Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Nation anihilation


Recommended Posts

Is it possible to suffer (due to the way the server works)18 battles from the other 6 nations at the same hour and loose the hard work of weeks or months in a couple of hours????. It looks that the mechanics of the game allow this kind of gameplay, of course many players could have the urge to abandon the game in this context (unless the have huge numbers in the server and be able to defend them all) 

I want to think this was not intended by the Dev`s and a simple limitation in the number of port battles that can receive a nation during a day shoul fix the problem very easily, otherwise a nation (any nation) can be wiped out from the map in a couple of days. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The content of this game is created by players. Noone would do such a planned annihilation, because it does not benefit anyone. It's not fun for the attackers, to take empty ports, most of us play for fun, and there is no fun in crushing someone much weaker. It's not good for the game if people leave it, and players do understand that. There used to be coalition wars in the past, but from my experience, the attackers always did stop the pressure at a point, where further offensive actions would damage the defender's community. All of the nations' leaders, do care about the balance of power in the game, and I couldn't imagine that anyone would let this kind of things happen.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not about piss or not piss any other nation, i am not writing about España, i am writing about the game´s mechanics, of course España cannot defend every zone that was given to us at the beggining of the game and of course we know better than anyone our numbers. Read carefully the post and you will understand it ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point..  but basically what you describe would imply that the other nation has enough players to fight those battles too

and why should spain for example join a crusade against ...   sweden or france or denmark?

It all depends on which nations you have near you and which ports could be interesting.

 

The attacking nations would need to get the ships for 18 portbattles too
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 ports attacked against same nation in the same day is not sustainable unless Dev's are "currently" allowing that mechanic purposely in order to aim for territory ownership balance in the map. 

If it's the case, we'll end up with the logic "most populated nation = biggest land control" , at that time, the biggest nation with its possible allies, will be able to destroy a smaller nation quite easily.

Let's hope we'll be reasonable regarding balanced alliances...

or Dev's will have to implement some restrictions in a future patch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see a problem here. You are describing a situation where multiple nations join up in purpose against only one nation. This is currently not the case, and even in the future i don't see that happening. Even if it would happen, that means that the other nations which do not border your territory, must to sail a LOT before they are able to gain hostility, fight the PB, etc.
 

The only reason you have a lot of PB's now is because you are spread out too much as a nation. Define which territories you will want to hold, to defend, which are better defended than other, which have the needed resources, and focus on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2017 at 3:27 AM, Morfin van der Wendel said:

The content of this game is created by players. Noone would do such a planned annihilation, because it does not benefit anyone. It's not fun for the attackers, to take empty ports, most of us play for fun, and there is no fun in crushing someone much weaker. It's not good for the game if people leave it, and players do understand that. There used to be coalition wars in the past, but from my experience, the attackers always did stop the pressure at a point, where further offensive actions would damage the defender's community. All of the nations' leaders, do care about the balance of power in the game, and I couldn't imagine that anyone would let this kind of things happen.

I remember something different last year. Players just don't care about others. France, netherland, sweden, USA. They got all wiped. Just have a look at monk33y's troll comment. Bs business as usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017. 06. 04. at 9:53 PM, monk33y said:

Bookmark this post! In a few months when gb's last 6 ports are under daily attack on eu server, we will see demands for the Devs to fix the game. Mark my words!

Months? weeks ! The DAILY CM gift from devs. is a huge mistake in my opinion. and generate fake PB-s, farming CM"s .

Edited by hiclipucli
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hiclipucli said:

Months? weeks ! The DAILY CM gift from devs. is a huge mistake in my opinion. and generate fake PB-s, farming CM"s .

Its a very ahistorical scenario to be honest these conquest marks. What do you think spain would actualy have done if spain (just an example) has the biggest fleet in the carribean, they wouldn't be sending more SoL's.

Instead the admiralty of the smallest fleet would be writing home to ask for reinforcements. Now those who have nearly no fleet get nearly no extra fleet, and the biggest fleet is just pumping out SoL's like there is no tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With the production costs the same for everyone. Clans are still having to pump funds in (reducing personal wealth), to get the bigger ships. At the end of the day with 1 dura, I'm surprised you don't see more capping fleets with a mixture of ships...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/06/2017 at 11:15 AM, Celtiberofrog said:

7 ports attacked against same nation in the same day is not sustainable unless Dev's are "currently" allowing that mechanic purposely in order to aim for territory ownership balance in the map. 

