William the Drake

Yes, i wasn't arguing for the fact or lack thereof of raiding, but rather the politics surrounding the very thin line separating Pirates and Privateer. Technically Morgan was a Pirate regardless of whether he knew of the peace treaty or not. Technically he was supposed to return his plunder to Spain because of this, but didn't thus angering Spain. Had he been captured by Spain, at any point, he most certainly would have been tried as a pirate. Often politics had more of a hand in determining if one was a pirate or a privateer than did the Captains actual actions (i.e. William Kidd). However, the accounts of alleged cruelty on Morgan's part during the raid assert that he was no gentleman Privateer, but more of a cutthroat. Just as the saying is that One man's Freedom Fighter is another man's Terrorist, so to that One man's privateer is another man's Pirate.

This is true, but you also have the option to select Pirates when first choosing a faction. I am arguing that the process of "turning" pirate should be the only way.

But I thought that was due to the fact that players could have multiple accounts, not multiple characters per account? True X-teaming was only possible because of the former. If you had other nation Characters on the same account, the only way you could use them was to either A. Wait until the map reset, or B. Paid to have it done (which I agree, promotes the wallet-warrior and is not a good option to have.)

When he sacked the Spanish city of Panama, when technically Spain and England had declared peace, thus rendering his Letter of Marque null and void. He also refused to return the plunder from said city to the Spanish after they cited this issue and demanded it back (as well as Morgan to be Hanged). Morgan did neither. he also breached his LoM in some other, smaller ways, but this was the biggest. Accounts also claim of some more prate than privateer cruelty during this same raid

With EA now "officially™" around the corner, I feel this needs to be implemented, since even the devs claim

Neutrals need to be removed eventually, however there needs to be a diplomacy system where each nation has the ability to declare war, peace, alliance, or neutrality in a conflict to facilitate the removal of neutrals. As for character #, I'm split. I personally would like to have a Pirate, an Englishman, and an American, but I can see how people could abuse having characters in other nations. Perhaps have a time penalty when changing between characters of different nations?

Huzzah! Outstanding to hear! My only question is this: are we also to expect New content to coincide with EA? Remember that this is only Early Access, not a full release. The game is still vet much in development.

Wait wait, large sizes in general or large sizes for the ship in question? Pirates had to utilize what they had, and often coming across naval grade large-caliber cannons was not something that happened often. Same with having a full complement of the same caliber of gun: pirates weren't forging cannons, if they could manage to get a ship to have a uniform compliment of guns, it would be from numerous other ships, again, not happening often. And the large "Fortress Ship" you are referring to I think only happened once at Nassau, not a common practice. At least to my knowledge Large-caliber cannons just doesn't fit the Pirate goal: making sure a target stays afloat so as to capture and loot it. Also for the fact again hat pirates would need to have taken said large-caliber guns from another ship, which in this case would have been a Naval grade vessel. Pirates avoided engaging with naval ships because of the fact that Pirate ships were custom built to do one thing: chase down unarmed or lightly-armed traders, not to face off against heavily armed naval vessels (one-on-one at least. Large numbers of pirate vessels may have been able to go up against a Naval Frigate with some success, but this is also an assumption).

Wait, are you being sarcastic, or no? Because while, yes, pirates did cut out gun ports and add cannon (usually only to previously undergunned trade vessels) they would not use heavier guns to do so. Pirates wanted to capture a ship, and larger guns would result in sinking the ship instead of capturing it.

“Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." -JFK

Never have I seen so many words combined so eloquently to represent "Freedom". It brings a scurvy-ridden tear to my eye.

I honestly believe that the fact that we are competing with other Nations (Mainly England and U.S.A.) in the holding of ports (mainly in the Bahamas area) that we don't see more fighting amongst pirates. We can't afford to fight amongst ourselves because if we do, we risk losing our ports to the nationals (again). Remember that not too long ago pirates were whittled down to just our capitol MT. Then we banded together to reclaim our old ports (in which many had valuable ships they didn't want to lose). You eliminate our fear of losing ports and need to defend, conquer, and recapture them, and it is my opinion that you will see at least a small rise in pirate v pirate instances. Going on the Record

I have voiced concern of Pirate port ownership, PB role, crafting, and other things in many of my previous topics: An Approach to Piracy Pirate Havens, Port Security, and Trade Regulations In short, should pirates capture (and hold) ports? No, should they raid them? Yes. Should pirates be able to craft small vessels? Yes. Large frigates and lineships. Absolutely not. Should they be able to craft some economic materials (sugar, wheat, coal, iron, etc.) yes. Should they be able to corner the market on rum or ship materials, no.

