Vizzini

Yes I understand the reasons. My point was whether it would stop a player buying the admiralty connection DLC / a steam sale alt or whether it would make anybody who had already bought it feel cheated. There are loads of things that might improve QOL for us, it's possible that it might hinder sales

Given that there is a DLC that includes extra dockspace, I am not certain it's the best idea for everybody with a clan to be able to have one.

VP screeners didn't have enough BR to keep the Prussians ( who sailed well to get there all together) out and once inside they kicked arse, pretty much Can't see any reason to try and spin it any other way.

Good edition, perfectly summing up the VP position about sunday trading hours 😡

What would happen right now with an alliance system ? Tactical voting by everybody with an alt or 2 ? Right now player numbers seem steady , of course we cannot tell what they will be in the next few months but the doom mongers seem to have jumped the gun by the saying the games going wrong as it stands

I'm in the same nation as some of your alts, turning up to screen as often as possible. Playing the game during EU hours Vp since release Complaining that others have more free time than you ? really ? You do realise it is a multi player game and plenty happens when you or myself aren't online ? or do you have ideas to stop that happening ?

Players unwilling to risk all are on the wrong server. There will be no reason to play if you have nothing to lose for a great many on the PVP server A war of attrition grinds players down until they get low on morale or resources. Imagine a scenario where a player can hit the reset button , get his ships and ports back that he lost last night. He will never be bothered about the risk of losing it and in the same way there will be no incentive for the player attacking games playing ok right now , don't let the whiners spoil it

good research Holmes !!

i'd argue that its the implementation of 'impossible nations' that causes players to only join one with a healthy playerbase and to swap out when they get 0 ported If we had gone full on clan wars, when many hoped we would , there would have been as many nations as clans Being forced to team up with players you despise will never end well far better for each clan to have total control over what they do and not be dictated to by alts in a nation voting or acting against their interest. Being able to attack anybody not in your own clan, on the open water would increase pvp imho

waiting for valve to approve the dlc's as you well know :) /reported

They would however lose their major crafting base as they would get no bonus from a freeport. This has been a major factor in players leaving their 'impossible nation' ..once they get slapped like Prussia did at New Orleans I'd rather have many more nations than fewer, there are far too many drama queen trolls in every nation as it stands. You cannot move nation any more and find any peace. All you can do is press the x and disable nation chat..... You are then left with your clan we get more fighting and bitching and whining inside nations than we do against the other actual enemies. Often we have better friends in other nations than we do within our own A pirate outlaw mechanic, that couldn't be abused in any way was the dream. Sadly it didn't work without gamers finding out how to ruin it

given players already have the option to ditch as much cargo as time allows... anything else would just be seen as sour grapes on the part of the player who is getting sunk. Perhaps rank reduction for repeated occurrences from their admiralty would be in order ?

Craftable tow using reals, dubs , vic marks and combats make them expensive 1 per day craftable and slow some of the inflation is 9,999,999 still the most reals you can trade with a player ? If so, we're going to need wheelbarrows soon to buy a loaf of bread

Safe port for the so called "impossible nations " that they can fortify and defend themselves, rather than pouring out the same 1 port in the middle of the map. This might encourage players to adopt Poland, Prussia etc and spread the playerbase away from the zergs a bit The threat of getting 1 ported is too great a risk and it's difficult , expensive and extremely time consuming to switch nations. all in all, games playing better but the toxics could be dealt with properly, not left to run wild and it's up the the devs to sort this, put measures in place to chat ban for months at a time, players whose main purpose is to troll and spoil others experience

great stuff , best thing since @Jeheil left us

dlc ships already take care of this option and I could see limited appeal from the devs with the possibility of hindering any sales by allowing a form of durability such as you are describing surrendering should mean you lose it , otherwise every battle could be over really quick

I'd bet this would be open to abuse, the way it is right now may create drama but I am not sure allowing a team of alts to pass /sell a port to somebody without a fight is a good idea as I see it

yes would need obvious set parameters with a minimum but these ideas have been brought up before

Ports owning clan should determine the BR of their port battle. That way if any clan want to ensure they have a 25 x however many or a 5 v5 if they suck at having friends , they can. However, it should not end up with fewer nations it should be entirely clan based and provide everybody with more targets on the open seas and other players who cannot field more than 5 decent players, the opportunity to own a port, participate in RVR without being FORCED to endure the drama of nation chat. Make a safe port for each of the impossible nation and perhaps people would spread out more

The impossible nations have only truly worked with Russia due to the numbers who joined at the start and since they became top dog. The rest were unable to get a foothold. A nation with no base and not enough players will always struggle and many non native speakers will not risk joining due to expected language difficulties ( French and Spanish nations have experience with this also) Even if they had 1 unconquerable port, they would still be sitting inside it getting slapped every time they try and go fishing.

shit man, we get better fights inside the nation than this !!!

right now, you suffer a small delay if you wish to surrender all your other ships what you suggest is to automatically lose them all ? for everybody ?

I like the idea of a port being raided , it's infrastructure wrecked but not totally destroyed and still having the ability to rebuild ( at least one time ) and goods seized from the port This would allow a nation an amount of time to either rebuild it's defences or remove it's ships before destruction. Right now , with some of our player base, we have people who will throw their toys out of the pram and threaten to stop playing if they lose their crafting base I'd also like a detterent on clans owning too many ports , an increased cost scaleable and thus making it more likely to be left in the hands of another clan ( alts even, don't care ) and timers being the same for all of a clans ports Stale RVR has come about as there is now more to lose. However, many of these ideas have been put forward before and I am not sure if there is the appetite for more tinkering, after years of it already *durability on the largest, bestest ports is what i was trying to say , that can be rebuilt , using surplus materials

while the rest of the server whines and complains about the red peril , Reverse and friends are having fun !!