Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Galt

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/18/1994

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Oklahoma, USA.
  • Interests
    Certainly not sailing ships.

Recent Profile Visitors

266 profile views
  1. CKA (GB) is setting diplomacy with MARS (U.S) to OW Conflict.
  2. Bless you gentlemen, thank you for your understanding!
  3. @admin Port battles for PvP Global are being scheduled for weird times. CKA (GB) finished raising hostility for George Town at server time: 2:15ish on 9/12. The port Battle was scheduled for server time: 10:00 on 9/13, a 27.75 hour time discrepancy. I live in the U.S. so since I scheduled a port battle for 19:15pm I have to wake up at 5:00am, directly after server reset, to fight the battle. A good portion of our clan just can't wake up that early on a weekday but already had planned to commit to an early afternoon fight. Please address this because there are several port battles scheduled for the exact same time on, what I deduce, is a mostly across-the-pond server.
  4. Little things you'd like to see

    It would be nice to see a bit of customization for your ships so you can really personalize it. I understand that the devs have already declined the ability to rename ships but something like customization sails or clan emblems that we can paint on allowing us to easily locate allies or enemies at great distances. Second is the ability to customize the flags on the topgallants allowing for clans to develop their own flag code; Red field flag indicates a fireship, blue dots indicate a group leader, small things like this that make it easier to identify friendly ships across the battle. I also think it would be nice to allow captains to change their national indicator before a battle only to have their true jack appear in the battle. This would allow for captains to either literally smuggle goods into a ports or allow them to spring traps, forcing players to really learn their enemies and who is a member of (x) country. Just a customization tab with emblems and shapes provided by the devs would be really cool and allow people to put some real passion into their favorite ship, even going so far as to require certain actions ((x) amount of kilometers traveled for traders, (x) players sunk, (x) towers or forts destroyed) that would unlock further options so that if you see a Frenchman with a certain Jack on his bowsprit than you know he is an experienced privateer or even allowing pirate clans to have their own ensign, all on a black field so they are still identifiable as pirates, but that way clans and players can really develop their own identity and give them that much more reason to join clans, represent both their nations and themselves, and actually invest time and care into what their ships look like. Of course these are just ideas and you can decide what they can or can't edit about a ship so that they are still withing historical boundaries but I would really enjoy investing more time into my ship to make it, well, mine. Also, a longer night sequence would be appreciated. This game is beautiful all the time but it kinda sucks that the sun goes down and then instantly rises again. Adding lighthouses so you can see land at far distances and a simulated moon and stars that cycle and determine how bright the night sky is. Also just by making the 24 hour day tick by slower would really even out this out. Not to mention the ability to douse lights so you are nearly invisible at night allowing traders to slip away or warships to sneak up on unsuspecting prey.
  5. With the news of the patch on Monday, it has become apparent that a great deal of captains and clans may need to relocate resources to the designated safe zones. I submit to the Global clans a consensus to declare the weekend an honorable ceasefire from scheduling new port battles and OW predation on relocating battle fleets and trade fleets. Clan warehouses may need to be moved, if a clan were to lose it's warehouse there would be little to no incentive for them to continue playing the game. Number are low as it is, let's please agree to not drive more people away. I understand this is a colossal undertaking and that it is also a PvP server, and that this is a big request. I personally believe it best to just let people move what they need to around and we can continue, business as usual, come Monday post-patch. This agreement to go into effect come next server reset, 9/9 server time, to server resume after the patch. I am making this personal request and I will speak with my clan (CKA) if they will agree to this. Please do the same and post below if your clan is willing to agree to this. I will update the list as I am able to. Regards John Galt The consensus from a majority of the server seems to indicate there will be no ceasefire.
  6. To my knowledge, CKA is behind this and would like to be included in this, the Danish Accord.
  7. My issue isn't with PvP, because my clan, save for a LOVE and RED, are the ONLY ones actually fighting a war while you guys work on your nice shiny fleets. We are the ones actually losing our ships and sinking them in return. My issue is with this charade of saying "They violated the terms of the agreement because it wasn't kept a secret." My clan was the one that insisted there be a written document with the signatures of the the clans involved. I don't want to name names and frankly I can't remember who it was that said it, but the counter was "if there is a written document, word will get out." so this became a multi clan affair in which GB clans beside TF and VCO were involved, even though it wasn't their business. But I also feel that other U.S. clans should have been involved. In regard to having the two biggest clans be allies, I am not saying we be "bewt frens to fwight duh wats!" I have always advocated a designated region for PvP where the U.S. and GB can initiate pb without the other getting overwhelmed, which is happening because GB has a much more clan based player base. I get it, you're professionals at what you do, but why not actually fight the people that are taking our ports (FYI, its the pirates) and not fight battles away from where both the blue and black dots on your map sit so close to the most important red dot (that's your capital.) I also take issue with the conversation I had with some clan leaders when asked if they will be defending the British ports we are losing to the pirates and was met with "No, none of our guys are set up there, it's a long sail, we just can't do it..." But when I approached you guys about the U.S. taking a port to gain some marks, stop the rats, have a base of operations for future hostility raising sorties, I was met with "If the U.S. attack one of our ports, WE WILL DEFEND IT!" It's just blatant hypocrisy in our eyes. It was a huge spit in the face to CKA in implying that we are just wasting our time because you and the rats are a bit buddy buddy. Fight the yanks, fine. CKA has no reason too, we would rather operate in the north as we traditionally have, but don't do it for such an asinine reason of "well they talked about it." Especially when the clans, from my understanding, that are doing most of the fighting, aren't even the clans that were involved in the arrangement! And in response to the notion that "The U.S./GB alliance is too strong, it kills the game!" I think it's been proven, when GB (the member of such a strong alliance) was one ported. I think that taking nations to such ineffective levels kills the game. I don't feel that one porting a nation, yes even the rats, is really such a good thing (because in the end we are all just playing a game so have fun.) But GB was certainly on hard times and between attacks from the rats and the Danes, we weren't exactly winning (at least on PvP2.) so to say that the alliance was too strong is just an alternative fact.
  8. When it was made clear that the GB clans would only defend the Bahama ports against the U.S. but would not move up there to defend against the rats, it became clear that their agenda was geared to whatever excuse they can find to start hostilities. By trying to change the nature of the deal, after it was signed, they feel they are justified. Now I can't say don't do this or don't do that, because they just want to play the game they want to, and I want to respect that. But ffs don't try to pass this off as something it isn't. You guys were looking for any excuse you could to fight them because they have a lot of players, even though Skmarsh had agreed that the Pirates are a bigger threat (the ones that have actually taken British ports) and that we need to get the French out of the area. Which, I'll admit, they are doing. Call it what it is, you want to fight the U.S., which is fine. I won't take part but at least have to common decency to call it what it is.
  9. Port Battle Only for Clan

