staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 2 minutes ago, rediii said: timers didnt change in recent weeks. What was your suggestion? Lower the timer becahse its too expensive to pay timers for ports you dont need? (after you wrote it is not a problem) Also think about the american players please. Yes when I make a suggestion I think about it before and if I think it is good for the game I suggest it and earn posts against the suggestion aswell. Thats normal. My sugestion was to make a more even game, because money matters now. That either no nation have the advantage of saving money because of they have ports that can’t be taken ore for those that dont have that benefit, they can be compensated, it could be that the closer port to the Capital you don’t have to pay for the timers, but that they still can be flipped. What a abouth the America’s? I guess you talk content. Is there content in taking a port where no one shows up to fight. Maybe a little bit. If you read what I wrote then I clearly stated that I liked that money matters. I like that you can’t have timers on every ports. So will there be ports for the Americans? I do belive so,. Will they get more fights, ore more EU players online in there timezone because of no timers, Idon’t think so. The system with timers could be made in lots of ways. The one we have now, might not be the right solution. A nother system could also be an increase in cost depend on how many timers a nation/ clan have. I may not have all the solutions, But therefore I still belive I as the rest have the right to push the game in a direction I like it to move towards. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 49 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said: I'm not telling you how you have to rule your country. The more costs you have the better for us. Don’t think you neither win ore loose anything by us having cost. If it made us unable to get ressources ore craft ships, then yes. But it have not been a problem. We never wanted many ports. Just a small area for the new and casual players and then a couple for fun fights. Do the Nations have ports that I personally think er should drop. Oh yes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 1 hour ago, rediii said: not even sweden has timers on all the ports in or outside the safezone and it doesnt have a nightcrew aswell. Sweden has timers on important woodports, ports that finance themselve and important ports to have a foothold somewhere and nothing else. I know that because I made the plan for it which port should have a timer and which one doesnt. You complain because you do it wrong. Its not the fault of the game, only your fault Just took a look at the map. Sweden 13 closer ports(Without Gustavia and Cul de Sac) 11 have timers on. Denmark 13 closer ports (without Christiansted and Frederikstad) 10 have a timer on if I countet right. Just looked right before maintance, so just a fast count, But will ofc make a new count, when I can come on the game, to se if I got i wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 13 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said: Every extra hour you have to spend for generating money you cannot use for screening against us I think it lately have been you screening us out. For now we have a couple of ppl that like to trade and get ressources, But if they should stop, well then we would feel the pressur of finanse, like most other Nations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said: Difference is that Swedes can afford those timers and Danes are struggling to pay for. Try just for once in your life, to stay on the argument. His claim eas we did it wrong because we had timers on port close to CS. That not even the Swedes had that, because He had made a smart plan, that focused on best use of the spendings. I made a fast count, and if I ofc made the it right in the hurry. It showet that the Swedes actually have one port more than the danes. Are ppl struggling to pay in the Danish nation. I can’t ofc speak for every clan , But DNP and KDP still have a steady income, that can finance the timers. But as said it is because of a few players. Without them, we would be hurt to. Edited April 17, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 So no different in ports that finance them self and ports thats almost finance them self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 1 minute ago, rediii said: Sweden has valueable ports away from the safezone. Nassau, Carta, Santo Domingo, Cumana ... all generate a lot of taxes that also finance timers back home. Compared to denmark you guys have ports that are not valueable (misteriosa, San Andres, Guama Sevilla) ... I could even say Cayman Brac is not valueaboe but you use the port a bit atleast. Alone misteriose and san andres cost you a million a day. You are right that Sweden have good ports that can finance a lot. Also