If it's the case, we'll end up with the logic "most populated nation = biggest land control" , at that time, the biggest nation with its possible allies, will be able to destroy a smaller nation quite easily.

Let's hope we'll be reasonable regarding balanced alliances...

or Dev's will have to implement some restrictions in a future patch.

 It seems you don't remember when your "Eastern Alliance" attacked 7 british ports in the same day. In those times was sustainable? Maybe it was... your Alliance lost all 7 PB's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Spud said:

Its a very ahistorical scenario to be honest these conquest marks. What do you think spain would actualy have done if spain (just an example) has the biggest fleet in the carribean, they wouldn't be sending more SoL's.

Instead the admiralty of the smallest fleet would be writing home to ask for reinforcements. Now those who have nearly no fleet get nearly no extra fleet, and the biggest fleet is just pumping out SoL's like there is no tomorrow.

They would, but what would they have got back? A sloop or two, perhaps a light Frigate. Britain, France and Spain did not have ships to spare for operations in the Caribbean, they were all tied up, Toulouse and Cadiz and most other ports were under continuous blockade, Aside from the battles that secured the Caribbean the only time the French and Spanish main fleet came close to the Caribbean was when Admiral Villeneuve broke the blockade dragging Nelson and his fleet across the Atlantic and back prior to Trafalgar. In the circumstances who could blame the small Nations, even America from taking their share of the spoils wherever they can from the hard pressed Empire Nations? 

In game there is no 'political' reason for fighting, no real incentive for a sustained conflict, few nations actually have anything the other nations would find worth fighting for, trade is all but impossible the way things are at present, so no trade wars, there are a few resources that are scarce and in theory Nations would contest those which makes for a limited battle area in a large body of water. Fighting because you can gets very old very fast!  Give the Nations something actually worth fighting for, worth attacking or defending ports for, then stand back, if it is truly worth it, even the smallest Nations will find innovative ways to take from others or keep what is theirs! Equally there is nothing stopping the small Nations co-operating in such ventures until it suits them otherwise, the bigger Nations can look to their own interests as long as they are not foolish enough to over expand.

Pirates need a reason for being, something to risk their ships for aside from the thrill of the chase and a good fight, no Pirate would go after escorted ships unless they knew the prize was worth the risks involved, they would often know what ships carried high value cargos, and generally whose warships were operating where. I think a lot of pirates would sell their grandmothers for that one ship that made them rich,  they would fight anyone for the chance to take that one ship, Edward Teach never had a shred of loyalty to anyone but himself, other Pirates were equally ruthless. A few such high value ships would give Pirates greater incentive to take on the world, band together if the ships were escorted, and of course the devil take the hindmost once the prize was theirs, why share such wealth?, It would not be long before the Nations take an unhealthy interest in the activities of the Pirates, which could of course affect their other interests especially if those cargos affect their ability to conduct their wars, How long would the Nations tolerate the loss of gold or supplies destined for the prosecution of their wars?. How long would they tolerate such supplies being resold to their enemies?

Aside from somewhere to operate from they had no interest in taking land nor the means to hold it if they did, at last resort they can operate from Freetown's if necessary, as they already do from La Navasse and every Nation knows there is no way of stopping them from doing so. Should the Pirate clans unite to recover their lost ports, the Nations would find it difficult to stop them, given that Pirates are in theory, if not fact, masters of small ship fighting and National Captains mostly want the big, prestigious ships of the line, two completely incompatible doctrines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cabral said:

 It seems you don't remember when your "Eastern Alliance" attacked 7 british ports in the same day. In those times was sustainable? Maybe it was... your Alliance lost all 7 PB's.

Precisely, Brits were the most populated and they managed to defend (control) victoriously.

Nevertheless, today we may emphasize on the fact that as one day attacks are limited to 3 max, there should reasonably exist some restrictions for one day max defences. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...