Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Nathaniel

Members
  • Content Count

    415
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Nathaniel last won the day on December 30 2015

Nathaniel had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

275 Excellent

About Nathaniel

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant
  1. Congratulations! Very good fight and well deserved for all the determination. Hope you put the casino hours on the same timer, otherwise there are so many lures out there...
  2. Like the Bahamas port of St. Nicks? But you are correct in so far as the danish proved a bigger obstacle at that point for us getting east. There were fun but costly bloodbaths for both sides at Bani and El Soco.
  3. Eh, and there i was thinking all this were plans of Bubbles himself, preparing some devious mischief.
  4. Well, we might just stop referencing Trafalgar and start referencing actual big fleet engagements in the Caribbean with the actual aim at island conquest. Like or the Battle of the Saintes (1782) or the Battle of Martinique two years before - but i just have to point out as an aside (and i know the TS didn't reference this explicitely) that it won't help the "less SoLs in port battles" advocates. It still were all what we would consider 25vs25 3rd rates+ battles.
  5. Battles with 50 third rates is perfectly fine - that's how a typical line battle of the time looked exactly like, hasn't it? So if Trafalgar wasn't boring i don't see how a battle with 50 SoLs should be boring. It isn't. And when everyone will have access to 1st rates in a month or so battles will actually become more equal. Flags certainly should cost most however, but i agree that simply increasing the costs will benefit the most populated factions. But this is quite easy to solve - tie flag costs to the total amount of ports owned, thus also punishing overextension. While i understand some players leveling up don't want to spend all their time on PBs, you also should acknowledge that PBs are the type of content that motivates a lot of players that have mostly finished the grind to log in every day. Unlike the ganking wars those are the only type of content when you can expect your opponent to show up most of the time and engage in tactically interesting battles. So i want to stress Monkey Bullet's final point that any increase in port battle lenght (or time restrictions to buy flags) should be accompanied by an increase in big pvp content where both sides are motivated to stay in. Before that gets in, let frequent PBs stay, even if not neccesarily the 14 or so a night the Danish were able to get. Blockading eachother's ports doesn't count.
  6. While i like frigates to have a bigger role in the game, specifically why exactly should they play the main role in large line to line engagements? Why shouldn't Port Battles consist of just 1-3st rated ships? Just count the number of frigates at Trafalgar!
  7. Why should there be a Russian server? This game operates on "as few servers as needed" basis. Even if the Russians would have a separate server, who would stop them to play on pvp1 like the Americans do? While there may be arguments that some gameplay mechanics could change, i also think that not all sandboxy solutions have been tried up yet. Basically (and here i speak in a wholly personal capacity) Sweden has three choices: 1. Wait for France and GB to recapture it's ports (which, as Fredrikstedt today has shown to us, might be a long process), 2. succumb to the enemy and basically become a peacefull danish protectorate or 3. ask one of your more populated allies for 4-5 ports in a safe location on the other end of the map to rebuild your strengh.
  8. Gerade der RUS clan von Varaborn und Babay hatte anders als Klavas andere Russen eine ganz andere Grindpolitik. Sie ignorierten mehr oder weniger den Großteils des PvP Contents und saßen die ganze Zeit am Grinden um nur vor kurzem rauszukommen.
  9. All hail Babay the great! The lord of the grind, master of Klava, thunder of the seas!
  10. Well, it's a game, we have a new fictional nation and have to live with it. And a very coordinated one at that. Not that different from "historic" Crusader Kings 2 or Empire: Total War. I congratulate our enemies with their victory and promise a mighty comeback in due course.
  11. As far as i understand (and that's only my understanding) it's really not a matter to whom the accounts belong but only a matter of the acts commited. It is not allowed to damage farm over and over without any risk of sinking, but it is allowed to donate your labour hours to another crafter.
  12. I'm not convinced a nation should be able to win at all. Having ever more port should be possible, but request a hard strain, thus maybe allowing a faction to dominate for months, but ultimately leading to the other nations gankng up on it with another pretender to emerge. Works well for EVE's alliances, should work with only minor tweaks here too.
  13. Yes, agree. I also don't quite get the argument a dev made recently that EVE-style warheouse thefts should not be possible. But why shouldn't they? Guilds already utilise spies and diversion and keeping your warehouse safe should be a big part of your clan security politics, as it is in EVE.
×
×
  • Create New...