to Rare clarifying the situation on server stability and, in particular, the server merge frequency.

2. More than 10 minutes would be punishing for those who scuttle after getting spawnkilled to join a new server to get entirely rid of the spawnkillers.

I think 10-15 mins (closer to 10 would probably be better) is sufficient time that most players in the game would be able to server hop by the time they've ran into any trouble.

3. Serverhopping is abused to form premade Alliances and to hop on active Forts aka find regular players at a lucrative place to plunder.

That's not my reason for suggesting it but it is a concern for a few, that's what I am gathering from the replies.

4. There is no good solution.

There is no perfect solution but I think these discussions could lead to something that would satisfy the vast majority of players.

Punish abuse also punish normal use.
Where 10 minutes are ok for someone who want to switch server for not gaming the system reasons we still dont know if it helps at all.

If it would help with lagspikes and overall performance i say give 1 free hop. This is for the regular server switch and then put a 30 minutes cooldown on it.

Like I said, I think 10 mins is enough time that the majority of players wouldn't need a server hop in before the timer runs out. 30 mins feels like too much, even with a free hop.

Sure you can be unlucky and meet the next problem for what you regularly want to switch server and then you cannot, but this will happen very rarely.

To game the system to form premade Alliances or to find active Forts or players to plunder would stop for sure.

I personally are not that interested in playing with people gaming the system.
A premade 2 ship alliance can be cool, because you know more than 3 others you want to play with, but locked down pve alliance Servers are bad imho and hurt the game the same way other abuses do.
I happily sacrifice the premade 2 ship alliance option, bareley used.

Again, that wasn't in my consideration, although it is a factor in encouraging the constant server hopping at the moment.

To go for plunder only and only PvP at Hotspots is all fine, but need not to be supported by serverhopping, especially not if it additionally cause server instability and lag.
I think the pure PvP pirates need to have the same struggles like the regular pirate, someday you are lucky and find booty another day you sail the empty Sea, lucky if you can plunder a Seafarer chest.
The regular pirates life is no other, some day you are lucky and no one comes for you taking your hard earned loot without to mess around with the environment to get it, but only you and sometimes they wreck you and get it all.
This is fair.
To lock servers for PvE only and to hop Forts to plunder only is not!
At least imho it is both not intended, else we would have choice. Btw pvper who dont want to enjoy the sandbox aspects and like instant action there is Arena.

Again, not really my concern here but I agree with the sentiment.

I also like to plunder crews at Forts. But i wouldnt serverhopp and game the system for it.
Two reasons:

1. i play and want to immerse and gaming the system this way is highly unimmersive and feels dull to me
2. If i get into such a fight i would apreciate it more.
   If i was maybe lucky (depends on pov) and did it 2 times in peace or with alliance i'd also apreciate the Varity to get attacked and have to fight for it.

I want the game balances my experience and not cheat it.

What people are doing is to simply hack one of the core Designs of Sea of Thieves. Uncertainty and unpredictability.

They dont accept there is no one, because the playstyle is not balanced PvPvE and therefore they game it to their desires.

True for the PvP and the PvE only players.

Both hurt the system, the game and the community and i think also the majority of players.

To me, and this is off-topic because it isn't the reason for my OP, but it does seem that server hopping to get PvP at the fort is the PvPers equivalent of PvPers setting up Alliance PvE-only servers. PvPers frown upon that but are somehow okay with gaming the system for their gain? Both go against the spirit of the game, IMO.

@nabberwar said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@sweltering-nick

There, i made this a FOTD problem for you... happy now? xD

Let's be quite clear here. First, I never said it wasn't a problem. Second, I merely stated that op in question has zero correlation that determines hopping is the cause. We can look back in time when conditions were closest to what op described.

Zero correlation? I have more than once stated that this could be a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc. I believe the correlation is absolutely there - server merges within 10 mins of joining a session and getting multiple server merges in an hour at peak times.

Correlation is there, the causality is up for debate and I admit that.

@realstyli
Correlation doesn't equal causation for a reason. All of this is heresay until Rare would like to speak up. Wouldn't be the first time we have had server instability due to patches. Their is a demonstrated history of it with previous patches. Those patches even included low hopping during those patches as well. I am not saying hopping isn't the cause, I just find it highly unlikely due to previous time periods of hopping, as well as a past history of instability without hopping.

Frankly....I like a good server merger.

