Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

171 Excellent

About Bigvalco

  • Rank
    Able seaman

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

661 profile views
  1. They all already do... And with a BR limit, you wouldn't need a full 25 first rates to win or even 25 4th rates. You would just need the better strategy.
  2. The BR limit is the simplest solution in this thread so I have no idea why you think it is over complicated. Saying that a limit would prevent casual players from joining is absolutely silly, you think that they aren't discouraged from joining with the current system? The idea that the admin posted is better than it is currently, but still just more of the same. When you make it so that they are just 25 4th rates, how is that better than 25 1st rates? A BR limit would actually make casual players more effective in port battles because it will make it viable to have something other th
  3. You can still bring in a first rate, just that it takes up a larger chunk of the team than a frigate would.
  4. You can make them viable with a BR limit that doesn't allow people to use 25 1st rates in the battle.
  5. Well the solution to only having 25 santi fleets is now going to be... 25 ingermanland fleet? It's a little bit better, but I feel like it is more of the same. I don't really understand the argument being presented against a BR limit... If we use the system that is being proposed of what size ships for certain ports and then also add a BR limit, then I don't see a problem. With a BR limit there will be a mix of ships or there will be a limited number of the best ships. Without a BR limit, then all we have is 25 of the best ships for that tier. The problem of random joiners is alr
  6. I personally liked the idea of a BR limit on battles, so we can mix and match to equal the max limit. You could just make it a different max limit on low, mid, and high tier port battles. That way we can get a good mix rather than just bringing the best possible ship for the tier.
  7. I've seen some suggestions about a National Bank and/or War Bonds, I would love to see the ability for Parliament to have a war tax to add funds for a war and/or adjusting taxes to raise funds to declare war. This would be interesting, but I'm unsure if people want this if they can't change who is in parliament without participating in a war that the parliament chose in the first place. Bottom line is that I like what has been proposed and I respect the amount of thinking that went into these ideas, I don't think I could have come up with it myself!
  8. I love the idea, I think people have been begging for a change like this for a long time, I have a few questions though. 1.) Will these be huge differences in speed depending on wind? Or will it be more subtle like 10-20% so that you might still have a chance if you are in a fir, speed fitted renommee and against a live oak, tanky santissima in a heavy wind? 2.) Is there any chance of adding trade winds or currents on the open world to make it so that we are more likely to find player traders using known routes that are best for speed? This feature would be awesome when/if player trade
  9. You will still have the first rate creep, the defending force normally takes less losses than the attackers so they likely won't lose the port ever with a system that makes it more harmful to lose those types of ships. I feel more like making it expensive to own or sail largers ships with provisions is the best idea rather than limiting how often we can sail certain ships because we are waiting to replenish more crew. You will see less people sailing the first rates if every day at see they have to feed 1100 sailors. Or make a fee for having a ship docked, so that people have the option t
  10. May I suggest that the parliament elects a ruler for a set amount of days? Rather than it being based off of only estates.
  11. I have a concern of what would happen if some of the clans capture the early and more secure ports that almost never would be attacked and yet gain just as much of a bonus as the clans fighting on the front lines holding contested ports. Would there be any kind of solution to benefit the clans fighting over more contested ports compared to being fat and happy and owning ports that don't get attacked for 2 months? Maybe adding a form of taxatio/maintenance for land? If they fail to continue paying for this then the port goes up for auction in the capital? Then the problem would be the time
  12. We've had quite a few people from PvP2 join up with us, if you are looking for a pirate clan to join over here, but don't want to be a mindless drone. Then this is the place for you, just hop onto Teamspeak and come say hi.
  • Create New...