Suggested Changes for Hourglass

@d3adst1ck such a terrible take, most hg fights do not take that long, and once you learn how to spread they can go much faster. Secondly, this change would penalize two good crews for both being well-matched. Finally, what do you propose happens after the 15 minutes elapses, should both boats sink, do both servers merge and lose out on rep?

@d3adst1ck Honestly, now that I think about I don't hate it. My favorite fights have been 45 mins to an hour so it would be painful to lose out on those, but it might make hourglass more popular which is more important.

@guildar9194 Yeah it basically would be a separate game mode... but being able to access it within the High Seas still lets it fit within the current way things work. Just like Diving to Monkey Island is technically a separate game mode.

I have third Partied a LOT of ships, and they always get frustrated, and I have been third partied as well... but also have dove to a bunch of people that have figured out ways to place their ship in a cheeky position to give them a LOT of edge in the battle.

I don't like a time limit, but I think the win/loss rep gain should be higher for those longer fights... which is why I think some system to register how active the ships were (IE: if a ship just sailed in a big circle the entire time, not firing a single cannon, just making failed boarding attempts again and again before finally sinking, wouldn't get as much rep as a ship that landed 50 cannon hits, and just messed up that last bucket.) should determine the rep gain. (Not a rep gain per cannon shot, or player killed... but the metric would give Total rep based on overall performance).

@d3adst1ck I've found that spreading front to back and forcing the helm downstairs is the best way to break a stalemate, even if you let them take cannon for a shot or two. Also if you pair a good spread with the new insta boarding on the main three holes you can force a team off cannon and off helm adjustments to break stalemates fast.

@reverend-toast yeah I know a lot of people would like a separate game mode but it is just to big of a risk. I already know hg isn't popular, but rare doesn't have to worry about it because the mode only makes them render small dive waiting rooms. Hourglass is the only reason I play this game and it's connection to adventure is rares greatest innovation. right now rare is content to let the PVP community do its own thing but once hg comes at the expense of its bottom line they will remove it rather than invest in the comp community.

@d3adst1ck Its not points that I am suggesting, its just performance, so if you spent the entire match just hitting the mast over and over again with a cannon, it isn't going to make your total go up.

So for example: You lost the match, it went on for 20 min, but you didn't spend any point of the match fleeing, or even resetting... so instead of getting 1/20 of a level (Before streak/emissary bonuses) in HG you got an entire half level... the winner got an entire level instead of 1/3.

@d3adst1ck That is why I think there should be a hidden metric that determines the activeness of the match. Like if a ship is consistently trying to catch the "runner" they should be rewarded when the runner is not.

If the winner just got the win due to some weird fluke, but they themselves weren't engaging at all they should as well. But if you have two extremely solid crews, consistently cannoning, repairing, bilging, rotating, adjusting, playing a perfect game that gets drawn out due to both crews skill level, they should get more reward than a crew that gets a win purely because the other crew was loss farming.

@d3adst1ck Yeah, but seriously... only getting 1/3 of a level for a win... is crazy low, especially with trying to get to 1000.

If they made a win a guaranteed level, that would be one thing... but if you can get a match, sink, repeat 20 times in an hour, but only get 1 win in an hour in a drawn out match.... losing is more consistent than winning... which shouldn't be the case.

having something that judges you, and will reward you accordingly would give reason to engage instead of loss farm... yeah it will still happen, but giving incentive to NOT cheese the game will make the matches more rewarding for everyone involved.

@d3adst1ck Yes, but the fights longer than 15 min can be quite fun... especially when you are fighting an evenly matched crew that is also actively trying to win... and having a timer cuts that.

What happens if both ships are still standing after 15 min? Do they both sink? Does an announcer voice yell "DRAW!" This would work if they were transported away from the High Seas, but trying to implement it in the current game would be very clunky and in many cases more dissatisfying to the participants. (Especially if both sink).