• It spreads fear when your on a half active fort
• The surrounding area changes
• Means you been alone on the server for some time.

Keeps you on your toes when you see the message that your changing seas and suddenly you look around you and now spot 3 player galleons that werent there and your ship has a 2 forts worth of loot. xD

I think Rare is quietly addressing server hopping in the best way that they can. By adding cursed cannon balls, cooked meat etc they are essentially giving advantages to older ships. The longer you have had to stock up on the original supplies as well as the new ones, the bigger advantage you have verses that lesser stocked fresh server jumper. This is at least the advantage I see with fort hopping.

As far as alliance hoppers... its going to be an issue. Hiding indicators has been one suggestion, but its going to be difficult to find them all. Reducing the benefit of alliances, and especially multi ship alliances could provide the best results, but its going to get a lot of complaints too. At the end of the day, if people want to cheese the game they will...

Many people will just stop playing, including streamers. Wouldn't be prudent.

I can see the reason behind this post and I agree to the extent that I don’t think Rare thought players would server hop. I think Rare is taking to much pride in ever admitting that they just don’t know how to address issues quickly and effectively. If I was a betting man I’d say they didn’t intend for server hopping.

All they need to do is put you back in the same server without informing you. You’d be none the wiser unless you run into the same players. Then after an undisclosed amount of time if you leave the game and join a new game it’s a new server.

@realstyli said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@bugaboo-bill said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

1. We dont know if it helps.

Yep, but I am open to Rare clarifying the situation on server stability and, in particular, the server merge frequency.

2. More than 10 minutes would be punishing for those who scuttle after getting spawnkilled to join a new server to get entirely rid of the spawnkillers.

I think 10-15 mins (closer to 10 would probably be better) is sufficient time that most players in the game would be able to server hop by the time they've ran into any trouble.

3. Serverhopping is abused to form premade Alliances and to hop on active Forts aka find regular players at a lucrative place to plunder.

That's not my reason for suggesting it but it is a concern for a few, that's what I am gathering from the replies.

4. There is no good solution.

There is no perfect solution but I think these discussions could lead to something that would satisfy the vast majority of players.

Punish abuse also punish normal use.
Where 10 minutes are ok for someone who want to switch server for not gaming the system reasons we still dont know if it helps at all.

If it would help with lagspikes and overall performance i say give 1 free hop. This is for the regular server switch and then put a 30 minutes cooldown on it.

Like I said, I think 10 mins is enough time that the majority of players wouldn't need a server hop in before the timer runs out. 30 mins feels like too much, even with a free hop.

Sure you can be unlucky and meet the next problem for what you regularly want to switch server and then you cannot, but this will happen very rarely.

To game the system to form premade Alliances or to find active Forts or players to plunder would stop for sure.

I personally are not that interested in playing with people gaming the system.
A premade 2 ship alliance can be cool, because you know more than 3 others you want to play with, but locked down pve alliance Servers are bad imho and hurt the game the same way other abuses do.
I happily sacrifice the premade 2 ship alliance option, bareley used.

Again, that wasn't in my consideration, although it is a factor in encouraging the constant server hopping at the moment.

To go for plunder only and only PvP at Hotspots is all fine, but need not to be supported by serverhopping, especially not if it additionally cause server instability and lag.
I think the pure PvP pirates need to have the same struggles like the regular pirate, someday you are lucky and find booty another day you sail the empty Sea, lucky if you can plunder a Seafarer chest.
The regular pirates life is no other, some day you are lucky and no one comes for you taking your hard earned loot without to mess around with the environment to get it, but only you and sometimes they wreck you and get it all.
This is fair.
To lock servers for PvE only and to hop Forts to plunder only is not!
At least imho it is both not intended, else we would have choice. Btw pvper who dont want to enjoy the sandbox aspects and like instant action there is Arena.

Again, not really my concern here but I agree with the sentiment.

I also like to plunder crews at Forts. But i wouldnt serverhopp and game the system for it.
Two reasons:

1. i play and want to immerse and gaming the system this way is highly unimmersive and feels dull to me
2. If i get into such a fight i would apreciate it more.
   If i was maybe lucky (depends on pov) and did it 2 times in peace or with alliance i'd also apreciate the Varity to get attacked and have to fight for it.

I want the game balances my experience and not cheat it.

What people are doing is to simply hack one of the core Designs of Sea of Thieves. Uncertainty and unpredictability.

