Thurston Beers

Pvp1 American ports Saint- Malo and Soto la marina are both still owned by x-USA players turned pirates. I request the change of Lord Protector.

Can I have my 75k back? you can take the blue pump I got for it.

i would like to see an option where I can "upgrade" on of my outposts to store more than just 5 ships. Maybe i have to publicly announce that i have an outpost in the port, or maybe i have to own land in the port. Nonetheless, I find only being able to store 5 boats in a port where I pvp to be very limiting (even as a captain who wont sail 1 dura boats). Any boats I do capture, I normally send them to the back-lands to be dismantled for parts or sold instead of being reused. Edit: my pvp dockyards look something like this-Pavel, Trinc, trinc, coni, ingermanland. Yes, I do use all the boats.

I do not like the idea of "most victory points" for the lord protector. The lord protector should be something that can be controlled and decided upon by a clan or a nation. What I propose: Allow those who attended the port battle or those who own land in the port the right vote for the lord protector (bidding on land after a port conquest should be allowed. Land should be a finite resource. There is only so much land to go around). The lord protector MUST own land in that port. If another clan doesn't like the rules/polices of the lord protector but owns no land within the port, allow them to attack port and steal the land from the clan that owns the port (civil war). I do not like the idea if a single ruler. What I propose: Allow the top 50 (or more) to rule without the "leader." Action is taken based on a majority rule. Actions cannot be put up for a second vote for x days. Example: If Britain put up a vote for France to be allied and it failed, it could not be put back on the floor for another X days. I like the idea of owning land even if it does not play a role in RvR or diplomacy.

Port capture I think 7 days is way to long of a "capture time." I think three days would be more acceptable. If you want to slow the RvR element down, I propose breaking the map up into regions and forcing the enemy to capture all the other ports in the "region" before taking the regional capital. Once you control the regional capital, you can attack the next region. This allows for the creation of "front lines." This would also force players to work the map region by region instead of taking two-three regions of ports within a day. People who want to do port battles and combat pvp know where the action will be. People who want to do commerce raiding can try to sail past these lines. (Maybe allow for cheaper labor production/cost of pruduction in contested regions to draw shipbuilders tot he pvp zones: risk = reward.) I like the idea of raiding and stealing resources. What bout stealing labor hours? I like the Idea of announcing port battles ahead of time. I think one day for regular ports, two days for regional capitals. Port battles I like the ideas proposed. Looks good. My only concern is how quick a zone can be captured. Will we be able to send ships from zone A to zone B before zone B gets captured. To build upon what was suggested: What about a system where there are two zones and one fort. One the fort is destroyed, the atteckers send some crew to man it and "rebuild" it to a certain extent. The fort will not heal to 100%. This would count as X victory points. The defenders would then have to retake the fort by destroying it. Again the fort does not heal and is repaired less than it was during the first capture. Wars Excellent, would work really well if the map was broken into regions. I think this is a bad idea: I think ports should be lost as soon as the server resets that night. Ports should not be available for more than one nation unless they are allied. What about white peace deals instead of surrendering. For example what if the Danes and Swedes are currently embroiled in a war. France decides ti attack Sweden. Danes decide to temporary ceasefire for their war to attack France.

I like the idea of adding an incentive to boarding. As it stands right now, there is no point in boarding another player unless they are in a hauler. There does need to be an incentive to surrender instead of scuttling yourself. However, Crew should not be limited. Crew should not be lost when sunk. The last thing I would want is to have to constantly recruit more crew every day just so I can go pvp. "You lose crew when you lose the ship (all durabilities)"I do not sail one dura boats anyways. So the whole crew as a resource would be useless unless you lost some every time you sunk. I propose an alternative: Create royal sailors. Royal sailors are limited. They can only be recruited by nationals. They cost a fortune. They are lost when you sink, even if you lose only 1 durability. They are stolen in boarding combat, but kept if surrendered. Royal sailors can be recruited only in nation owned ports using labor hours and money. They are tied to the captain like XP, however they can be sold/traded. Royal Sailors give a small bonus to the combat effectiveness of the boat. for example increase reload rate by 3%, yard turn by 2%, boarding prep gain by 2%, etc. Small bonuses, but big enough that people would want them for their "end game" boats. Boats can still be sailed with regular sailors.