Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Graf Bernadotte

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

708 Excellent


About Graf Bernadotte

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

810 profile views
  1. Graf Bernadotte

    Little Cayman will open its docks to the public

    Oh you had a fight lately. Nice to hear. Everybody knows that you can't defeat KoC, but right next to Key West there are two Danish ports with night timers now. Wouldn't it be a so much better idea to attack a defended port instead of commenting other people's business only? Every time you turn my arguments against me, I know they have been good ones. Won't be mad for that.
  2. Graf Bernadotte

    Little Cayman will open its docks to the public

    What a poor destiny. Being reduced to a forum troll who must comment the moves of King of Crowns and now rediii. Like a pooch who is begging for the bones of his master's dinner table.
  3. Graf Bernadotte

    It's time for Justice

    Drinking so much already in the early afternoon is a dangerous sign, mate. 😄
  4. Graf Bernadotte

    Little Cayman will open its docks to the public

    It happens already, and not only in Spain. US will have their server again soon. And then they will remember how boring this game was without Europeans.
  5. Graf Bernadotte

    Little Cayman will open its docks to the public

    What the hello kitty. I bought thousands of teak as stock for nothing?
  6. Graf Bernadotte

    Character rating for inside a nation

    You won't find legal internet pillories for ordinary people. They violate human rights.
  7. Graf Bernadotte

    Character rating for inside a nation

    This opens injustice the door. Since such ratings don't need any good reason which can be proofed by others. There is no possibility to defend against negative ratings. If we wanna fight unfair players we have to implement a tribunal where accusation, defence and proofs are published. Then everybody can form an opinion about the case.
  8. Two days ago two of my friends and I joined a hostility mission of Russians against Pirates on Pirate side and got tribunaled. The decission didn't condemn us, but admin said that such behaviour will be considered as griefing in future. This has to implement that also joining the wrong side by mistake will be considered as griefing, what would be against all rules, since a wrong click is done very fast and concequences can be enormous. It could also happen that players which are allied only with a few clans of a nation and hostile against other clans could not have a look inside the mission to find out, if they can fight some hostile members of this nation. It would also not be possible to leave a mission against a hostile nation when players find out inside that the core players of this nation are fighting on the other side, what makes it impossible to win that battle. But if all those cases would allow entering a hostility mission and leave again without fighting, they could be misused as excuses for players who only joined to block spots of the defending nation. Result is, that only honest or innocent players get punished, while everybody else could fool the tribunal abot his real reasons. Only solution is to close hostility missions for any allied player. By the way. We had an allied system. but it was removed. Give us back a possibility to ally with other nations or clans and we can help them also in doing hostility without risk of joining the wrong side.
  9. You don't get the point. The question is if there is a wrong doing. We didn't bring Christendoms case to tribunal because we didn't think that he exploited game mechanic. And he didn't report it as well, because he also claimed that this was proper game play. I still think that's the right decission, since it is impossible to divide joining the wrong side by mistake and by intention or by changing the mind. Result would be that only the honest player would be punished, while a player who claims for mistake or changing his mind after he saw the strengh or the skills of enemy players could never be proofed wrong. To proof our point it is our good right to point out that Pirates have the opposite opinion in this matter when it comes to their game play. And that they are so sure in their opinion that they did not report it to get a decission of devs how to behave in future. Reason for this tribunal is to deny other nations a right they claim as a Pirate privilege.
  10. There is a very clear rule in Naval action. If you find a possibility to exploit the game mechanic you're allowed to test it and find out if it really works, as long as you inform Devs after with F 11. That's what happened here. And now we need a decission of Devs rather this is a game feature, will be removed or will be punished as exploit in future.
  11. I appreciate this tribunal. It allows us to clearify what behaviour is requested when it comes to deny other nations entry in a battle on the side of their choice. To judge this case and to give clear advices for players in future we have to answer some questions. 1. What is the difference between joining the wrong side in a hostility mission and an OW battle. Both battles have limited numbers. Joining the wrong side gives always a disadvantage to the nation which loses a slot for an additional player. 2. Why do we need rulings for blocking and green on green, if already joining the wrong side is forbidden? Doesn't those rules implement that joining the wrong side is proper game play? 3. If joining the wrong side is forbidden, who decides what is the wrong side? There is no alliance system in the game. Spain doesn't have an alliance with Russia. Does a nation has to announce in advance which side it will support in a battle? How long has this nation to wait until it can change this choice? Do they have to wait for a second, an hour, a day or a month before the nation will be allowed to attack players of a nation again they helped before? 4. Who has to proof that joining the wrong side was intentional? I stated in battle chat that we joined accidently the wrong side. The rest of us entered battle for better protection. This claim is not disproved by the fact that in the first battle only five of seven Spaniards entered the battle. One Endymion stayed outside because it is fast enough to outrun alone a stronger enemy fleet. I joined the fleet later and arrived only minutes before the first battle was over. 5. A while ago Christendom joined a screening battle of Pirates against French with his Spanish account on Pirate side, to deny Spanish screeners to join French side, which was their allied back then. Isn't that behaviour a clear statement of Pirates that denying entry on the side of choice will be considered as proper game play and not as griefing? 6. Should denying entry in a battle be a privilege of Pirates only? 7. Why didn't Pirates clearify this question with a self accusation to avoid future cases and took advantage of this behaviour until they became victim? 8. Isn't it the duty of players to clearify such controversial behaviour that players know in future what is allowed and what is not. How can we be blamed for bringing this case up again?
  12. Graf Bernadotte

    Delete contracts of previous nation in port

    The new owner clan collects the taxes out of all contracts which were set after the port was lost. The conquerer benefits from those contracts. It's only the players of other clans in the same nation who have to compete with the prices set by old contracts. They have to overbid them. What generates an extra tax income as well. Why to take away this reward for a successful conquest?
  13. Graf Bernadotte

    Port Battle Screenshots (New BR)

    Not only for organisation of a PB. If the successful PB setup changes too often, we will flood our accounts with ships, which are useless after one or two PBs. That will implement another time sink in grinding all those new ship types which are in PB fashion next week. Result will be that not the best setup is tested anymore but we will use a randon setup of ships players own already.
  14. Graf Bernadotte

    [Caribbean] Great battle results.

    Then you must tag differently in future. Since all of your battles have the same result, unless you have double supremacy.
  15. Graf Bernadotte

    Port up for grabs

    Guess Hansa just found out that it was not worth the price to buy Esperito Santo. They really expected having only SH as enemy. Now they need new ships to tow for PB tomorrow. Nice. First time in my life i was at Vera Cruz.