Included in Build Sea Relations: Improve Consequences from Sea Battles

[pedrwyth]

Then tell me how you'd want your game to play out.
If I'm going to add a toggle, I need to know what needs toggling.

I guess in gameplay terms more like 3.4 - I'm here because I liked POTC and found the changed geometry to proper Caribbean, more islands , extra quests better graphics, new features like berthing ships and more stuff working properly in the Mod added much to the stock game. In 3.4 I basically just did the quests with other stuff on the side where needed for cashflow (ie as I played the stock game). Looking back I see when I left Cozumel I was an unknown freebooter, neutral to all but Pirates and the English, had done about 50 smuggling runs and a dozen fetch quests, and looking at the log sunk or captured about 30 non-quest ships of various nationalities and I enjoyed the whole experience. Didn't use false flag much (I was neutral to most so my flag was fine), ignored smuggling enhancements (just talked to the agent twice straightaway when I remembered).

I then wanted to see game crashes/bugs reduced if and when I play again. I don't need to care about improvements I can avoid or indeed maybe sample if I feel like it (Navy,privateer, merchant passport types, capturing colonies, seeking fame,land) as long as they are not forced upon me. However I guess the relations changes and the knock on in the shipyard, turning you pirate etc will I think change gameplay too much for me. Not particularly interested in more "realism" knowing next to nothing about Caribbean history, ships, weapons, international maritime law etc so inconsistencies in that area don't particularly bother me (although I can understand a wish to improve them) . Am interested in extending the amount of quests/sidequests and game geography for variety of experiences available.

Games are just that to me, when it ceases to be fresh or I know it too well it goes back in the box and I move on to another probably completely different genre "favourite", then, in due course, - when it feels fresh again, I may return to it again for a while - hence my return to POTC. I'm not a sailing (or pirate) enthusiast just find it a reasonable setting for a game.

I respect that many if not most active on the forum are different, they care about the genre. They may have played other sailing/pirate products (and probably many other games besides) however many seem to have played so much of the Mod that they know the plots (and often sailing related films) inside out . Changes toward a better simulated gameworld are welcomed then not only because they are a move towards what is "realworld right" but because they re-fresh the experience. I understand and empathise with that but i don't share the motivation.

It just looks to me that when I finally got to play again it wouldn't be the game I enjoyed, - Reinterpreting my last game I would be an infamous pirate unwelcome virtually everywhere I would need false flags, which would be seen through and remembered all of which would restrict the questflow. That's not to say it wouldn't be good but a different game and I'm not finished enjoying what it was.

I hope the above is an explanation (intended) and not a rant (un-intended).

I know that in game solutions are preferred to toggles so would it be possible or too difficult to avoid or ameliorate the changes for a particular player type (say "traditionalist" -or archaic if you like). If so this could go as a feature request to allow discussion as to what could be in and what out of such a type.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

@pedrwyth: You are absolutely right that these recent changes do have a MAJOR impact on how the game plays.
I knew that would happen when we started it and I fully expected that we'd need a toggle at some point to go back to a more simplified approach for some players such as yourself.
Of course I'd like to avoid that if at all possible, but this may be too large a change for some and that is fair enough.

You should most definitely NOT need to be forced to return to Beta 3.4 because we've made more improvements.
That goes against everything we have ever attempted here.

Playing as a "free agent" free of the burden of nation relations and all that stuff is definitely something that I know certain players like to do.
I haven't yet thought of a sensible way to implement that without a toggle though.
If we try to take our lead from real life, how would that fit into the world? Anyone who isn't loyal to a nation will probably be considered a pirate.
The game in its current Beta 4 state does somewhat allow that, but that requires you to attack ONLY pirates.

If you attack any other nation, naturally both that nation AND its allies will not be happy about it.
That is already one major change from before: The allies actually CARE now, so international relations mean something.
This could easily be disabled with an "Arcade Game Mode" toggle.

Another change is that even if you attack only one other nation, it is still considered an act of piracy with all its consequences if you don't have a LoM.
This is because only privateers and navy officers have any business sinking and capturing ships. This is more of a historical thing.
Again, this could be disabled with an "Arcade Game Mode" toggle so that attacking nations hostile to you is fair game, regardless of having a LoM or not.

The third issue I can think of is "selling ships". Based on our latest discussion, we WILL allow this everywhere and always, but pricing may be affected.
Perhaps we should treat this similar to the attacks themselves: LoM required on Realistic Game Mode and for Arcade, the other ship just needs to be hostile.

All the above being said, if everything works as intended, it sounds like it should be possible to get the functionality you would like without extra toggles at all.
All you have to do is to be willing to attack only specific nations, rather than any one you feel like. Then get a LoM and you can pretty much do what you please.
A LoM is quite cheap in the early game (500 gold) and after the changes proposed above would give you MORE money (rather than less as is currently the case).
So I'd be curious to know if you have any objections to doing that and, if so, for what reasons.

Again, I AM willing to make the Arcade toggle as I totally expected to have to do that anyway.
I'd just prefer not to if I can avoid it...

 

[Levis]

Beware if you tie this to the arcade mode it might piss people off. You might only want to disable this while still have the other realism settings.
Couldn't we add something to the relation agent in the pirate towns? Something on the lines of "tell me, how do you manage to stay friends with everyone?" And he tells you about a pact or something and you can join it to stay neutral to everyone? You can leave it whenever you want.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Beware if you tie this to the arcade mode it might piss people off. You might only want to disable this while still have the other realism settings.

Of course I'd add a seperate toggle at the top of InternalSettings.h too!
Because *I* usually play on Arcade Game Mode but DO want my new rewritten behaviour.

Couldn't we add something to the relation agent in the pirate towns? Something on the lines of "tell me, how do you manage to stay friends with everyone?" And he tells you about a pact or something and you can join it to stay neutral to everyone? You can leave it whenever you want.

