New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size

  • While I am sure these topics have been discussed at length before, I have found it difficult to find a thread discussing these suggestions recently. I would like to bring these topics back to light as I believe they are quite important to the gameplay of Sea of Thieves.

    Crew Increments
    The first suggestion is a very simple one, which is to increment crew sizes. And no I am not suggesting incrementing by a lot, at most I was thinking one additional crew member to each ship. As an example, the sloop would go from a 1-2 crew size to a 1-3, the Brig from 2-3 to 2-4, and the galleon from 3-4 to 3-5 with the performance of said ships adjusted accordingly. Obviously, this is a mere suggestion and Rare could decide that they would rather multiply crew sizes by a different factor if they were to ever do it. While the current crew sizes for each ship can be manageable at times, they can quickly become chaotic and unmanageable in times of battle. Arguments against larger crew sizes in the past were about the Galleon being too overpowered if it were to receive a larger crew size, but this is why each ship would receive an equal and balanced increment. I have always found it interesting that the amount of cannons on the ships outweighs the crew sizes. Although you could argue the additional cannons are good for alliances. After recently attempting an alliance I think it is safe to say I will refuse to do it ever again. This is because my crew and I assisted another ship in a fort battle only for them to backstab us and sink our ship while we were dead(I disagree with the ability to friendly fire upon alliance members). I think the alliance system could also use a rework due to issues like this, but that is a discussion for another day. Others would argue the additional cannons are useful for those who pre-load them and fire them sequentially. While this can sometimes work it is often inconsistent, unreliable, and just downright impractical. Incrementing crew sizes would allow for better management of cannons, repairs, sails, and the wheel. This suggestion would not only help in the functional side of things but would also really amplify ship battles and hand-to-hand combat. I know I am not the only one thinking that this could be a good compensation for the shutdown of the Arena mode. I believe PVP is just as important as the PVE aspect of the game (it is a pirate game after all).

    New Ship(s)
    I know for a fact that this topic has come up multiple times, but it no doubt has a relationship to increasing crew sizes. In my example with the sloop going to a 1-3 crew size, it would be wise to consider a smaller soloist ship if you will. Many have suggested this ship before, and I think it deserves some consideration. The functionality of this ship would take some brainstorming on Rare's part so that the game's balance is not skewed, but I think it could be doable. Aspects of this ship would include the lack of a crow's nest, the lack of an underbelly, small storage(one barrel per supply), fast maneuverability, and possibly a single cannon. These are just the beginning ideas of a ship this small, but it is a start. This may be difficult to implement, though, as a ship this small would be at an immediate disadvantage to any of the other ships(could be an opportunity for a soloist mode).

    Larger Server Size
    This is kind of a separate issue but could be tied in with the other two. I will say that I am a huge PVE fan and it is a portion of the game that I play more often than not. I also pursue PVP interactions quite often, and I have many times found it difficult to find other ships in the game. It feels like the ship cap and player cap are far too low for the size of the map. My friend group and I have spent countless hours sailing around looking for other ships to pursue. It is difficult for reapers to find any action. This may be a server merge issue, or maybe it is an issue with the balance between the ship cap and the map size. All I know is this issue has gotten progressively worse. A quick bandaid fix could be some sort of leaderboard or a new server merging system, as the current implementation feels primitive. While the addition of a leaderboard could impair the immersion, however, unknowingly being stuck in an empty server ruins said immersion. Surely there could be a way to implement a leaderboard-like hint that would allow you to gauge the player count in the server.

    Thank you for reading thus far, feel free to leave any questions, comments, or concerns.

  • 31
    โพสต์
    18.5k
    การดู
    feedback
  • You are right, this has been talked about many a time.

    The simple answer is, fortunately or unfortunately, the servers aren't able to deal with such a large amount of people/ships. 24 players and a max of 6 galleons were too much for the game, and Rare capped the servers at 16 players, and 5 ships per server. Which also explains the lack of ships when you PvP.

  • While this is unfortunate I think Rare needs to reconsider attempting this again. Rather than giving up on the possibility altogether, they could work on improving the game's optimization in hopes of maybe supporting this amount of players. The percentage of SoT's player base that takes part in mostly PVP is surely quite large and if this scarcity issue is not fixed people are going to find other games to play. Simply saying the game cannot support this amount of players is an excuse, but it is not a very good one. Not one developer could sit here and tell me 24 players is inconceivable with the current technology that we have at our disposal. The possibilities should be endless and a 5 ship server cap is simply unacceptable.

  • @mastahprodigy They've been doing that constantly. Larger ships and server capacity isn't going to happen.

