William the Drake

I have suggested a supposed form of Notoriety/Honor, however implementation of this is admittedly susceptible to abuse and manipulation if not implemented properly: Notoriety, Infamy, "Heat" and Bounties There should definitely be fewer Pirate ports in some locations, but I think it is a need to avoid a high concentration of pirate ports, not so much the overall number. I also think that pirate ports should be more like temporary havens: If a Nation feels the need to run out some Pirates, the pirates will simply pick up and set up somewhere else. Pirates aren't the stand-and-fight type: An Approach to Piracy I am also in agreement that Neutrals should go (I swear it looks like their towns are surrendering to me but I cannot enter to formally accept it!) Instead, have all ports belong to a nation or pirates, but have varying levels of "security". Depending on the port's importance/size/etc. security can be heavy or light. Ports with light security will be easily accessible by pirates, smugglers, and traders of warring nations. The higher the security, the harder it will be for pirates and non-national traders to gain entrance to the port. Also, port owners could even put up a type of reverse blockade: no ships can enter the port except for those of the ports owner; i.e. only English ships could enter Nassau, Spanish to San Juan etc. (I believe Spain did something like this in South America where only Spanish traders were allowed to trade at Spanish ports)

I like this one better: But to that I say: Or you could just watch the full video for the full level of FREEDOM!

Gentlemen! On this, the eve of your noble country's birth, I wish you a hearty salutation and merry celebration! May you always fight for freedom and liberty, always stand against tyranny, and may you always be in need of the employment of questionable privateers! "Give me Liberty, or give me Death!"

It was a great collaboration between GL, Valve, and Apple to give UGG a mid-year sales boost. Apple provides the controversy, Valve (Steam) provides the spotlight, and GL provides the awesome game, and legions of supporters with wallets at the ready.

The specs, from length of all the rigging to the length of the voyage : Bienvenue à Philadelphia! I thoroughly enjoyed my tour of the ship, and may very well for a second round tomorrow!

As been noted previous, the "Stars and Bars, flag is actually the 1st National Flag used by the CSA, and the flag more well known now is the Virginia battle flag (and in all actuality, the flag seen most today, the rectangular one, was actually the CSA Navy jack) However, it does well to note that the latter two national flags of the CSA, known as the "Stainless Banner" and "Blood-Stained Banner" respectively, both include the Virginia Battle standard in each flag in its entirety. Also, I do believe (hope) that Apple will slowly begin to take these things in a case-by-case manner and start reinstating all content where the image is used in a Historical manner (it should have been done this way in the first place. But hey,it's Apple's choice to ban what they want at the slightest twitch. Ah capitalism)

I (hope) that this purge is only an initial response and a case-by-case response will follow suite. However this is being optimistic. I have no doubts that we are not the only historical community of gamers that are having this discussion (as I pointed out before, that UGG was not the only Civil War game to be removed) and believe Apple will be receiving numerous complaints and requests to have their games reinstated, as I plan to do as well. Very well said!

This is in fact the case: almost any game concerning the Civil War has been (or is in the process of being) removed due to the presence of the Rebel flag. (I believe one such game was "Civil War: 1863). It seems at this point it is a blanket system, rather than case-by-case, which is, again, quite rash in my opinion.

Once more, I am fully on the side of Game Labs in this situation: Make no concession to change anything in-game, as it is a historical representation of the conflict and symbols used in it. If there is any type of appeal process that keeps the game as it is, I say go for it.

I live in a southern state. I was born and raised in a city with numerous monuments and commemorations of Confederate leaders, in a manner that is very much prideful in nature. I, for one, believe that the reexamination of the importance and pertinence of these memorials and symbols is long overdue, as I have seen and heard the tension they can cause first-hand. This said, GL has my full support for getting UGG back up and running; It is a superb strategy game that portrays the Confederate Flag in its historical setting. As a corporation, apple has the right to remove content as it sees fit, and I believe what this is is simply an initial, reactionary purge, albeit rash, for anything that depicts the Virginia Battle Standard. If their is an appeals process, take it, and I think you should have little issue getting the game back up.