timers in its core area. You are also right in they loose less money than the danes. But if I remember right even the Swede are losing money now. Think the big change in finance, was seal bottles got upgraded, ppl had to buy less upgrades. If you look on the danish ports you mention. First we actually have few far away. BF by the Dutch make good sence. Think they have had some good fights. Misteriosa might actually be oure most important port away. It have and will give us some good pb’s. Cayman we had more hope for. It was the same with San Andreas. Guyama Servilla is just a relic from back where we got the port to hunt britts. Do we have ports that we that have little value from, oh yes. But that do most nations. In general most nation would have all they need in 8-10 ports. Rest is not really needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said: Most of the Swedish ports next to Gustavia have a tax income of more than 400k. They are close to break even. While most of Danish ports next to CS have a tax income of less than 100k and cost enourmus amounts of money every day. Sweden pays only a fraction of what Danes have to shoulder. And Swedes have a multiple of players compared to Danes. Finally Swedes have a lot of money ports and generate profit instead of losing millions every day like Danes do. I cannnot see that rediii's post is wrong. I just logged in to the game: tjek the ports close to Gustavia with timer and income, an yes yesterday might have been a slow day: Hat Island 91 k Marigot 8 k Phillipsburg 528 k Fort Bai 183 k Oranjenstad 241 k basseterre town 142 k Charles Town 103 k Plymouth 363 k English Habor 237 k Saint John’s 1,6 KK Codrington 33 k. Then 2 close without timer. Island Harbour 68 k and Sandy Hill 4 k But no doubt the money ports helps. But accoarding to the latest report even Sweden are loosing money now. Edited April 17, 2018 by staun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, rediii said: nassau net income 990k Santo Domingo net income 1.1m Cartagena net income 2.3m Cumana 2m And that is straight wins which finance timers back in swedens homewaters. Yeah and have I doubted that Sweden have good money ports. Don’t think so. But that was actually not what started this debate. I was that I surgested that timer was a disadvantage fore those nation that didn’t have a large area that was safe for capturing. And that I hoped in time that it would change. Then there was a post about only Dk was “stupid” enough to put timers on ports close to core territorium, that not even Sweden did that, even if a simple count could show, that they actually do the same. Then the debate was turned to finanse the ports. Yes the Swede have the best setup, better than the danes. Luckely we have some players who are willing to help finance timers. But again the issue was never on how to finance it ore wether we in DK-NG where struggeling to finance oure ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 10 minutes ago, rediii said: Your fix is to just put timers on plrts that you get money from or are important so yes DK does something wrong You even wrote yourself that san andres and cayman brac isnt worth it Thats my opinion that San Andres have little value, But apearently not by the one who have chosen to have the timer. I still belive in Cayman. Those ports in gennerally only have value for me, if the can generate fights. I could easy se us drop Guama Servillia. Not much use either in El socho ore Hugyie. We also two close to La Mona that have little value, except for the VM. I would be fine with the core area for new and casually players. But again the issue was not witch ports to own, But the advantage some Nations got because of the timer and have ports that can’t be taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said: Nations with big safe zones can't collect taxes out of uncapturable ports. That's a disadvantage to nations with no safe zone. That's why a nation with no or little safe zone can compensate their extra costs, if they have enough players who use the ports for trade runs. Problem with this strategy is that important ports for resource collection are not necessarily good trading ports. That's the bad design of trade mechanic not the different size of safe zones. So actually those Nations with out a Capital in term of finance are better of then a nation like Dk ore Sweden. But if I read you right, you agree with me, that the mechanic of timers econemy, just don’t work as is should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, rediii said: ofcourse they have a advantage, thats why they are "easy" or "medium" nations etc. And all I argued for was that the gab in term of economy should be a bit smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 3 minutes ago, rediii said: clans will set more timers if it gets lowered. It's a decision to make negative income. Maybe ore maybe not, still lots of money