Captain Lust

Very well put, Sir.

Agreed mostly. Now of course realism always should come second behind balance but still many seem unreasonable... maybe some upgrades like muskets and pistols become too strong with 50% on big ships? I don't know, haven't used them too much. With borading ladders and boatswain i never bothered at all to be honest... as far as i understood the boarding ladders give you less penalty for attacking a ship with different deck height, which is nice and all but is it worth a slot? It only comes into play when boarding and only when you board a much bigger or smaller ship. Boatswain i wouldn't ever pick up either but i agree with you it should be way better on big ships since thats the only place where they matter. Overall i think not only the rated upgrades are poorly balanced but all upgrades in general. With all this being said i like how the 6-7 get quite significant % bonuses, making it easier for them to compete with 4-5 rates even tho it may or may not be completely balanced for some upgrades. It should be noted that im biased here, because i enjoy the smaller ships a great deal but only against other 6-7 who have access to the same books ( against skilled frigate captains i found 6-7 rates to be rather ineffective, mainly due to demasting ). TL;DR: I agree with upgrades being poorly balanced but don't mind 6-7 rates getting an advantage that makes them more competitive with 4-5 rathes even tho it is not logical or realistic but only balance.

Lmao, i don't think people here even understand the concept of inflation... at least nobody seems to care.

Rare footage of the BLACK clan celebrating their victories on a dead server.

You understood the nature of war carebearing on the pvp server. FTFY, mate.

Well, while i don't mind the sailing ( it is a game about sailing ships after all and the OW looks pretty nice ) im growing very tired of the game turning more and more to pve players even on the pvp server... i'm not saying i want free ships and upgrades but i want to earn them in PvP. You know something is hello kittyed up when there is a discussion on the forums about how to get people to do pvp on the pvp server. So yeah i understand you very well... but there is no need to call the devs names...i think they're doing their best to fix the game, that's the most logical assumption at least since it is their game.

Sounds very reasonable. The cost should probably also depend on the number of clan members - this seems very obvious to me, many clan members = higher cost since you have more people being able to contribute. This could also help balance zerg clans. But either way i'd rather have owning ports be more on the expensive side so the inflation is slowed down, smaller nations aren't bullied by the big players too hard, taking all their ports around them and we can actually have some neutral towns to be used to tp to the action for pvp. I think people underestimate the power of controlling ports and their taxes and what it means for other players but we shall see. Making the ownership of ports profitable will of course promote RvR a big deal but it will only make the rich even richer / give the powerful clans even more power -> snowballing -> losers on the other side quitting the game because they can't do anything. Isn't that just like PvP Global pirates? They don't even need their ports to yield profits - they just hello kitty everyone regardless. Also i value PvP over RvR since while RvR is important content and a core mechanic to keep the game interesting for many in the "late game", it is too time consuming for the average player that will maybe be in the screening fleet but probably never in the actual port battle itself. Having more neutral ports promotes constant pvp, because people can tp to where the action is happening instead of just logging off because they cant be arsed to sail there 2 hours so it will be over by the time they get there... If owning them gives gold -> no more neutral towns -> no more tp -> "hello kitty that, im not sailing 2 hours down there to get some action - see you all in Legends next year, if i haven't moved on by then". Just my opinion / prediction...

So much this. Also i don't think it was short of notice... as admin stated , the map was up on the test server for days... i'd rather see the patch asap looking at the pitiful server pop atm...

Cayo Biscayno is today east of Miami in florida...

Incredible collection of books or not credible collection of books? I'm not a native english speaker but i think it could mean both.

I wipe my ass with million dollar bills. Np. @admin @Sir Texas Sir ... so yeah, don't think it's too expensive.

Yeah, i agree but if you make it cheaper you only end up with players from those 10% hard core traders who are in zerg clans owning the map... because when gold doesn't matter anymore only the player numbers matter... Making it harder to hold ports with the cost, makes it harder to expand to enemy territory, which also simulates the enormous cost such a war would have. I think this feature has the potential to balance nations more than anything the game ever had ( except for alliances done right, maybe ) but we shall see...

And this is good. It improves economy and prevents zerg clans from crushing the weaker nations. It was a good idea, don't let people tell you otherwise or make it cheaper, please. There are horrendous amounts of gold in the game again already... people complain how it is expensive when in reality they have all the gold to pay it, if they really need their name on every port, they just don't want to... Thanks for your effort.

So now all we need is actual HE shells for the mortar brig. My mate would love that...

Please ask the people voting for its removel, i really really would like to know aswell...

I liked those option when they were in game and i think they should be back... Of course you don't, only like the previous 4 posts and now you're busy being all whiney about a random comment... or is it just that you really are one and thats why it hurt so much? If so, im sorry man - there are many fish in the sea

What is this offtopic spam about? Do you have an alternative to invisibility timer? If not, why spam here? I get you're butthurt over what i said, mate... I would like to see this, good idea.

I called those that didn't come up with an alternative to invisiblity timer while at the same time wanting it removed that, and rightfully so. If they want it removed we need another way of preventing revenge fleet camping. If speaking the truth makes me an internet warrior, then fair enough.

Says the one that gets upset about someone saying "cuck" on the internet. Don't let your parents know, please... i don't want them to think of me as a bad boy...

Aren't you a delicate little snowflake

I agree with Liquicity... revenge fleets are much more ganking than the victim of them is a ganker more often than not. The players that voted to remove invisibility without coming up with a better solution are probably the same cucks that sit in the greenzone for pve and only join pvp fights that are massively in their favour / on their terms...

With the new safe zones there is no reason to remove / nerf the invisibility or promote revenge fleets in any other way in my opinion and im glad the poll reflects that.

Is Kidd's the other pirate safe zone? I was on testbed but i didn't sail there...

I don't know im not a RvR player... ask the pirate zerg clan that dominated global server to the point of people quitting... Hence i said it shouldn't be too high but not too low either - barely profitable at best. Maybe the first port is very profitable and it costs more the more your clan has. So this way there will be some neutral ports to be used by everyone (maybe) and a chance for smaller clans to fight other smaller clans in RvR when the big clans / zerg clans are saturated. There has never been much RvR if you look at the playerbase as a whole. There are few players that care about RvR and of those even less who actually can do it because they're the chosen elite that organises PBs with their clan excluding the rest. Not only do too many ports in the hand of one clan give them too much power, it also excludes the rest of the players yet again. I'd really like to see some noob clans skrimish over unimportant backwater ports, rather than a big zerg clan coming in stomping them both to get their #34 port... A big clan can still own half the map but they also have to actually pay for their ports and that is how it should be imo. Not only does it make sense and helps economy alot, it also makes the choice of which ports you own actually matter instead just grabbing as many as possible. So in thise case if nation A caps all ports of nation B ( "one porting" them ) they suppress them hard and we all have seen how this affected players, but this time nation A pays ALOT of gold every day in doing so and thus weakens them, restoring balance somewhat. It's like the roman empire, nazi germany or this really fat guy at an all-you-can-eat buffet - you get too greedy, you lose ( collapse of empire / heart attack ) aka "bite off more than you can chew"...

Dutch ship De Zeven Provinciën (1665) ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_ship_De_Zeven_Provinciën_(1665) ) Not sure if this is design is too old but a suggestion can't harm, i guess.