JollyRoger1516

I can't say I support the idea of PvE players being forced onto a PvP server. Apart from them having chosen a more relaxed gameplay over the competitive gameplay on PvP1EU please also don't forget that they will now be thrown into a pretty toxic crowd when ti comes to PvE - some players are even attacking mixed players like me who choose to play both PvE and PvP. Being subjected to such players won't help your playerbase. But should you go through with it anyway pelase at least put the guys onto the Pacific Coast. There are several reasons for this. It allows for a clearly seperated area of gameplay. PvE in itself is not historical so thats not really an argument. The Gulf although not a particular hotspot is far from empty! Not every nation will receive a PvE zone - should alliances ever change (I know - unlikely) people might not have access to the region anymore. The regional boni int he gulf would create major problems - in the current iteration you would effectively grant one nation a strong hull port that cannot be captured and in which ships cannot be attacked. That is a major advantage over anybody else and no matter who holds it that can be game breaking. So please consider creating the Pacific Coast as an area where every nation gets at least one port and where there are either no regional boni (not a fan of that as it would kill the PvE crafters) or where everyone gets the same bonus (maybe even strong hull so we don't end up with the problem that one nation might no longer have any real RvR ships!).

Black Dog/Hound Shadowstrike Willy's Delight Sinister Doom Deathbringer The Black Hand The Hangman's Doom The Cursed Strumpet The Demon of the Night Winds (taken from Mass Effect - Ardat-Yakshi) The Witches Cauldron (might be better for your tavern^^)

Like I said I get you when it comes to battle conditions. And btw yes - crews would actually sand the planks and regularly resand durign a battle to prevent shrapnel that was lying around to cause additional damage and to prevent people slipping on the blood spilled. In fact often before a boarding attempt sand was even thrown onto the enemy ship to allow safe jumps to the other side especially when a grape attack preceeded the boarding.

'Shadowstrike'?

While I get you when it comes to 'battle damage/shrapnel' you'd be surprised outside of it. Ships are always being kept in absolutely perfect condition with the decks being scrubbed often mroe then once a day even to prevent the described 'weathering' effect. Splinters that could hurt people (remember infections were very dangerous at the time) were also removed via that. Often the Navy back then (and probably also today was effectively the cleanest possible workplace. It's also the reason why pirate ships often had trouble with their ships as the discipline to keep up regular maintenance was lacking and therefore the ship was hardly combat ready should a warship catch up to them or even ready for harsh weather.

Name competition for your followup ship after the wipe?

I don't even know why people keep coming up with this crappy statement int he first place. @Snoopy has already more then once shown that the Royal Navy employed nearly equal numbers of SOLs and frigates. While the Caribbean was somewhat void of most of them there are actually only 3 reasons for this. The war was primarily in Europe (against Napoleon at least). That meant that the big ships were needed in the home waters as due to their longer travel times they required a long term deployment strategy. Due to the reefs and weird shallows near a lot of ports in the Caribbean SOLs had to choose their locations very carefully. Also the traders were often in the shallower department due to this therefore making big ships unsuited to hunt them - thats the main reason frigates were deployed so much in that region. Wars in India often saw several SOLs simply blockading the ports which was less possible in the West Indies. As the enemy had similar ideas and didn't bring the really big ships into the West Indies there was no need to have gigantic ships patrol the area. But for all you guys who constantly say that the area was void of SOLs - Havana alone was one of the biggest SOL producing ports of its time (La Nuestra Señora de la Santissima Trinidad) and regularly deployed SOLs around its waters for sea trials alone but also for some engagements!!! The answers to people's SOL problem are two: Suck it up nancy! Devs - don't ruin the SOL's/make them even ahrder to get (you'd just lose more of your playerbase) just make the port battles more about the smaller ships. SOLs did blockading and deploying troops but they rarely ever went close enough to ports to come under direct fire which the faster ships were much better at outrunning. Currently the main problem is that the meta of most important ports simply forces you into a first rate so therefore everybody has/needs one.

I don't know how I survived this for so long but damn that fire is wearing me down - I am truly at the point where I ask myself why I even still try to help others in the game considering I have lost faith in the development process by now anyway...

In your own math you forget one thing though. Due to regions being attacked now instead of single ports and some regions holding like 8 ports - it would then be possible to see 200 building slots destroyewd in a single attack! That is not exactly small money or effort to ship out in time! So in the end the either everyone wants to be in the inner regions not to suddenly get f+++ed over or they risk losing their entire production in a single evening they mightve been at work or sth. Also didn't you say that shipyards return? Won't that mean that the scenario will get even worse with entire shipyards and their warehouses falling victim to an afternoon flip or sth similar?!

