ajffighter86

It's a well known fact that the natives did it. Look at the images. Those are Indians throwing the tea overboard. (yes I'm joking)

I would think pirates would be a good faction for people who aren't into diplomacy. Then again, you have a lot (not all) pirates who seem to want to play like a nation so . . . we need something more hardcore than pirates for the true pirates to play as. I suggest a zombie faction. Zombies will attack anyone without reason, and are very difficult to establish diplomatic relations with. Join the zombie faction.

Made commodore rank today and tried the ship. Very nice, good idea to include crew space. I did notice one bug, with collision with ingermanland, my bucentaure suddenly sped up to 9 knots and 'lurched' forward, kind of a hard thing to capture with an F11 screenshot, or I would have. Other than that, I've not noticed any major bugs with the ship.

In the USA our employers are getting suspicious of us developing a 2PM "stomach ache" every day to leave work early and racing home participate in port battles. We had to set at least a few port timers to our time zones.

Gentlemen, I'm sorry to report that I just caught the last sealed bottle, with a congratulatory note that says, "This is the last bottle. Go get your platinum marines that award you with 500% marines on your ship." Now you may return to fighting. Thank you developers, for the wonderful time we had catching bottles.

I think that's a reasonable compromise. The question is whether or not the developers are up to the task of creating two different systems for the two types of servers, but I do not want to ruin your gameplay and you do not want to ruin mine, so at least we could agree on that. Hopefully this will be fixed soon.

Well, I for one am glad to see someone taking the economy seriously in the game. For all its flaws, things like this need to be tested and I don't think anyone has really tried to make the economy work outside of their own clan circles. Good luck.

Not to be snarky, but 'emporium' perhaps would be the intended word for the system you're trying to create. Unless you're trying to hold absolute power over tobacco, which, come to think of it, is not a bad idea either. But I like this idea. The only question now is how to prevent pirates from intercepting delivery of goods. You'll have a lot of traders being kil—eh, slipping and falling off the dock, while charitable strangers see to it that their goods get to the intended destination.

Were it not for the Spanish in waters in the dutch lesser Antilles, they had no business being in, during the Great Swedish/Danish/Franco/Dutch War of Late Spring 2016, this war could have been avoided. ( ) Also great fight today outside Portillo.

Let me ask this: If you are able to 'determine the engagement distance', what is there to prevent every player from choosing the most extreme distance option and leaving every battle that doesn't suit their odds? In other words, wouldn't this simply further reduce the overall amount of open world PVP, when we should be implementing features to encourage it? And supposing that your friends were able to join for an unlimited amount of time when you are being ganked . . . if the circle keeps growing, wouldn't they keep spawning too far away to be of any assistance to you anyway? I'm not voting yet. I would like a better system, but I do believe that we have a fair amount of control as to how battles are set up as they are now. You just have to be really considerate of how you tag someone (or allow them to tag you) on the open sea before the 20 second countdown timer ends. Because cannons are now loaded after the battle starts, I will always let a larger ship try to tag me closely if I cannot outrun him. I can usually have my cannons loaded and be raking his stern before he can even set his sails to 100%. They think they are getting a good tag, but it turns out to literally bite them in the rear. So far I have not needed a slider bar or pre-determined engagement distance because over-confident enemies usually determine the starting distance for me with their tags. I'm just not sure that the proposal would solve more problems than it creates.