thats each week goes Down the drain. But thats depend ofc how much it get lowered. Ore if there could be found a game mechanic that could narrow it. And except the ide that a nation had a couple of free timers, I have no good idea right now, and I see plenty of problems to implement that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qw569😳 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 (edited) April 2018 RvR report according Mishka Number of PB except Neutrals 92 successfully defended 34 successfully attacked 58 Clans Total clans in RvR 51 Top 20 clan with number of PB Clan Number of PB Succesfully ratio HRE 15 66.67% WO 12 75.00% BF 11 36.36% HAVOC 10 70.00% REDS 9 22.22% CSA 8 50.00% VLTRA 8 0.00% ALOHA 5 80.00% VCA 5 20.00% XXXXX 5 80.00% ARMED 5 80.00% RSC 4 50.00% CABAL 4 0.00% KOTO 4 100.00% DNP 3 66.67% VNM 3 66.67% LIONS 3 33.33% GA 3 33.33% WTF 3 33.33% ER 2 100.00% Ports Top 10 ports ordered by number of PB Port Number of PB Encontrados 5 Camp du Roy 3 Grand Anse 2 Maracaibo 2 Salina Point 2 Haulover 2 North Inlet 2 Arthur's Town 2 Roseau 2 Kemps Bay 2 Battles Top 10 most short port battles 31 min [01-04-2018 06:41 UTC] The port battle for Great River (France) is scheduled for 2 Apr 2018 06:40 UTC. Defender: CBC. Attacker: ARMED (Great Britain). BR: 2550 [02-04-2018 07:11 UTC] Great River captured by ARMED (Great Britain). Previous owner: CBC (France) 33 min [20-04-2018 21:56 UTC] The port battle for Sandy Bay (France) is scheduled for 21 Apr 2018 21:53 UTC. Defender: VCA. Attacker: GA (Great Britain). BR: 5330 [21-04-2018 22:26 UTC] Sandy Bay captured by GA (Great Britain). Previous owner: VCA (France) 36 min [12-04-2018 07:01 UTC] The port battle for Rosaly (Sverige) is scheduled for 13 Apr 2018 07:00 UTC. Defender: HRE. Attacker: WO (France). BR: 7640 [13-04-2018 07:36 UTC] Rosaly captured by WO (France). Previous owner: HRE (Sverige) 36 min [10-04-2018 22:51 UTC] The port battle for Arthur's Town (Great Britain) is scheduled for 11 Apr 2018 22:50 UTC. Defender: RSC. Attacker: FP (Pirates). BR: 2240 [11-04-2018 23:26 UTC] Arthur's Town defended by RSC (Great Britain) against FP (Pirates) 36 min [04-04-2018 04:36 UTC] The port battle for Arcas (España) is scheduled for 5 Apr 2018 04:35 UTC. Defender: GOE. Attacker: XXXXX (Pirates). BR: 1090 [05-04-2018 05:11 UTC] Arcas captured by XXXXX (Pirates). Previous owner: GOE (España) 37 min [29-04-2018 04:26 UTC] The port battle for Saint-Nicolas (Sverige) is scheduled for 30 Apr 2018 04:24 UTC. Defender: HRE. Attacker: XXXXX (Pirates). BR: 7920 [30-04-2018 05:01 UTC] Saint-Nicolas captured by XXXXX (Pirates). Previous owner: HRE (Sverige) 37 min [22-04-2018 01:41 UTC] The port battle for Salina Point (Kingdom of Prussia) is scheduled for 23 Apr 2018 01:39 UTC. Defender: ALOHA. Attacker: NOT (Pirates). BR: 1150 [23-04-2018 02:16 UTC] Salina Point defended by ALOHA (Kingdom of Prussia) against NOT (Pirates) 38 min [28-04-2018 20:36 UTC] The port battle for Ahumada (France) is scheduled for 29 Apr 2018 20:33 UTC. Defender: CBC. Attacker: CSA (United States). BR: 2160 [29-04-2018 21:11 UTC] Ahumada defended by CBC (France) against CSA (United States) 38 min [16-04-2018 03:36 UTC] The port battle for San Sebastian (France) is scheduled for 17 Apr 2018 03:33 UTC. Defender: BLANC. Attacker: CSA (United States). BR: 2620 [17-04-2018 04:11 UTC] San Sebastian captured by CSA (United States). Previous owner: BLANC (France) 38 min [11-04-2018 06:01 UTC] The port battle for Roseau (Sverige) is scheduled for 12 Apr 2018 05:58 UTC. Defender: HRE. Attacker: WO (France). BR: 7560 [12-04-2018 06:36 UTC] Roseau captured by WO (France). Previous owner: HRE (Sverige) Top 10 most long port battles 121 min [03-04-2018 19:36 UTC] The port battle for Morgan's Bluff (Sverige) is scheduled for 4 Apr 2018 19:35 UTC. Defender: HRE. Attacker: REDS (Russian Empire). BR: 1120 [04-04-2018 21:36 UTC] Morgan's Bluff captured by REDS (Russian Empire). Previous owner: HRE (Sverige) 117 min [05-04-2018 19:21 UTC] The port battle for Kemps Bay (Sverige) is scheduled for 6 Apr 2018 19:19 UTC. Defender: GOD. Attacker: REDS (Russian Empire). BR: 1070 [06-04-2018 21:16 UTC] Kemps Bay defended by GOD (Sverige) against REDS (Russian Empire) 114 min [16-04-2018 01:06 UTC] The port battle for Ays (France) is scheduled for 17 Apr 2018 01:02 UTC. Defender: WO. Attacker: CSA (United States). BR: 5140 [17-04-2018 02:56 UTC] Ays defended by WO (France) against CSA (United States) 111 min [28-04-2018 06:16 UTC] The port battle for El Soco (Danmark-Norge) is scheduled for 29 Apr 2018 06:15 UTC. Defender: DANVE. Attacker: VNM (Verenigde Provinciën). BR: 5040 [29-04-2018 08:06 UTC] El Soco defended by DANVE (Danmark-Norge) against VNM (Verenigde Provinciën) 111 min [12-04-2018 19:46 UTC] The port battle for Camp du Roy (Sverige) is scheduled for 13 Apr 2018 19:45 UTC. Defender: HRE. Attacker: CBC (France). BR: 2690 [13-04-2018 21:36 UTC] Camp