Christendom

so essentially we're looking at community managers, which I think has been suggested here for years. I'm not sure about moving over to discord, but having a group of mods vote on decisions would be a smart move. You could even bring back global and have them monitor chats. Maybe throw them a bone or 2 in the form of a fancy ship for their efforts. Couple of suggestions - 1 - active mods. Our last mods were not. 2 - multiples as biases will always be a thing 3 - mods vote on action taken and submit higher up if discipline beyondt their scope is needed 4 - we need a set of rules that is not subject to change or interpetation based upon feelings for the individuals.

Last I looked over there I was banned, not even sure why. I think that's the idea though right? Ban someone they simply just can't create another persona.

I don't know much about that game other than it sure has a long list of promises and I have no desire to be in yet another discord. Overall I'd say that twitch streams featuring 1800s naval MMOs aren't really overflowing with viewers at the moment so I'd imagine any positive exposure to the genre benefits them and games labs. Something something high tide and all boats. Again, just a little food for thought.

well....I think that's called a bang bang play in football. Banning folks on the forums for rulers affiliations is perhaps not the best way to endear ourselves to their community. Seems dumb to have beef between 2 games over dumb shit. Just a thought. Maybe if everyone unbans each other and plays nice we can all go out for ice cream later...

@admin So I don't really got a dog in this fight in regards to heel and sail positions. I'm just a schmuck with a 19ft Pathfinder that I use to fish and drink beer on. I rely on @William Death to break down most of the sailing changes for me like a 5 year old. However, I don't think banning players because they are consultants, supporters or even developers of another sailing game with strong opinions is a wise or just decision. Considering the market for niche 18th Century Naval Combat games is a rather small one...making it even smaller and less inclusive would perhaps not be that ideal. There's no love lost between @Sir John myself as frequent opponents on the east coast, but he's definitely contributed a fair bit with his pictures over the years and with his sailing knowledge. In a game featuring the USS Niagra, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have someone who sails on her as a community member. Just my 2 cents.

Solution is fairly simple. Have flags given as rewards for hunt missions. Kill x amount of HDF 1st rates and you turn the mission in for a flag. Would also increase the amount of flags given out and hopefully increaset he amount of port battles.

You should have figured out this flag exploit before 30 of us got a couple week forum siesta IMO

is there historical precedent out there of ships going to board while intentionally on fire with the intention of blowing up and killing the crew off both ships? I’m curious. Paying my respects to global chat boys. F

Was that before or after sweden was screening Spain into their port battles? Surely if Spain's ally can join in, GBs was welcome also right?

Personally I think every nation essentially being turned into an impossible nation by relying on capturable player owed ports AND then doubling down on that crafting by even more extremely expensive port bonuses is and has ruined this game. Spain lost a port, died. Danes (1st time around) lost one, died. Sweden lost SJ and went to sleep for a while. VP.. and Prussia....same. Loading all your crafting needed for RVR in a suped up port and then being able to lose said port in a matter of days is just an overall poor game design decision for repeated gameplay. Maybe Swerg 2.0 is pulling a dick move, but they are doing exactly what the RVR system wants them to do. Crush opponents into quitting the game OR buy the forger DLC and move ($$ wink wink). Don't hate the player, hate the game. Russia and the 3 other nations are "impossible" and we know that going in. Back pre-release when We lost ports on The secret islands and bermuda it wasn't pretty. But that's the risk of joining said nations. Joining GB should not have the same risks as an easier and starting nation. Imagine how utterly complex it would be to a new player joining GB or the US and trying to figure out crafting. Can't craft in the capital and get bonuses...oh ok gotta craft in a player owned port.....gotta join a clan....gotta be on the friends list....and I can lose everything. Just a poorly designed setup and I suspect one of the major reasons new player retention is abysmal in NA.

Removing global makes sense if we had fewer nations that had hundreds of players in them and by necessity vibrant, active and self reliant communities were formed within them. Maybe inter nation trade channels (why don't we have this?). We wouldn't need a global chat. But we have 12 nations diluting an active population of 700-800 players (on a good day) and some nation chats are consistently dead. Certain times of the day I would imagine there are less than 10 players on in some nations. Global is the only resource sometimes. Personally I think it would be a mistake to remove it without actually making real attempts to moderate. At release there were plans to make new community mods and use clan leaders to help police chats. What happened to that idea? It's kinda hey global is toxic....but yea we haven't actually taken any steps to moderate it......we're just removing it.

By your own admission it's only been a month or 2 right? You entered into the gear based / super ship / DLC fest that it currently is. Or the promises made that ended up being broken. You didn't really see how great it used to be or the potenial it had. Honestly the ony thing keeping this game going is the community. At least in my opinion.

But we don't ban players. Only those that post critical youtube vids. Not the ones that are toxic in game.

yea but guys removing global will help!