Pirate ships

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Mr_Wong_ wrote:

      What does everyone think about having pirate ships in the game? Perhaps when a coastal city gets insurgents, then there is a chance that it will produce a naval unit. Also. there should be a higher chance of Pirate naval ships that will spawn at real world locations that are known to have them.
      Mr W,

      If you are suggesting this because you think it will make the game more fun because the game will become more realistic, I think Teburu's answer is correct.

      If you are suggesting this because you think Navies are too powerful, and you think introducing Insurgent ships is a good way to erode player's navies or a good way to slow attackers' advances into captured territories, you need to make a better case for that purpose.

      If you are suggesting this because you think it will make the game more fun, because you think having Insurgent ships patrolling near Insurgent-owned cities will be more fun, I think you need to better describe how you think players' experiences will be changed by this.
      • Will killing/suppressing Insurgent ships be just one more tedious chore? Or will it introduce some useful uncertainty into the game's outcome?
      • And if the change will make the game outcome more uncertain, will skilled players be affected less than unskilled players (the game rules should generally reward skill, not random luck)?
        • If the answer to the "Is skill rewarded" question is "Yes", what skill will be involved in dealing with the Insurgent ships?
      KFG
    • I didn't know that I would have to make a book report for this, it was merely a suggestion... buuuut, since ppl like to tear a simple suggestion into tiny bits,

      While it is true that piracy cannot compete with modern day Naval units, in this game insurgents can't compete either. Yes, pirates would be a nuisance to the players, but insurgents are as well. I don't think that they should be any stronger than a level 1 corvette. They would just be another thorn in the mix, but there's nothing wrong with that.

      Yes, I do think that it would make the game more interesting and unpredictable. Right now we all can just roll up on a port, bombard until there's only dust, and then plop an inf. unit and wait till the morale is back to normal. A lot of ppl play like this, and there should be repercussions to it. If your fire control is on aggressive and you go to sleep expecting your ship to still be bombarding when you wake up gets boring after all the other players have faded out of the game. If a pirate spawns and you lose your ship(s) though, then it's your own fault for not taking precaution. I don't know if I think that the pirate ships should have free reign to the whole world though. Maybe they would just stay at the port that they spawned from. It would certainly deter anyone trying to get an advantage by taking a city simply bc insurgents inf took over.

      As for it affecting new players and skilled players, I doubt that it would do much in making the gap wider. Low level ships that don't level up wouldn't be much of a problem for the new players if they are willing to learn how to play the game. It could also provide a buffer from other players as well. Also, it may make players think twice about leaving a city with low morale. They may even have to change the unit mix just to take a port city.

      As for a "skill", it would encourage players to protect their transport ships (that way 10 tanks don't sink), make a more concentrated effort to use amphibious units, aggressive fire could have dire consequences other than civilian casualties, thoughtful unit placement when taking a city, and deter using an insurgent port as a hideaway from other players.

      That's my report, I hope you'll agree!
    • Mr_Wong_ wrote:

      I didn't know that I would have to make a book report for this, it was merely a suggestion... buuuut, since ppl like to tear a simple suggestion into tiny bits,

      If a reader wanted to be encouraging, they would write that any suggestion is worth writing because even if it never gets adopted it might trigger another idea that does get adopted.

      If a reader wanted to be harsh, they might write that un-analyzed suggestions that are tossed out to become someone else's problem, are poor suggestions

      IMO, "tearing a simple suggestion into tiny bits" is something I''m obliged to do to my ideas, just to be polite, before asking others to spend their time on it.

      YMMV

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • I dislike the idea for public games. I don't have any experience in the other formats.

      When I take a city now, if it's a port city, I have to park a unit on it if I want to lower the risk that it falls into Insurgent hands.

      After the idea, when I take a city, if it's a port city, I have to park two units (of different types) on it to lower the chance that it falls into Insurgent hands.

      There are few if any strategic or tactical factors that influence this decision, the city could be almost anywhere and the choice remains the same. Aside from taxing me by subtracting a unit or two from my forces, and consequently slowing me down a bit, Insurgents don't significantly alter my strategies or tactics.

      The net results is that this change simply increases the cost of expanding my territory, and slows that rate at which I can expand.

