Long Time Thought - Reapers should server migrate after sinking [Survey Optional]

  • Long time SoT player - not a frequent recent poster.

    Survey here if interested:

    TLDR: I've posted about this before in threads long forgotten, but I still adamantly believe that the game would be healthier if Reaper ships had forced server migration after sinking [or scuttling]. The game has evolved a lot since Reapers were introduced, and I want to be clear that my position isn't so much that Reapers need a nerf, rather that the ecosystem itself would benefit from higher risk/reward gameplay which has always defined Sea of Thieves, but has become more muddled over the past few years as on-demand content dilutes the experience. This suggestion is a starting point for what could be several changes, and address what I think are some latent gripes people have, but don't know how to express or fix.

    Pros:
    Finality - ships have a reason to fight back if they know this crew will be migrated.

    Diplomatic Depth - ships have a greater reason to band together against a common enemy. This applies both to reapers forming uneasy alliances to ensure they endure in that server, and non-reaper ships allying to survive.

    Economy & Theme - we all know PvE reaper ships exist & can be quite profitable. I fly it quite frequently as well. But I think it should come with higher risks for the sake of keeping the other factions more relevent for farming. Controversial I know that I believe a PvE reaper ship should be punished for sinking too. Thematically I think this would help push Reaper's ship in the right direction to be more definitively PvP focused.

    Creates higher stakes for boarding meta - Abandoning your ship to sink the other crew at all costs becomes a lot less viable if you can't just let your boat sink to board & row away with the loot after.


    Cons:
    Server & Connection Related - It would suck to be punished for server & connection issues causing you to sink AND be migrated as a Reaper, but I would argue that most of the pain is from sinking, and being auto migrated would just become a fact of life after some getting used to.

    Discourages Reaper PvE Farming Servers - Again, controversial and I think it is actually a "pro", but it does create more incentive to backstab crews flying a Reaper's flag, which could make alliance servers more toxic, and ultimately make the Reaper-only versions more difficult to assemble & vet players.

    Kills a sense of rivalry among Reaper crews - This one I think is more pertinent. Some people just LIKE fighting over and over, and revenge killing. This change isn't meant to appease everyone. As a long time player, I believe there is more to gain from stopping the culture of revenge killing & endless fights. We have HG for this tbh. See threads for all the concerns about spawn distance, skull of siren song abuse, etc.

    Kills off tucking & kamikaze boarding as a strategy - If you sink while flying the reaper flag, these strategies are not viable. I'd argue the pros outweigh the cons.

    May not solve all issues with revenge killing - It is no secret that players can simply just not fly the reapers flag to avoid this, and still be PvP heavy. That is totally ok. They just don't get the benefit of having visibility to other ships at grade V and that is a perfectly fine trade-off.


    Neutral Musings & Commentary:

    I do not believe this change doesn't need to happen in isolation. It isn't so much that Reaper need a strong nerf, rather that the culture of the game has shifted further and further away from high stakes gameplay. Ironically though, this means victory rings hollow, but defeat still is as painful as ever since time is the most valuable commodity. I think we should change that now that gold is plentiful, events are plentiful (moreso with the ability to dive), and opportunities to experience PvP gameplay are also more plentiful (HG) so that the player's time is better respected.

    One could argue that Reapers coming back again and again is a design decision and is part of the risk/reward for other factions as well. And I agree! It is part of the equation, is intentional, and has been the status quo for a very long time. That doesn't make it the best solution now given all the changes the game has seen. Doing nothing comes with cost too. Other areas of the game that made SoT a success, example diplomacy, have suffered because the current system has created an ecosystem where everyone has less to gain than they ever did. I'm not really talking about the allying mechanic directly which is a way to symbolize your allegiance, rather that there is very little reason to engage other crews now at all. Diplomacy has always boiled down to a simple assessment of whether you think the other crew will help or hurt you in that situation, and whether they will be a nuisance or not given their ability to keep coming back. With this change, I think diplomacy would get a nice bump to relevance by giving ships a reason to ally out of self-preservation & the promise of finality in removing a server threat. More reason to reach out and form those uneasy alliances again. Right now, PvP encounters often feel pointless & at the whim of when the PvP crew will finally tire out. PvP crews can try to liven things up by trying to get a rise out of the other crew, contributing to toxicity, which then becomes exhausting when they are also enabled to keep coming back. I am biased though, I personally believe there is something inherently toxic about Reaper ships coming back again and again after sinking. I feel there is no honor or respect for the player's time in that, and while yes, it is a pirate game, we play in a sandbox and the sandbox does have some ground rules, such as the red sea, to help PvP be a healthy reality of gaming.

