Brigand

I'm aware of the similarities, but so far, it has not been confirmed if the devs used those plans or if they just looked at several model ships or their plans and came up with their own design. If they had build the brig to truly resemble the Fair American, they would have surely named her as such. Somaybe she was loosely inspired on by the Fair American, but we simply don't know. Keep in mind that there were a lot of brigs sailing these days; it was quite a popular rig. So she could just as easily represent some other brig. The Fair American is a nice model though. ~Brigand

The cutter has the cutter rig. The difference between the cutter and the sloop* is that a cutter typically has more head sails; at least more than one, typically three. All topsail from the 18th century were still almost invariably square (the gaff top was only introduced very late in the 18th century) In addition to the main sail (which is a gaff sail on a cutter rigged vessel), cutters of old typically also had a yard to fly a square course from. As Maturin already observed: it would be unlikely that a cutter would fly both square course and the gaff mainsail at the same time. ~Brigand *As with most sailing related 'definitions' you could have a discussion about this. Sailing terminology is not helped by the fact that the terms are used interchangeably by different countries, for a great many years, etc.

I don't know an ETA, but I can tell you that the Player ship selection 1st Half 2016 has not been forgotten. ~Brigand

The topic of this thread is now being discussed within the moderation group. In the mean time, I'm closing this topic. Thank you all for your replies. ~Brigand

There is a confirmed chat bug, the development team is working on a solution. ~Brigand

No problem. Closing topic. ~Brigand

Please report bug in-game using the F11 key. This way, the developers have access to all the information they need. ~Brigand

The port screen actually means you are in port with your ship. If you want access to this screen, you need to sail you ship back to a town and click 'enter port' (or something close to that) once you are really close to the town. ~Brigand

Ships will be awarded later. If you logged in, created a character and played around a bit, you should receive it later. ~Brigand

I'm guessing (but I don't know, I'm just a volunteer) that you will miss out on the extras: But nobody other than admin can make the decision. ~Brigand

Welcome to the open seas and good luck! closing topic, ~Brigand

Of interest: Protecting your underwater hull: Cleaning, graving and sheeting. Cheers, Brigand

Thanks for the comments! I've clearly been away too long. I was under the impression that, our current snow is loosely based upon the HMS Ontario, while there are plans to include a more faithful representation of the HMS Ontario in the future. I'm however not sure about this. The "Pirate Frigate" is simply in the wrong category, I'll move it. Do you know if it is simply a variant of the Cherubim? What is the 74 / 3rd rate you speak about of which ship is it a varaint? ~Brigand

The OP has been updated (finally). I'm likely to have made mistakes, so please(!) point them out if you spot them. Cheers, Brigand

Ignorance is not an excuse. Let's not pretend otherwise. We've had this discussion before, those who did not agree at first, changed their minds later and learned to play by the rules. ~Brigand

This has happened in the past. It is the classic case of damage farming. It has been made very clear in the past that damage farming will not be tolerated. ~Brigand

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/2036-how-to-activate-download-the-game-on-steam/ ~Brigand

To me, this sounds like a classic case of damage farming. It has been made very clear in the past that damage farming will not be tolerated. Thanks for briging this up Kutai. ~Brigand

question answered, closing topic.

I should probably not step into this discussion, but I think some clarification is needed. It seems you are confusing two parts of password security. One part is about storing passwords or, more properly, password identifiers. The other part is about communicating the (knowledge of) the password with the server. My question to migrate the forums to https addresses the second part. Storing passwords on the server is a bad idea. Fortunately, this fact is slowly becoming a known fact. Instead of storing a password, a password verifier should be stored. The accepted best practice is to hash the password (using a password hashing algorithm (such as BCrypt or SCrypt) or, less ideal, a key derivation algorithm (PBKDF2)) and only store the computed hash. Verification of the password is done by hashing the client supplied password and compare the resulting hash to the one stored on the server; if they match, access is granted. However, before the password can be verified, it needs to be communicated to the server. The only* method of communicating safely with a server available to a web browser is (unfortunately) by communicating through SSL/TLS. In other words, by communicating over https. Hashing a password on the client side (before transmission) to subsequently send it over a non-encrypted connection is, unfortunately, non-secure. The problem is two fold: first, the hash (as calculated on the client side) effectively became the password: since the server will grant access to whomever sends the hash, I could simply send the hash as well and impersonate you. The second issue is that, since the connection is non-encrypted, the integrity of the data you receive cannot be guaranteed. In other words: I can manipulate the information sent between client and browser and, as a result, I can remove the client side hashing (which is typically handled by a snippet of javascript code). The result would be that you would, unknowingly, send your password as plain text over the wire (=wifi nowadays). Hope this clears things up a bit. ~Brigand *other methods exist, but they are far from practical and typically only feasible within an organization which can control software on the client machines.

Hello Admin, It would be a good idea if the forums (and maybe the website) would be moved to https. This may seem as a low priority issue, but I think it is not. Let me explain. Short explanation: Because passwords. Long explanation: Because it is a well know fact that people reuse passwords, and people like to keep their passwords organized (the human brain is awfully bad at remembering strong passwords) there is a big chance that people reuse their Naval Action forum password for other services, both Naval Action related and other, as well. Since the connection to the forums is non-encrypted, username::password combinations are send in plain text over the wire (which ironically nowadays means through wifi). So any user logging in using a public or otherwise shared wifi router is extremely vulnerable to MITM (=man in the middle) sniffing attacks; anybody with a mild interest in the subject can harvest passwords at, for example, your local starbucks corner. By migrating the forums to https this attack vector would effectively be disabled. ~Brigand

The client should start without steam, but Steam is required for logging in. Did you try reinstalling steam as well? If not, then maybe your steam client itself is corrupted? ~Brigand

Yes. Those tugboat were powered by oars though. ~Brigand

It is a known issue and I agree, it is odd. Fortunately, it doesn't hurt anyone. The worst that can happen is that somebody is fooling themselves into believing they are 1 like more popular than they really are :-) ~Brigand

I've seen some other plans from the late 18th century / early 19th century with quite extraordinary rig sizes. I did some digging on two of them (a brig and a schooner, both English) and both were just that: plans. As far as I could figure out they were never build. So maybe, this one didn't make it to the building phase either? ~Brigand