I've also been considering some additional skills, also to expand on economic boundaries. Here is one: Careening: The ability to properly maintain your ship as well as construct modest ships and ship construction pieces (i.e. small-medium masts, keel sections: material specific for making ships). The level dictates the efficiency/speed with which you are able to conduct maintenance on a ship as well as how much material is needed to do so. -> Shipbuilding: This specialization allows the player access to all types of ships to build. However, if you have a low shipbuilding skill level, and attempt to construct a very large ship, the process will take longer, possibly more materials will be needed, and defects may even appear in the finished design! This skill allows for the building of large, organized shipyards.

Aside from the things listed above, there is a discussion and concern as to how Pirates will participate in RvR, though it originated in a separate post: The Case Against A Pirate Nation RvR will be an odd and "tricksy" aspect to approach as pirate. 1st I believe we will have to wait to see what type of RvR and economy are implemented and then go from there. Right now we are just speculating as to what Pirates could do in certain, hypothetical RvR scenarios.

I think funding is separated. You should buy it anyway, as it is a superb RTS Game.

NOTE: Pirates are in-game and playable. Any discussion or debate as to the necessity or want of pirates is now irrelevant. Please avoid any pirate-based flaming (or flaming of any nature for that matter). Thank you. As alluded to in a separate post, I hope very much so that Pirates and Piracy will be handled rather uniquely in comparison to other nations in Naval Action. (it is my ultimate hope that each nation will operate in their own unique way, but that is a discussion for another day) As stated in many other topics discussing it, I agree that Piracy should be seen as the "Hard mode" of Naval Action; it should not be for the faint of heart, heavily PvP oriented (but not exclusively PvP; a player should be able to make their way without PvPing, but have a much harder time of it), with simple goals. This all hinges on how Piracy is implemented, including the very first step of actually becoming a pirate: Turning to Piracy- In my opinion, Piracy should be a middle-to-late game decision. If done too soon, the player could (and should) be run into the rocks without mercy. The Pirate's Life is not an easy one. Because Pirates are KoS for basically everyone, this is a good thing in that new arrivals will not enter into a 100% hostile environment with the bear minimum of resources. Going Pirate should be like a fry deciding they have grown big enough to swim out of the protection of the shallows, at which point they are at the mercy of the sea and all its malicious mechanizations and inhabitants. The Pirate's Ship- Emphasis should be placed on smaller ships for Pirates. The speed and maneuverability of smaller vessels was more fitting for Pirate's hit-and-run tactics historically, and should be reflected in game; Pirates should want to hurry up and capture a ship, plunder it, and sail away (also the fact that pirates preferred ships with low draughts so as to navigate shallow waters). Long, drawn-out fights with heavier armed and armored navy ships should not be something a pirate is eager to do. The largest ship that a pirate should be able to efficiently able to pilot in my opinion is a Surprise at the moment, although I could be swayed to bump that up to the Trincomalee (Any ships yet added between the Surprise and Trinc should also be taken into consideration). NOTE: I am not arguing that pirates should be restricted to small ships; If a pirate get's their hands on a Heavy frigate or ship-of-the-line, so be it, let them sail it. But it should A: be no small feat to do so, and B: Incentives should be placed where sailing a smaller ship would be more lucrative/safe than a larger ship. The good captain Darby discussed this here and I am in agreement: In short, set a cutoff point, and any ship above that will have repair costs raised to exorbitant prices, to the point that either scuttling it or keeping it simply as a Trophy ship are the only viable options. The Pirate "Economy"- Much is up in the air as to what the in-game economy will look like. But regardless, I believe that Pirates should have a minimalist approach to the overall economy as far as direct supply. Should pirates be allowed to have a plot of land to farm some sugar here and there? Sure. Should they be able to prop up a (single) ramshackle rum distillery (which produces a paltry amount of rum)? Eh, ok. Could they even sell their rum (No! Not the Rum!) to shady/desperate traders or smugglers for a spot of coin? Absolutely. Should they be able to corner the rum market in their region? No. In my opinion these things should only be a secondary option to a pirates income. The pirates main place in the overall game economy should be to simply be as a parasite on said economy; "Take what ye can and give nothin' back".. or, you know, sell it back for some gold (sell-back price will depend on where and who you can safely sell it to). But in short, Pirates should not be trying to compete with trade companies to corner any markets. Mobility of Pirate Ports and Havens- Pirates shouldn't be camped in areas heavily trafficked by navies, nor should they be occupying a plot of land that has an incredibly valuable resource sitting in it, thus being a major target for nations. A pirate want's his safe-house to be just that: safe. Sitting on a massive gold mine that England wants is just asking for some major overkill on England's part. That said, pirate ports probably shouldn't be permanent: what good is a secret hideout if it is no longer secret: "A (simple) Pirate's Life for me!" - "Politics? Domination? A Pirate craves not these things." Pirates should not be concerned with "conquering" a map, nor should they be concerned with capturing ports. Raiding them of their valuables, perhaps, but only the most daring and cunning (and foolish) would attempt that, and it should be considered a major gamble. Pirates should have their own separate RvR system/goal, and not give a hoot as to whether the Nations are killing each other or not (although, navies being preoccupied with war and less with Pirate-hunting would be nice). Other mechanics such as crew recruitment could be tweaked, such as crew could only be recruited when boarding and capturing a ship, or have crews harder to come by in pirate ports. Things such as smuggling and port accessibility will have to wait until the game is developed further. Cheers, William Drummond, the Drake.

