Elmarby

I cannot readily think of an idea more ill conceived than this. It will invite the larger nations to just snowball out of control. As one nation bites the dust, the nation apparently already pretty powerful enough to pull off such a feat will be made MORE powerful. Gameplay wise that is very short sighted. And worst of all force people to co-operate with rivals they've been fighting for months on end, often without any feigned animosity. DO NOT DO THIS!

And how is surrendering after 2-3 broadsides adding to the fun? PS Please do not tell me what I have and have not read.

If you do this, and I hope you water this down some instead, you HAVE to reduce crew costs. Getting in to any fight would be ridiculously costly and would get in the way of players actually going out and having fun.

The promise is already made so it might be hard to go back on the excessive and potentially crafter damaging offer now, but I would have recommended the HMS Hermione in its stead. After all, that ship does have a history of being turned over to people who had no hand in building or capturing the ship.

New UI in September? Hah! I'll believe that when I see it.

Except of course it is very bare bones implementation which does nothing to simulate anything approaching what a real captain was faced with. Or rather, his purser because it was such laborious and dull work that someone else got to do it. And you want us to take it on? Oh joy! What fun! And all that for features not needed because the sailing habits of a NA player is nothing like what a real captain might face in the first place. When was the last time you spent more then a week at sea? So we are saddled with this "system" to deal with the logistics of our typical 2-3 day trips? Highly unnecessary. And as for your last sentence... absolutely lamentable. Would you like a similar admonishment for your comment that lacked the bare minimum of insight? It is better not to say anything indeed!

This adds nothing to fun nor does it simulate anything that needs simulating. So why bother?

Seems to me that your idea on zones of control are much more complicated then what they need to be. The erratic nature of frontlines will make it a headache to program something that will give a consistently fair representation of the frontier. And much of that extra effort is to have a ZoC in bits of sea where the likelihood of help is slim in the first place. I think just a simple zone of control of a certain radius around each town, as was already implemented with the reinforcement system, is almost as effective in doing justice to the concept of towns and their shipping exercising a certain level of control over the surrounding seas. I believe it also has the merit of being more easily understandable for the player. As for your idea of giving a bonus to an intruder, I am not convinced either. While it has some merit as a gameplay device, I see no rational behind it from a realism/imersion standpoint. The intruder chooses to be in enemy waters, why should that be automatically be given greater reward? Where is the extra money of beating a ship inside of a ZoC as compared to outside a ZoC coming from? Ultimately, operating in an area controlled by the enemy should be dangerous and should provide its own naturally occurring reward: that of traders going to and fro, ready to be intercepted. The other day a Dutchman bagged a fully laden LGV. THAT is the reward for entering an enemy territory, and I do not believe the game needs any additional stimulus then that

I don't see why this needs to be the case. Not all types of battles drag surrounding fleets/ships in. This type of behaviour can be applied to any battle such "guard dog" fleet initiates.

The current situation is quite unsatisfactory. You now have enemies sit in the safezone waiting for a captain to sail out of the zone and not notice him. Logging in and out there to facilitate doing so unseen, etc. all in perfect safety. This needs to be addressed and hopefully it will be done quick as it is quite an exploit. I like the suggestion of sending in the AI fleets after these exploiting clowns as at least a makeshift fix.

Cannot access that link. Which may be why I did not see a similar suggestion. Because I TOTALLY looked for them before I posted my suggestion. Yes-sirree, I totally did that. *makes innocent face*

With the reinforcement zones currently disabled, maybe it is a good idea to suggest an alternative. With the current BR 1.5 max difference limit on joining battle, would it be a good idea to replace the reinforcement zones with zones that waive this limit for the side that fights inside their own reinforcement zone? So a fight in Dutch waters could see Dutch reinforcements unrestricted while still restricting the intruder to the original limit established by the start of the fight. This still gives home ground advantage without magicking reinforcements out of thin air. I think this would be a fair compromise. If you are in someone's home waters one should expect and do deserve to be outnumbered if the owning nation can send ships in the area to that fight. Perhaps fights in his zone could also have a slightly extended join time, but that is not an essential addition to my suggestion. Thoughts?

With the recent change of the admiralty taking your captures, there seems to be next to no incentive to capture PVE ships any more. It's much less hassle and earns good money to just blast them to pieces. I honestly cannot think of any reason why I would want to go through the trouble of capturing a ship after today. I therefore have two proposals: -Allow players to scavenge the ship for parts directly after capture, destoying the ship in the process. Allowing them to haul as much useful crafting components off the ship will be a nice boon. It is historically defensible as ships were occasionally burned if the prize taker did not think sending a prize crew away was a good plan. -Have a significantly increased drop rate for upgrade modules for each ship a player captures . This would incentive capturing and help out those of us that have never seen decent powder monkeys.

I can't access the ingame chat and I would like to know why I was restricted. Ingame nickname: ''Elmarby" Was playing a PvE mission by myself when I got disconnected momentarily. Logged back in and few moments later a message popped up. Couldn't read it fully as it quickly disappeared as I was clicking just as it appeared but it said chat ban. And sure enough, I was banned. Which was a bit of a surprise as I hadn't used chat the entire day. Nor would I consider myself a toxic player. Clarification and, if warranted, a nullification of the ban, would be appreciated. Thanks!

The king hasn't so much returned as been forced by the patch not to use scummy exploits to remain invisible.