The problem is that what helps you, also helps the enemy. People like to say that removing timers is the solution to prevent ganking, but we have had longer timers in the past and this was ultimately not proven to be the case. Say you are sailing and see an enemy gank squad on the open sea consisting of 4 enemy ships. You ask for help and 5 players are relatively nearby and willing to sail 20 minutes to help. They join your fight, thanks to having unlimited time to do so. However, as your teammates are joining, the 4 enemy ships have ALSO asked for help as well. 6 more enemies come to help them. It is now 6 on 10. By the time any more friendly ships can even get to your battle, your ships will be so smashed up that the outcome will be pretty much determined. If you are fortunate to be in a fairly large, active faction, there is a chance that you might be able to find 19 more players to come and fill your team's roster in the fight. If you are NOT in a large, active faction, plan to get good at building ships because you are going to be replacing a ton of them, and eventually you will tire of being little more than target practice for your enemies. Now lets' consider the smaller faction's odds with a shorter timer as we have now: Your nation is down to 3 or 4 ports. Every port battle you try to defend in results in disaster. It is certain death to leave port in a trade ship, much less any ship. You are considering either deleting the game or, re-rolling to another nation, abandoning your former friends and leaving your faction to the mercy of the buzzards feeding on its carcass. But do not despair! There is hope. Guerrilla warfare. If you can manage to break out to sea, get behind enemy lines, and hit targets in the relative safety of their home waters, now you are no longer at a disadvantage as the smaller faction. You can even do this alone if you choose your targets and hunting grounds wisely, teleporting between free ports and always hitting the enemy where they least expect it. They will say, "How did this Swedish player get here? I thought we eliminated them from the game!" Au contraire! They will constantly be panning the camera in fear of Swedish players coming over the horizon. They will check under their beds for Swedish players before going to sleep at night. The 2 minute timer has put the tiny nation on equal footing with the Zerg nation. TLDR: Unlimited time with fewer active players means you will always be at a disadvantage, because the enemy will continue to pour into the battle until it is full while you are resorting to calling people on their phones and telling them to log-on to the game because no one else is online in nation chat. The 2 minute timer serves to equalize the contenders. Yes, they will still be sailing gank squads into your waters before you can react and the battle closes, but at least you can do the same to them. That said, I'm with-holding voting for the moment, because I would like to hear more arguments from the opposition before deciding one way or another.

Yes. I'm getting horrific flashbacks of the days of insta-reinforcements. no matter what you did, traders would use the AI as sacrificial lambs to escape battles whenever you were fortunate enough to catch them alone. All the while, people were raging on the forums that pirates do not act like pirates and should be sailing small, fast ships and attacking traders. All I will concede is that trading is not rewarding enough in terms of leveling up, and is perhaps the worst use of time in exchange for what little benefit you reap from it, but I do not believe that relying on AI "crutch" fleets is the answer.

In any case, good on you that you were actually able to turn the tables. I love it when someone in a bigger, higher BR ship attacks what they believe to be an 'easy' target and end up having to leave the battle in a row-boat.

Smaller nations tend to have to resort to hit-and-run raids on shipping of larger nations. It's really the only way to be any way effective. Unlimited timers, even the 5 minute timer, made this nearly impossible to achieve. If you're a lone pirate trying to hit traders in waters that your enemy believes to be relatively safe (in other words, trying to play the game like a real pirate), it honestly sucked to have players to be able to call up a whole fleet every time you tried to attack something. If we are going to extend timers, we might as well bring back the ability to instantly call up a fleet of AI ships every time you are attacked. Raiding shipping lanes will again become an impossibility. If you are backed into a corner and have to resort to guerrilla style warfare, because your nation does not have enough people to fill a 25-ship fleet, you WANT there to be shorter timers. A longer timer tended to always give the advantage to factions that were able to bring the most ships to a battle. That is why timers were reduced.

I think the map would have to reflect relatively equal player activity on multiple nations. If you are sailing around by yourself, you won't have to worry about your general location being highlighted in a heat-map. Besides, someone interested in PVP is not going to sail 2 hours to find one player to gank, but they might sail 2 hours to central America if there's dozens of players ripping each other to shreds every day (unless of course they are avoiding PVP, in which case, the heat map would still be useful for the opposite reason)

Just wondering if there's any justification for why we can't do this. I've had many good sporting fights with enemies and as a matter of respect I like to chat with them from time to time, but I have to search for them in the 'find player' list to initiate a conversation and it is somewhat of a hassle. (especially since the search function can be hit-or-miss). I understand that initially the decision not to allow this was to prevent spying, but frankly, that has proven to be nearly impossible to prevent anyway. I know there is global chat but some may find it rude to carry on a conversation that fills up the global chat window. Just offering this in suggestions, perhaps i'll add a community poll. It would be a low priority change I admit, but I think a relatively simple one.

this thread, lol

Please do not flame me too hard for this, but it is a serious question: "Pacific coast opens" Do we really want to be expanding the size of the game world as the player base continues to drop? No offense, and not meaning to be a downer.

