Henry d'Esterre Darby

I can't say yes or no to that question at this time (the moderators don't know the answer to that question). I think the results of this first Kickstarter will be used to establish the answer to that question.

Doesn't matter. Either way, you have to pay someone to generate new ships. It costs money. The kickstarter will allow people to put their money where their mouth is. If they really want a ship (or certain ships of a nation) badly enough, they can pay to have those ships added to the game. GL doesn't have to rely on new sales to fund new ship development, and they don't have to sweat paying modelers for ships that may not generate new revenue in game sales. With regards to Constitution - you have a complete, working ship in the game. Maybe its model isn't as good as some of the later ships, but that's it. It's in the game and working fine. If you want a more snazzy Connie, then enough people will have to be willing to plonk down some money for her. There's no harm in everyone saying "no" and not paying for it - but Connie is already in game as promised. Promise made, promise kept.

I have updated the title. As always, please limit responses only to providing additional factual evidence, or a rebuttal by the accused parties.

Interesting. Thanks for sending the bug report - the Devs will definitely be taking a look.

My job on these forums, as I've explained in the past, is to enforce the rules. The rule is - flat out - chat violations are to be reported via the in-game report system, NOT on Tribunal. Ink has posted himself today in response to a Chat-based Tribunal thread this very statement. This is not negotiable.

This is still considered swearing. Just don't use those words when addressing your fellow Captains, it's that easy.

This incident is under review by the Admiralty. Further evidence or a rebuttal/apology by the accused should be the only posts in this thread. Warnings will be issued for spam/off topic posts. Thank you.

Thank you for your patience. While I know there were a number of incidents with this player, he has since discussed his actions with the Admiralty and apologized. We have heard of no additional wrongdoing since then, case is dismissed.

I'll add that having diagrammed the wind and boat positions out, it is very possible for him to go backwards at that angle. It appears to me that his sails are backed, that's how he went backwards - it's something anyone can do with manual sails with the wind at the correct angle.

I can pretty much guarantee he wasn't cheating. But until we can communicate better with you, it's hard to explain how things work.

n_Ka - is there another language that you speak that might allow us to help you better? We're having a very difficult time figuring out what you're saying.

The only way people get chat violations reported and acted upon is to use the in-game report feature. Specifically due to Photoshop and other troll tricks. Ink is asking you about specifics so he can check the in-game reporting system. Please answer his question and stop trolling this thread. Thank you.

Welcome! Good hunting folks.

Video of Happy9786's behavior was located (in another thread - please make sure to link all evidence in the same thread!), this is also under review.

We need more than "someone did something". Please post proof of your allegations in the form of video or screenshots of the actual activity. If no admissible evidence is submitted in 24 hours, case will be dismissed.

Investigation into this matter is ongoing. Please be patient. Thank you.

Based on an analysis conducted by the Admiralty, the following finding regarding intentional interference by an Alt has been made: Neither Merovingian nor Happy9768 show noticeable evidence of being alts. Merovingian's account shows adequate evidence of being used and played since creation in a normal manner. Further, there is no evidence that accusations that Happy9768 is an alt of North. Happy9768 looks like it may be a legitimate new account - a player that doesn't know how everything works yet. A video was mentioned, but I do not see a link to it. Allegations that Happy9768 may have operated his vessel in a way that hindered friendly forces in the fight can not be proven/disproven. The next person to sail with Happy might be best advised to take him/her under their wing and show them the ropes/how things work in order to make them an asset to their nation. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

You can also select "Send Crash Report" the next time you restart the game in steam after you've crashed (once you go back to playing, the data is lost). This helps a lot.

I wonder if the "autoscaled" AI forces are at a lower overall experience/competence level (e.g. comprised more of rookies and lower skilled commanders) if you're beating them severely each round? If not, that might be a good way to keep the current "extra" numbers system while still rewarding players who are carefully husbanding their forces.

You can select the unit, then right click the icon on the field for the defensive position to tell the unit to man that that position. The icon is usually a silver shield.

I'll have to try that Fellvred - thanks!

This is not an official response, but Game Labs has been supportive of people streaming their other early access title, Naval Action. Considering there were no apparent NDAs signed as part of early access, I think you're fine to stream.

Are you absolutely sure you're logging back in to the same server you were playing on previously? Try checking the other servers in the list - are all of your assets present on a different server than you were expecting?

Everything on Steam goes through a cycle when you're getting ready to put up a game. While I don't have a solid answer for you, it wouldn't surprise me if the game drops off the released soon category just prior to becoming available. Keep an eye out and hopefully we'll see it soon - we'd all like to get in there and play it.

Alts are allowed, they are even allowed to spy as long as they don't openly admit they are doing so. There has been no usable evidence presented that any wrongdoing has occurred. Case dismissed.