LeBoiteux

I guess shutting down the PvE server is an economical decision made to save money. On the other hand, doing so is an another decision making PvE much less fun, the others being delaying the implementation of AI aggressiveness and the overhaul of a smarter AI. The ability to explore the OW was part of the fun of the PvE experience. PvE zones make the experience dull, making them just training centers for wannabe PvPers. IMHO a better idea would have been to implement Exploration gameplay in the wide world of the PvE server to make that experience special. Too bad. Unfortunately, shutting down the PvE server is another step in a direction you've chosen and assumed on NA forum : neglecting PvE. because PvP, ie playing with human beings, without the risk of physical damage, sailing pixel ships in a chair in front of computer screen is historical ?

Some PvE players like playing alone, other in group. Thus a simple option (or a perk) about OW PvE instances you could tick in port would address that issue. It would allow (or not) friendly players to join your side in a PvE instance after you tag a bot (or a bot fleet) in OW. That ability to tick for friendly support currently exists with fleet missions. Btw that option could be useful, especially if the current system of missions is meant to disappear. Diversity of options is better IMHO.

@ Surcouf : +9999...9 What else ?

On peut quand même compter le server Testbed (qui a été patché) pour un patch, celui de Février (?), non ? Ca a nécessité du taf... Je dis ça mais je ne suis pas payé par les devs et je ne suis pas sur le Testbed et j'aurais préféré un p'tit patch classique (ou deux ou...).

Another simple option that's already been suggested is to let players pick up their ship names among the historical names of a database, and nothing else. Hundreds, thousands of real ship names are known from any nation. The database could be established once and for all by dedicated players, mods or the devs. The system could allow duplications of name or... not.

That so-called French bias against the techniques of the Venetian Navy in French reports is an unverifiable hypothesis. It's not because one dislikes his enemy (that's quite common, isn't it ?) that one denigrates his armament. Moreover, those French reports weren't meant to be distributed but were internal documentation for the French Navy, weren't they ? Thus, they weren't part of a "campaign of propaganda dismissing everything that Venice produced" but part of industrial spying to improve French plans. Your argument, especially about Napoleon's motives, sounds quite passionate and... very subjective. (btw Napoleon legalized brothels in France in 1804)

That alleged smear campaign against the building techniques of the Venetian Navy by France sounds very much like a Conspiracy theory

Add a new game mode Admin once called "Naval Officer Career" for those who just want to fight without having to craft, sell or buy ships ; in addition to the current gameplay one could call a "Privateer Career" in which you have to buy, craft or capture the ship you want to sail with :

It was "18-C" for "18th century"

Une déclinaison possible des missions actuelles, c'est d'en faire : un mode de jeu rapide pour les casuals, un tutoriel / centre d'entrainement pour les débutants, un endroit pour tester un navire qu'on ne connait pas (très utile quand on débute et qu'on ne sait pas quel nouveau navire acquérir ou quand sort un nouveau navire) Pour tout cela, on conserve la structure des missions actuelles et on ne change que les récompenses et les risques : 0 XP / gold gagné Pas de perte de navire, ni réparation Le navire est fourni, au choix du joueur, à chaque début de mission. Evidemment, le joueur ne conserve pas ce navire après. C'est un mode PvE de batailles rapides et fermées. Ca peut plaire aux casuals sans rien enlever aux hardcore gamers. Un casual ou un débutant peut tâter du 1er Rang sans risque pour lui et sans conséquence pour les joueurs dans l'OW.

Surcouf... qu'est-ce qu'on fait avec des plans ? Hein ? (Je fais les gros yeux) On construit des navires et on navigue dessus... PS : je sais que tu n'as pas le jeu. C'est pour ça que tu poses la question. Dans NA, on peut crafter (fabriquer) des navires à partir du moment où on a les plans (logique...). A partir de là, on peut vendre, donner, naviguer sur ces navires. Sans ces plans ou sans acheter ou recevoir de gentils collègues ces navires, on ne peut pas naviguer dessus.

Thx for that long reply !! In fact, the plan might be as well : a abandonned project for the Venetian Navy a first draft of a 18-C Corvette before finalisation a plan from a published compilation of works, not necessary of built ships or a plan for a customer country, right ? About the gun "situated at the very rear of the quarterdeck", isn't it the lateral window (above a balcony) of the sculpted stern ?