That might be an option too.
What exactly should be influenced by that? And would you get some sort of "item" that would trigger that?

 

[pedrwyth]

Outside of that required in the quests I don't think I ever initiated a battle at sea. I would think the other nations attacked me when I was working for Silehard under the English flag and I just finished the encounter. Actually I suppose since you are effectively forced to work for Silehard you ought to get a LoM at that point anyway! When ships attacked I never asked them if they were navv or had a LoM but perhaps the AI needs adjusting unless all other nations ships are going to be privateers - perhaps I should bring them in as pirates for trial? Later when Silehard's man Blacklock turns nasty I kill him and England goes personally hostile, their ships attack me so I finish them too. It later turns out Silehard is the rogue and the English want him off me - perhaps a pardon at that point to restore your personal standing. I don't want my relations soured or accused of piracy for my reactions within the questline.

The other place would be encountering customs ships. I usually scattered the fleet and ran, but sometimes you couldn't outrun them (depending on ship condition etc). Whilst I could see you could board them and (if lucky enough to survive) let them go, but it would play havoc with the financial benefits of smuggling (my aim at the time) given the likely damage to the ship(s). I presume removing gold etc from them first would still fall foul of your new relations.

Leaving aside what suits me I do think that the instant knowledge of your behaviour/actions throughout the Caribbean is unrealistic, particularly if you leave no survivors - not that I currently have a suggestion of how else to structure the spread of this information through time and space.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Outside of that required in the quests I don't think I ever initiated a battle at sea.

It is difficult to determine through code who initiated a battle.
That is why I am basing it on who finished the battle. No relation changes occur until the other ship is either sunk or captured.
So shooting their rigging and then escaping is fair game and you should get absolutely no negative points for that.
Equally, boarding them and deciding to let them go also should NOT count as "capturing" their ship and also give you no negative (or positive?) points.

I would think the other nations attacked me when I was working for Silehard under the English flag and I just finished the encounter. Actually I suppose since you are effectively forced to work for Silehard you ought to get a LoM at that point anyway!

Indeed quests are a special case. It does make sense for Silehard to give you a LoM.
Or perhaps to create an "Agent" status, which means that you don't get negative points for your actions on behalf of (in this case) England, but also don't get promotions either.
That would work well with distinguishing the "Agent" player type from the other ones too.

When ships attacked I never asked them if they were navv or had a LoM but perhaps the AI needs adjusting unless all other nations ships are going to be privateers - perhaps I should bring them in as pirates for trial?

You do have a point there. Any merchant ships should not be particularly keen to attack you anyway and should generally only defend themselves.
Navy ships DO have valid ground to attack, of course, and pirates are just pirates. There are no NPC privateers in the game at this time.

Later when Silehard's man Blacklock turns nasty I kill him and England goes personally hostile, their ships attack me so I finish them too. It later turns out Silehard is the rogue and the English want him off me - perhaps a pardon at that point to restore your personal standing. I don't want my relations soured or accused of piracy for my reactions within the questline.

If I recall, after the main quest, you should report to Governor Brin who already restores your relation to England AND offers you an official LoM for your trouble.
So that should already be in place?

The other place would be encountering customs ships. I usually scattered the fleet and ran, but sometimes you couldn't outrun them (depending on ship condition etc). Whilst I could see you could board them and (if lucky enough to survive) let them go, but it would play havoc with the financial benefits of smuggling (my aim at the time) given the likely damage to the ship(s). I presume removing gold etc from them first would still fall foul of your new relations.

I think you can still LOOT them and still get no negative (or positive) national effects.
But that might have to be checked....

Leaving aside what suits me I do think that the instant knowledge of your behaviour/actions throughout the Caribbean is unrealistic, particularly if you leave no survivors - not that I currently have a suggestion of how else to structure the spread of this information through time and space.

It would indeed be more realistic to build in delays here and there.
But that would REALLY complicate matters. Good idea, but perhaps for another time....

 

[Grey Roger]

Outside of that required in the quests I don't think I ever initiated a battle at sea. I would think the other nations attacked me when I was working for Silehard under the English flag and I just finished the encounter. Actually I suppose since you are effectively forced to work for Silehard you ought to get a LoM at that point anyway!

That's actually a good point. Without a LoM, attacking a French merchant ship, e.g. the Oiseau, is now an act of minor piracy. (You auto-hoist the British flag at that point so at least you're not in danger of committing a major act of piracy.) Silehard commandeers your ship, then allows you to work as a free agent rather than formally joining the navy, which by definition is a privateer so he should indeed give you a LoM.

It later turns out Silehard is the rogue and the English want him off me - perhaps a pardon at that point to restore your personal standing. I don't want my relations soured or accused of piracy for my reactions within the questline.

Hint: after the action at Cozumel, go back to Port Royale, either under a false British flag or via a beach and a back door. Go and talk to Silehard's replacement. You may get a nice surprise.
[Ninja'd by @Pieter Boelen ]

The other place would be encountering customs ships. I usually scattered the fleet and ran, but sometimes you couldn't outrun them (depending on ship condition etc). Whilst I could see you could board them and (if lucky enough to survive) let them go, but it would play havoc with the financial benefits of smuggling (my aim at the time) given the likely damage to the ship(s). I presume removing gold etc from them first would still fall foul of your new relations.

You're already breaking the law by smuggling, then you're resisting arrest and attacking a law enforcement ship. Of course that's going to count as piracy! (Unless, of course, you have a LoM, get caught smuggling into an enemy island and then attack the enemy's customs ships.)

