Cragger
-
Posts
484 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Cragger
-
-
In another thread the dutches answered to a direct question I did and said that, due to their alliance with US, they had the right to defend US territory from attacks but this did not imply also the obligation to help US attacking ports in the territory of Spain.
So, it seems that your point is that they are not obliged to help you attacking Cuba, but they can do it if they want.
But you are wrong my Sir: according to the three admirals treaty Dutches should not attack west Cuba since it is defined there as a de facto spanish territory according to the three admirals treaty that is binding also for the dutches (and the concept of "not attacking" a certain territory of course includes also the concept of not helpling other in attacking the same territory).
And here comes the substantial correctness of the spanish accusations also against the Brits: since the three admirals treaty was signed by the british and accepted by the dutches, the Brits should tell the dutch to refrain from helping US in attack to west cuba ports. But here we read another story, since brits ignore a blatant breach of the treaty and prefer attacking spainiards in this forum.
So, basically, what Spain - in my oprinon LEGITIMATELY - claims is just that Brits and Dutches fulfil the three admirals treaty instead of giving support to the US in its attacks on north western cuba (and this goes for Dutches) and instead of remaining silent in front of a clear breach of the treaty committed by the Dutches (and this is for the Brits).
I hope I was clear enough.
Not sure where this Spanish claim is coming from anyway of Dutch or British screening for U.S. offensive flag pulls. Cuyo was done by U.S. players alone, reclaiming Vacas U.S. players alone, maybe at Baja there where some, I was not present at that one so I can't say.
Regardless politics is here and as we can clearly see those involved in this treaty are not the national majorities and now national opinion is setting up things quite differently.
-
I know the Devs want realism, but determined defender is not realistic. Anyone should be able to board a ship if they can slow it down enough, even if it is suicidal due to crew numbers.
Flip side ramming to board, 50% marines and attack mods that are more powerful then cannon themselves isn't realistic either.
There is a reason many many ships in this era have tumblehome curve, not only does it reduce top weight and lower the CoG it makes boarding by force very difficult because the waterlines of ships will touch and still leave a large gap between decks.
I'm not a fan of determined defender though and I look at it as hopefully a temporary bandaid to how powerful and easy it is to force a boarding atm. I hope that boarding becomes much more refined then this:
-
4
-
-
I think the main thing I got from Episode 21, is that in the grand scheme of things (at the moment at least) it's essentially all vs pirates. Hopefully the upcoming patch will mean there is less of that as we will be forced to be at war with some nations in order to be at peace with others - Pirates should get a bit of an easier time going forward.
It's the first step in making Pirates more then copy paste nation with perks for sure. This will be important in the long term to offer an entirely different way of playing Naval Action. Just like how low sec pirates in Eve where so different then Alliances in 0 security.
-
You dont offerered anything.
"I have no authority to speak with you.", words of your own diplomat. Second attempt U.S. envoys waited two hours for your diplomat which never came to speak with them. Impossible to offer anything when the other party flat out refuses to speak or compromise.
Your nation accepted this treaty assuming it would provide you a target with no support from the coalition. What you didn't realize is that U.S. has always honored agreements with the Dutch and British and they had no intention of letting this treaty divide our partnerships.
-
Looks like US got confused by the color of boundaries
U.S. isn't part of this treaty you will notice. The Spanish absolutely refused to speak with U.S. on it. No confusion at all.
-
So you think the possibility of a port attack in Florida is equivalent to the possibility of attack in northern Cuba right next to the capital? The capital of the United States is in Florida to 10 minutes Tortuga or Cayo Vacas?
Why do you think a capital means much of anything atm in this game? U.S. 'capital' isn't their real capital. Btw, Mantanzas is the same time from Islamorada as Cayo Vacas due to Cayo Vacas being on the north side of the island.
Again this shows you simply desire a short range launching point against Florida.
-
The Spaniards would rather a 1v1 fight. Or even a treaty to respect the ports we consider indispensable. North of Cuba, Tortuga, Cayo Vacas, Cayo de sal and Anguilla.
So you ask the U.S to tolerate a Spanish assault point at Cayo Vacas and Las Tortugas against U.S. ports that is extremely difficult to respond and cuts west and east Florida off from each other. Yet don't wish to tolerate a U.S port being in such proximity to your own ports. See, here again you are showing your true intentions of future aggression.