To be clear, I actually wouldn't mind spying if it were more purposefully implemented as a game feature. I don't think it should be high on the developer's priority list. There should be some degree of challenge to it, and yes, the good spies would never be caught. I can live with all that. Plus, in a ROLE playing game, a spy would be just another ROLE to play as (much like they have implemented smuggling). But people creating alternate accounts for the purpose of preventing PVP action, what can we do about them? Because they will only affect the game in a negative way, IMO. And I don't take much offense to anything, so just speak your mind. OMG clan on PVP2 had a bit of an inside joke about who was the ambassador to the Brits or Americans, and what made it so funny is that people actually believed that there ever was such a person. People would actually ask us to have the 'contacts' deliver messages. Come to think of it, I'm not even sure. Maybe there was such an ambassador. Even we didn't know but we kept pinning the label on random players and then those players would suddenly be hounded to perform clandestine acts. It was harmless trolling, really. I doubt we ever did anything that broke the game like buying and 'burying' conquest flags.

Well, the Dutch were just discussing in nation chat, the phenomenon where a player with an alt-account buys a flag of an opposing nation and simply holds it until the timer expires, preventing any chance of attack on that port from happening. Why some (not all) of the pirates—the largest faction on PVP2, feels the need to have to resort to such tactics and doesn't NEED to resort to such tactics—do this is beyond my comprehension. Then you see a Dutch contraband ship nonchalantly following pirates into their port right before a conquest is launched? Call it paranoia if it makes you feel better, but it's pretty damned shady to be a coincidence. But perhaps I'm no longer talking about spying, but speaking of someone generally just being an asshole. Spies, I don't mind so much. Loose lips sink ships, literally. But tactics like the one described above have no place in this game.

Admittedly it has flaws. Just simply throwing out suggestions to see what sticks.

Introduce a popular vote by online players of the nation to banish the spying player from that nation for x-number days (then making him attackable by any player during that duration). Link the banishment to their steam account, so creating a new player wouldn't be a work-around. It would get expensive very quickly to keep having to buy additional accounts just to keep up with current information on the enemy. Of course you still run into the age-old problem of people using votekick abuse. Today I witnessed a dutch contraband player following a pirate player fleet into a pirate port right before those same pirates launched an attack on Dutch ports. I mean, it doesn't get more suspicious than that.

I'm in favor of scrapping pirates as a 'faction' and making everyone independent privateers/pirates. If you turned to a life of piracy during the era, you didn't instantly become a member of a massive network of brothers in black. Most other pirates would have been unlikely to trust you, and perhaps even in competition with you. Now if players wanted to create their own brotherhood of pirates, then I don't see why, or even how, they should be prevented from doing so. But it needs to reflect a loose framework, not the same level of organization that nationals have.

Hello tech team, I have not been able to log on to PVP-1 EU for many months due to a character that I created somehow not showing up on my list when I log on, which is preventing me from creating a new character. The name was "Raphael Semmes" I put the game down for a while, I guess about 4 months now, and have tried to log on today only to find that the problem now affects me in PVP-2 as well. I keep getting 'master database synchronization failure, character 'Raphael semmes' already exists.' I've tried uninstalling/reinstalling the game, but that didn't fix it, so I'm thinking it's a corrupted file on the server-side. I suppose if it cannot be addressed, then I will just have to wait patiently for the mega-wipe and hope that the dreaded ghost of 'Raphael semmes' will not still be sailing the seas of Gamelabs' servers, preventing me from logging on. Thanks for any assistance you can offer.

Thank you for looking into this Ink. If it helps, this thread more accurately describes the problem I am having: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12066-failed-to-remove-player-at-master-database/ Whatever you guys did for the creator of that thread, should address my problem, and perhaps fix the problem for the original poster of this thread as well.