  • More players and ships could potentially lead to more emergent PvP and it seems rare is moving away from that.

    These are awesome ideas, when PvE servers hit I bet they will start engineering to support more players/ships per server.

  • No thanks

  • Any of the current ships with an extra crew member is incredibly OP...and in some cases, borderline unsinkable. And trying to adjust the mechanics of each ship to balance the extra crew member in a dynamic way would be a tremendous undertaking as the balance from ship to ship is already incredibly delicate.

  • @p3tey-pan
    "When pve servers hit"
    Oh boy here we go again

  • @jojo-buddy-v2

    I hear you, they are coming. I’d bet on it.

  • @p3tey-pan said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    @jojo-buddy-v2

    I hear you, they are coming. I’d bet on it.

    A fool and his money are soon parted. You can just give it to me now as Rare has made it abundantly clear that will NEVER happen.

    Stay Salty!

  • @dlchief58

    Oh I forgot man, businesses never change and are always 100% transparent with the public. You’ll figure it out, I’m sure there is a massive amount of brain power at work there.

  • @p3tey-pan no one is saying rare is 100% transparent, pirates life is a great example of this, but everyone (especially people working for rare) has said on numerous occasions that the game is pvpve and that will never change

  • @jojo-buddy-v2

    Completely understand what you are saying. Not trying to be hostile and I’m sorry for the tone above.

    What I trying to get across was that what people people say doesn’t matter when you have a large business interest behind you.

    I think the people at Rare are great, they have a winning IP here and in the best version of our world what they say lines up with all the factors that contribute to profitable, efficient business operations.

    I want that version of business everywhere I can get it.

    From what I have experienced though, the business interest will typically win over the visionary or idealist in most situations. I always feel like metrics, when presented to the user base, is meant to justify why they are making a decision they don’t like. No one at the announcement looked like they wanted to shut arena down, all the presenters that were attached to it looked bummed.
    I find myself proffering justifications for actions when I know that I am going to screw a bunch of people over, so trying to “greater good” and justify my actions makes me feel better about making hard choices.

    And from a business perspective it was probably a hard choice, that was either put to them, or they made to get ahead of some less than impressive numbers post pirates life update (player spike and decline graphs).

    Everyone at Rare is attached to this product emotionally. It is evident in every single detail they put into the game. But somewhere in the food chain someone (or someones) is not attached to Sea of Thieves and see it as a line item in their corporate portfolio who’s primary concern is ensuring that it remains a stable cash flow generator. Business ops people stomp on devs everyday.

    Ok big rant, no salt. Just my take on things expanded.

    Fair winds friend.

  • Where does the reapers bones faction fit in a pve only server?

  • @flintlock-dan you can currently max out the faction doing only PvE soooo…

    PvE servers are definitely never happening though.

  • Yes, but the point of them is to hunt emissary ships which involves fighting and stealing look from other players.

  • @flintlock-dan whenever i run reaper i never hunt ships lol

  • @madfrito99 said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    @flintlock-dan whenever i run reaper i never hunt ships lol

    4 months to go from Reaper 1-75 without hunting emissary ships or sinking other players and stealing their loot?

    How are those alliance servers these days? Lol

  • Many, many people have talked about this, but it falls down to two reasons. Balance and servers. The balance of the game will be completely ruined by cracked 4 man brigs (which is no doubt the best ship) and more people would be taking to the forums about being sank by sweaty gallys and brigs on a one or two man sloop.
    And you can't just get better servers. So, no. I don't want anymore ships right now anyway.

  • @kommodoreyenser shhh its a secret lol even without alliance server if i run reaper i dont go after ships…very rarely

  • @flintlock-dan said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    Yes, but the point of them is to hunt emissary ships which involves fighting and stealing look from other players.

    TBH I never use the Reapers for that. Why reveal myself on the map if my intention is to hunt other ships? Makes it impossible to catch them off guard, and it just draws too much attention to me sometimes (I've had times where ship after ship after ship attacks me until I either switch servers or lower the flag). Sure you can see emissaries at rank 5, but most emissaries (in my experience) just lower their flags as soon as the reaper reaches rank 5 and the reaper gets too close, after which they vanish.

  • Larger crew sizes (and ships) would have to come at cost of ships in server. Would it be worth it? For PvE players absolutely. Imagine a 16-players Galleon being basically a pve server haha. Would be glorious.

  • @d3adst1ck said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    @mastahprodigy They've been doing that constantly. Larger ships and server capacity isn't going to happen.

