Quineloe

France + Netherlands = 1 ?

Then add more and more third rates so we can have variety that way. I can't possibly think of a more dull fleet composition but the same ship 25 times.

If you have a ship befitting your rank, you can accept missions one rank lower for a trivial push over fight that will reward you exceptionally well. Missions are too good, unrealistic (unlimited supply of pirates in big ships at any port when there are NONE on the open world?) and make solo hunting on the open world remarkably unattractive.

FK is firepower kills, BK is boarding kills and OK is other kills, ships shooting the ships in boarding action. That image Xordan posted is very outdated. You should not use it anymore.

This is pretty rude, this is a forum. If you want an answer from admin and no one else, PM him.

Interesting that your attack fire deck guns of a third rate causes as much casualties as my attack into a Navybrig. That skill really seems to get worse and worse the less important the top deck is. and fire grenades is hilarious.

Bach, for a start, the TP cooldown is 4 hours, not 3.

PVP destroys far more assets than it creates, requiring PVE grinding for the losers to get back into PVP - to the point where they rather don't PVP. To add, I just watched plakrocks stream where he was in a 20vs8 battle in front of Gustavia vs the Russian invader. He scored 1450 exp for the battle. 2x300 assist on Constitution 1x500 assist on Third rate 350 exp for actually dealing damage. This is incredibly lopsided.

Why is that an issue again? You want to beat your enemy to the point where he can't fight back as you take port after port, and being able to have sufficient fallback ships prevents this? Is that the issue? Is this even on topic? how can the docked ships of a player he cant use to fight be considered "zerg"?

The problem is while in theory, damage is what gets the rewards, the game has moved away from this. Massive bonuses for "assist", "kill" and "mission completed" make it look like fighting is profitable, but it really isn't. This creates the current scenario where an intense PVP battle with many ships limping out on their last leg is rewarded very poorly because no exp was given out for assist and kills, just damage. Also, losing a PVP fight of course rewards very poorly because of this. This definitely needs to be addressed, if the goal of this game being primarily being PVP is to be met. Unless of course grinding money to pay for resources to build ships to use in PVP is considered PVP. right now, this game is even on the PVP server 99% PVE because of, well, the POTBS situation

It appears these two players don't exist anymore.

Boarded a Navybrig AI in my mercury, 138 crew vs his 152 crew. Upgrades: exceptional marines, boarding parties, common swordfighting handbooks. My lower crew is due to having boarded the trader brig first, taking it out with a simple 1-2 fire deck guns attack. The only mistake here is obviously attacking into fire deck guns. All the other engagements went very poorly for him. So Grenades are weak against brace. Deck guns are weak against brace, very strong against attack, moderately good against Defend Attack is strong against brace and fire deck guns.

This has never happened before. Never. So it's impossible for him to know, unless he actually coded the port battle thing. In which case, good luck asking for punishment for him. The fact that you insist he might have known this and needs to be punished makes me question how you are getting this idea. In fact, I've repeatedly asked, but apparently asking for the reason why you see fit to punish another player is now "trolling". Lord Vicious gets it. And he's actually the guy who supplied the flag and wasted a lot of money. The people who rant about punishing the guilty here just tagged along. If this had been a known bug, documented well before yesterday, I'd see your point. But this is the very first time it happened, yet you insist he deliberately exploited a bug no one knew existed. But apparently common sense has to stand back when gamer rage is on. My last response. This thread will be closed soon, and no punishment will be dealt. Without anyone bothering to read any chat logs. If you're so infuriated about a bug, maybe you should stay away from early access games.

You mean you two guys who are angry Tampico didn't flip over a bug are now "everyone"? Funny thing is most people here disagree with your calls for punishment of the player. Name someone who agrees with you who isn't with you in the first place. So much for "everyone". It was a bug. Get over it. It's not like you'll hold that port for very long anyways.

Spain was attacked by 6 nations at the same time.

did you read his? He said people are clicking out with demasted ships from battles just because no one fired on them for a mere two minutes.

I ask again, did this ever happen before? You're asking for punishment of a player because of a newly discovered bug that had detrimental effect on you. That's what I'm seeing here. He had no reason to leave, he had no reason to stay. It seems you don't belong in an early access alpha game if you get that worked up over this.

You mean will oak logs from my oak logging operation automatically get fed into an oak log buy contract when I produce them? I'd be surprised.

Do you honestly think we'll ever get AI that is not a pushover if you bring sufficient numbers?

HRE Drama thread in German forum. If the infighting even reaches a public forum, it's pretty severe. The only thing I need to know about EVE is the "this is REALLY eve" video on youtube. Losing a ship s probably a deterrent if you have to buy them for twice the price at your capital shop. If you're in an active clan, building ships at cost kinda changes that. And if losing ships truly were a deterrent in this game, this game has already failed its premise.

Doesn't this argument fly out the window the moment we can produce our own resources?

I'm really irritated the whole "balance through grind" argument is still not dead. It has never, ever worked. It just segregated the player base into players with infinite time to pay for it anyways and those who drop out because they don't want to spend what little time they have paying a "fun tax"

guilty until proven innocent. I'll rest my case here.

It's pretty obvious he had no idea this was going to happen. Yet you continue accusing him of intentionally exploiting it. No reason to plead innocent due to ignorance, the first thing you responded was accusing him of lying about it. Which means this bug has to be common knowledge, or at least known to you. Otherwise how could you possibly run this argument?

A warning for what? If you knew this bug existed, how come you didn't report it?