Booyaah

Remind me why we need events to be timed again, especially on 3 hour timers? We used to play 2 matches in a row and they don't take 3 hours each. We can barely get 15 ppl now to show up once a week even though it's now easier being able to queue up from any port instead of heading to Plymouth. Most the old school pvper's are not playing the game right now, the current active player base is around 75% PvE players I'd say. There's a few US/Dutch and Pirate players that like pvp, but that's about it... There is no way you are ever going to get 36 ppl to queue up in a 3-5 minute window, hell last night there were only 34 ppl on. Need a custom lobby where players can choose sides and everyone hits a ready button before the match starts. Or just bring back the random lobby at least and auto balance the teams randomly.

lol USA camping Jeremie? I think you have your factions mixed up...

You have 2 choices as a streamer: - Put a several minute delay which means you can't really have real time interaction with your viewers which means no one will really watch you unless you're some pro League of Legends player - Keep a low delay to interact with viewers and just deal with being stream sniped, it's part of being a streamer. Putting a few minute delay on your stream when playing NA is not really going to mask your position much since sailing is so slow anyways.

Then you as a player (Frekken or whoever) have the ability to say 'yes I want this person to join me' and others who are not particularly fond of a person can say 'no I don't want them magically to be made my ally when I would attack them any other time'. Win/win for both sides. Sometimes ppl maybe having a gentleman's duel 1v1 fair odds and then someone comes in all bloodthirsty and mucks it all up.

Take a screenshot of the images and save them as PNG in MSPaint, problem solved.

Yes I agree, someone in the original group needs the power to accept or deny additional reinforcements. When entering a battle, the person who made the initial tag should get a popup saying: <playerank> <playername> from <country> sailing on <ship name> would like to join your battle as an ally. Do you accept? The same goes for auto AI reinforcements.

That ss is in a battle instance (notice the UI). That means night battles!

It's called spyglass + flag check. I have to use that tactic all the time in trafs as you have a cluster of ships all grouped up and many of the names overlap where you can't rely on the overhead name.

I suggested real moon cycles way back, everyone told me it wasn't a priority right now: Night battles would be awesome!

Most of the crafted ships being produced are crap 1 module ships that no one really wants to buy though. Maybe the cheap ship market will be a good thing for new players who are slow to earn gold.

I don't think some of you have fully thought out the consequences of removing player names. People will go into battle thinking it is AI to farm. This will cause unintentional ganking, because I doubt a lot of players are going to stop shooting after they have already spent so much time setting up the encounter. And those players will just be able to throw their hands up innocently and say 'we didn't know we were ganking, there were no names'. The only thing I can think of to do this would be to bring back the Spyglass in OW and require you to hold it over an unidentified ship for 10 seconds to identify the ship, then another 10 seconds to get the player's name.

I'd rather have it so that, when the player is invisibile, so are all other players to him. This will prevent ppl in ports from sitting in invisibility permanently and scouting out ppl to engage as they come or leave. This will solve the main problem. I like to still have invis so when I do decide to leave battle, I can't get grief'd over and over again by someone's buddies sitting outside waiting in the OW.

One trick I have learned to massively increase your storage space is to keep a slot for a trader's snow in your main outposts. That thing has 30-40 slots by itself. You can even load it past the 800 weight and essentially just have it dry docked holding a ton of goods. The only downside is you lose one of your 5 ship slots in that outpost.

Hi guys, I would like to continue with our 'normal tradition' this Saturday. Apparently we need a minimum of 36 players for a large battle event to take place via the Events screen. We only had 15-16 last weekend as most ppl got silver eyes with the crafting and did not want to fight in yachts apparently. Sometimes we get caught up so much in progression that we forget to stop every once in a while and just have fun. Now that things have settled down a bit, hopefully we can get back to business I believe the Event large battles occur at (correct me if I'm wrong): 12 PM PDT (pacific US daylight savings time) / 3 PM EDT (eastern US daylight savings time) / 9 PM CEST (central european summer time) or 3 PM PDT (pacific US daylight savings time) / 6 PM EDT (eastern US daylight savings time) / 12 AM CEST midnight (central european summer time) We have had 120 ppl sign up over the months and I see over 200+ online during weekend peak times. Please fill out your desired time slot in the spreadsheet just so we can get a rough head count ahead of time: https://goo.gl/Tf6GBf Depending on how many ppl sign up for each slot we could do trafs at both times or a combination of a large battle + several smaller battles. I do not believe the event functionality has been tested thoroughly yet. One thing they need to bring back IMO is the chat box while you wait on the timer. I'm not sure how the Event functionality will balance the teams across nations, and I don't think we can really enforce anyone being on teamspeak anymore, so I would just say everyone shows up this Saturday and let's see what happens. Steel or Snoopy or Jacob or anyone else from any of the larger guilds that normally attend, if you could poll your guys and post back in here with a rough head count for your guild/faction that would be helpful