More generally:
I agree that there needs to be a balance between realism and fun. This is nowhere more apparent than when I was working on "Early Explorers", which to be realistic would need several more islands disabled as they hadn't been colonised - including Barbados, Martinique and La Tortue. You can imagine what that would do to gameplay! So, realistic or not, they stay. But I am reminded of an old space combat/trading game called "Federation of Free Traders", which was similar to the more famous "Elite" but with all sorts of neat features added. Unfortunately, it lost the basic gameplay fun of "Elite", so while "Elite" became a classic, "Federation of Free Traders" slipped into well-deserved obscurity. (Experience with the dynamic economy of "Federation of Free Traders" is why I always get nervous when there's mention of doing it in PoTC!) So when adding all these neat features to PoTC, we need to be careful that we don't lose the fun of the basic game - we want to be the "Elite" of the seas, not the "Federation of Free Traders" of the seas...

 

[Pieter Boelen]

That's actually a good point. Without a LoM, attacking a French merchant ship, e.g. the Oiseau, is now an act of minor piracy. (You auto-hoist the British flag at that point so at least you're not in danger of committing a major act of piracy.) Silehard commandeers your ship, then allows you to work as a free agent rather than formally joining the navy, which by definition is a privateer so he should indeed give you a LoM.

So no need to have a more secretive "half-LoM" for Agents then? I'd be quite fine with a simple solution of having Silehard give you a LoM as part of the storyline.
You'd lose that when you temporarily turn pirate, which WILL mess up your relations with England. But that is part of the story and should already get reset afterwards.

There is every chance that the new system will have unintended side-effects for quests all over the place.
If that is the case, those instances should be reported so that we can deal with them appropriately!

I wouldn't want to require a toggle to disable all the cool new systems just because somebody might like to play a quest.
Rather, either the quest should be made to work WITH the new systems (preferred) or there should be some quest-specific exceptions added to let it still work as intended.
It might take some time to find all instances where this may be needed, but that should be the best solution by far.

But I am reminded of an old space combat/trading game called "Federation of Free Traders", which was similar to the more famous "Elite" but with all sorts of neat features added. Unfortunately, it lost the basic gameplay fun of "Elite", so while "Elite" became a classic, "Federation of Free Traders" slipped into well-deserved obscurity. (Experience with the dynamic economy of "Federation of Free Traders" is why I always get nervous when there's mention of doing it in PoTC!) So when adding all these neat features to PoTC, we need to be careful that we don't lose the fun of the basic game - we want to be the "Elite" of the seas, not the "Federation of Free Traders" of the seas...

I think just about all functionality we can think of has the POTENTIAL to add more fun to the game.
It depends on how it is handled. I think generally when something doesn't work well for gameplay, it also doesn't work as originally intended/envisioned.
Which means that it is more of a problem with the implementation than with the concept itself.

Of course some features have a LOT of impact and can get VERY complicated, which also makes it extremely easy for something to go wrong with implementation.
Definitely something worth being careful with....

 

[pedrwyth]

You're already breaking the law by smuggling, then you're resisting arrest

Yes but these are solely national trade/customs and excise matters. Only the nation concerned is going to be interested, even their allies only have general attack/defence reciprocal arrangements for times of conflict so are unconcerned. No international piracy considerations there! Accordingly you should only lose points with the nation concerned not their allies, although I think previously there was probably no impact on relations since I stayed mainly neutral to all.

Those who don't get a LoM or join the navy don't need to know military codes of conduct.
They just need to know that if they attack anyone who didn't attack them first then they're pirates.

My emphasis

and attacking a law enforcement ship.

No they're attacking me, I'm defending myself whilst seeking to withdraw from an incident with them (or possibly seeking to halt an unprovoked attack on your vessel if it's not your own nation and not a hostile one).

Bring me my Barrister I smell an international incident - assuming that if you capture them you let them go (having taken compensation for any damage to your ship). Certainly if you get out of their waters they should immediately cease pursuit unless its your own nation or a hostile one and you are flying the national flag. Even if you sink them I doubt that it would be considered piracy - commandeering their vessel may be unwise though.

Of course that's going to count as piracy! (Unless, of course, you have a LoM, get caught smuggling into an enemy island and then attack the enemy's customs ships.)

Not if you don't sink them or retain their vessel under the current regime and as above that seems fair.

If you have a LoM and they are hostile you could attack them anyway, the smuggling has no relevance.

However since my game style is to go wherever the quest plot takes me and smuggle when arriving there to make ends meet - which could equally be my nation, hostile or neutral I don't see a LoM is going to provide any sort of solution to allow me to retain my playing style in the new world.

Despite some of the intimations elsewhere it should be clear that smuggling is not the same offence as an act of piracy.

 

[pedrwyth]

The more I read and think about the implications of recent changes, the more certain I am that it does need an option to revert closer to the original game behaviour. .

However not to be entirely negative I feel there are two main points at which the change would be too much which with adjustment could bring less of a step change..

The first is where the player is attacked and responds by sinking or capturing the enemy. Currently taken to be an act of piracy? By definition the attacker is either going to be from a hostile nation (so a war situation) or a pirate. I do not believe in a war situation that it is right that if you succesfully defend yourself (by sinking or capturing your attacker) and return to port you are now regarded to have behaved as a pirate.These are not "normal" times. As a touchstone case think of a merchant ship sinking a U-boat (hoewver unlikely) returning to be arrested as a pirate -I don't think so!

In the game it is apparently currently (and may always be) difficult to know who started the conflict -particularly since with instant boarding perk you don't even have to fire your cannos. Given this uncertainty I think the presumption should be the player is not the aggressor and therefore innocent if the other party is hostlie or a pirate (pirate is an OK target anyway of course).