But I must agree I've always been perplexed by my ability to "like" my own content. I mean, I wrote it so of course it's going to be brilliant. But it doesn't seem that the counter actually does anything other that give said person bragging rights. I must confess however that I pride myself in have a 90% like ratio

Take notice of the number of stars in the Old Glory that is used as well. The one that is used in-game should fit the later-end of the time period NA takes place (the early 1800s). However I thought one of the earliest Navy Jacks was that of the one in my signature: (The red, white, and blue striped one in the middl

Ramming that causes damage does need to be a mechanic; I don't want to end up like PotBS where ramming someone simply meant impeding their movement. However, ramming as it currently is does need some tuning. I remember the devs addressing this by saying they will be looking into differentiating the weight of ships and how this could be used so that small(er) ships won't do "as much" damage to larger ships. This could be a decent work around, to make sure players don't turn to sacrificing smaller, cheaper ships in order to cripple much larger ships. However, when dealing with ships that are closer in rank, this may still be an issue.

Today in 1815, Andrew Jackson defends the city of New Orleans with the assistance of Baratarian Pirates under the leadership of French Pirate Jean Lafitte! U.S. suffer minimal casualties and successfully rout the British forces!

It always amuses me that whenever there is discussion or debate of any type of pirate organization, it is written off as "Fantasy/Disney" Pirates. These users are lauded and called Jack Sparrows, and summarily mocked for almost any type of stance that remotely promotes some sort of pirate mechanic that may be deemed useful. Don't get me wrong, these sort of characters do in fact exist; PotCO was not a game I got into, and with good reason. There are indeed characters who will see this game as one of the few age-of-sail games either in development or on the market and think "Oh look, a pirate game, Pirates need to rule the wave because pirates are awesome! We need a Black Pearl and a erroneous Queen Anne's Revenge that's a Man-o-War-Galleon-Super-Lineship, because Pirates!" Yes these characters do exist, however this has been the scapegoat for almost anyone advocating pirates and piracy on this forum and in game, especially during the early months when pirates had yet been implemented. Now to my point: Did pirates fight amongst each other? Yes. Did they also band together, in small groups, from time to time? Yes. Did pirates ever organize themselves to such an extent as to be considered a sizable threat and entity? Yes, and while there are admittedly only a handful of occurances, they happened and were similar enough in nature to prompt the idea that pirates being a "faction" and working together is not fart-fetched and is historically accurate. (NOTE: the idea of pirates as a faction, NOT as a carbon copy Nation). Example include: Madagascar Port Royal (Though this could be argued as a "privateer haven". However the port and its inhabitants were often described as "vagabonds," "miscreants," and "A collection of the most uncouth characters there ever was." Take that with what you will. "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy." Nassau Tortuga Now, were pirates capable of working together in large numbers, even to form various pirate Republics. Yes. Did pirates want to create a pirate empire, to besiege and more importantly occupy numerous ports? Absolutely not. Pirates were ill-fitted to take on the National navies, and direct conflict was nit in the pirate's playbook. I have said it many times and will continue to say it: pirates should not be concerned with "conquering" a map. We should have our own, unique (and probably separate) victory mode: An Approach to Piracy

The switch from starting out to going pirate is the first step. But Yes, notoriety systems and LoMs are something that definitely should be introduced, and I have suggested some ways to do this myself: Letters of Marque Notoriety, Infamy, "Heat" and Bounties