du Roy defended by HRE (Sverige) against CBC (France) 107 min [20-04-2018 17:26 UTC] The port battle for Encontrados (Danmark-Norge) is scheduled for 21 Apr 2018 17:24 UTC. Defender: BF. Attacker: HAVOC (Verenigde Provinciën). BR: 2550 [21-04-2018 19:11 UTC] Encontrados defended by BF (Danmark-Norge) against HAVOC (Verenigde Provinciën) 106 min [18-04-2018 02:31 UTC] The port battle for Rum Cove (Russian Empire) is scheduled for 19 Apr 2018 02:30 UTC. Defender: REDS. Attacker: WO (France). BR: 1110 [19-04-2018 04:16 UTC] Rum Cove captured by WO (France). Previous owner: REDS (Russian Empire) 104 min [07-04-2018 18:36 UTC] The port battle for Manataca (Kingdom of Prussia) is scheduled for 8 Apr 2018 18:32 UTC. Defender: ALOHA. Attacker: VLTRA (España). BR: 2640 [08-04-2018 20:16 UTC] Manataca defended by ALOHA (Kingdom of Prussia) against VLTRA (España) 102 min [08-04-2018 17:46 UTC] The port battle for Misteriosa (Danmark-Norge) is scheduled for 9 Apr 2018 17:44 UTC. Defender: DNP. Attacker: GA (Great Britain). BR: 2690 [09-04-2018 19:26 UTC] Misteriosa defended by DNP (Danmark-Norge) against GA (Great Britain) 95 min [26-04-2018 20:11 UTC] The port battle for Deadman's Cay (Great Britain) is scheduled for 27 Apr 2018 20:06 UTC. Defender: ARMED. Attacker: WTF (Pirates). BR: 1070 [27-04-2018 21:41 UTC] Deadman's Cay captured by WTF (Pirates). Previous owner: ARMED (Great Britain) Edited May 1, 2018 by qw569 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Don’t know if I on the data above can conclude what my feling is, but here it comes anyway. Ppl are losing interest in RvR. It is the few thats keeping it alive. If we takes a look on Dk-ng. We could have a nice war against the Dutch . Think we are even matched in players and skill. But lets be honnest the it never got hot. There was fights an Pb’s yes. But the Dutch was the only trying to win ports. We just defended when attacked. We had the plsyers online yesterday when the pb at San Andreas started, But that was only because we where waiting for a guy to come out of battle. It was to late for many of us online. I know we set the timer. No complaint there. For now we just keep the ports and timers to prove we can. We have allready see down by the Dutch, what happens without timer, lots og empty pb. The last month we have been hoping to win the fight, But lose the Pb, unfortanly we been bad at it, and therefore kept the ports. think soon we will se Pb and then dropped and nobody will Pick them up, what happens then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Crowns Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 there is a decline in pbs. this is direct result of the everyone wins conquest system and the high price for timers on the ports. also the core problem is that most ports have 0 value. and as the player base shrinks this problem will increase. game just needs more players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 3 hours ago, rediii said: Instill dont understand why DNP didnt help BF at maracaibo and I also dont understand why danes didnt attack dutch ports atleast in EU time. Also VNM told me that denmark has a even number with them but they didnt defend or something like that. Anyway, you earn what you sow. We helped when they asked for it, both in screening and in the pb. Why we didn’t attack ports by the Dutch, short answer is even if we took them, they will be lost next Night, because we didn’t want to spend more money on timer. So no point in doing it. We earn what you sow. Guess with that comment you imply that the RvR mechanic is fine, and that is just is me, that think we need to do something if we want a rich and prospering RvR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sven Silberbart Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 (edited) Holding a port must be a benefit, not a pain. Port/Timer costs are a bad idea. Like @staun said: there is no incentive to hold a non profit port. (At least 0 costs) Edited May 2, 2018 by Sven Silberbart 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Resources collected/farmed in ports should also be taxed, as many ports are kept to access to the spesific resources close to capital or crafting port. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staun Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Weather we low the cost ore increase the income. In the end what matter is the cost of a port, and benefit from having it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenris Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 It does not matter what you tax in port, as long that port has no value. As long this poor molested project does not get any deeper content, there will be no more than 500 players online. And not even shiny new UI will help out, or new ships, which actually are not needed, but they are supposed to be "content". There are too many things left behind, unfinished, not implemented,and will never be in game, like a real MMO should have. People are bored, sick of doing over and over same things, and not even simple things can be done, like clan docks, diplomacy, agreements, BR limitations in patrol zones, raids, pirate mechanics, global contracts for ships or goods,possibility to trade everything for anything on contract, in global or national market. Polishing the surface won`t help, and this might end in a history of many projects, having great potential, but not succeeded, because actually why? