Musuko42

Make all crew losses carry over to the open world, exactly like hull damage; lose crew in a battle, you're down that number of crew in the open world until you replenish. Make crew replenishment work similarl hull repair; you can sail to port and hire new crew, or you can use a more expensive "crew repair kit" out at sea (which would basically just be a shortcut, pretending you've sailed to port and back, but not actually having done so). Alternatively to the "crew repair kit", allow players to hire crew (at a greater cost) from friendly AI ships in the open world. To mitigate this a little; when you lose crew, but still have the ship, you can get most of them back instantly (wounded crew getting healed by your doctor). So if you lose 100 crew in a battle, you may return to the open world with only a 10-50 crew loss, depending on the capabilities of your doctor (can be tweaked with upgrades, perhaps...or later, with officers).

Maybe the process of becoming a lord can be simplified? Add another XP-type meter for each player. Call it "favour". It measures how pleased the home nation is with you. Once you reach a certain threshhold, you can be granted a lordship. And if it dips below that threshhold, it can be taken away from you. Participate in a successful port capture or defence, gain favour. Capture enemy ships and deliver them to the admiralty, gain favour. Craft ships for your nation, gain favour. Sell supplies and/or ships to other players in your nation, gain favour. Sink or capture enemy players, gain favour. Lose your ship to enemy action, lose favour (this might also help disincentivise the use of kamakaze attacks with throw-away ships). Sell supplies and/or ships to enemy players (via free ports), lose favour. Over time, your favour will slowly deplete, so inactive players will gradually lose favour and drop from the list of lords. The idea here is that (nearly) all gameplay will be rewarded, or punished, in this system, instead of just particular actions. And it's (hopefully) simple to understand and keep track of; you'd know exactly how close you are to becoming a lord, and you'll have lots of ways to work your way up to it. I'd love to hear what others captains think of this idea.

I may be reading it wrong, but as I understand what's written there, if the port is awarded to the player that does the most damage, that would tend to award it to the strongest player in the group...which would be the same player every time that group does a port battle. You might end up with most of the ports being held by a handful of players. Unless there is going to be some mechanism to account for that? Maybe if you are already a lord protector of another port, you get a handicap in the ranking for being lord protector for the next port.

Why don't they remove it? Either temporarily, until it's updated and accurate, or permanently? Having bad gameplay information in the game surely can't be good for anyone.

I've never had it happen to me. I made this suggestion in response to comments I've seen others make about what they consider to be a problem; the mass use of free cutters to swamp larger ships. Instead of accusing the suggestion-maker of being butthurt, I'd ask instead that you actually respond to the suggestion made. Did you not read my post? You spend XP to get money, which will either let you buy a ship, or take you to the lowest rank where you can teleport back to your home port and pick up a free cutter from there. You'd never be stuck with no way out.

I've heard that AI-crafted ships are going to be phased out. I could be wrong. But if that's the case, people might be a lot less loose with ships if you have to craft or buy player-made ships.

Make the basic cutter available only to first rank players, and only at the home port. Make it incapable of initiating PVP combat, or joining PVP combat on the attacking side. Introduce a mechanic where you can lose XP in exchange for gold. This way, if you're a higher level player and get stuck without a ship somewhere, and with no money to buy one, you can dump XP in exchange for gold in order to either get enough money to buy a small ship (punishing you for your bad planning by making you lose XP), or get low enough rank to be able to TP to the home port and use a basic cutter to start over.

Shh! Don't point out I made a spelling mistake when criticising a pirate's grammar! That's just plain humiliating!

You pirates disgust me! Honestly, this just isn't acceptable. It's a disgrace! How could you do something so heinous? I mean, really... The word is hanged! I shall send you the bill for the damage my monocle suffered when it fell into my port.

I like your spirit, and look forward to meeting you out at sea, pirate scum!

As are everyone else; there's no official "government" in the game. As I've pointed out before, the ones who are playing the game improperly are you guys; you're making friends with the enemy. If anyone should be "gotten rid of"...

I don't think you understand what the word "quote" means. You keep using it incorrectly. Anyway, are you going to answer my question or not? That explains the evasiveness, then

If that's the case, then you're also a pirate, and so am I, and so is every other player in the game, as there are no legitimate governments implemented yet.

I asked you first. You're answering a question with a question? You could be a politician?

That isn't proof that their motivation is to annoy other players. Trolling requires intent to annoy, not just the effect of annoying. You've not proven that intent. How can they enjoy the game to its fullest if you want to restrict them from one of the things they want to do?

That's not how it works. You're the one making the assertion (that they're trolls), so it's up to you to prove it, not me to disprove it.

Can you provide proof that their motivation is to annoy fellow players?

That isn't a quote.

Sums it up far better than my random ramblings. This. Precisely this.

So, they can play as they want...except the way they want to play? Logic!

No, it's like trying to score goals in soccer while some of the rest of your team have decided they're going to kick the ball back and forth between the teams and not try to score.

Unless you know for sure that these clans are taking those ports for the purpose of annoying their teammates, it's unfair to accuse them of trolling. They may have other reasons for taking the ports, like simply having a different view on how to fight for their nation. Again, I'll point out that fighting your enemy is more "correct" than making friends with them in the game as it stands, with the current mechanics. If anything, the ones trying to make peace are "trolling" those who are trying to fight the war. Consider; if the majority of your nation's clans decided that everyone would only use half sails during battles, would it be trolling for some clans to reject that limitation and use full sails? These clans, this council, are asking other players to abide by restrictions that they made up for themselves. I have yet to see a valid explanation from anyone why players should be asked to abstain from enjoying legitimate activities within a game that they have purchased. At the end of the day, the only people that players have to listen to when it comes to what they can and cannot do in the game are the game developers. Anything else is just pointless squawking.

edit - doublepost.

I agree with you that diplomacy will be in the game, and that it's fine and dandy to metagame diplomacy at the moment. What I don't agree with is your suggestion that doing so is helping to test the game mechanics, because treaties made outside of the game have nothing whatsoever to do with the game mechanics. Making treaties outside of the game is not testing the mechanics of the game, any more than my making a cup of tea tests the game mechanics. No, the game mechanism that marks everyone except my factionmates as an enemy does.

Who are you talking to here? Me? I'm in the British nation, in the AUSEZ clan. Are you making the mistake of assuming that everyone who defends a position is personally invested in it?