Cayo de Sal and La Anguilla has been stated many time as acceptable being in Spanish hands. Cayo Vacas and Las Tortugas are not, The Florida keys being in U.S. hands makes the assault distances equal. In Spanish hands it makes it to the Spanish advantage and changes nothing about the U.S. being able to attack North Cuba from Islamoralda, Mimbres, and many other ports that are equal distant.
-
I just have explained it, if you don't understand it's not my problem.
The rogue clan can attack and defend what they want. Is that clear? Ok, so that rogue clan took pirate ports, but, and this is a big "but", instead of attacking those ports, you attacked a Spanish port that all the clans have the right to defend.
It's not so difficult, man....
For example: Rogue clan takes Manataca, you could attack Manataca to retake that port. Instead, you attack Cayo Vacas and all the clans have the right to defend that port. Simple.
Wasn't pirate ports. Agreement was to give us Las Tortugas to U.S. . Instead you defended that port claiming it was 'a rogue clan' that clan being RAE and your 'council' claiming RAE had left the council. Yet all your major clans were in the interception fleet in numbers. You showed your true colors there that you where working with the pirates then and people remember.
-
I know timers American ports are on their best times of their defense....
So are the spanish ones, what's your point?
-
No, we didn't. Spain had an agreement but a rogue clan can do what they want.
That's what happened and instead of realizing this, your answer was a flag against a Spanish port that had not been taken by this clan, so Spain obviously had all the right to defend that port.
Besides, this clan only took ports from pirates, not from USA. If you had bought a flag against those former USA ports, this clan would have to deal with that issue alone.
Even today you don't understand this?
A 'rogue' clan that just happened to include all your clan members at the port battle. More like a rogue nation.
-
1
-
-
US allies are now acting because you realized what would happen to you had the treaty been signed as it was initially conceived.
Then you went to the forum and begged enough to include you.
That means something to me: fear.
Do you fear Spain ? Let's fight alone. Spain vs USA
It's a fair war. Let's do it.
Hmm, where was this supposed desire for a fair war when you betrayed the U.S. agreements with you and joined in on the pirate assault?
-
U.S. allies are honoring their allies previous commitments. It was obvious to them your intentions when you signed on to the treaty and made every possible effort to not even speak with U.S. envoys you only wanted peace to attack their ally which is actually weaker then you in prime time due to this being a Euro server. Dutch and British have not pulled a flag on your ports and are engaging only in open world PvP which was the stipulation of this treaty, that PvP just happens to find itself outside of port battles.
-
So I must think that when the english and the dutch signed the treaty, were thinking about how to betray and attack the spanish. Yes truly honorable. Of course if it not 3v1 is not a fair fight... and that´s something you can not tolerate that he is alone.
After you filled the mouth talking about being honorable, truthful, think of the interest of all players... May be it´s that those words have another meaning in english dictionaries.
Just like you only signed the treaty so you wouldn't have to worry about attacks from the Dutch and British so you could attack U.S. which you actually currently out man at peak play time.
-
Oh Baja its near USA capital... its an offensive war defend it... By the other side the USA landed flags against us first. but that is another question.
Yes because Cayo Vacas just magically flipped Spanish after this treaty was formalized without spanish aggression. Try to spin it as you like but Dutch and British know quite clearly who started this port was Bifo
-
Twice a Dutch fleet have helped the USA faction. Screening a port attack thrown by them and defending an USA port intercepting the flag that was sent against him.
This doesn't fit the spirit of the treaty. Consequently we consider ourselves aggrieved so until we don't have an official answer were reserve the actions to defend the interests of our faction.
You didn't want U.S. to be part of this treaty. Dutch and British have and alliance with U.S. that supercedes this treaty and was publicly announced. Then you started pulling and landing flags on Cayo Vacas, La Anguilla, Cay de Sal, and have failed on others. Now the U.S. responds to Spanish aggression. Maybe you shouldn't have been so defiant of U.S. being part of this treaty or maybe you just thought U.S. would be a pushover and have gotten more of a response then you expected.
