staun

I knew it @Thonys complaint to admin about no Dutch ship made admin weak. So he gave you a super trader. Bet only Dutch also is the only one, that can sail it.

Have they upgraded the Indiaman ore have there been a new tradership, I mean Dutch traders on the PvP leaderboard?

But for how long? Almost have the impression Sweden is fine with losing Carta and soon will stop defend ports. That you are not in the game for real, but just on when a port has to be defended.

You know what they say. "Do as I say and not as I do".

Numbers alone dosen’t make a fight equal. So yes some ppl will not fight for sure, think a lot of players woudn’t lose ships in fights against the best. But that a side there is some things that worries me with BR. - A trader takes up br, not sure a trader has the same fighting cabality as a same br war ship. - Br ballance on ships. In bigger fights the Br would imo actually make the fight unballanced. Take a 3 rate br 300 belona 450, you think a Bellona is 1,5 better than a 3 rate. I know ppl can always just sail the ship with the best balance between br and capebality.

They don’t have to change timer. Did greg change timers. Nope but he got multiflipped because ppl thought he dodge fight with timers. Maybe players think the same abouth Prussia. But in the end it is not about Prussia, But a change of mechanic. As said I will not support a system that punish ppl for trying.

It is not that I disagree with idea behind the starting post. His idea had just something I didn’t like. Do understand the frustration. - Punishing ppl for falling. - All ports forced outside your normal play time, if you actually do an effort to take a port, switch to a dodge timer. So we punish ppl for actually trying to do something abouth dodgers. - We want to punish ppl for waisting time/ content. At the same time we want this to be a war game(atleast I think we do). In term of war, what they are doing is actually a valid tactic. - Sometimes I think we should not always try to fix things with a mechanic, but let it be up to the players. If there is one thing I learned in the 1,5 year I played, thats ppl is amazing to find ways to abuse a mechanic. Ppl can easy fix it them self if they think somebody has crossed the Line. I remember a clan that had 8 pb, because ppl thought they had dodger timers. Before my time, but I heard stories about nation ganking up on stronger nations, when they think the strong went to far. In short I am against punishing ppl for trying. I actually belive more in ppl to fix a situation than a mechanic.

Why would it do that. When I was in Dk-Ng, all our timers was on eu time. We attacked no ports outside Eu time. So no different for us. But it might change the will for ppl to flip outside the hours then normally play. I would never flip a port at night, if I knew for the next 7 days another of my ports would be at night time, where I would not be able to defend it. But for multizone nations it would be ok I think.

Is it me that got it wrong. I understand it as lets see. Your ports are at 00,00-03.00 server time(I think). You want to attack a port at 17.OO server time. To do that you have to put your own ports to 17.00 server time and it has a cooldown of seven days, before it can be changed back. And you are fine with that?

And think your idea is good if we was a clan based game. But even if clans own ports it is based on nations. How many nations has only 1 clan in there Pb's.

But still limited to only 3 hours for hostillity, right?

You think it is good for the game to punish ppl for trying and failing´? Because thats what his idea is. Did they try?????? His idea will make no distinction between have acted in good faith and not.

Actually got lost there. How is it you see your idea can avoid alt abuse in clans to avoid more and more expensive timers, when we still have the same limit in nations attacks.

I understand the idea by it and aslo why it is an annoiance that ppl flip an port and don't show up. Just think it will be hard to do anything about it. Unless it is desided by an actually tribunal. I will never support an idea that punish ppl for trying and failing.

The idea is not about longer cooldown on a port that have been defended . If Your clan attack a port in EU time and your clan have more than 3 ports, all your ports will for 7 days have a EU timer. That how I read attack in a given time and timers set to a given time. Have I gotten that wrong?

Fine idea. Problem still is the same with alt clans, where you just switch ppl over for the hostillity. Think it is a good idea, problem is just the player in NA. So unless you make a cooldown on clan switch, I do think it will be abused,

Ask @Gregory Rainsborough if a single clan can be multiflipped hard. Your idea now change how it is now. As I know it to be you can have 3 ports to be flipped by a nation and all nations can do it at the same day. But your idea will not be so much different. How many clans has port in different nations. Try calculate it and see how many ports that can be flipped. what have Gb 10 clans. So it would give what 20 pb if I get you right?

And monday- friday. lets hope they don't have a job. How is the seven day cooldown for all ports(if you have more than 3) to be understod?

Idea is good, if not for the players in NA. We all know how it would be abused. PPl would just use one man clans(alts)to own the port. Not a problem to invite them over to a clan for the hostillity and then go back to there normal clan. We did it all the time in DNP to help some of the smaler clans to flip and get aport. But we both know it will be abused.

I have no problem with a NA where there was no upgrades, Wood type ore knowledge slots. Only skilled matter. My point is all have acces to upgrades, Wood and ship knowledge. This things is not imo the reason we have players better than others, imo the reason is this is a skill based game.

I actually sail a lot without opgrades and only with books bought from dbl ore got from a seal bottle