Farrago

I would also love it. It makes sense to be able to do except for one thing: alts. I, and I think most, would use it more with alts than as a means of commerce between two players. For example, my US alt brings trade ships down the coast from Charleston. Somewhere around south Florida in a quiet part of water he trades the cargo to my Spanish alt who then sails it west along the Cuban coast and out into the middle of the gulf where my Russian alt is waiting. The Russian takes it into Vera Cruz. Yes, this can be done in ports, but with significantly more risk than an out-of-the-way quiet stretch of water. Or the way I would use it even more: My Pirate sits off the US coast, capturing traders. After each capture, I transfer the loot to my alt US trader in Open Water who then takes it into a US port. By the way, I didn’t say “abused.” I said “exploited.” Both of my above scenarios seem great. But are they the reasons to want this mechanic? I’m not saying an emphatic “no.” One way to look at it is it would provide more options for the solo player. [shrug]

Aren’t they free to surrender?

I would also like this option. But we need to make sure it’s not exploitable. Ransom can only be paid in reals, doubloons, or victory marks. No cargo Or it would facilitate abuse by assisting alts with smuggling. There can’t be any additional protection once back in OW. Only trust.

I withhold judgement on whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing that screening is removed. It will depend on what the hostility process is like. But perhaps this teleport to the port battle should all happen from the same port: defenders in the port being attacked and attackers maybe using the Devs upcoming Naval Base idea. A fleet should need to assemble together before joining. Ultimately, the current screening problem is a server population problem. Giant screens are the result of not enough going on with the servers at the same time.

That’s where I am as well. If the whole hostility thing gets reworked so that it’s during hostility that there are legitimate opportunities for battles between players and multiple nations to influence the result then the change to a lobby PB will be okay.

Ultimately we can each only judge by our own experiences. I believe in one of the recent patches the devs did back something off of the AI. Perhaps they will listen to you and reduce them further.

I keep hearing that AI are more difficult. They are certainly more “skilled” than they were a few years ago but my experience is that if you are facing one AI in a ship of comparable class then they are certainly not that difficult. One player killing an AI fleet should not be easy nor should it be easy to kill a much larger class ship. The problem is some expect to be able to easily farm much bigger AI with lower level ships.

Your idea is good. A ships log book would be even more cool. It would stay with the ship and have trade and combat records.

He was reported doing it a day or two ago as well. He is at it again. That would be 0350 UTC 7 April for his first kill. After this screenshot, I noticed he got more kills and he's pretty high up on the PVP leaderboard.

Now that’s a pretty good idea. Returning a captured ship to the Admiralty could earn some sort of reward which when you get enough, you are awarded a desirable ship note.

I never sail without cannons but if I’m out solo and am being chased and run down, I’ll still use the defensive tag: it’s me vs them choosing when the battle instance starts. And if it seems like terrible odds, I’m going to run. If that gets tribunaled as griefing, so be it. I don’t think anything I’ve ever done could be misconstrued as griefing but then that’s why I try to video every battle instance, just in case.

For those who remember: there was a clan or two, quite strong in RVR, on the global server which were made up of Chinese players. They were extremely dangerous and perhaps they will come back and light up the night. @chailang Still, without alliances and with the frontline mechanic in place, there’s a limitation on what any new blood can do for some of these pressured nations.

You’re making a suggestion about a different game (Ultimate Admiral?) in the section about the game Naval Action. You should ask in the appropriate forum so the appropriate developers see it.

It’s the same. Both sides need to be eligible.

While it would be nice to have a definitive ruling about the original post rather than @admin choosing a different example it seems to be official opinion (and hopefully Admin will correct or clarify): A defensive tag to save yourself or others might be okay but you can’t just hold the enemy in battle indefinitely without giving battle. Am I interpreting correctly?

Just guessing here but... a) You don’t have all your perk slots open yet. That is total player XP based so keep playing and you will eventually have all of them open. OR b) You are only selecting fleet 3 or 4 whatever-it’s called and not the other fleet perks. You have to have all the other fleet perks chosen. To use fleet 2, you have to also be using fleet 1. To use fleet 3 you have to also be using fleets 1 and 2.

And I thought my family reunions were unpleasant.

Duct tape.

No. Please settle for having max magical powers.

A long time ago we used to be able to teleport a certain max weight of cargo to another port. It was like your suggestion in that it did take hours for the cargo to arrive during which you could not send another load. It was removed, probably because mechanisms that magically remove ships and cargo from open water have been minimized. I doubt such things will come back. Trade and transport are already so easy relative to the risk that inflation/prices is climbing faster than many of us can do the cargo runs.

Perhaps if they have earned a spot on a weekly leader board there should be some identifiable pennant or something on their ship. A captain would probably know the ships sailed by the scourges of the waters in their region.

Sign me up for the San Francisco Bay edition of Naval Action!

A year or two ago we had something sort of like you describe in game. Around all noncapturable ports was a Reinforcement Zone. If your ship was attacked within your Reinforcement Zone, you could hit a button and instant, super AI reinforcements number in size and strength of your attackers would join you in battle. Here's the problem. It was easily exploitable. As good as our AI buddies are, they are still no match for some planning and skill on the side of the attacker. They are easily led astray, manipulated, steered into a friendly's way, and generally make a nuisance of themselves. There's a reason you rarely see the most skilled players in game using AI fleets in combat. This was true of those reinforcements, even tho they were buffed, they were easy to fool. I recall very few if any players liking the Reinforcement Zones. Initially new players and traders liked the idea but saw quickly that they didn't save them. The Devs could make the reinforcements into those super AI like the Raider fleets but unbeatable AI are not really good for the game either. We want few brick walls --situations where if you do this, you will definitely die. Another problem with your idea is with our current BR rules of engagement for reinforcing the weaker side, you would close yourself off from getting useful help -- help from players -- and just allow more bad guys to get in to your battle. Your mechanism could also be exploited by experienced players using low level ALTs or rerolled captains. Good luck.

Voting for alliances didn’t work. It was too stagnant and easily manipulated by alts as well. I’ve never heard a proposal that could overcome those limitations. Dev ordered alliances probably will piss off as many or more players than it pleases. I think Admin has stated that international clan alliances aren’t feasible to code. A similar response was made about clan warfare. So we’re sort of left with players observing (or not) their own alliances. What would be helpful for this and other reasons is if there was some place in game where players could find more information about all game clans. Clan creators could choose what information they make publicly visible such as alliances, play style, recruitment policy, etc.

Going to Sweden?