    This cuts both ways, and this isn't to say that PvE crews can't be toxic as well. The difference I think is that PvE players have to put out a lot of effort to restart, resupply, find another event, possibly find another crew whereas PvP focused players didn't really lose anything & gladly admit they live for the hunt. This creates exhaustion for one side of the equilibrium, and ultimately, human nature is to take defeat a lot harder when you feel preyed upon. We can't fix human nature, but we can create more motivation to fight back. And I will gladly admit that I have PvP'd too and have ruined innocent players days, have trolled, lied, and plundered. I don't feel proud of it, but I do it because I wanted to give my crew that experience. Ultimately, it's a game, and PvP doesn't make you a bad person. I sleep just fine at night. But I do think people in general set their morals based on the bounds they are allowed to operate in, and I think there is an opportunity to be better while still enabling Reaper ships to have their fun.

    I think the game has evolved enough that there is plenty of targets for Reapers to go after (and HG PvP to engage in) that migrating after a sink isn't really a very detrimental proposition. PvP Reapers often bring no loot to a fight, and the flag they drop isn't really all that valuable compared to the time it takes to fend them off, particularly when it comes to competent crews. This creates an incentive to not fight, and I don't think that is healthy for the game either.

    If you feel that this is too big a nerf by itself, I do think Reapers could be changed to become a faction that you are locked into once selected. You raise the flag, cannot lower it in this server & as a level 1 Reaper, can already see every ship on the map with an emissary flag. No more having to farm up to level 5 to start having fun. Then Reapers can have a new level 5 power that I won't get into in this thread, but could more than offset the detriment of auto migrating. This sounds extremely scary, and personally, I wouldn't do this unless you create a gold / doubloon cost to initially raising the reapers flag, and also force every ship flying on high seas to always have an emissary flag at all times. That way there is "safety in numbers" providing enough targets for the Reaper ships so that no individual crew feels targeted non-stop.

    Thanks for reading. Lots of provocative ideas, but I care for the future of the game, and believe that even if people don't realize it, there is a latent need to create a more Reaper vs everyone else mentality that gives the game some grounding & let's disputes actually be settled verses a breeding ground for toxicity & time wasting. It should be feared as a PvP faction, but I think it is healthier for the game to change the behavior of all ships, but most importantly Reapers, to have more self-preservation in mind. This creates the need for diplomacy, truces, and actual stakes to keep your ship alive that has become lost as on-demand content takes over.

  • 25
    Posts
    17.6k
    Views
  • @calicorsaircat

    If a reaper is doing hourglass, then what happens when they get server merged twice at the same time?

  • @xdragonman15558 Not sure I understand the nuance of your question, but I would say they just get migrated once. HG is a unique example where Rare was smart enough to migrate the crews away from one another after to avoid revenge killing. But that same mentality is absent in adventure mode.

  • This is genuinely a cracking idea

  • @legit-pirate131 Then you'd be banned... ?

  • @kianonboard Those who walk ahead face the first arrows.

  • @legit-pirate131 What do you mean?

  • @kianonboard The nail that stands proud is struck down.

  • @legit-pirate131 Yep - spawn campers will be struck with the hammer.

  • @kianonboard @legit-pirate131

    Appreciate if can stay on topic, thank you!

  • It would suck to be punished for server & connection issues causing you to sink AND be migrated as a Reaper, but I would argue that most of the pain is from sinking, and being auto migrated would just become a fact of life after some getting used to.

    Then why don’t you just accept and get use to being sunk like normal?

  • @burnbacon you and I have always disagreed on opinion, so I won't try to convince you.

    Maybe reaper ships should take the L when I sink them?

    What I want is to make that L more permanent for Reaper ships since they had the power to find me with the grade 5 flag, didn't bring anything of value to the fight, have other targets to go after, have the ability to HG and server hop.

    I think it is healthier for the game, and as I outline, small changes can come with offshoot pros and cons. I would rather evaluate the suggestion based on the merits of those pros and cons rather than your approach of evaluating based on the merits of whether you think I am a sore loser or not. That isn't objective.

  • Migration due to hourglass sinks is fine.

    Migration because someone or some group targeted you, not so much. Sounds very much like I want my loot without a full fight for it.

  • @th3-tater thanks for your opinion. I guess my suggestion is more in line with drawing a line for what a "full fight" constitutes.

    That is where the debate is, and I think there has been plenty of feedback over the years that players do not like fighting the same ship over and over.

    I'd argue the time is right to enforce that because other game systems have evolved enough to give them the opportunity to find new targets readily.

  • @calicorsaircat

    I like your post. It's well written and highlights a need for more diplomatic options on High Seas while providing a clearer option for one: teaming up to remove a Reaper Emissary.