Yes, I have not had time to update everything 100% as I need to do another pass (probably a few more hours of work). Things have been pretty crazy with the crafting patch. Please note, resource listings should be ignored unless you see a U (for updated) next to the in-game coords.

Hey guys I updated all the capital ports and a majority of the ports that went from pirate to neutral and vice versa. There's still some more work to be done. Also, if you see a port with a capital U (stands for updated) next to the coords, it means I have updated the port goods produced listing since the crafting patch. Currently I have done a majority of US and bahamas and am starting on the neutral ports in Cuba. If there is no U, then then those are old production notes and should be ignored.

Well thanks Barberouge, looks like there is some work to be done. I've had several ppl tell me since the patch they still like my map due to it having coords and (partial) resource listing. But now I see there is an in-game map, I guess it is only a matter of time once you guys implement a moveable compass and grid lines, there probably won't be too much use for these outside maps anymore. Although I assume the in-game map will be covered in fog of war at the start when the game goes to EA?

I'm the type that would much rather put the data inside a rdbms and write some fancy select statement than manage a spreadsheet, but that takes time that I don't want to spend

1) So based upon's today 'highly annoying' experience, pending until the devs maybe giving us a game lobby available through Plymouth, I do not think we should form the lines at Plymouth. I am thinking somewhere to the eastern most part of the Lesser Antillies like either Rosaly or maybe the the top NW tip of Guadaloupe between St Louis and Le Moule that we tried earlier today? Just because there is no AI traffic there to endlessly engage our fleets...we could do Aves, but that's a ways off... Also, I think we should go back to filling out the sign-up sheet. I've kind of been slacking off in regards to that lately, sorry. The reason I say this, is because ppl can fill out their desired ships ahead of time (instead of waiting at 4pm for ppl to line up) and we can 'mostly' know what the ship composition will be ahead of time. Plus it's easy to sort by ship size to get the BR as even as possible. Then we could have everyone either wait in port and then each side can 'trickle' in right out of port. Sign-Up sheet: https://goo.gl/Tf6GBf What sounds the best? 2) In order to get more battles in, do you guys want to add a rule, once 50% of a team's ships are captured/sunk/escaped that the other team wins and we can start a new game so we can maybe get Is there a reason you want to only do lynx? Fore aft I think would actually do really well in brig only because of the their ability to sail into the wind and dictate the battle compared to a Mercury or Navy Brig. I just like having some diversity, for some strange reason I want to sail the Snow again *shrug*

Let's plan to do a frigate only battle (4th and 5th rates), since I don't hear any objections and it sounds like everyone wants to. Then we can do w/e the group wants after for the remaining battle(s). So if you don't have a frigate now, please grab it and teleport it down to Plymouth ahead of time if needed. Then next week we'll have our brig battles The 2 most important things are to be on the TS server (don't need a mic, just listen) and to be at Plymouth on-time, that's it.

Last few weeks have felt a little stale with everyone in Santis... You guys want to spice things up this week and do a no 1st rate battle first? Help the environment and save some masts

