What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?

Safer Seas with actual captained ships and stuff

You asking for the perks or just save your ship set. If it’s the ship set, I can see that added but no perks of being a captain. No quick selling

@heletos said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

Hello!

Just wanna know if there are any plans on a better version of Safer Seas with actual captained ships and stuff. Maybe even offline so that i dont have to deal with server issues?
High seas became a very unpleasant experience to me, and i wanna know if i just move on to other games, or still do the battle passes till the mode arrives.
I really dont enjoy any PvP content at all as of now.

As someone who shares your opinion on PvP, I'm sad to say that, according to Rare it's pretty much never gonna happen (though, to be fair, they said the same thing about Safer Seas being a thing for 5+ years before they eventually changed their tune). Also, asking for it in these forums can get your post removed and your forum account issued a warning, much to my own and other's annoyance.

@felix-ashur said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

(though, to be fair, they said the same thing about Safer Seas being a thing for 5+ years before they eventually changed their tune

@th3-tater said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

Keep asking. Safer Seas exists.

@goutfoot-stiner said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

It could be possible Rare has changed thier stance in the past on things... originally they weren't going to have optional cross play but they did..

Always love that argument lol. "Well, Rare made a compromise that time, so surely they will cave in all the way every time we demand something from now on".

The thing people keep missing is that this compromise that is safer sea was made possible and happened simply because it was done in a way that did not trample the core aspect of the game which is a PVEVP shared world, by gating some perks in the main mode and scaling rewards accordingly in both seas in a fair way for all groups involved within the game.

If people want the extra perks and reward rates, they simply must play the according difficulty, it's that simple! Or not, that's the beauty of having the choice.

@goutfoot-stiner said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

So Rare will do what it thinks is best to keep thier numbers up and make emporium sales and if it means eventually giving people what they want and adding private servers they will do that... the compromise argument has nothing to do with the logic you provided above but more to keep people in the game and buying ancient coins

Pretty sure Rare is doing what they think is best to keep their numbers and sales already. Some people around here simply seems unable to accept that their decisions don't align with their own views and desires, and choose to ignore Rare's answer. Imagine having someone ask you for something, you reply to them and they ignore your answer while asking the same thing again and again unless you give them what they want.

People claim wanting what is best for the game's growth and longevity but it's false, they only want what they think is best for themselves. People wanting 100% unlocked PVE without any PVP whatsoever couldn't care less if they were the very last players in a dead game, since it wouldn't affect their experience in any way.

As of now, options are available, choose the amount of risk you want to encounter and you get rewarded accordingly, pretty fair and inclusive for all players. Your so-called PVE server is already there, use it or not.

@goutfoot-stiner said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

@bloodybil that doesn't change the fact that Rare can pander for profit like they've done before... so you can never write anything off as not gonna happen with this game is the point I'm making

They can reach people halfway and make balanced compromises without betraying their core vision and goal for the game like they have done before, yes.

Let's hope for further risk/reward alternative options like they have done in the past, safer sea is indeed quite the success and a great preparation for high sea while giving according recompenses to the level of difficulty that players insist on keeping themselves to, while also providing motivation and incentive for players to reach for more in high seas.

It was a great move to prepare new players alongside guilds to help them find people to play with, especially with the PS5 playerbase they knew was coming.

@goutfoot-stiner said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

@bloodybil the playerbase counts for safer seas went from 600 thousand active players to 1.7 million roughly during the safer seas launch then back down when it wasn't up to the PvE communities expectations. These were presented by people who were accessing the sea of thieves servers at that time to pull player count based on the amount of people connecting to thier servers...you might be able to still find those posts on reddit so safer seas was sort of a success at first...

Also PS5 got catered to with PS5 only servers

Influx of players on a new seasons with new features? That's unusual. Whatever the servers, PS5 players had access to crossplay too and got to learn the game via SS and meet players to play with and join guild groups is what I'm getting at. Preparing for a new player base warrants adding a few tools to help then catch up on 6 years of mechanics.

All in all we can disagree all we want, we can simply trust that Rare has the numbers they need to have to cater to their target audience, and player base they feel is the more lucrative to their business.

They will probably remind it again here sooner or later, but they envision a PVEVP shared world, and people who only want to PVP or PVE and want nothing of the other side are welcome of course, but not their main focus, and they are entitled to cater to who they want, I'm certain you agree at least on that.

You guys have fun and demand what you think is best.

@callmebackdraft

Now that you write this, i never thought about server sided calculations.

