Allow Loadout Changes on Enemy Ships

@look-behind-you how is fixing an ammo crate buffing boarding??? Also, the fastest way to hit level 1k in servants or guardians is firebombs on average I board their boat and sink them in like 3 minutes all because I have good aim and the ammo crate takes that away the glitch has been out for a long time and I'm trying to bring recognition?

@look-behind-you said in Allow Loadout Changes on Enemy Ships:

..but Hourglass is PART of High Seas. 🤷‍♀️

To be fair, the overwhelming majority of players (that have an opinion on the matter) would prefer it wasn't.

@look-behind-you said in Allow Loadout Changes on Enemy Ships:

You need to play by the rules you have, rather than the rules you want.

And where has that gotten Rare? If everyone simply accepted the game exactly as it is and never gave feedback, there would be little reason for this forum to exist. The whole purpose of the feedback section is to discuss mechanics, point out issues, and suggest improvements that could make the game better.

Of course we have to play by the rules that currently exist—that's not in dispute. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a say in how those rules evolve. Constructive feedback is how games improve, and whether a suggestion is accepted or rejected, it's still worth discussing.

the overwhelming majority of players (that have an opinion on the matter) would prefer it wasn't.

And the majority of the actual players ingame say nay to this. The ones who enjoy what already is because (we all hate change)

Rules are rules. Yet nobody wants to follow it because it goes against how they wanna play vs another’s playstyle.
Then we have those who adapt to everything and learn to over come.

But nobody wants to do any of that.
If they allow weapon change, I want to be able to mushroom my anchor again. XD

@thegrimpreacher do you think you should have a limited amount of sword swings on an enemy boat too? Or is this just a double gun complaint in disguise?

@rambobrad Amen

@rambobrad Ah, the inevitable textbook example of reductio ad absurdum in action. Look, I got no problem with folks that double gun. I do it myself. The entire allure of the sword is that it doesn't run out of ammo. That's kinda the whole point.

The risk you should run when boarding with one, two or zero guns is that once you've exhausted your ammo you suffer the consequences for your load-out choices. Again, my opinion has always been that maintaining control of any enemy boat should get exponentially harder (until it reaches virtually impossible) the longer you attempt to do so. The actual "naval" part of naval combat should have always been 85-90% of any hourglass match.

@thegrimpreacher nerfing loadouts apart from swords would make boarding more prominent since there would be more opportunities to board using a sword lunge. And also people would probably decide it's not worth using 1 gun along with it with only 5 shots and rather use a harpoon as well for even MORE board attempts.

It would just promote the loadout that excels in board spamming. The opposite of your aspired result of more naval.

@thegrimpreacher Might aswell remove the ability to climb ladders, shoot out of cannons, board skeleton ships, remove both weapons, no more food, no more cannonballs, no more curse balls, no more bone callers, no more ability to drop sails, no more raising anchors, completely remove alliances, remove skeleton camps (in case someone tries to sink you while your down there), remove reapers chests, remove ffotd (promotes player activity), and reduce sword swings by making it so it has a cool down. Like I can do this all-day, Bruh:/

Solo player here.

The grapple gun is a menace, making boards and multi-boards stupid easy. Combined with the knockback blunderbuss, and I often get double boarded and blundered off my own ship. There isn’t a counter to this.

So I really don’t like the idea of the boarders both having 2 weapons after their dual grapple board.

But hey hey, not like rare has considered solos at all letting the blunder and grapple get this out of hand, so who knows :-)

Since the topic is about boarding to an extent - and as a mostly solo player, I'm gonna say something extremely unpopular, and I'll def get flack for it, cuz ppl hate waiting 😂 Understandably though.

To make boarding matter/risky, simply raise ferry time. And/or make bigger differences in resurrection seconds between crew sizes than the current ones (to also incentivise solo/duo crews to fight brigs/gallies instead of running).

"But bro, that also means I will wait longer if an AI kills me".

Well... yea. Git gud, and don't get killed by AI. 😁 Dying should matter more.

And it would def make you think twice if you're gonna Leeroy Jenkins grapple the first solo/crew you run into. Suddenly, ship battles actually are ship battles more often. Not Tarzan fights 90% of the time.

I'm not against boarding. I'm against 90% of fight time being brought down to just non-stop boarding.

TDM horde flack coming in 3...2...1...

There isn’t a counter to this.

Solo player here.
Traps, blowpipe, poison darts, explosion darts, snake baskets with snakes, use cargo crates to block view on ladders, throw down spears, blunder gun and bomb, swords, bone callers, firebombs (yes set your ship ablaze) bucket of vomit, horn of winds, ashen skull, siren skull

Boy as a solo I don’t have a single item to defend myself from multiple boarders. (But of course your solo…so it meant to be difficult)
Sniper missing his shots without a spotter or OW

Also, it thanks to the complains from players, missing shots doesn’t consume grapple ammo. Worse choice.

@burnbacon said in Allow Loadout Changes on Enemy Ships:

the overwhelming majority of players (that have an opinion on the matter) would prefer it wasn't.

And the majority of the actual players ingame say nay to this. The ones who enjoy what already is because (we all hate change)

Rules are rules. Yet nobody wants to follow it because it goes against how they wanna play vs another’s playstyle.
Then we have those who adapt to everything and learn to over come.

But nobody wants to do any of that.
If they allow weapon change, I want to be able to mushroom my anchor again. XD

OP's idea is no good (unless they make some dramatic changes to the harpoon gun), and I said as much in an earlier response.

That said, the quote you are referencing is in relation to an hourglass comment. If you put a pole out to the community about whether or not Hourglass should be on Adventure servers, it would be a landslide in favor of NO (or indifferent). You might get single digit numbers globally for a hard 'yes'.

@RamboBrad I do not accept your premise. The idea that if ammo was limited it would somehow cause MORE boarding is ridiculous. The reason that most people don't use the sword when boarding now is because they can renew their ammo stores on enemy ships. If the sword was as overpowered as you're making it out to be it would be the meta for boarders to use right now instead of what it ACTUALLY is with double-gunning or gun-pooning. Ammo would be just as limited for the harpoon gun as it would be for single- or double-gunning with the ammo box permanently locked.

@awesomeguy63262 said in Allow Loadout Changes on Enemy Ships:

@thegrimpreacher Might aswell remove the ability to climb ladders, shoot out of cannons, board skeleton ships, remove both weapons, no more food, no more cannonballs, no more curse balls, no more bone callers, no more ability to drop sails, no more raising anchors, completely remove alliances, remove skeleton camps (in case someone tries to sink you while your down there), remove reapers chests, remove ffotd (promotes player activity), and reduce sword swings by making it so it has a cool down. Like I can do this all-day, Bruh:/

You should probably google the term "reductio ad absurdum" I used in my previous post, since this is an over-the-top prime example of it. You might learn why people who feel the need to resort to it have already lost the argument. Bruh.

Not really sure how we all got off onto this ammo crate glitch excursion since it wasn't the original topic of this post, but regarding Rare reversing course and making loadout changes possible on enemy boats again in order to make boarding even easier to maintain...NOPE. :-)