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebrall Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 10 minutes ago, Fenris said: It does not matter what you tax in port, as long that port has no value. As long this poor molested project does not get any deeper content, there will be no more than 500 players online. And not even shiny new UI will help out, or new ships, which actually are not needed, but they are supposed to be "content". There are too many things left behind, unfinished, not implemented,and will never be in game, like a real MMO should have. People are bored, sick of doing over and over same things, and not even simple things can be done, like clan docks, diplomacy, agreements, BR limitations in patrol zones, raids, pirate mechanics, global contracts for ships or goods,possibility to trade everything for anything on contract, in global or national market. Polishing the surface won`t help, and this might end in a history of many projects, having great potential, but not succeeded, because actually why? Well I agree with you 90% , there’s a few things though like the ui that should of been in game along time ago now they really need to get it done and move onto exactly what you’re saying like the content. I understand the ui means nothing to you as a current player but one of the goals I believe is to increase the player base so they need the aesthetics in place ASAP as old players are not Likley to come back now, as they are either fed up or achieved what they feel is there end game so you have to look at the game in a few different lights right now. and the aesthetics attract new players and the content keeps the players so they need to pull finger and get the aesthetics Done and really start smashing the content out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenris Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Rebrall said: I understand the ui means nothing to you UI wont attaract new players if mechanics are screwed and you have nothing to do when you log in. That`s not the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebrall Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, Fenris said: UI wont attaract new players if mechanics are screwed and you have nothing to do when you log in. That`s not the point. 🤷♂️ Feel you didn’t read what I put but w/e it’s pretty obvious pretty things attract new people interesting things keep them so as I said pretty ui and cool scenery amazing battle instances were skill can be all the difference, gets there attention and fixing the content and mechincs keeps them, and I know it’s slow but using the tutorial helps you get started yes it basic and could into a lot more but you know baby steps it’s clear the devs are a small team working on multiple games or apart of other dev teams I hate how slow progress is but I live with it cause the game is cool af and has potential and they have started working towards actually sorting some of the basics missing from the game so hope they keep going with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenris Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Rebrall said: 🤷♂️ Feel you didn’t read what I put but w/e it’s pretty obvious pretty things attract new people interesting things keep them so as I said pretty ui and cool scenery amazing battle instances were skill can be all the difference, gets there attention and fixing the content and mechincs keeps them, and I know it’s slow but using the tutorial helps you get started yes it basic and could into a lot more but you know baby steps it’s clear the devs are a small team working on multiple games or apart of other dev teams I hate how slow progress is but I live with it cause the game is cool af and has potential and they have started working towards actually sorting some of the basics missing from the game so hope they keep going with it Use comma pls, cant read this. Those are well known apologies, and they don`t work anymore, since all these things were named, suggested, and are not done. We lost a year since wipe, with horrible austerity which kicked away 50% of players that were playing. And we are back at same things we had before wipe. Nothing, in game, features, mechanics was added, except 2-3 new ships. They need to deliver soon, otherwise there will be noone left to criticise or to praise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now