      I'm not aware that there is a well-understood and/or agreed reason for using additional Insurgents to increase that cost and/or slow that rate.

      You could get me onboard with some other possible ways to do either thing (increase the cost and/or slow the rate of expanding), but this way isn't one I like.

      Similarly, I'm not aware of a credible claim that new/existing players will play more if they get to do more fighting with AI Insurgents.

      KFG

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • KFGauss wrote:

      I dislike the idea for public games. I don't have any experience in the other formats.

      When I take a city now, if it's a port city, I have to park a unit on it if I want to lower the risk that it falls into Insurgent hands.

      After the idea, when I take a city, if it's a port city, I have to park two units (of different types) on it to lower the chance that it falls into Insurgent hands.

      There are few if any strategic or tactical factors that influence this decision, the city could be almost anywhere and the choice remains the same. Aside from taxing me by subtracting a unit or two from my forces, and consequently slowing me down a bit, Insurgents don't significantly alter my strategies or tactics.

      The net results is that this change simply increases the cost of expanding my territory, and slows that rate at which I can expand.

      I'm not aware that there is a well-understood and/or agreed reason for using additional Insurgents to increase that cost and/or slow that rate.

      You could get me onboard with some other possible ways to do either thing (increase the cost and/or slow the rate of expanding), but this way isn't one I like.

      Similarly, I'm not aware of a credible claim that new/existing players will play more if they get to do more fighting with AI Insurgents.

      KFG
      AND, considering what KFC, just said here^^, it has always been the game overlords stated goal to increase P vs P and minimize P vs AI
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Mr_Wong_ wrote:

      What does everyone think about having pirate ships in the game? Perhaps when a coastal city gets insurgents, then there is a chance that it will produce a naval unit. Also. there should be a higher chance of Pirate naval ships that will spawn at real world locations that are known to have them.
      I don't think it's a good idea, sorry. This isn't the 16th century, when pirates could capture warships and use them themselves.

      I did some work with the Spanish navy a few years ago, and got to speak to some officers who were on board a logistics vessel that was supporting the anti-piracy mission off Somalia. Some unfortunate Somali pirates mistook the ship for a civilian transport and tried to attack and board it. It didn't go well for them - the ones that survived the heavy machinegun counter-fire soon surrendered and were picked up and imprisoned by marines. Navy transport ships are still military vessels.

      To me, it's just not plausible to have insurgents in any type of ship that is capable of defeating anything that the player might use, including transports. Having insurgents in even a Corvette-strength ship would be akin to allowing them to use helicopters and fighter jets as well. I know that fun gameplay usually trumps realism, but there's got to be a limit.
    • Mr_Wong_ wrote:

      What does everyone think about having pirate ships in the game? Perhaps when a coastal city gets insurgents, then there is a chance that it will produce a naval unit. Also. there should be a higher chance of Pirate naval ships that will spawn at real world locations that are known to have them.
      I came here looking to post the same suggestion and did a search to avoid doubling up. I felt you make a very similar case I would, and want to say I totally support this. Give transport units some defense capabilities, make a level 1 naval base capable of creating a coastal defense unit that specializes in pirate defense that could be produced to escort ground units. In the Vietnam conflict they used Coast Guard "Patrol Boats" to good effect, this is an opportunity to introduce something similar. They would have 0 bombardment or air defense, and only have enough naval defense to engage in "naval melee" meaning no range attack.

      Thanks for making this solid suggestion, would love to see this get some traction.
    • I think it would be interesting to have Pirate ships, but I think "there should be a higher chance of Pirate naval ships that will spawn at real world locations that are known to have them." is a horrible idea. Horrible like skiing down a hill at 45 mph and having your testes ripped off by a protruding metal pole. One that's rusty, ... and has jagged edges, and had a decaying yak heart on it, festering in the sun for a week incubating tetanus, ... and ebola, and rabies. Mainly because this sort of "muh realism" type of thinking is really unbalancing. If you want to do it, do it randomly.
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • I like the idea of rebels building rebel corvettes and harassing players.

      If a city falls to rebels forces and it has a port then there should be a chance that the next unit spawned is a rebel corvette. Heck why not have a game mode where all those weird city states that are not player controlled when the game starts, make those rebel controlled from the beginning so they add more danger to the seas?