Ignatius Magnus Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Dear dev team, Have you considered having two -distant- capital ports per faction? It could help to open the RvR possibilities, worth testing? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William the Drake Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Some factions would be pretty easy/obvious: Spain: San Juan + Havana Britain: Kingston + Barbados France: Fort Royal + Leogane (Or New Orleans?) After that I think it gets a bit iffy, only because the remaining nations are very isolated (historically speaking as well as from initial port assignments) For example, even for America which isn't the smallest faction, what would be a suitable 2nd Capitol if they only have the upper East coast of North America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Cornelius Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 It would be very nice if at some point the map was expanded to include the northeastern US and Canadian approaches. During the time frame there was significant action there - and Halifax would be a far more obvious British secondary capitol (and Boston for the US). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chromey Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 hopefully make it so factoins can spend alot of money to upgrade and add towers and forts to certain ports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptVonGunn Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Maybe just make the Regional Capitals work that same as Capitals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrez Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Make Regional Capitals unconquerable. To have an save Eco spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Make Regional Capitals unconquerable. To have an save Eco spot. That would completely break RvR, Not having a safe ECO spot is a feature ^^' As for second capital... why? Why? The only difference between normal and capital town is the safe area and uncapturableness... which doesn't make sense to transfer to a second town. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Eliminate Capital as we know it. Make it unconquerable BUT also blocked to any building types. Transform it simply into a symbol. Introduce Home Port, each player selects own ports and "teleport to capital" gets replaced to "teleport to home port". Make Regional Capitals the Naval Bases / Shipyards Other ports as main resource production and lower rates shipyards Only do this after the new PB mechanics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrez Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) We need save Eco spots to maintain Shipbuilding otherwise we are pushed to use basic ships from shop. Since Patch capturing ships is no option. Edited April 15, 2016 by Shrez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileus Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 We need save Eco spots otherwise we are pushed to use basic ships from shop. No, you are not... you are pushed to actually protect your eco spots to make them safe eco spots. The better organized your navy, the more safespots you get. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 We need save Eco spots to maintain Shipbuilding otherwise we are pushed to use basic ships from shop. Since Patch capturing ships is no option. Last evening the combats I was present ended in 2 captured ships from players. So capturing ships is an option. On PvE server I guess there is little need or problem with shipbuilding overall. But sure... give PvE server the love needed, just leave PvP the way it is at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius Magnus Posted April 18, 2016 Author Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Some factions would be pretty easy/obvious: Spain: San Juan + Havana Britain: Kingston + Barbados France: Fort Royal + Leogane (Or New Orleans?) After that I think it gets a bit iffy, only because the remaining nations are very isolated (historically speaking as well as from initial port assignments) For example, even for America which isn't the smallest faction, what would be a suitable 2nd Capitol if they only have the upper East coast of North America? Yes, I agree it would require to stretch the historic setting in those other cases. I think the Dutch could have some port around Nassau. Pirates are no problem, they can be near Curaçao or wherever. Danes and Swedes have no historical candidates, but seeing that Haiti is Denmark already, historical accuracy has only limited relevance in the game. The reason for this suggestion was map balance in a strategic-gameplay sense. The other day I was looking at the EU PVP1 map, my thoughts were : Factions that live cornered in the SE, too close to each other, like the genius in the lamp, a lot of potential inside a tiny place to live. USA up there to the NW with one or two fronts. Gulf of Mexico a desert (not the kind you eat last). GB right in the middle, for the good -> a lot of options, can expand in any direction. And for the bad -> too many fronts become stressful quite fast. Spain surrounded by the 3 most powerful factions, isolated from smaller factions. Diplomacy coming down to a stall as factions find their place. So the raw idea was: Set two distant capitals (the examples proposed above are nice, for the Spanish faction I would prefer Cartagena de Indias rather than San Juan but that is personal taste & another topic). Allow player teleport between them. Only players, not ships, neither goods. With a short cooldown (15m). The Caribbean is big and lives a lot of people in it, so we need people in ports, and especially in capital ports, none should enjoy empty ports. Having two Capitals could bring more alternatives for diplo and expansion, which might improve the strategic part of the game. Every faction would potentially have meaningful diplo relations with most other factions. Bringing new allegiances and wars. The map population would distribute and balance better. Now there are some notable underpopulated gaps, and some cluttered areas as well. Expansion options would multiply and peace/war cycles could turn around more dynamically. It would have other effects, be good or bad. For instance a second capital would act as a escape valve when the other one is under siege by the enemy, giving starters some options. I am curious to see how this would play out, and it looked simple enough to implement and test. We could see any downsides that way. Edited April 18, 2016 by Ignatius Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson09 Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) This would lead to a "mess". One capital is needed as a safe trading hub for beginners, therby lowering prices. Small factions won´t gain. major downside: another 8 ports being added, which cannot be captured... As you could imagine, I am a die hard supporter of the vassall colony game concept to solve RvR-issues.... http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13343-conquest-mechanics-diplomacy-vassal-states/ Edited April 18, 2016 by Wilson09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babble Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 already suggested this section 4 http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/12696-the-road-map-table-of-contents/?hl=roadmap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now