@d3adst1ck You just said attackers leave, defenders stay... but most HG battles have both diving to a server. How would it decide? Does it fix both ships? Do they both dive and then forced to immediately go into another match? what if they used all their supplies on that match? What if both ships are on the verge of sinking and the ship "diving" off the server then hits the ship desperately bilging causing the one hole that would take them over?

If a time limit was put in there, it really would need to be in a separate arena than on the High Seas, or else there could be all sorts of unfairness depending on how the game handles a draw.

1 on 1 Battles: This would work mostly with how the game is currently handling HG Battles. However, instead of diving to a match and then joining a random server in one of the possible HG Battle locations, this would take both ships into the Sea of the Damned in a set arena..

So they would have to create a whole server in the SotD...like Arena use too...

if you have another Emissary Flag up (OoS, GH, M) it will not let you activate HG.

So..nobody will wanna Defend because nobody will wanna invade someone who is using those flags either.

"Scoring System": This isn't really a score to determine the Winner or Loser... but more a method to provide more reward for longer (Active) matches, and give a little more reward for actively participating in a battle instead of just loss farming.

I will NEVER understand the complaint of Lose farmers. The person who fights a lose farm, Earn free 1 victory and 1 streak. That is glory reward if it happens 5 times in a row...(happens a lot) SO WHY complain.
Your lvlin up much faster and earning more Wins. So your W/L goes up and makes it so you fight more people who arent Lose Farming in the end.

@d3adst1ck said:

Competitive games have time limits. Sports have time limits. Sometimes teams are evenly matched and tie.

I've always advocated for the UFC to adopt "fight to the death" rules.

No one goes home until.

@burnbacon It wouldn't be a "Whole Server" just a small section, like when the Adventure took us into the bastardization of the Sea Dog Tavern on Sea of the Damned. Yes Arena was its own server, but it also was an entirely different mode (Which HG already is... so equating it with Arena is a little odd).

The idea that I was proposing that Defending and Attacking the defenders was a different mode, with the intent to play the mode in a much larger arena with the intent to build up value and attack each other as high valued ships. Basically make a PVP focused adventure mode. Just having the Guardian always be the defender, and the Seeker always be the... Seeker...

The "Scoring System" is just to give more value to a win/loss if there was an active battle, not just a long battle. If you lost, but you still scored a bunch of cannon hits you should get more reward than a person just sailing out of the circle... same with winners... Just winning on a technicality shouldn't get you the same as someone who actively performed well.

Definitely have a look at my other post that's been floating around for a bit, it's in regards to a Scoring System for Hourglass:
Proposal to Introduce a Scoring System into Hourglass

That said, I wanted to point something out, actually. I like this point, in particular:

@reverend-toast said in Suggested Changes for Hourglass:

Total Rework idea: I have mentioned this before, but wanted to refine it a bit: Have there be a difference between 1 on 1 battles, and the Invasion mechanic.

• 1 on 1 Battles: This would work mostly with how the game is currently handling HG Battles. However, instead of diving to a match and then joining a random server in one of the possible HG Battle locations, this would take both ships into the Sea of the Damned in a set arena... conceptually I was thinking the Sea of the Damned version of the Sea Dog Tavern. This would make a lot of the people who want true 1 on 1 battles happy, since you won't need to worry about your battle being interrupted by another ship. But it would also prevent people from being able so set up scenarios where they are able to put their ship in an unsinkable location. Just outside the battle circle, have a place where they can restock their supplies, turn in flags, and lower HG if they decide they don't want to continue. They can then either vote on the map to dive again, or if they lower a portal to the High Seas will open for them.

The reason I do is it helps prevent the "third party" or "unsinkable location" scenarios from happening. While I don't know Rare's stance on the whole third party situation, I have plenty enough reason to believe the unsinkable location situation is very clearly an exploit of the system. I think this would not only make PvP "cooler" for the aesthetic and set dressing, but it helps remove some isolated problems the mode has currently.

EDIT: However, there is not currently a separate server to host this kind of stuff, a lot of the Hourglass stuff takes place on the existing seas, so I'm not sure how that would affect things or if this would be feasible or worth their investment to fix something like this.