What then (I hear you ask) is the benefit at all of the LoM in the game, well that could be the decider - as per this thread as to whether you can get any financial gain from selling a non-pirate captured ship. A non Naval or LoM player gets no pirate behaviour penalty but cannot sell the ship (but can keep the cargo and any crew which they transferred - recompense for any damage sustained). . You should also not be in a position to ransom the captain if captured- who is after all a prisoner of war (this in fact should apply to all players (except someone playing pirate) as far as I can see). If at some time it becomes possible to record who is the agressor then if they are not Navy or with a valid LoM they should inded move towards piracy- as should sinking or siezing neutral or friendly ships. However if you take a captured ship and sell it to the pirates then, again, you should move towards being a pirate

The second is run-ins with the coastguard ships. Again here I feel it is twisting the scenario to involve piracy, they always fire first and I have already (above) shown why I think it ia mistake to have any linkage with piracy. However I could see releasing them after capture (if they surrender) as a requirement to avoid sanction (unless of course they are from a hostile nation), although I am not sure if they don't surrender quite what you do Actually given the widespread support for smuggling in these times I doubt that any reputation loss should be involved either - just your personal stock going down with the nation concerned.

For this to be sufficient for me I would also need to be able to change the false flag recognition reset to be on change of ship (making sure the previous ship ID was nowhere in your squadron or berthed to avoid an exploit of swapping to and fro and also to ensure the smugglers do not decide not to deal with me - both of which are probably achievable.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Based on the current code, the game should indeed not consider smuggling itself an act of piracy.
However, if you get caught smuggling and there is a coastguard vessel waiting, how you deal with that coastguard ship may be considered an act of piracy.
If you sink them or capture their ship for your own, then you have just committed an act of war against their nation.
Their allies would object to that and if you didn't have any loyalties to a nation hostile to them, that is considered an act of piracy.

So that is why you would probably want to have a Letter of Marque.
And of course avoid smuggling to islands of friendly nations OR avoid getting caught!
@Levis has added a lot of opportunity to deliberately avoid the coastguard, though of course that wouldn't always be successful.

And there is always the option of hitting the coastguard ship's sails until you can escape.
Or after boarding, letting them go.

So smuggling by itself isn't considered an act of piracy unless you allow an actual act of piracy to follow upon being caught.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

The more I read and think about the implications of recent changes, the more certain I am that it does need an option to revert closer to the original game behaviour. .

There is hope for the new system yet!

However not to be entirely negative I feel there are two main points at which the change would be too much which with adjustment could bring less of a step change..

I'd like to take the opportunity here to thank you for your feedback. Getting responses is so much better than a deafening silence!
Hopefully by thinking this through here, we can create a game that truly works in such a way that everybody can be happy with it.

The first is where the player is attacked and responds by sinking or capturing the enemy. Currently taken to be an act of piracy? By definition the attacker is either going to be from a hostile nation (so a war situation) or a pirate. I do not believe in a war situation that it is right that if you succesfully defend yourself (by sinking or capturing your attacker) and return to port you are now regarded to have behaved as a pirate.These are not "normal" times. As a touchstone case think of a merchant ship sinking a U-boat (hoewver unlikely) returning to be arrested as a pirate -I don't think so!

Definitely an interesting situation and a tough one to think through!

If the attacking ship WAS a pirate, then capturing or sinking them is not considered an act of piracy, so at least that isn't a problem.

As for the situation where the attacking ship was NOT a pirate, it becomes definitely more tricky. You U-Boat is a nice example.
Imagine though that you on that merchant ship do sink the U-Boat somehow, imagine the number of people you just killed!

At the very least, you should give them the chance to surrender. And if they do surrender, you are of course obliged to accept that surrender.
But then what? Keep the U-Boat for your own? You'd probably have to hand her in to the navy of your own nation.
I doubt you'd see any money from this. Maybe a "thank you" and non-monetary reward with a ribbon or so?

Based on the current game, you can simulate this in two ways:
1. After capturing the "U-Boat", decide to let them go. They should remain neutral and you can "pretend that you handed them over to your authorities".
2. If you think you DO deserve a reward, then you need that Letter of Marque so you'll get both the money from the sale AND the promotions that follow.

In the game it is apparently currently (and may always be) difficult to know who started the conflict -particularly since with instant boarding perk you don't even have to fire your cannos. Given this uncertainty I think the presumption should be the player is not the aggressor and therefore innocent if the other party is hostlie or a pirate (pirate is an OK target anyway of course).

At the moment the game doesn't care about how the conflict started, but does care about how it was resolved.
The player remains innocent unless they sink the enemy ship or capture it for their own.

For any battle to occur at all, the ships MUST be hostile as far as the game is concerned.
If they aren't and you actually fire on them, the results will be MUCH more extreme as in that case, the game does store that the player WAS the aggressor.

Consider also that the game does not actually hugely penalize you for a "minor act of piracy".
The nation whose ship you attacked will of course turn hostile. But that was probably already the case and therefore doesn't matter.
You'll lose a few more points with them, but what else would you expect?

But since this IS considered an act of piracy, you'll GAIN those points with the Pirates.
As the pirates are hostile at the beginning of the game, this will turn them less so.
Eventually they'll turn Wary and then Neutral. Eventually, once you reach Friendly, you WILL be considered a pirate in non-pirate ports.
You also LOSE points with the pirates if you attack any of their ships.
So assuming that you started out hostile to the pirates, you'll need to sink maybe 60 non-pirate ships and not sink ANY pirate ones before this happens.
That shouldn't happen all that quickly, should it?

As for the actual subject of this thread: Sale prices.
Based on my latest intentions, you WILL be able to sell a ship that you captured as a minor act of piracy in ANY shipyard.
It will just be for a terrible price. I was thinking 10% of what the ship is worth.
That would work well together with my note of gaining only a tiny sum of money for bringing in that "U-Boat".