This model looks strikingly similar to the Hercules/Adventure model from PotBS. Any correlation?

Ahoy! Glad to have ye aboard matey! Now then, let's get don to the business of this treasure o' yours that I heard about...

Well at least there's a Bibliography: http://www.golden-age-of-piracy.com/sources/bibliography.php

I'm not sure what the NA ratio is, but i know that Archeage uses 10 min Real Time for 1 hour in-game, resulting in a 4-hour day in ArcheAge. The system seems to work nicely, and there is even a sort of clock at the top right of the UI that tells you the exact in-game time when you mouse over it.

I'm more interested in what ship is in the background of that NA shot. Is that a xebec?

I am in the process of reading The Captain Who Burned His Ships, a biography of Thomas Tingey, captain in the Continental Navy, Commandant of the Washington Naval Yard, and Commodore in the U.S. Navy, by Gordon Brown. The book cites Tingey's apparent aversion to the American philosophy of ship design, which called for fast, maneuverable ships, while preferring the English design of stout, solid ships (perhaps due to his initial employment in the Royal Navy). The book reads that Tingey "...as a product of the Royal Navy, he had always preferred sturdy ships over sleek, tall-masted American models." (114, Brown) Earlier in the book, it refers to Josiah Fox, a naval constructor stationed at the Washington Naval Yard alongside Tingey: "...[Fox] and Tingey both leaned toward the British model in ship design, which put sturdiness and reliability over the American penchant for speed and maneuverability..." I figured, should Naval Action continue to use only historical models, that the difference between styles would naturally become apparent. However, it would be nice to consciously know that picking a faction meant more than simply picking what flag to fly, and make choosing a faction also a choice of ship and play style. The 1800s begins to fall out of my realm of knowledge concerning naval warfare, so I will rely and give precedent to other members who know more about this topic than I do; in this case I am simply a curious messenger.

An old barcode warrior eh, lol. There are a few of us sailing around as it is. You can see an impromptu list here: Who is Who: NA <=> PotBS