    I can understand wanting to be in a port battle, because I love them. But, and I believe this is fair to say, that the people who grind up the port battle should have priority, and that ought to extend to their clan mates. I may not actively be sinking ships or gaining hostility, but I built the ships that my clan uses to do it. I believe that earns me a place in the battle. That being said; going in a port battle just for conquest marks, to me, seems counter intuitive for solo players. Conquest marks, to the best of my knowledge, are only used to get blueprints for line ships. While I can understand the appeal of wanting to sail a line ship (I certainly love them,) doing so alone is the act of a mad man. Sail a 1st rate alone, and you deserve to lose that 1st rate. I agree that there should be a way for to exchange in other marks to "move up the mark chain," as it were, I think it should be very difficult to do so. But for someone in Pickle to take up a port slot is irritating for the clan that organized the battle. Although I am not sure if this situation applies here, but to be down a (hypothetical) 1st rate in a line ship battle is already a disadvantage just because "someone wanted to play with the big kids." My advice to you would be to just join a clan. I don't know what options you have on your server but in my server, and in my nation (GB,) there are several options for casual players. Players that are members of a clan for the sake of joining and organizing port battles but that mostly sail on their own, under their own terms. Think of it more as a group of like minded solo players that sometimes want to play with other people. Port battles are not for solo players, they are for large organized groups to fight other large organized groups. in that respect, solo players have no place being involved. Submitted for your approval John Galt
  10. Hotfix 2 for patch 10.00

    I'm not denying the role that coal playing in shaping early/middle american history even though it wasn't until 1836 that coal mines really got anyone's attention. Coal up until then was produced mainly in Ohio. But steering back to the topic, at the time coal production in the United States was not only minuscule but unnecessary. Britain mined a majority of the coal that was needed but (from my very limited understanding) coal was really only used to warm homes, where wood/charcoal would have been cheaper and more practical.
  11. Hotfix 2 for patch 10.00

    If history has anything to tell us, it's that the Spanish on the PVP2 server are not that big. I am sure the US will have no difficulty in taking the east coast and Florida.
  12. Hotfix 2 for patch 10.00

    Not that it matters, but Britain produced much more coal than the united states at this time (1799?) and China currently produces more coal than the U.S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_coal_mining#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_coal_production (2011 data) https://yearbook.enerdata.net/coal-and-lignite-production.html (2016 information on coal production. China still #1 (apply memes accordingly))
  13. This isn't an alt account, I just didn't use my in game name: Galt. Any news I need is usually posted and I just check for updates, not get into online arguments. (This is an exceptions, the devs deserve defending on this one.) Servers are tricky and while I agree they could try using a better provider, the developers don't strike me as Midas-eqsue so I can understand with having to go with the cheap yet somewhat reliable provider because servers are not cheap (I work for a university IT division and it seems like servers are just constant work.) My point: it wasn't deliberate, I am sure they are working to get it resolved as quickly as they can. The fact that they made a forum post means that they are aware but since I am guessing that it's a NA server and it's 11:04pm my time, it might be hard to get a hold of someone to fix it quickly. (Not sure who their provider is, 24 support can also be complicated.) Besides, was there even a battle scheduled for now? you boys flipped Port-au-Prince (last I heard. (see you Saturday.))
  14. It's no ones fault, these things happen. You should be more forgiving, there is a whole world outside.
  15. You couldn't make it because everyone was in a first rate and you started the fight with the wind in your face. Where you start in the battle and how the wind blows are all factors now that you ignored, and it cost you the fight. we won because we had faster ships that could make it to the circles before you could, because we had perfect wind. Lesson #1 - don't bring all first rates and expect to get very far (for PBs.) #2 - analyze the OW to determine the best time and place to join the battle. Be that as it may, I do feel that points could stand a nerf. I think they accumulate a bit too quick.