What then (I hear you ask) is the benefit at all of the LoM in the game, well that could be the decider - as per this thread as to whether you can get any financial gain from selling a non-pirate captured ship. A non Naval or LoM player gets no pirate behaviour penalty but cannot sell the ship (but can keep the cargo and any crew which they transferred - recompense for any damage sustained). . You should also not be in a position to ransom the captain if captured- who is after all a prisoner of war (this in fact should apply to all players (except someone playing pirate) as far as I can see). If at some time it becomes possible to record who is the agressor then if they are not Navy or with a valid LoM they should inded move towards piracy- as should sinking or siezing neutral or friendly ships. However if you take a captured ship and sell it to the pirates then, again, you should move towards being a pirate

I like your idea of not allowing certain player types to ransom anyone without that being considered an act of piracy as well.
But if you are even in a position to ransom anyone at all, the act of piracy has already been committed as you captured or sank their ship.
If we DO always allow this, you can "gradually slide into piracy" based on your actions, rather than being locked into any specific way of playing.

Can't think of any straight-forward ways to determine the aggressor in any sea battle either.
And even if we could, working that into the current system would make it more complicated.
Just looking at the code currently in the UpdateRMRelation function, it is pretty much as complicated as I would like to see.
It already allows a wide variety of situations as it is. In fact, I'd LIKE that code to look a bit simpler and cleaner; but I have been unable to think of any way to do that.

The second is run-ins with the coastguard ships. Again here I feel it is twisting the scenario to involve piracy, they always fire first and I have already (above) shown why I think it ia mistake to have any linkage with piracy. However I could see releasing them after capture (if they surrender) as a requirement to avoid sanction (unless of course they are from a hostile nation), although I am not sure if they don't surrender quite what you do Actually given the widespread support for smuggling in these times I doubt that any reputation loss should be involved either - just your personal stock going down with the nation concerned.

At what point does piracy come in there in your experience?
Unless I am very much mistaken, if you convince their ship to surrender and let them go or just escape them, it wouldn't be considered an act of piracy.
If that isn't the case, that would be a bug that needs fixing.

I also think reputation loss is not factored in anywhere; at least not on the "sea relations" side.
It was my intention to add that some time, but only for GROSS acts of piracy, which is only attacking WHILE under a friendly flag OR firing on a friendly ship.

To clarify further, there are two "levels" of acts of piracy:

1. MINOR
You sank or captured or non-pirate ship.
The nation you attacked will turn Hostile if they weren't already. All its allies will turn Wary.
For nations that were already Hostile and allies that were already Wary, you just lose some additional points.

You gain some points with the pirates, which eventually can lead to the Pirated becoming Friendly and you considered a Pirate too.
If this was a nation that was NOT already hostile to you before, you'll gain EXTRA points with the Pirates.
That may be considered a "Medium" act of piracy. This can happen, of course, if you capture/sink a coastguard vessel after being caught smuggling.

2. GROSS
This gets triggered exclusively by capturing/sinking a ship where either you fired on them while they were friendly OR you did this while under a friendly flag.
So that requires either deliberately firing on a friendly ship or possibly your false flag being discovered and then finishing the battle while still under that false flag.
In this case, you lose any LoMs and navy commissions. The nation you attacked become as hostile as it can be (-119 points).
Any allies turn hostile too (-60 points). All remaining nations turn Wary (-45 points).


So basically, while the game code DOES call "minor acts of piracy" as piracy, the game won't consider you a pirate unless you repeatedly do so.

 

[Grey Roger]

You should always be allowed to defend yourself. That's why merchant ships were armed, and indeed why merchant ships were armed in WW1 and WW2. (Not just U-boats, either. The Liberty Ship Stephen Hopkins managed to do so much damage to the German auxiliary cruiser Stier that the cruiser itself was so badly damaged that it had to be abandoned and scuttled.) I'd say that if a ship is firing at you then you should be allowed to sink it without penalty.
http://bismarck-class.dk/hilfskreuzer/stier.html
From what I gather, though, what you're not allowed to do is take a prize unless you have a LoM. So you can sink that pirate or enemy warship but you can't capture it. Under the new proposal, you could bring the ship to the shipyard, where you get the price for a pirated ship because you have no LoM. (Further repercussions may be implemented later...)

You're not allowed to fire first. You shouldn't attack enemy merchants and they shouldn't attack you. If they do, you're allowed to defend yourself - either they're operating under a LoM and are actually privateers or they're the ones committing an act of piracy. Likewise, a warship belonging to a nation which is not hostile to yours shouldn't be firing at you, so if you attack it then it's an act of piracy. (And, for that matter, an act of war against a nation with whom your nation is not at war, which could perhaps land you in all sorts of trouble with your own nation!)

To simplify, then:
No LoM: you're not allowed to attack anything unless it's already attacking you. (The game can detect this, screen icons are red and you can't escape to worldmap, so this ought to be possible.) You're not allowed to capture prize ships. You can defend yourself, up to and including sinking a ship which is already attacking you.

LoM: you can attack anything belonging to a hostile nation. You can take prizes.

In any case: attacking a ship belonging to a nation which is not hostile to your nation is piracy, also an act of war.

As for false flags being discovered: if possible, I'd suggest that continuing to fire under a false flag after being recognised should be a lesser offence than starting a fight while under a false flag. The former is a simple mistake in the heat of battle (and a lot easier to make when there you're playing a solo game rather than commanding a ship with a first officer to suggest changing flag), the latter is outright piracy.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

How about @Grey Roger and @pedrwyth have a look in PROGRAM\NATIONS\nations.c, specifically the UpdateRMRelation function?
I completely rewrote that one as per Grey Roger's suggestions a while back and added all sorts of comments to explain what it does and how.
Look it through, think it through and let me know if you see any simple ways to improve its behaviour as per your wishes.

