Ian2492

Like these RP threads, Good show.

HEY MOM! I'm on the front page of the paper! We lost 2-3 AI snows to the towers, I know this is considered ''Huge Losses'' to the US' incompetent shipbuilding industry, but for the Royal Navy's war machine, it is but a seaweed in an ocean. For King and Country! Huzzah!

In addition to this, enemy nations could have intercept mission (X ship has been seen leaving Y port in direction of Z port with important mail W minutes ago, you must intercept him!)

I'd say seize stuff in free ports too but that might just be me.

The guy who rammed you out was desperately trying to dodge you, you were surrounded, way outgunned and hugging the border *shrugs*

It's already like that as far as I know. The other day a lone american cutter tried to tag my Navy Brig and it said Combat cancelled, BR difference too high. If a fleet sticks together, they can avoid getting split.

I'd be ok with defecting but you should be left with the ship you're sailing at the time and what's on it. Everything else should get seized. There could be a gold cost to simulate having all your properties seized too and having to buy a new house etc in your new capital. Eventually I'd like to see a reputation/bounty system where defecting could put a bounty on your head.

I think that a ''cosmetic'' slot is a great idea but it also depends on how much money they could make out of it vs how much money they need to spend making new skins.

I have no clue about the actual hitboxes but I'd just like to point out that it's possible to have a ricochet on a square mast, possibly even easier than on a round one.

What happens when a battle starts as PvE and ends up in PVP? What about protection zone AI?

It has the advantage of not being an arbitary cutoff, and removing the ability to jump in on top of someone. Why would someone that arrives at 1:01 (or 5:01) be denied entry? He should just be further back from those who joined at 1 min. You can then scale up this system to have a reasonable join distance based on time and based on the distance compression of OW. It also allows for the movement inside the battle instance to be meaningful. If you join on my side at 5 mins, while I'm being attacked by a superior force, I can attempt to close the distance in time. The attacking captain can also make the decision to press the attack or to disengage based on how far and how strong my reinforcements are. It removes the safety net of "oh its past 1 min, i'm safe" and instead you have to account for speed and distance of reinforcements.

First I'm on mobile so i can't see what post I liked that you're reffering to, what's your point with the picture of me likeing a post? I could like like all the posts in the website and it shouldn't affect your opinion of my proposal unless you are basing your opinions on emotions as opposed to facts. Second, if you want a 1 minute timer, could you explain to me what the advantage of a 1 minute timer has over a system where if you joined 1-2 minutes after the battle started you would be quite far from the battle and there would be significant risk of your ally losing the battle before you got there to help? My proposed system can be adjusted to whatever scale necessary to be balanced up to point where if you join 5 minutes in you'd have to sail an hour to start seeing ships in the distance. It's still far better than an arbitrary cutoff.

I don't understand how you feel my proposed system would encourage ganking, I myself think it would reduce it, since you would have to join in an organised simultaneous fashion if you wanted to have a strong numerical advantage. The current system allows for baiting people into commiting themselves to the battle before dropping a fleet onto them when the timer is at 4 minute 50 seconds. I feel you underestimate how far I imagined people would be spawning. The spawn distance increase over time should be quite drastic, it could even be exponential, to a point where if you join late you could only have a chance of participating if the battle headed your way. This system would have no drawbacks over the current 5 minute system, and multiple advantages.

This information could easily be displayed on the battle card that we already have. Speaking of which, The battle card should also update with the progress of the battle, so you know what you're getting into.

I posted an alternative to the timers altogether here: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/8211-suggestion-to-replace-battle-timer/ This would only be acceptable if manual shooting with spacebar would allow you to shoot at a decent speed, and multiple decks at once. In real life it was simple to tell your crew to fire in the ship only when it's in front of the gun, for example when you're raking. Right now the rolling broadside's effectively is entirely dependent on the speed of your ship, which makes no sense. Alternatively, they could add a broadside mode that is dependent on the speed of your ship, so that guns only fire when they reach the point where the first gun fired.

Not really because after a while you'd spawn so far out that you'd have no reason to join at all, and your opponents would be far enough to simply leave the battle. I guess you'd have to remove the xp bonus for 'winnning'' a battle and base the xp solely on your contribution to the battle, in order for people to be able to leave at any point.

Hello everyone, The 5 minutes battle timer has been a large source of debate and controversy amongst the community and I'd like to propose an alternative that would bridge the gap between OW and instance battle. As we know instance battles are necessary to allow for compression of the OW, and compression of the OW size is necessary to ensure that voyages don't take weeks in real life. This leads to our problem: either remove the timer, which is unrealistic because it allows for players to sail hundred of miles to join a battle, or use a small timer, which can be annoying in terms of last-second jumping in, or being locked out. 1) Last second jumping in is unrealistic because people can tag a ship, wait until he's committed to the battle, then have everyone jump on top of him. In a real life settings, the target would've seen the reinforcements coming as soon as their sails would pass the horizon, thus he could chose to disengage if he felt that the battle would be unwinnable. 2) Being locked out can also be annoying because if your fleet gets split next to eachother, and one of the battle ends, technically, you should be able to proceed to help the next battle. If an enemy ship succeeds in holding you in a mock battle for 5 minutes, you won't be able to help your allies, and thus it leads to complaints of unfairness. The solution I would propose is that the timer would be removed entirely, but for every x amount of time that passes by (say, each minute), the players that join would join further away, to a point where if you join an hour after the start, you'd be far enough that it would be next to impossible to participate in the battle. 1) This would fix the ''last second jumping in'' because if one person tagged you, and all their friends joined 5 minutes later, they would be far enough to allow you to take a tactical decision to retreat or fight, instead of having a gank fleet spawn in the middle of your little fight. 2) It would also fix the feeling of unfairness of being locked out, because people that join further away will still feel like they have a possibility of helping out their friends. They could coordinate to try and regroup and defeat their enemy. TL;DR : Remove timer, make people join progressively further away based on time since battle start, solve the problem of instanced combat. Thoughts? Comments? Insults? Regards, Ian

Maybe pirate port battles could be changed to raids, so pirates have unconquerable ports (havens) on the map, when they get a big fleet up to raid a nation's town instead of capturing it they raid it, which gives penalties to that town's economy for x amount of days and a large amount of goods to the pirate raiders. This could go and in hand with William the Drake's excellents suggestions in this post : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/6664-pirate-havens-port-security-and-trade-regulations/?p=125864 Also, removing the pirate's ''national'' chat might help them break off into smaller groups, if that is your end goal.

Definitely, well fought. o7

Breaking news: The US naval reinforcement are now able to sail over mountains! Sailors beware.