RvR is already the be all and end all with the slots fought over and meta gameplay etc causing problems - this will force it even more and also be yet another point where content and playstyles are locked away for the majority of people - crafters and traders will now not be able to do their thing unless they partake in RvR they don't like or by dropping such gigantic sums of money (let's face it thats gonna happen) that msot of them would rather leave the game. I like your one duras but this is just not good...

There is a point to that. Level 50s bonus was only the ability to craft golden upgrades while a gold 1st rate could already be crafted at LvL 49. Will the blueprint levels shift and make room for more now? (Please make all of them learnable the current system is horrible and leads to overworking those with the blueprint and a crappy availability to the rest... - also always risks an imbalance considering some of these ships are now the meta ships!!!)

hello kitty PBs

Twice in a row Red Team won the day now.

Yeah luckily neither does Augustus still represent the entirety of the opinions of the Brits. Yet another reason my clan and others decided to part (only on a decision making lvl btw) with the council. I will not stoop to such a low level. I personally endorse any activity done by regular fleets in their respective prime time - we all gotta deal with it whether it be day flips, work flips or night flips - get over it and if you can't oppose it directly flip harder. But I will not back up intentional night flipping with the intent to piss others off - doesn't matter to me who started it or conditions why people are doing it but I ain't backing such crap.

No we turn into woodworms

So only a ship I never sailed before is grey? Does that mean after sailing surps for 24 hours if I capture a surp it will in fact be gold and not grey?

1) As you seem to not be aware of this I will explain it to you. A global server is a standard server structure. It is an implied basis upon which all games run. That implied basis does not have to be advertised any further unless significant changes have been done to the general concept of a global server. TO sum this up - you do not ahve to advertise a normal structure/situation/etc. A split server structure such as it is run in World of Tanks/Warships/Planes or Armored Warfare for example must actually be explicitly be warned off prior to purchase to warn people of a possible exclusion (as the port timers would do in your idea(and the fact even the US server runs the same lockout)), problems connecting with their friends, etc. To sum this up - you HAVE TO WARN of split servers/any differences to a normal structure. Otherwise you run a bait and switch which is illegal and should enough reports come in steam will investigate and possibly ban the game from steam. Wouldn't be the first time it happens and although steam really got be more harsh on it they are not completely inactive inr egards to false advertising/lack of compensation when changing etc. 2) The fact that my clan and several others have left the British council due to its focus on extreme RvR , meta focus and elite player fleets should very clearly show you that I couldn't give a rat's furry behind about winning. I am here to have fun and organise myself within reasonable structures - handing of my friends and commiting to completely unreasonable nubmers and scenarios is not only not fun it is quite frankly retarded to ask for it in the first place!!!

I am chilled. You offer nothing in return and only selfishly look to further your playerbase. I'd be on board within a heartbeat should you offer areasonable ingame solution to nightflips. Literally within a heartbeat. But I will heavily oppose and obstruct you from tearing a global community apart and banishing palyers from a game because you fail to understand the meaning of a global server.

Way to go taking stuff out of context - you'd get torn apart at my university. It's a numbers problem not a time problem.

Think again. Pic that mic up that your weak hands let go by accident and say something that I can respect and consider! Then you can *drop mic.

Let me understand this. 1) You want us to give up on an ally we had for over a year now and are compeltely loyal to. 2)You want us to give up an ally (this ones about numbers now). 3) You won't give us anything in return probably not even an end to all the bitchin and whining. 4) You want us to fight even more non stop 24/7 against 6 nations and with an ally that just lost the majority of its active playerbase all by ourselves. 5) You effectively want us to just say goodbye to our strong hull and live oak access thereby rendering our RvR when played by the meta (even though I don't run meta attacks anymroe you have to if you wanna win against a serious fleet) compeltely useless. And you wonder why we say no?! - Am I gettin this right? Cause I think I do and I think you really need to rework your negotiation skills!!!

YES IT hello kittyIN IS . All they complain about is your constant whining.

What do you offer in return?

Lol an apt description of how the Danes are currently fighting their wars. Oh no don't attack Im havin my beauty sleep.

Lolz 1) The game is advertised as a global game - no mention of any other server sturcture or intent to sent possible new customers on an empty server. That is called a bait and switch and can get you banned of steam. 2) The US fights the same problem but crys a lot less about it. 3)You subscribed to a global server - that means you also subscribed to the possibility of a night flip. Don't cry about getting nightflipped after you signed up for it. I once did that with gankers and it was equally useless. I still try to change people's minds about ganking and going out for fair fights but is the individuals choice you are not forcing it on them. 4) This might be a 'short solution' but it is ebtter then a solution that will cost us yet another part of the playerbase(10 crybabies return and 50 real players are sent off - great solution). Australians have already disappeared who once even had a 50men presence in the French nation. Well done. 5) Fight your damn wars in game and not on the forums. If you want a port take it with ships and don't try to banish the playerbase holding it!