As it is, I've again got a lot of other things lined up to look into to get stuff working at all.
As far as I'm concerned, the nation relations system itself is technically operational and not broken (it definitely was before!), so that is good enough for me.
For the time being, at the very least. We can always expand and improve later.

At the moment:
- Other ship being hostile to you = you get only a minor act of piracy for defending yourself IF sinking/capturing them; this would be a MAJOR one if that wasn't the case
- There is already some AI code affecting merchants to hopefully convince them to not deliberately attack you; this code is old and perhaps could do with an update, but I don't want to do that just yet
- Continuing to fire under a false flag after being recognized is considered NO OFFENSE AT ALL. However, sinking/capturing a ship under those conditions is.

 

[pedrwyth]

OK i'll print out the code to see if I can get my head round the functionality (rather than the effect).
It would seem self-defence might be acceptable after all - if it can be coded.

Of course there could still be a problem with coastguards who are not HOSTILE but attack because you are smuggling. The code assumes only hostiles attack but not so, perhaps the check of the fact they are red (attacking) if it can be checked would include them. However if you fire the other ship would usually go red anyway so I'm not sure how the timing of the storage of the attack posture could be reliable achieved - maybe that's what coding challenges are for.

Might be good to move this stuff to another thread - either feature request for retaining a simplified game or review of nation relations - not really shipyard prices (except for knock-on effects).

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Indeed I should probably move a whole bunch of posts elsewhere. Tomorrow....

If I did my job well with the rewrite, the comments should be able to explain how it currently works and why.
Worth noting is that function gets called only when sinking a ship or capturing her for your own.

As added "fancy trick" the game does add a "betrayed" attribute to any friendly ships that you deliberately fired on.
That gets transferred to the temporary player "traitor" attribute just prior to that function being called.
So that should explain where that extra check comes from.

I fear if we add too many exceptions, the code will become complicated and prone to errors in implementation.
In fact, it might already be at that point, but I haven't yet been able to think through a scenario where it would function truly wrong.

Another fear of mine here is that the way the game works may easily end up seeming quite random to players.
That is why I would prefer to maintain at least some measure of simplicity if we can.
We can make the most fancy systems, but if the player cannot understand how it works from playing with it, then it is just wasted effort.

The bottom line is that the "minor acts of Piracy" are not actually excessively nasty in my eyes.
You can avoid officially becoming a pirate by compensating your actions with some actions against them.
Or get a LoM. They aren't expensive in the early game and don't really have any disadvantages that I can think of.

The small nudge towards Piracy can also serve as a warning before it is actually too late.
Provided you don't REALLY attack the wrong targets.
And it allows you to walk the fine line between an honourable character and a pirate so you can fall somewhere inbetween.
That's all part of the role playing, no?

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Above posts split from WIP - Different Shipyard Sale Prices for Naval Officers/Privateers | PiratesAhoy! as a new "Feature Request".

From my side, I care most about confirming the the current system actually does what I think it should without any unexpected side-effects.
But I'm certainly willing to support whatever further improvements are requested for later on.

In the meantime, I'd suggest everyone who feels like it to check the following:

How about @Grey Roger and @pedrwyth have a look in PROGRAM\NATIONS\nations.c, specifically the UpdateRMRelation function?
I completely rewrote that one as per Grey Roger's suggestions a while back and added all sorts of comments to explain what it does and how.
Look it through, think it through and let me know if you see any simple ways to improve its behaviour as per your wishes.

As added "fancy trick" the game does add a "betrayed" attribute to any friendly ships that you deliberately fired on.
That gets transferred to the temporary player "traitor" attribute just prior to that function being called.
So that should explain where that extra check comes from.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Did some more thinking on this one and got to the conclusion that the current system I set up is pretty darn good.
I can't think of many major improvements to make, because:


1. Capture/Sink Already-Hostile Ship Without LoM (current situation)
This is also BY FAR the most likely scenario to occur for most players, I reckon.
At the moment if you do this, the game considers it a "minor act of piracy".

You drop down a few points with the nation you attacked and gain a few points with the pirates.
For the nation, it doesn't matter since they probably were already hostile. You can't get those points back until you make peace, but that only makes sense.
For the pirates, a few points don't matter either; it only matters once you hit Friendly, which doesn't happen in one go.
This can serve as a warning that you're sliding into piracy AND I want to tie the "Relations Tutorial" into this event so people notice this functionality.

You can easily compensate by attacking some pirates and bringing your points with the pirates right back down.
So no actual huge gameplay problem here, but it DOES provide potential gameplay AND an "early warning" system.


2. Hypothetical Scenario: Capturing/Sinking Already-Hostile Ship Without LoM does NOT adversely affect your relations (suggested for future development)
First of all, should you not lose points with the nation whose ship you sank/captured regardless of whether they started out being hostile?
One way or another, they lost a ship and they're not going to be happy about it, are they?

So then the query is purely with the gaining of those few(!) pirate points.
This would throw away potential gameplay (gradually sliding into being a pirate) and the "early warning system/tutorial".
The only advantage I can think of is that this would probably be a lot EASIER to accomplish and make for very clean code.
But I don't think I would like to do this for the reasons described above.

Worse, such a change would completely throw the "minor acts of piracy" out of the game.
That means that either it is NO act of piracy or it is a BAD, BAD, BAD one (see below).


3. Fire on a ship that is FRIENDLY, making them hostile and then capturing/sinking them
This is at the moment the worst possible act of piracy in the game and affects your relations with ALL nations.
Yes, it is bad. But how likely are players to ever do this? And if they do, it MUST be on purpose.
Hitting the friendly ship by accident does NOT trigger this response.


4. Approaching a ship under a false flag, then hoisting a hostile flag before being recognized and capturing/sinking them
At the moment, the game does NOT heavily penalize you for this and it would most likely be considered a minor act of piracy.
It could even be a valid attack if you had a LoM hostile to that nation at the time.
Perhaps this SHOULD be more heavily penalized? Might be quite simple by adding the "betrayed" attribute to those ships that now see you with a hostile flag.
That would trigger the REALLY BAD response as described above. I don't think we should do this; would be too nasty.