They dont accept there is no one, because the playstyle is not balanced PvPvE and therefore they game it to their desires.

True for the PvP and the PvE only players.

Both hurt the system, the game and the community and i think also the majority of players.

To me, and this is off-topic because it isn't the reason for my OP, but it does seem that server hopping to get PvP at the fort is the PvPers equivalent of PvPers setting up Alliance PvE-only servers. PvPers frown upon that but are somehow okay with gaming the system for their gain? Both go against the spirit of the game, IMO.

@k1lroyw4sh3r3 said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

I can see the reason behind this post and I agree to the extent that I don’t think Rare thought players would server hop. I think Rare is taking to much pride in ever admitting that they just don’t know how to address issues quickly and effectively. If I was a betting man I’d say they didn’t intend for server hopping.

All they need to do is put you back in the same server without informing you. You’d be none the wiser unless you run into the same players. Then after an undisclosed amount of time if you leave the game and join a new game it’s a new server.

Again server hopping isnt an issue at all. Nobody has given any argument why it is an issue.

• Lag isnt caused by server hoppers, its caused by the servers itself, they just can't handle lots of players close to each other. These lag issues were already there on launch, but Rare is pushing pvp more, so more people are close to each other fighting which means the lag is more known for people.

• People hopping for forts! So what? If you can't even defend the fort you shouldn't deserve the loot in the first place. My crew and I did the fort 5 times in a row, lots of ship came, we sunk them all and sold every piece of loot. And if you sink there because of others, well learn from the mistakes you made during those fights. But don't blame others for it.

• And yes, this game is a PvPvE game. But PvP will most of the times come first. If you didn't expect so much PvP, well you shouldn't bought it in the first place, it's a pirate game. If server hopping gets removed (It wont, I am ferm believer of that) this game will die very quickly.

@galactic-geek said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

Some say that server hopping to get a fort vs. Server hopping to avoid a fight is the same.

It's not.

One is an intentional decision, for personal gain, and gaming the system.

The other is a reaction to something bad happening (cause and affect) and an attempt to avoid it in order to continue having fun.

Context matters.

It isn't the same thing but the result is comparable if using the same logic used to argue against hopping, avoiding a fight by server hopping is one crew avoiding part of the game and taking opportunities from another crew, which is exactly what all this bleating about server hopping for forts is about, only server hopping doesn't take away from the game, it just means a fort thats meant to have player interaction, has player interaction. Some people just need to realize that that interaction isn't always going to be positive and isn't always going to have a monetary reward.

I really doubt the constant crying over server hopping is representative of the general FoTD experience for most people, I see plenty of Alliances at that fort, I see plenty of times where it isn't contested and we can just grind it out a few times and I see plenty of times where its hotly contested by two of more ships, or a single ship attacks and gives up, the FoTD seems to be a fairly varied experience for most people, which is clearly what its designed to do.

@freakaddelle

This feature would actually encourage PVP as it would make fleet building nearly impossible (for an example having 5 galeons from one discord server grinding the fort together)

I don't think so, their is multiple ways for these servers to be made. Server hopping is just one method. The other most popular method is to approach all ships and try to buy them off. Give them loot in exchange for them to switch servers. Some are even known to bully them til they quit to try and buy off the new arrival. Those tactics include spawn-camping to just hunting them down every spawn. This certainly doesn't make Fleet building impossible.

@captain-coel said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@realstyli I believe Rare is all about playing however we want to.

Not if you don't like pvp 😋

@nabberwar said in Add a cooldown for server hopping in Adventure mode:

@realstyli
Correlation doesn't equal causation for a reason. All of this is heresay until Rare would like to speak up.

This is pretty much what I have said if you read my comments. I'm just saying the evidence is pretty compelling that the too are linked and I propose a solution. If Rare doesn't think so, that's fine, I accept that.

Wouldn't be the first time we have had server instability due to patches. Their is a demonstrated history of it with previous patches. Those patches even included low hopping during those patches as well. I am not saying hopping isn't the cause, I just find it highly unlikely due to previous time periods of hopping, as well as a past history of instability without hopping.

During those periods we had the old server merge rules, so you didn't merge until you were anchored. Now you can pretty much merge at any time as long as your crew is all on your ship and you are moving slow enough (though I have been merged since the update when my ship is going at full sails, albeit into the wind).