U.S.S. Independence I think this ship has been mentioned before a few times but there was never a thread made for her: In 1836 she was razee'd into a 54-gun frigate: Originally I think she was closer to 90 guns, but they had to cut down on her armament some due to her weight and draft proportions *insert fat Murican joke*. I'm still looking for the original 2nd/3rd rate plans, but am having trouble finding them so far in US Library of Congress, US National Archives, or DANFS mil site... Tonnage: 2243 Length: 190 ft 9 in (58.14 m) Beam: 54 ft 7 in (16.64 m) Draft: 21 ft 3 in (6.48 m) Complement: 790 officers and enlisted Armament: 90 × 32-pounder (15 kg) guns (**not sure about this) Excerpt from here at least confirms her dimensions and armaments: http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/line/sotl.htm#inde Independence was the first to launch and the first to make a foreign cruise of any ship-of-the-line of the U.S. Navy. She was one of "four ships to rate not less than 74 guns" authorized by Act of Congress 9 January 1813. Her sister ships were Franklin, Washington, and Columbus. She launched 22 June 1814 in the Boston Navy Yard, immediately took on guns, and was stationed with the frigate USS Constitution to protect the approaches of Boston Harbor. Her design was identical to Franklin and Washington: Length, 190 feet 10 inches; extreme beam, 54 feet 71/2 inches; tonnage, 2,243; draft, 24 feet 4 inches; and a complement of 790 officers and men. Their original armament was 30 long 32-pounders of 0.55 hundredweight; 33 long 32-pounders of 0.50 hundredweiglht; and twenty-four 32-pounder carronades. The lower deck gun ports of Independence came too near the water with all her armament, provisions and complement on board. Some of her heavy guns were exchanged for the lighter 24-pounders of the USS Constitution to help remedy her deep draft. After trials, it was necessary to further increase buoyancy by landing "a considerable weight of carronades, spars, provisions, water, and other articles of equipment." The Navy Commissioners ordered Independence not to sail with a view of converting her to a "razee" to improve her efficiency. Before the order reached Boston, she sailed 3 July 1815 under command of Capt. William M. Crane. She wore the broad pennant of Commodore William Bainbridge commanding the second squadron dispatched to deal with the renewed piratical acts of the Barbary ~States. Her lower deck ports were caulked in to overcome the problem of her deep draft in crossing the Atlantic. Commodore Bainbridge deplored the proposal to razee Independence for "such a process would have spoiled one of the finest two deck ships in the world." "It is true," he wrote the Navy Commissioners, "the ship is built too shallow a depth for her other dimensions, which makes her lee guns in action rather low . . ." But Bainbridge continued: "You may sir, be assured of one fact; that there is not an officer or seaman on board the Independence who would not willingly engage in her (with all her faults) any ship of two deck that floats." He stated that Independence was a ship of superior stability who was able to outsail the fastest frigates of her squadron. Bainbridge proposed to raise her gun decks but would not be a party to altering one line of the design that might affect her superior speed, handling, and stability. Peace with the Barbary States had been enforced by the squadron under Stephen Decatur by the time Independence entered the Mediterranean. But she led an impressive show of American naval might before Barbary ports that encouraged them to keep the peace treaties concluded. Having served adequate notice of rising U.S. seapower and added to the prestige of the Navy and the Nation, she returned to Newport 15 November 1815. Economy measures reduced her status to that of station flagship for Commodore Bainbridge until 29 November 1819. She then was station flagship of Commodore John Shaw until placed in ordinary at Boston in 1822. The controversy continued as to whether Independence was capable of performing "services indispensible [sic] for a 74 at all times." Surveys were held with the warship carrying 5 months provisions, water for 700 men, stores, and her original heavy armament. Some of the scuppers of her lower gun deck ports sank beneath the water. Naval constructor William Doughty reported that "Independence carries her guns too near the water to 'enable her to perform the services indispensible [sic] for a 74 at all times with certainty,'because, in blowing weather, she could not fight her lower lee guns and would therefore be liable to be captured by a ship of inferior force . . .". On the other hand, Oliver H. Perry wrote that "Commodore Chauncey, Captain Creighton and several other officers of rank and reputation, were clearly of opinion that no vessel could surpass the Washington and I see little or no difference between her and Independence." US engineers just have high quality standards IMO

You guys should crowd source port assets from the community. I'm sure there are some more modelers out there

admin, it might not seem 'realistic', but we had a situation where we had balanced sides, but then there were 4 spanish players wanting to play, so when they joined a side it threw balance off by 4 1st rates. I don't think the current system allows players from one country to split across both sides for balance purposes. Anyways just a thought to have an option to allow for ignoring your nation. And can you also add to the lobby and in-game battle screen (tab key), the BR on both sides (both the initial BR on each side when the battle started and the current BR of alive ships on each side). Oh and demasting is fine (please nerf damage done to masts via dispersion from +800m out)

I assume this voting takes place on the 'tester' forum?