5. Approaching a ship under a false flag, being recognized and manually hoisting a hostile flag before before capturing/sinking them
As far as the game is concerned, this is equivalent to number 5 above. Maybe a minor act of piracy or a valid attack.
Either way, nothing truly bad happens to the player.


6. Approaching a ship under a false flag, being recognized and NOT hoisting a hostile flag before before capturing/sinking them
As the attack finished with you flying a friendly flag to the other ship, the game considers this a betrayal.
This triggers the REALLY BAD response from number 3 above.

I can imagine this being annoying, so my suggestion would be to auto-hoist your Served Nation flag once you are recognized.
@Grey Roger doesn't like that, but it can be tied in with Arcade Game Mode which he doesn't use.
This basically lets the game automatically take the needed action that the player should do him/herself.
Just imagine that an officer did it.


7. Being caught smuggling by a hostile nation and capturing/sinking the coastguard ship
Nothing special here. Depending on your flag flown when you do this, it can be either a minor or major act of piracy.
Assuming you don't have a LoM covering you, of course. Otherwise you'll gain points with your served nation(s).


8. Being caught smuggling by a NON-hostile nation and capturing/sinking the coastguard ship
This is an annoying one as coastguard ships are deliberately coded to be hostile to you REGARDLESS of your actual relations to their nation.
So if you're friendly to England, the English coastguard ship will still be hostile. And it should be, no? It's a coast guard ship that caught YOU!

If you follow through with this attack, England will turn hostile as you attacked one of their ships. You lose any LoM you may have had.
Seems fair enough to me. You wouldn't expect England to just let that one slide, would you?
In any case, this would probably be another minor act of piracy, unless you did all this under an English flag so don't do that.
Of course if you want to smuggle and NOT lose your LoM, @Levis actually added a sidequest that lets you do just that!

If you DO want to smuggle with non-hostile England and want England to REMAIN non-hostile, then don't sink/capture their ships!
Shoot their rigging and escape. Or force them to surrender, board them and let them go. (After looting, of course).
All of this would be acceptable behaviour and shouldn't affect nation relations one way or another because the applicable function doesn't get called.


9. Sinking/capturing a ship of a nation hostile to YOU but belonging to an ally of a nation FRIENDLY to you
Again, depending on the flag you used, this may be a minor or major act of piracy.
The nation you attacked was already hostile to you. You lose a few points, but that doesn't matter.
However, their allies turn WARY of you, unless you had a single LoM from another nation that did allow you this act.
In that case, it is OK for the allies. In any case, the allies only turn Wary. Unless they already were, in which case they'll slide into hostile too.

This seems fairly reasonable behaviour to me and makes alliances actually MEAN something. That definitely wasn't the case before.
However, I can also imagine that this behaviour may puzzle players who don't thoroughly pay attention to all nation relations.
Might get especially complicated when you throw Changing Nation Relations into the mix.
My suggestion: Disable the effect of Allied Nations in Arcade Game Mode for simplicity's sake.


10. Final Thoughts
Unless I am very much mistaken, I have covered pretty much all major cases.
Based on the above, I'm pretty happy with the current system for Realistic Game Mode.
Perhaps some simplifications for Arcade would be in order to not make this too difficult on players just looking for some quick fun.

If I am wrong on any of the above, please explain why and I'll think it through again.
And if you can think of any examples that may prove difficult but I didn't mention here, also let me know.
Plus most important of all: If you observe the game behaving in ways contrary to my above description, that would be an unintentional BUG that needs to be fixed ASAP!

 

[Grey Roger]

The main quibble I'd have is that sinking an already hostile ship without a LoM should not be an act of piracy. From the Wikipedia article on Letter of Marque:

The East India Company arranged for letters of marque for its East Indiamen such as the Lord Nelson, not so that they could carry cannons to fend off warships, privateers, and pirates on their voyages to India and China—that they could do without permission—but so that, should they have the opportunity to take a prize, they could do so without being guilty of piracy.

So capturing the ship is piracy but sinking it isn't

But, if I understand correctly, the only difference between a legal attack and a minor act of piracy is that both lose you relation points with the enemy ship's nation but the minor piracy earns you positive points with Pirates and can lead you to become one. So sinking a customs ship which caught you smuggling ought to count as minor piracy - you were caught breaking the law and sank a law enforcement ship, the pirates really ought to like that!

Case 4: should definitely be a legal attack. There is the minor legal loophole that a merchant can approach a warship under a friendly flag, then hoist a hostile flag, the warship responds by attacking so now the merchant can sink it as this is self-defence. Why you'd do that, I don't know - you can't capture the ship so you lose relation points with the ship's nation, you have to repair damage and replace ammo, and you can't capture the ship so you don't earn any money, so you get all the bad stuff of a battle without any of the good stuff. But in general, provided you hoisted a hostile flag before attacking an enemy ship, you should be fine legally.

5. Approaching a ship under a false flag, being recognized and manually hoisting a hostile flag before before capturing/sinking them
As far as the game is concerned, this is equivalent to number 5 above. Maybe a minor act of piracy or a valid attack.

Indeed, case 5 is equivalent to number 5. It's also equivalent to 1 and 2 - you're being attacked by a hostile ship, you've properly hoisted a hostile flag, so you're legally defending yourself and are also entitled to capture the ship if you have a LoM.