A splendid synopsis and much to touch on, good show! Case 1 Reply: Agreed; leave a basic level system behind. I do believe that we should be able to lose almost everything when defeated/captured, however I believe completely restarting/deleting the character is a bit much. Now, setting the character back as far as possible in terms of resources, money, or otherwise, I do like (perhaps even get "marooned" on an island). The "attack anyone at anytime" is already sort of in-game, as you can pretty much attack anyone, bit it will result in you turning pirate (and pirate on pirate violence is not, and should not, be punishable, except perhaps by a player-based pirate tribunal) Player run, managed, and built guilds? Yes. Player run/managed nations? No. I only say this because I fear the idea of a single player holding sway (more or less) over an entire faction. The Nations should be AI led and managed. The reason for this is that, also, there are those players who wish to play the game without excessive player interaction (even in an MMO) i.e. the same types of players who wish to go it alone rather than join a player-based guild. Keep the base factions AI led and managed, but the ability to start player-based factions as well (via coordination between large guilds?) As for limitations on trade, you are somewhat contradicting your own statements: Why limit goods or trade based on rank, if you with that rank/xp not be an issue? (unless I misunderstand the point you are trying to make) Case 2 Reply: Realism vs. Game-Mechanic practicality has long been a heated discussion here. For my own example, I argued that there should be no live map in the open world. This, however, would request a whole set of navigation mechanics, that could otherwise be worked around by simply viewing Google Maps (as pointed out repeatedly in the discussion). Overall I agree; more realism would lead to more dynamic gameplay, but one man's immersion is another's boredom. Some aspects like provisions for long voyages could get tedious, for example. Case 3 Reply: "And when everyone's super, no one will be." -Syndrome. Little to add to this section, only how about actually penalize the player for things like mutinies? Hits to valor/honor would show that you didn't think things through, thus would make thinks like say, recruiting crew or buying a ship, or getting a mission from the admiralty after a mutiny would be rather difficult (so a player couldn't bounce back immediately after a mutiny back in full swing). Case 4 reply: 100% agree. In fact, I agree a lot; Not only allow the player decide how they want to play and let them work towards their own end-game. NOTE: While I like the idea of relying (and suspecting) others, I would ask that you take a short look into the game ArcheAge. In it, there is a mechanic of Trade packs: you craft a trade pack, and then bring it to any number of NPC traders across the world. The type of trade pack you make, and the distance you travel to trade it, all determine it's value (a trade pack that can only be crafted with materials found in area A will fetch a hefty amount of coin in area B, all the way across the map on the other continent, which also happens to be the enemy's home turf). Trade runs are dangerous due to the default enemy players from the other faction, "Reds". However, the player atmosphere there is very toxic (at least the EU server Kyprosia), to the point where no one even thinks of reaching out for help: it is far more uncommon for someone to help out; Team killing and stealing packs is the norm, and almost everyone just takes it as fact. So just be aware that things that look good and exciting on paper can go from bad to worse when trolls are introduced to the system. Case 5 Reply: Agree again. Give Guilds/Clans almost free roam as far as management, guild housing, etc. Flags, sails, ships, guild houses, perhaps even Guild founded/run ports. Allow guild leaders to customize their guild's rank/permission structure as much as possible. Guild warehouses, wallets, and salary systems. Economy: Pirates of the Burning Sea had a good initial idea that failed in the long run: an almost exclusively player-run economy. Everything from the mining of raw materials to the final product of a ship was handled by players. Items listed in the auction house, from ships, to ammunition, to manufactured goods were all placed their by players for their price. only when the game ran low on players (and after Portalus re-vamped the economy, making almost everything previous obsolete) did teh system fail. Portalus did implement AI auction house listings, but only on some low-end materials for higher prices than they would (normally) be listed for by players. Unfortunately, the lack of a player-base to supplant the old economic system saw the whole thing crash, and now inflation has run rampant: good ships are hard to come by, and prices have increased almost 400% in some cases. Things like "premium" and "Partner" ships also didn't help. Great work on your synopsis and an enjoyable read, keep up the good work!

Ahoy John! As far as the "Chat" tab goes,...I don't think a chat even exists. I could be wrong, but I don't have access either, and I have never heard any chatter about it until now. It might be an exclusively dev/tester chat room. As far as accessibility to other aspects of the forum, are you having any other issues? can you view pictures in the gallery, view peoples' profiles, blogs, member list, etc.? These are the common (and to my knowledge, working) parts of the forum that are accessible to members.

I believe they are only selling tickets for cruises on board the Serenity, AJ Meerwald, and the (recently added for sailing) Hindu. That's online at least, and we are considering sailing, but it will be no great loss if we don't. Duly noted, thank you!