-
Breach of the treaty by the Netherlands. I have often read forum lack of honor of the Spanish players. The Dutch nation decided to attack the Spanish faction justifying their actions in which the harassed Spanish players when they fought with the French in Carriacou.
Now the Dutch nation defense blocks the ports of northern Cuba that were accepted as Spaniards in the treaty. IS NOT PVP As the Dutch nation itself has said is an act of war that can cost you. As we are always accused of being traitors and break the treaty but this is a clear demonstration that it is not.
It seems that the Dutch want to meddle in the defensive war that Spain has with the United States. Spain only seeks to ensure a security perimeter around the capital Havana. Perimeter that Americans will not recognize. We demand that British and Dutch, especially the last stop interfering. Of course as you have entered a treaty to help the Americans they can not keep his word. Who has courage and honor? The facts prove it.
Lol, defensive war.... you pulled flags first and landed them. Dutch have an alliance that supercedes this treaty.
-
Where did you read this? I can't seem to find much info on her sailing characteristics.
http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/line/sotl.htm#inde
Taken from documents of the era.
The Independence was not a lousy sailor, she was infact able to outrun all the frigates in her squadron. However it was a design flaw that her leeward lower gun ports where too close to the waterline and in a blow they would not be able to be opened.
I'd still rather have her as her original construction simply because 2nd rates are one of the rarest rates. While as a very heavy built 54 gun she would be frankly a bit overpowered as a 4th rate making her the go to ship over all others.
Also while all the guns where 32lb guns they were not all long guns. Only the two lower gun decks where so, the rest were carronades.
-
Probably should close this thread since the Danish 'War' on Sorry is now ceased.
-
It looks like it has ports for oars. Damn....
Oar-assisted frigate. Origins come from 1670s such as the HMS Charles Galley. Not a surprising throwback design considering these frigates had to operate in dangerous narrow harbors and rivers for berthing and hide in coves and other treacherous places abroad during the American Revolution.
-
1
-
-
-
I understand you perfectly.... But problems with clans happened in all nations... Spain was reduced to 2 ports using RAE as excuse... Nothing new under the sun.... The excuse is not important. The thing is that your'e punishing all players of this nation not only Lord Vicious.
Mistake was believing the pirates should have been and would continue being treated as a nation with benefits.
-
Pirates would have positives if you simply look at them in proper perspective.
Big Positive, Not having alliances means pirates can attack whomever they want whenever they want and have that not having a restriction placed on pirates because of a majority vote to ally with your favored target.
Privateers are servants of their nation of marque. They can only attack enemies of that nation and must treat prisoners properly. All nationals are currently privateers in that they keep what they capture from players.
Pirates do not deserve an asset safe 're-roll' more then any other player. Offering everyone the opportunity to change their nation and keep their assets is one thing. But pirates are not deserving of special disposition. Going pirate was easy. If you don't want to be a pirate anymore do what everyone else must do to join a nation. Transfer your assets, delete your character, and remake it in a nation accepting your blueprint losses.
-
Don't let yourself get drawn into the same drama trap so many have when dealing with Snoggy and his 'friends' Jeheil. Acknowledging them simply gives them some relevance to exist. People like what you do and that bothers them because it isn't flattering to them.
-
2
-
-
it the majority decision in polls and historically correct
im not worried about me. im worried about the game and it not having pirates/privateers/hardmode........i have done nations and its a power creep.
It not having 'hardmode' what do you honestly think hardmode is?
Pirates have had dysfunctional mechanics for a long time and nothing about them has been hardmode. Infact what you are complaining about being implemented in the future IS actually making them finally hardmode. No friends, no alliances only themselves seeking to make personal profit by force and guile.
Why do you think pirates need the ability to make alliances to be pirates? Look at Black and pagan pete to see how to behave as a real pirate.
Why do you think pirates need the ability to capture ports to be pirates? ^ See above.
Why do you think pirates need SOL (Useless in pursuing laden tradeships) to be pirates? ^ See above.
And btw, privateers are national thing and we are all pretty much privateers as we get to keep what we capture instead of turning it in to the admiralty.
PvP Gunboat challenge
in National news
Posted
Gunboat endurance race would be more amusing. The person that can do the most laps in a gunboat around some stationed ships wins before everyone capsizes.