On the limitations side i disagree. No captained ships, so no sovereign selling. And that with a 89% hit to earnings(including emissary thing). Also, a lot of commendations you simply cant do in safer seas, especially season 13 and 14 stuff. There is also a hardcap on trading companies at level 40.
So, as of right now, even if you despise the current high seas, there is just no point in playing in safer seas as it is at the moment. (leading to my question, should i just move on?)

And yeah, they could just make ships and players phase through each other so that they can fit 6 people per server. Rebalance the money output a lil bit, and allow captained ships and sovereign selling.
Probably disable alliances.

I dunno.

Right now i just grind without fun through the battle pass and run into the red from every PVP encounter, hiding all my supplies along the way.
I became so spiteful over pvp, and it annoys me a lot.

Yet, the PVE Ship battles are super cool, even after all those years.

@heletos said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

On the limitations side i disagree. No captained ships, so no sovereign selling. And that with a 89% hit to earnings(including emissary thing). Also, a lot of commendations you simply cant do in safer seas, especially season 13 and 14 stuff. There is also a hardcap on trading companies at level 40.
So, as of right now, even if you despise the current high seas, there is just no point in playing in safer seas as it is at the moment. (leading to my question, should i just move on?)

And yet there is no cap on the gold amount you can earn during a session, and no real risk of losing any of it during that time, due to a very high reduction in difficulty. People always bring up percentage but never mention the fact that that percentage means nothing if you lose all your loot to players, increasing that chance even further with emissaries.

Plenty of cosmetics don't require rep or commendations and can be grinded in peace. Thats one point to play SS if you want gold and cosmetics.

And yeah, they could just make ships and players phase through each other so that they can fit 6 people per server. Rebalance the money output a lil bit, and allow captained ships and sovereign selling.
Probably disable alliances.

I dunno.

I think they have their hands full already trying to bring features for everybody and fix those, instead of complicating things further with all kinds of unnecessary complicated mechanics and exceptions, but that's just my opinion.

Right now i just grind without fun through the battle pass and run into the red from every PVP encounter, hiding all my supplies along the way.
I became so spiteful over pvp, and it annoys me a lot.

Yet, the PVE Ship battles are super cool, even after all those years.

My question to you is this, what exactly are you missing out on high seas that prevents you from enjoying the game then? What are you playing the game for?

• Staring at numbers rising in the right corner of your screen?
• Staring at your ship nameplate?
• Staring at your baubles?

or

• Battling ships?
• Finding treasures?
• Doing tales?
• Solve puzzles?
• Fight sea monsters?
• Raid forts?

You can do all that and more, rewards will simply scale with the difficulty you choose, don't be salty you don't get extras without taking additional risks that comes with them. If that's a deal breaker, moving on is always an option. Void Crew is a great PVE coop game very similar to SoT in many regards.

@eastthread51441 said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

“ And yet there is no cap on the gold amount you can earn during a session, and no real risk of losing any of it during that time, due to a very high reduction in difficulty. People always bring up percentage but never mention the fact that that percentage means nothing if you lose all your loot to players, increasing that chance even further with emissaries. “

“Due to a very high reduction in difficulty.”

The PvE difficulty is literally the exact same between safer seas and high seas.

I'm not talking about PVE difficulty, I'm talking about modes difficulties, the players are the real difficulty factor here. Playing basketball in an empty net or against another human is different, even if the ball is the same. Reward shouldn't be the same for people shooting the empty net.

Not every high seas session results in PvP because PvP unlike a voyage or a world event is random and based entirely on the intentions of the crews on the same server as you.

Agreed, high seas brings an additional potential risk, and people playing in it are getting additional perks and reward for taking that risk. Just like emissaries gives more gold for slapping an additional target on your back for reapers.

Safer seas released as a super punishing, restricted and gated PvE only mode.

The mode scales reward with difficulty (players vs no players). People not willing to even risk encountering other crews are the ones restricting themselves, both modes are available to everyone.

IMHO safer seas is not worth using unless you’re

A. Brand new to the game
B. Playing with young children
C. Wanting to do tall tales without interruptions from other crews

For all other players, Rare released a mode that was dead on arrival. Literally no point in using.

You can grind for unlimited safe gold, you can buy the most expansive items of the game without any risk.
I enjoy both modes, one is more exciting and adds more stakes, another allows for chill sessions at your own pace with a little, let's call it, security tax.

Safer seas is a product of Rare refusing to accept that some people simple do not enjoy PvP and they never will. And to those people, Safer seas was a massive let down.

Rare pushes the PvE only crowd away with their punishing, restricted and gated PvE only mode.