Case 6: my main objections to auto-hoisting a flag were that originally forts didn't recognise false flags, so if you didn't auto-hoist a flag then all you had to do was escape from whichever ships had recognised you; and I don't want to auto-hoist a Personal flag, which is presumably what happens if you don't have a served nation, e.g. due to having multiple LoM's. If forts do recognise false flags and join in anyway then the first objection is negated. If, rather than auto-hoisting Personal, the game picks a random hostile nation from your LoM's and hoists that, then the second objection disappears. (If none of your LoM's is hostile then you're committing major piracy!) Alternatively, when your first shot hits the enemy ship and you haven't hoisted a hostile flag, perhaps have a "Logit" message on behalf of your first officer reminding you that you're still under a false flag and are in danger of being labelled a pirate.

Also check for the professional navy attribute. Hornblower doesn't get a LoM until the end of the story but is a naval officer, and players may wish to do some raiding - or have to defend themselves against an enemy attack - while on the way to the next story location.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

The main quibble I'd have is that sinking an already hostile ship without a LoM should not be an act of piracy. From the Wikipedia article on Letter of Marque:
So capturing the ship is piracy but sinking it isn't

At the moment that function doesn't know whether it is called from the ship being sunk or captured. We could tell it, of course.

But, if I understand correctly, the only difference between a legal attack and a minor act of piracy is that both lose you relation points with the enemy ship's nation but the minor piracy earns you positive points with Pirates and can lead you to become one. So sinking a customs ship which caught you smuggling ought to count as minor piracy - you were caught breaking the law and sank a law enforcement ship, the pirates really ought to like that!

One additional difference: With the legal attack, you'd probably GAIN points with some nation too, being the one(s) you've got a LoM with.

But adding that to you above note, sinking an enemy ship without a LoM should NOT be an act of piracy, except when that ship is a coastguard vessel.
That is two extra exceptions in one go. Would it not be reasonable to treat them both equally as they are now?
After all, a minor act of piracy is hardly an evil consequence for the player. It is just more than NO consequence.

Alternatively, if you sink (or capture ) a coastguard ship of a nation you were FRIENDLY with, that nation turns hostile (of course).
But the pirates don't care whether you sank or captured the ship. You just gain a few points with them either way.

Case 4: should definitely be a legal attack. There is the minor legal loophole that a merchant can approach a warship under a friendly flag, then hoist a hostile flag, the warship responds by attacking so now the merchant can sink it as this is self-defence. Why you'd do that, I don't know - you can't capture the ship so you lose relation points with the ship's nation, you have to repair damage and replace ammo, and you can't capture the ship so you don't earn any money, so you get all the bad stuff of a battle without any of the good stuff. But in general, provided you hoisted a hostile flag before attacking an enemy ship, you should be fine legally.

With the current system, that one can be either a completely legal attack or a minor act of piracy.
If you have a LoM, then you're perfectly OK to do that. And if you don't, then it is the same as it always is: minor act of piracy.
Seems fair enough to me. Legal loophole or not, it sounds like a ungentlemanly act to me and my gut feeling tells me it should be piracy.

Based on your note there though, it does seem apparant that we do NOT need to add the "betrayed" functionality here to make the consequences worse.
So you get the usual "light" consequence depending on LoM and the flag you were flying. Fine by me.

Indeed, case 5 is equivalent to number 5. It's also equivalent to 1 and 2 - you're being attacked by a hostile ship, you've properly hoisted a hostile flag, so you're legally defending yourself and are also entitled to capture the ship if you have a LoM.

I meant 4 and you know it!

You're absolutely right; they're all just variations on the same thing. For all of them applies:
Capture/Sink actual hostile ship while flying a hostile flag and NO LoM = minor act of piracy
Capture/Sink actual hostile ship while flying a hostile flag and WITH LoM = valid attack
Capture/Sink actual hostile ship while flying a FRIENDLY flag = always major act of piracy
Capture/Sink actual hostile ship while flying a PIRATE flag = always minor act of piracy

Case 6: my main objections to auto-hoisting a flag were that originally forts didn't recognise false flags, so if you didn't auto-hoist a flag then all you had to do was escape from whichever ships had recognised you; and I don't want to auto-hoist a Personal flag, which is presumably what happens if you don't have a served nation, e.g. due to having multiple LoM's. If forts do recognise false flags and join in anyway then the first objection is negated. If, rather than auto-hoisting Personal, the game picks a random hostile nation from your LoM's and hoists that, then the second objection disappears. (If none of your LoM's is hostile then you're committing major piracy!) Alternatively, when your first shot hits the enemy ship and you haven't hoisted a hostile flag, perhaps have a "Logit" message on behalf of your first officer reminding you that you're still under a false flag and are in danger of being labelled a pirate.

If you have multiple LoMs, then indeed the auto-hosting would hoist personal. That technically is the only one that would always make sense.
If you don't have a LoM, but did start the game with a nation chosen, you'll still be serving that nation and would not auto-hoist a personal flag either.
So that would ONLY happen if you deliberately started as personal OR got two or more LoMs.
Also, I do NOT intend to do that in Realistic Game Mode at all, so it shouldn't affect you one way or another.

Of course the forts now do false flag recognizing similar to the ships at sea.
Auto-hoisting a flag when a SHIP recognized you could get near forts hostile to you as well and vice versa.
So I can understand why you wouldn't want it. And it should stay that way for Realistic Game Mode for certain.

The LogIt note instead of the auto-hoisting is definitely an option though. That can be done for Realistic Game Mode.
Possibly also for Arcade. Though I'm not sure we can trust certain Arcade players out there to notice the log message....

Also check for the professional navy attribute. Hornblower doesn't get a LoM until the end of the story but is a naval officer, and players may wish to do some raiding - or have to defend themselves against an enemy attack - while on the way to the next story location.

That is already in place and should be functioning properly. Hornblower is considered a navy officer legally in the service of England, even though he doesn't technically have a LoM.
The relevant code is written to check professional navy OR LoM and either is OK for the attack to be legal.