Serk

I see it the other way around: Slower speed means even bigger time sink for a ''duty'' that is already dull, hence the AFK sailing 90% of the time except when approaching a town. There are even talks on the forum about screwing traders with the smuggler flags in the name of a "harbour master" that doesn't exist in game yet, just because "hardcore". Might as well ask them to surrender on sight, which might happen with a 20% speed penalty. We'll see about the ''cat and mouse'' play and escorts, etc. but at my playing time, I've barely seen more than 150 players online so I don't have high hopes in that regard.

The first that comes to mind are all those ''hardcore 1337 privateers'' lobbying for slower speed for fully ladden traders, to make it easier to intercept them on the few occasion they meet, but at the cost of a longer time sink-AFK saling for traders all the time.

I vote for Kidd's Island

Hence the introduction of the "TP to closest friendly port feature". It is a bit sad to debate this all over again, to be honest. If you find yourself in foreign water, the tp would send you to a free town as the closest friendly town, meaning you would still have to sail your prize back to your line if you wish to keep them. Remember, no more outposts are allowed in FT.

I'm really not looking forward to have a huge chunk of the server population dropping anchor here and there just to wait for some poor guy to leave his battle A nice positive effect on gameplay that the "TP to closest friendly outpost" had was to stop people to just drop anchor and camp known battle location for as long as 90 minutes instead of doing something more productive. The chance the target would just leave to a friendly port would discourage this counterproductive behaviour. Even so, some still did it despite the fact it could very well be a waste of time, so just imagine the effect of they are now certain that a target will get back in OW. Maybe a "TP to closest free town" could do it? Without the ability to built an outpost there, you will still need to sail your prize back to you own base sooner than later.

Those very well done ships are a major selling point of the game, so we need moar!!! Also, if 3rd are to become the dominant SOL in game (rightfully so), we need a few more models, including the téméraire class!

Agreed, I understand the logic behind limiting gold reward, to fight inflation and promote trading in a player made economy, but I see no reason to not allow XP for entry ranks. I recall the devs saying once the vast majority of players don't even reach the brig before quitting. I'm afraid making levelling harder for them won't help keeping them in game. It should seriously be considered to give XP for damage dealt, even if sunk, at least the first few ranks (up to brig/snow level for exemple), so new players still somehow progress while learning the ropes.

Yeah, it is well known that designing an improved access to anything means making it less safe.

I would expect an improved magazine to REDUCE the fire hazards, not the opposite.

And limit them to 6th or 7th rate. (Prince de Neuchâtel anyone?) They would then become real commerce raider instead of another carbon-copy nation ? (Or maybe allow them 9 pounder frigates like renommée and surprise max if absolutely necessary )

Nous sommes d'accord. Je voulais dire éliminer l'aspect nation et RVR seulement. Bref je les limiterais au rôle de "outlaw" que les devs ont avancé. Les pirates seraient donc des joueurs vraiment dédiés au raids commerciaux. Les 6e et 7e rangs devraient être suffisants pour capturer des traders. Il ne faut pas oublier que ça leur laisse les rattlesnake et avec de la chance le fameux prince de neufchâtel. S'ils veulent des frégates et des vaisseaux de lignes, ils n'ont qu'à jouer une nation traditionnelle. Il y en a quand même 7 de disponible, dont certaine peinent à remplir les rangs. Si vraiment on insiste pour leur laisser des frégates, p-e les limiter aux plus petites, avec des canons de 8-9 livres max (surprise et Cerberus + Pandora à venir). Ca me fait toujours rire de voir un pirate en frégate de 18 ou en bucentaure... ?

+1 Je limiterais même les pirates au 6e et 7e rangs. Pas de frégates. J'éliminerais aussi carrément la nation pirate ( qui n'est qu'une copie des autres nations sans rien ajouter de plus, selon moi) et leur laisserais seulement kidd Island, en plus d'opérer depuis les FT

And you can add that sailing in a basic cutter between outposts or free towns just to place contracts add's nothing to OW activity. Regarding the topic, I agree with the idea of severely reducing the numbers of free towns. It might achieve the same result at a lesser cost. If you have like 5 Freetowns for the whole map, preferably as far as possible from a capital, but still allow TPs or even goods deliveries, you still need to sail a lot on the OW to hunt or trade.

What land would you give to Portugal? Current map is already huge enough without adding Brazil to it.

Thanks, any answer on this? http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/19703-forthcoming-changes-in-the-next-testbed-patch/&do=findComment&comment=394445

Buy NPC ships?

I understand that you can store 10 ships, or all 25 ships in a single dock, but they are still tied to it, so you got to sail or craft them there.

With the removal of ship TP, having multiple base to build ship is a must have. Is the return of the shipyard building to built ship still going to happen? If yes, this will severely reduce player's option, especially since you are heading to a player only Econ and production, considering shipyards take a building slots instead of ressource production facilities.

You'd need to greatly reduce the map for this to work, but I'm all for it. A map covering the windward island could work. A map from Puerto Rico to Guadeloupe would cover all nations but pirates and US and sailing in real time instance take probably the same time from basse-terre to San Juan than Sabina to São Tomé in the current OW. sure, that means no US nation in game, but pirates could still be there as regular outlaws or privateers.

Instead of completely removing those option, it could be as simple as severely reducing the numbers of freetowns in the game. You would still need to transport ships and cargo on longer distances on the OW, but no need to haul live oak from savanah in a straight line in the open ocean to the windward islands...

I'm just refering to this 2015 thread, unless it has been proven wrong since: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/4416-50-shades-of-frigate-hms-surprise/ The stern galery, apparently.

+1 for the real HMS Surprise/Unité instead of the movie thing.

I am. Unlike you, I can't play on a server with a RVR window designed around my prime time. I'm forced to play on a global server with dayflip, nightflip or whatever you guys can come up with as whines, or a EU server designed to prevent any RVR for me during my prime time. You actually have a preferential treatment on this one despite having paid the same price as me for the game. Again, playing on my prime time does not mean sabotaging the game because you are asleep.

Raking and boarding with a surprise FTW!! It makes you wonder why, over 300 years, no one thought of installing angled armored plate at the stern instead of fancy windows

I'd rather see the HMS Caledonia in game (and thus add 18pdrs to L'Océan to keep it competitive), with early stern, than a Nelson class 1rst rate that saw action much later. Also, will a 17th century ship be competitive in NA? Personnaly, I'd rather focus on the late 18th, early 19th cenrty period.(American revolution to the fall of Napoleon).