GG Rare. Insanely smart move.

Nope the game was always meant to include both PVE and PVP in a shared world, that's the bulk of the player base and the target audience Rare prioritize. People not wanting to play one of the core aspect of the game are disappointing themselves by playing something not fitting their gameplay.

People like you want the big rewards without playing the equivalent challenge. Like WoW raiders playing LFR and expecting mythic loot for playing easy mode.

@eastthread51441 said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

@bloodybil

People like me? I have 6500 hours sailing the high seas. I’m pretty sure we are supposed to avoid personal remarks and instead keep the replies on topic.

Simply basing myself on the comments so far and calling things as they are. I am entirely staying on topic, and am not scared of exposing my views, personal or not. People that plays higher difficulties and challenges should be rewarded accordingly, same as in any game that has ranked/unranked modes for example.

The amount of hours don't matter if, having had the choice, you wouldn't have spent any in there.

We will never agree on how to maximize profits for Rare because you believe that it’s in Rare’s best interest to strictly adhere to their og vision at the expense of players who enjoy the PvE half of SoT but just don’t care for PvP.

Whereas I believe it’s in Rare’s best interest to make SoT as appealing to as many players as possible. As a developer with the goal of making money I wouldn’t care at all if a person wanted to enjoy just the PvE side of the game or if they want the full experience. What I would care about is retention and whether or not the players are buying the plunder pass and other emporium goodies to sustain the company and the live service game as it ages.

Indeed, I believe that affecting the main part of the game by splitting and sundering the core of what makes the game special to benefit a fringe of people that only like a single aspect of the game and despises the rest instead of appreciating it's whole, is probably not the way to maximize profit. Trying to please every single player out there at the expense of the target audience is never a great idea, but what do I know.

@eastthread51441 said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

Whereas I believe it’s in Rare’s best interest to make SoT as appealing to as many players as possible. As a developer with the goal of making money I wouldn’t care at all if a person wanted to enjoy just the PvE side of the game or if they want the full experience. And I certainly wouldn’t treat players differently based on whether they like or dislike PvP. What I would care about is growth, retention and whether or not the players are buying the plunder pass and other emporium goodies to sustain the company and the live service game as it ages.

Besides, we will never know the extent of the data Rare has, but clearly the direction they choose to keep shows what is working for them, and also demonstrates where they have drawn their line, even if not everybody want's to accept it.

@eastthread51441 said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

Look at all the negativity in your reply and then reread my suggestion. There’s no negativity. No saying you’re an inferior pirate because you don’t enjoy PvP. You’re absolutely entitled to your opinion but you’re wrong. And anyone who shares that same sentiment especially if they are in a leadership role at Rare is actively hurting the game’s potential for growth and revenue.

Negativity? Inferiority? Nobody is inferior for wanting any specific gameplay, all I've said is that it makes perfect sense that rewards scales with difficulty and the current modes are quite balanced in that regard.

Anywho, hopefully Rare listens to your business advices before it's too late because clearly the game is doomed otherwise by following silly basic game design concepts like tiered challenges and incentives.

@eastthread51441 said in What are the odds of a better non-PVP mode?:

@bloodybil

I do too hope Rare learns it’s best to treat all your players fairly regardless of whether they like or dislike PvP when they play games.

I personally believe that it's already the case, everybody is able to partake in the activity they prefer, and everybody is treated fairly when it comes to the rewards and perks.

There’s a lot of PvE to enjoy in Sea of Thieves.

Just because you may find it boring, easy and repetitive others may really enjoy it. And just as you greatly enjoy PvP and piracy others may not enjoy those aspects of the game.

I love the PVE and play both modes as I mentioned earlier. Again, to take back the empty net example, scoring nets is still fun even if someone is not playing against you, but if both ways of playing are getting rewarded, it makes sense that the higher difficulty mode rewards more, just like pretty much any other game.

The goal of a live service video game is to be profitable right? Wouldn’t more players playing the game = higher chance of profitability? Is that not logical to you?

And if the changes proposed affect negatively the rest of the players, is it still a good profitable move?

Anyway this isn’t the first time we’ve had this discussion and I know neither of us will change our mind so let everybody else read both sides and pick a side. No reason to keep going.

I am curious though, if you have a game that has multiple difficulty levels, you think it makes sense to give the same reward to everybody, and provide no reason to surpass your limits and reach for higher challenges?

Would it make sense to provide the same gold bonus to people not flying emissary, than to those who are flying it and taking more risks? What is the point?