I agree, allow ports to be accessible to everyone: this would eliminate the need for the rather superfluous "Neutral" nation and ports. However, there should be some levels of restriction to this accessibility, especially between nations that are at war. I have outlined how this could be done in an earlier thread; Pirate Havens, Port Security, and Trade RegulationsThis would allow traders and pirates almost unlimited access to all ports, should they wish to risk it, but naval captains would be limited to allied, peaceful and some neutral ports. Let's take a look at Sid Meier's: Pirates! for example, (mostly for the pirate point of view); in a game where you are more a privateer than a pirate, you can access all ports, as long as you have not been actively hunting around them. Start attacking French shipping around Martinique? Then you can still access the port, but the trader will probably not want to do business with you. Continue attacking French ships in those waters, and the next time you enter port, you will be prompted to either leave, sneak into the port (giving limited access to facilities and a rather fun mini-game), or to attack the city (if pirate # vs. Troop numbers are comparable. Also accompanied by a rather nice battle mini-game) Are you suggesting that Pirates can become Privateer only by paying with real-life money? Please clarify if I have misunderstood, but if this is the case, I am wholly against it. 1, Privateering has the potential in this game to be so much more than a simple career choice or Pay-2-Win mechanic. 2. This could easily be abused by "wallet warriors", especially if there is no "cooldown" time to stop players from nation hopping. The latter instance is also possible if this system is implemented w/o real money. There needs to be a system that allows LoMs to be given out based on the character's reputation and history. is a player notorious for flipping sides and not folloeing a LoM? Then less nations will be willing to offer him one. And that's just it; nations should be offering LoMs to lucky pirates (they should be purchasable only to non-pirates). I have outlined my concept of LoMs here as well: Letters of MarqueCheers

I thought you were making a joke that Poles were just a bunch of pirates.

I don't think Pirates need to be limited to PvP only. Your concern that pirates should be at each other's throats is unfounded; if we want to sink each other, ok. If we want to form a republic on the island of New Providence only to come down with an epidemic of syphilis, then let us. And having a target on our back by literally every other faction will have us as the PvP faction regardless; we won't have a choice in the matter. As I've stated before, pirates should be hard mode, not impossible mode. *cough* That is some serious shade being thrown.

As Early Access (allegedly) approaches, there is one mechanic that I feel, as a pirate, is imperative to implement before much larger numbers of new players (hopefully) flood the game; the concept of "turning" pirate rather than choosing to start out as a pirate. The game of ArcheAge already has this mechanic: players start as one of the 2 default factions, which are also at war with each other. If they commit enough crimes they have the ability to "turn" pirate, effectively joining a 3rd faction. Doing so removes them from their current guild, and lose the protection of any of their previous faction's guards, among other things. Going pirate in ArcheAge is no small matter, so many wait until they are the highest level to do so. I suggest that Naval Action implement a similar mechanic for pirates. Players should first start out as any of the default nations, and if they attack a "friendly" vessel, they turn pirate. (I think this should also be tweaked. I believe someone should only be made to go pirate if their are survivors to tell the story of said treason and piracy). Turning to and playing pirate should be a sobering smack in the face of the player; Cut ties with anyone and everyone, lose access to ports and trade you once claimed. Have a ship in a port you can't access anymore because you went pirate? Tough. It shouldn't be a simple decision, just as it was in history. And just like in history, I also think that "accidental" piracy should be observed. You didn't mean to attack a vessel; you thought it was an enemy? Good luck telling that to the Lord High Admiral during your trial. I think this is imperative to implement something along these lines for EA due to the fact that the game will then be accessible to a larger population, many of which who may come in thinking they can play pirate with the same (relative) ease as any other Nation. They shouldn't. Doing this after EA may cause some dissent, so it would be better to implement this sooner rather than later. , in my opinion at least. EDIT: Being a noob that I am, I have only just added a poll option to this topic Fair winds and swift seas,

Almost all instances where you call for graphic improvement are either A: Coming as soon as core content is fully developed, or B: may require too much resources and cause the game to run slower. More ships are also coming, and the forum gets a chance to voice their suggestion every time a new batch of ships is up for implementation. Now, on to specifics I like these, however some will add more to game-play while others are simply aesthetic and will not/should not be concerned about until later in development. Double shot is currently being tweaked, customizable flags and pennons are coming, and I believe the "rough" year limit for teh game is 1600-1850, whereas the "preferred" dates are somewhere around 1680-1820. Agreed to an extent, I have personally written topics regarding this: Pirate Havens, Port Security, and Trade Regulations An Approach to Piracy Here I must disagree, considering the time period, there is no global stock exchange that can relay market information in the blink of an eye. We should not be able to speculate on markets as they are happening. Market information should travel by word of mouth, so if you want to know the prices of a nearby port, you either visit it yourself, or talk to the market manager in the port you're in and hope he has some information. Again, this just seems like to much information immediately available to the player. A screen that shows the current war events and area of Naval operation and recent contention (recent battles, patrols, etc.) but not giving exact information on other captains rank and numbers. I must disagree here as well, do this and you eliminate any ability or possibility of smuggling. Also this would mean that warring nations would be able to trade in each others ports. Also, as a pirate, I don't want some stuffy naval officers trudging around my port!