    Migration to a new server already happens in Hourglass so I don't understand why it would be such a huge leap here.

  • @kianonboard

    The rule cited for spawn camping is all about bullying and targeted harassment, and doesn't mention spawn camping specifically. I.e. it's nuanced.

    If you want to be extra safe, you can leave a tier 1 hole in their boat and let them bucket before you send them back to the ferry. That way it's clearly nothing but their pride keeping them there.

    At some point they'll give up and let their boat sink. After that it's pretty unlikely they try fighting you again.

  • Frankly I still think every ship that sinks in PvP should get migrated, regardless of emissary.

    "Revenge fights" are not so much a feature as a nuisance.
    It gets real old, real fast, to have to sink the same ship/crew over and over as they just won't leave you alone.
    If you've sunk, you've lost. The fight should be done, not resume a few seconds later.

  • @the-old-soul800 I can see that working as well (in theory) given the availability of on-demand content, but there are a few hangups:

    I was trying to find a compromise where non-PvP focused ships in alliances, for example, won't lose out on the social aspect of the game by being migrated away from one another after a bad fight (or even just sinking to PvE encounters!) Differentiating between when a ship sinks to PvE vs PvP threats can be tricky, so my thought was to limit this to Reapers only who should be the PvP faction.

    There are ways to make it work though, but my overall bias I guess is that ships doing PvE content can stay on the same server, while ships that are PvP only don't have ties to the server like ships working on voyages or events do.

    Appreciate the thoughtful reply.

  • Frankly I still think every ship that sinks in PvP should get migrated, regardless of emissary

    Would this also happen for say…
    Just random rowboat with 6 mega kegs and explodes a docked ship. It’s pvp in many cases but there was no fighting just huge explosion and done.
    What of the ships doing Shrines? Ship pulls up, sinks ship without conflict but that is still PvP in the books.

    There too many areas where you sink without player v fighting player but ship sinking a ship.

  • @burnbacon
    The questions you asked really aren't in question.
    The examples you gave are both pvp and would count.

    The game knows if a keg is a natural spawn where it spawned or has been moved by players.
    It knows if the cannonball that hit your ship came from a player or skeleton.
    You don't have to find yourself in a face to face sword duel for the encounter to be real pvp.

    Besides that, even a version of the game where all sinks were migrated, even in pve, would still feel better than a version of the game where you have to sink the same crew over and over because they keep coming back for another failed revenge attempt every time.

  • @the-old-soul800 said in Long Time Thought - Reapers should server migrate after sinking [Survey Optional]:

    Besides that, even a version of the game where all sinks were migrated, even in pve, would still feel better than a version of the game where you have to sink the same crew over and over because they keep coming back for another failed revenge attempt every time.

    They're already addressing repeated sinks as per today's Developer Update.

    This is much better solution than trying to determine who is "doing PvE" which I don't think would work very well and is prone to a lot of errors in detection.

  • @d3adst1ck Thanks for sharing. Glad to hear the dev team is interested in a solution to this. The timing makes sense, hence my original post.

    I still stand by my post that Reaper ships are inherently the more egregious offenders of this given their grade V flag power, incentive to attack ships, etc, and so could (and should) be the primary target for a forced migration approach, but I can appreciate if the dev team wants to apply this more broadly based on frequent sinks. I just wonder if it will be enough to be honest...

    Time will tell once we learn more about Rare's plan for this, but my take on this is that if it takes multiple sinks to trigger, I don't really feel that there is much finality to that or benefit to PvE ships.

    It sounds like what the dev team is really trying to tackle is either 1) ram strat boarding or 2) tucking at events / burning blade and just letting your ship sink purposefully. While these are problems worth fixing, requiring multiple sinks might take hours of gameplay to trigger, which renders the benefit meaningless for the crew initially attacked since they will be caught up in fighting for almost this full duration.

    Against competent crews, it can take in excess of half an hour to battle ships off the first time, and for Reaper ships it likely did not require half an hour to find a player to attack... Reaper ships can constantly dive now in search of targets, and if they are grade V, don't even need to actively search once they emerge. If a Reaper crew sinks, I don't see any reason they shouldn't be forced to migrate again for a new target since that is probably how they found the first crew to begin with. The equilibrium is just way off in favor of Reaper ships returning. They stumble on a juicy target with minimal upfront investment, of course they are coming back...

    I think having Reaper's migrate after sinking fits the risk/reward that playing Reaper's should offer veteran players, because let's face it, it is the most profitable faction by far when uncontested. Reaper crews should honestly WANT this change because if they win PvP against another Reaper ship, there goes your competition who would have likely just respawned to camp Reaper's hideout.

25
Posts
17.6k
Views
13 out of 25