Is there the prevalence of 1st-3rd Rate ships ? I don't know. To me, any player should be able to sail the ship he wants to play with. Having fun is the basis of any game... However, you want fewer 1st-3rd Rate ships in NA ? Don't take unfair steps that favour hardcore gamers over casual gamers, such as cost barriers (crafting hours/ressources), one-duras, upkeep costs, restricted access to BP given to clans... A gameplay has to inspire fun and desire to play with to all, not the contrary. Instead, make 6th-4th Rates more desirable : increase the variety of 6th-4th Rates in game by implementing new ones make 1st-3rd Rate ships slower, less manoeuvrable, less lethal, ie. less exciting

I am indeed very interested by your finding. How did you succeed in identifying that plan as Monton d'Oro ? That plan shows no name. Did you find another similar plan with the name Monton ? Does Antonio Nadale, who drew that plan, mention the name in the text of his book ? You describe the Monton as a 24-gun Corvette. The current plan shows less than 24 guns (maybe max 2x9 guns + 2x2 on the quarterdeck, ie max 22 guns, maybe 20), doesn't it ? The plan is part of a book written by Nadale, Notizie 1729-1773. Would the Monton d'Oro, built in 1688 and destroyed in 1691, be part of it ? The plan is described as that of a "Fregata Leggera, 1701-1800". Shouldn't the Monton d'Oro as a 24-gun ship build in late 17-C be called a (light) frigate ? Looking forward to information in your reply

A priori le Pacifique ne sera pas ouvert. Malheureusement. Quand à de l'explo, rien pour l'instant.

And the shipyard forum might be renamed "Shipyard (1780-1820)" + a pinned thread should warn posters about the timeline and makes them know about the history section for later ships.

NA timeline : 1680-1820 That ship built in 1832 has to be in the History section as other build after 1820 actually are.

Exploration would have been a great feature requested by some for a very long time (see the many threads) that has sadly little or no chance of being implemented in NA (see devs' feedback)

For comparison : - Most French light frigates from early-18-C were 6-pdr frigates and would have carried 20 x 6-pdr + 10 x 4-pdr - Most French 9-prd frigates have been built only from the middle of the 18-C

+1. Very nice ship !!! 32 x 18-pdr ? Are you sure about the armament ? Shouldn't a 1715 light frigate carry : 20 x 6-pdr + 10 x 4-pdr or 30 x 6-pdr or max. 20 x 9-pdr + 10 x 6-pdr ?

New features : 1) Add AI aggressiveness : warship bots being able to attack players. 2) Add a Perk to enable or disable AI aggressiveness. 3) Make AI smarter : being able to chase, demast, coordinate an attack in group... 4) Add procedurally-generated islands in the Pacific that'd be periodically changed for Exploration. Modifications : 1) Make PvE missions a new game mode with no ship loss and no XP/gold reward for casual gamers and training newcomers (kind of tutorial). 2) Populate the OW in the PvE server with more bots, more shipwrecks, more bottles, more anything such as Environmental dangers (storm, sandbanks, fog...). 3) Make a French version of ingame HMS Surprise with 24x9-pdr + 6x6-pdr (no front barricades) and call her L'Unité.

You'll also make OW sailing more immersive by adding dangers in the broad sense in the OW (climatic ones such as fog, navigational ones, enemies...).

Subject discussed here (in 2014/15) : It would have been great...

When discussing about the OW design months/years ago (dec. 2014 ?) before its implementation, the ideas of a fantasy/unrealistic/unknown OW and an associated exploration gameplay were proposed by NA devs and (sadly) rejected...

Missions are indeed boring, a grinding tool that killed the spirit of the game : hunting in the OW. But missions had one major benefit : to quickly and easily give a (casual) player in a hurry a prey (as a PvE arena mode would) while the OW has always been quite empty and boring as it took a while before finding a prey in it and AFK sailing to and from port and AI was unaggressive. Some bots will attack players (as stated in OP). Great. That's one big step in the good direction to make the PvE OW more interesting/funnier. What about keeping the PvE missions as a training tool for newcomers and a quick game mode for casual gamers ? No XP/Gold reward and no ship loss. Reduced distance to the target. Just plain PvE fights ? By "cheating AI", I really hope that you mean an unskilled AI that'd let you win too easily...