Aphilas

"Some" 16 Agamennons. Sadly mass surrender and no fight:(

Issue is not really Essex. It's just more glaring of an issue on this particular ship. Doesn't take rocket science to build ship with planking+pump mod+pump officer and then test it in duel. Majority of the ships can stay afloat for 20+ minutes with one side completely missing. Such behaviour has been known since first couple days after the patch that implemented new officer perks tipping planking+extra pump from being kinda meh to planking+extra pump+officer perk being completely imba. Kinda interesting how pretty much everyone kept it to themselves to gain advantage though, until it went public and potentially ruining the overall awesome tournament.

Ahh, your previous post reminded me one person respondig to my posts in mature and extreemly well argumented manner a day or so ago. So I went back to check if my hunch is correct. It appears it was: Yep. Quite classy. Now to respond to yet another "classic" argument you bring to the table, the grammar and spelling, I must deeply applogise for offending your lingustical perfection due to English not being my mothertongue.

Fair point. I'll admit I haven't checked votes much past the first day of patch or so. I guess majority has not cast their vote at the point I've checked them. Trying to belittle someone with arguments including age usually is done by someone around 20, with the first feeling of being grown up. Hopefully that's not the case with you and just a matter of bad taste, since otherwise my age would quite disapoint you. Now back on topic, shall we? How does it feel to be second/third choise for everyone? I guess it's at least better than being left out of agreements like a week or two ago.

Ohh, I really don't. I'm just enjoying damage control on this fine morning:)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but US wasn't even your second choise before Swedes did what they did.

Can't wait until it starts sinkining into US minds that nobody gives a damn about them as either enemy or ally. Pretty much the only thing I am enjoying about this political patch. Well, Swedes showing the balls is another enjoyable thing. P.S. In before Brits and Dutch come running in telling that "US is our very important and strategical "friend"". I believe it is quite the opposite. It's _you_ doing your own things. But sure, claim you are speaking for all Pirates, just as you claim victories of Sorry while in battles Sorry doesn't even make half of the participants. Next time you post your recruitment message of "160+ member clan" don't forget to include a screenshot of more than 15 Sorry in a battle that is not half a year old.

Considering 1st rates - have you considered the possibility to limit amount of 1st rates by simply making them not craftable and obtainable only via limited supply that is directly controlled by the devs? For example events or auction like selling 3-5 of them per month?Limiting availability of 1st rates could really make PBs and large battles quite exciting and to have possibly multiple objectives - maybe we don't take the port during this PB but we aim to sink couple of 1st rates to ensure their absense in couple next PBs and so on. Another easy way from development point of view would be to implement a single craft ship BP (it's consumed after one has crafted the ship) that could be obtain only from, for example, highest rank epic events. In such case you could control via loot tables how many 1st rates exist in the world.

Then why hide behind Brits and Dutch? Go and take a good fight.

I guess I was not writting clear enough. Those were not aimed at you.

Maybe you should learn more about the matter before making posts like this and furthermore spreading misinformation. 10ish 3d rates coming for good fights is hardly "big fleets composed of heavy ships", specially considering that we always allow spaniards to freely form 25 stack as well as allow them to engange us at their will. After each of those fights spanish themselves GGed and said they enjoyed the fights. I'm sorry if 10 ships with sails down in front of the capital scared some trader lynx. On topic, hopefully all brainless sheep will quit or switch to some nation together with instigators once they realize that being dumb ain't going to achieve anything. I had a bad feeling it's exactly how it panned out to be when I was told PB is agreed with danes. Hoped that it's actually danes waking up from their sleep, but appears that will not happen due to inability to be at least half arsed in politics and diplomacy by certain people. Pitty since it could have been an interesting turn of events, but instead we will just move towards more stagnation.

Spend less time camping battle screens and spaming forums and you will hit the max rank very soon. P.S. Active PvP is actually very rewarding in both XP and gold these days.

Understood and respect to you for an unusual game design decision. Games would be boring if all were the same:) However, this contradics your other quote=P On a side note - since expanation only offers info about alliances... What is your opinion on allowing to increase threat/make PBs only on enemies voted by the nation and limiting those same way as alliances? That way you would have a clear line between ally - OW PvP - PB warfare?

It kind of doesn't, at least with as much as has been revealed to us so far. Example: US, Britain and Dutch are allies. Denmark, France and Sweden are allies. Both blocks decide to focus Spain who has no allies. It is similar to what has been going on PvP1 with US, Britain, Dutch and Sweden being allied/friendly. The presented system does not remove likelyhood of zerg blocks from multiple nations emerging, it simply gives opportunity for such blocks to assist each other in PBs. In other words, not only it doesn't solve the issue, but it makes it bigger. Unless, of course, there are planned systems that you are not ready to reveal to address such things.

What about the fact that players that quit the game can leave their account details to their friends? Say for example someone who is still playing from old pirate clan Koto can easily have access to 20+ accounts that are very old. Since game does not have monthly sub, that kind of issues need to be thought and dealt with, imho.

2 nationals of different nations not belonging to teams attack each other, one pirate team joins one national, other pirate team other national, nationals leave the battle. It worked half a year ago, not sure if anything was changed about it since.

Would be interesting to hear what is planned for Pirates, as this system (without other systems) puts them in great disadvantage and hugely benefits zergs - as was pointed out already in this thread this system doesn't change the fact that if certain nations have agreed an alliance they do not need to be in "in-game" alliance to assist each other with blockades and such. Only thing that the presented alliance system really changes is capability to enter PBs as allies. So, technically if we look at PvP1 server the UK/US/Dutch/Swedes alliance will still work together, but they will be able to enter PBs together on top of that. I hope that upcoming PB revamp will actually hinder alliances that are just agreements outside the game (being enemies in new system, but helping each other just as nations can help each other at the moment). I guess the easiest way to do that would be through threat system which is required to make port available for PB. If nation that is not in the in-game system alliance is performing actions near port it should damage threat levels of other nations. For example: Brits and Dutch are in the new system in game alliance, and they are working on increasing threat at port Baracoa. If US or Swedes are performing actions in Baracoa region, it should lower threat created by British and Dutch alliance, because US and Swedes are not in the in-game alliance with either Brits nor Dutch. That way the game would push nations towards multiple political blocks fighting each other instead of 1 or max 2 megablobs like it is now. Which, imho, is far more fluid and interesting as well as less damaging the game population. Obviously, it would not resolve possibility of 2-3 political blocks focusing 1 political block from all sides.

There are multiple issues that this perk will cause - for example this perk + Rattlesnake can keep, for example, a 1st rate in combat for forever for greefing purpose - tag and just tail him for an hour in the battle. After battle is over repeat. Secondly, again with fast agile ships like Rattlesnakes being used as ships that hold enemy in combat for large ships to catch up/get away in small group combat. At the moment Rattles already do this, but they are forced to present their broadsides now and then as well as maneuver to land the shots which decreases their speed as well as presents possible opportunities for opposing side to shoot it. With the perk all the Rattle will have to do is to sit infront/tail (depending on situation/where enemy doesn't have cannons) with 0 risk and 0 skill involved. Just upping/lowering sails to keep at correct distance.