    Why not? Blaming the lack of more ships and players on the server's ability to do so is not a good excuse. You have games that easily support upwards of 128 players and Rare is saying they can't even support 24? If this is the case Rare has some backend issues with their game, because there should not be an issue with achieving well beyond a 24 player server. It is time for the PVP aspect of this game to get some light. And the removal of Arena is just another blow to this area. Granted that mode ended up not being very successful, it is likely because it never received the care and attention it needed.

  • @mastahprodigy said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    Why not? Blaming the lack of more ships and players on the server's ability to do so is not a good excuse. You have games that easily support upwards of 128 players and Rare is saying they can't even support 24?

    Different games have different requirements. How many other games are managing full ship water physics, AI spawns, random loot spawns, world events, a moving storm, and volcanic eruptions in addition to supporting 128 players?

    You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

  • @d3adst1ck said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    Different games have different requirements. How many other games are managing full ship water physics, AI spawns, random loot spawns, world events, a moving storm, and volcanic eruptions in addition to supporting 128 players?

    You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

    Take into consideration the map size of battlefield and warzone. Their servers support a map that large with an insane amount of players. While Battlefield 2042 was a flop their servers were still able to handle different types of natural disasters while still supporting large player counts. It is not far-fetched, Rare just has not optimized their servers to support the player count. I have faith that they could do it if they put much of their focus on it. Also, keep in mind that many of the aspects in sea of thieves are not rendered in for players when they are across the map from them (with an exception to storm clouds and water physics).

  • @mastahprodigy said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    @d3adst1ck said in New Ship(s), Incremented Crew Sizes, and Larger Server Size:

    Different games have different requirements. How many other games are managing full ship water physics, AI spawns, random loot spawns, world events, a moving storm, and volcanic eruptions in addition to supporting 128 players?

    You're trying to compare apples and oranges.

    Take into consideration the map size of battlefield and warzone. Their servers support a map that large with an insane amount of players. While Battlefield 2042 was a flop their servers were still able to handle different types of natural disasters while still supporting large player counts. It is not far-fetched, Rare just has not optimized their servers to support the player count. I have faith that they could do it if they put much of their focus on it. Also, keep in mind that many of the aspects in sea of thieves are not rendered in for players when they are across the map from them (with an exception to storm clouds and water physics).

    Again, you're trying to apply what works in games designed completely differently to how Sea of Thieves should work. None of those mentioned games have full ship water physics which has already been stated as the biggest hit to server performance. Yes, you're correct that not everything is rendered by the players but the server needs to track all of that stuff even if you can't see it. This means it is constantly calculating the position of up to 5-6 floating ships, plus whatever other floating objects are active (barrels, loot, rowboats, etc...).

    Rare has been constantly working on server optimization and trying to maintain performance to allow 6 ships per server, but I'm sure your suggestion of "put more focus on it" was the missing piece of the puzzle.

  • @d3adst1ck

    This all software and hardware brother, and they all conform to the same rules. No matter what your server is doing it comes down to a few resource components but let’s just focus on CPU. If your codebase is not clean or inefficiently written, you are going to need more CPU to achieve desirable results. If your backend is poorly engineered, it is going to cost CPU, and cascade into larger problems (like community day)

    Rare could solve these problems in 2022 pretty easily if they had the right engineering talent at their disposal and the cost could be justified.

    Other large player count games have cleared this hurdle, because they probably have all the justification that they need because they are billion dollar IP’s that are being exploited annually at a minimum.

    So, server problems can be addressed in 2022 if they get some better engineering…and focus on it a bit ;)

    Fair winds friend.

  • @p3tey-pan Send them your resume.

  • I meeean 😀

    You could just put one or two more ships for players..

    Maybe I would sudgest 4-5 or 4-6 players but such large ships would be only on servers that they have at least 3+ players per ship so they have a chance.. not to have solo against 5 players..

    I would like to have a ship also for only a solo player, so just a 1 player ship..
    Might be nice 😀😀

  • @d3adst1ck

    Man, I have thought about it. Solving performance problems was my jam when cloud started taking off.

    I’d have fun with it.

  • as someone who much prefers the pve and actually adventuring, increasing the amount of players on servers would ruin it

    to explain many players resort to very brutal/cheatsy/onsided/or unfun tactics to win there fights, not to mention people useing hacks/exploits, so while i understand pvp is part of the game, more of it would ruin the adventuring aspect of the game, at least with how people do it at the moment

    and i get people will call me but her but i enjoy ship to ship combat, sailing around eachother firing cannons its awesome, and on occation sword fights can be entertaining(inspite of the very broken and flawed combat system) when there is less bunnyhopping

31
โพสต์
18.5k
การดู
feedback
1 จาก 31