admin Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 5 hours ago, Batman said: Nobody cares about your trincos. Never did. @NethrosDefectus maybe will explain what happened if he gets unbanned, lol. I hope he is taking his piano lessons seriously 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corona Lisa Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 11 minutes ago, jonnysweden said: Only an ignorant brit could say prussia, poland, denmark are unhistorical No Britain in these waters in 1500. Keep only Spain/France. Replace Britain with Pakistan, and Barbary Coasts u need to chill a bit boi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 1 hour ago, admin said: There is no player imbalance. Also british and pirates were 60% of the population on release (with 2500 online). Keep calm and rule the seas. I'm totally calm. If players switch nation and go somewhere else that's it. Nothing you can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neads O'Tune Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 Surely another issue is that there is NO nation loyalty what so ever in game anymore. Could anything me done to address this? I'm sure it's had an adverse affect on RvR. Your nation lost a valuable resource port? Do you rally the troops, storm the beaches and take it back? No you make an appointment at the appropriate embassy and get yourself a new citizenship. Rinse and repeat 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marquês do Bonfim Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 That's because nation doesn't play a big part in this game. Clans do. That's why nationwise, people don't care at all for those matters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neads O'Tune Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 1 hour ago, admin said: There is no player imbalance. Also british and pirates were 60% of the population on release (with 2500 online). Keep calm and rule the seas. But how many of those actually took part in "national interests" or (voluntary)PvP at all? Overall population numbers without context doesn't really mean anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percival Merewether Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 32 minutes ago, admin said: I hope he is taking his piano lessons seriously I know this is off topic of me but that is just brilliant 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thonys Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 3 hours ago, CITOYEN Julien said: Planned in 2119....😉 Huuh.... perhaps you made a typo mistake ? the one must be a zero..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neads O'Tune Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Thonys said: Huuh.... perhaps you made a typo mistake ? the one must be a zero..? Yes the second "1" right? 2109? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 11 hours ago, S. Bonnet said: Sir, that's the only sensible proposal in your post. There is no American nation, but the 13 colonies are subjects of His Majesty the King of Great Britain. The Americans are nothing more than a colorful mix of predominantly European immigrants at this time. Until now, they have not developed their own culture, unless you call hip hop and fast food as cultural achievements. / RP off Game time is 1700-1820, US was a nation in 1776. Prussia didn't have any influence during that time, it had a port for resupply in the 1600 for like 4 years, that is it. Russia never had anything in the area, Poland what got some troops stationed in Cuba. Tell me how those three have any reason to be in the area at all other to to kiss up to certain players from those nations to keep them in game when the Devs brougtht them? I honestly thought they where going to be test for new pirates mechanics and just for fun, not perm. IF they want those nations than make a EU ACTION game next. 10 hours ago, admin said: Prussia could build a couple of wapens and send it to Caribbean to trade and expand. Several German states HAD colonies in the Caribbean. Its a sandbox and Caribbean is just a map. Big historical nations have all the power to send all smaller nations back to Europe. Could but at this time they where not a navy power and there should be no reason for them to be in the area. Portugal has more reason to be in the area than those three nations other than to kiss up to some of you player base to keep them around. 10 hours ago, Intrepido said: And lose a lot of players in the process. Lose-lose situation for ALL the server. What players do we have to loose right now? 10 hours ago, Roronoa Sensei said: Like @AeRoTR said, i like the idea of a "Starter Nation". If making a starting nation is too much work, then what about every new Account gets one Forged Paper in redeemables? This way the new player can learn about the nation and switch nation, without deleting his character. If he wants to change nation again, he has to buy the DLC. Just an idea. Starter nations won't work cause folks will keep alts in those nations to do things and not get attacked. This is why you need safe zones for those that are leveling up and casuals that don't want to PvP 24/7. Just about every game out there has zones like this that have both PvP and PvE mixed. Why do folks have to force others to play there style? It never works, it only drives more players away. Instead you need to give safe zones for them and give them incentives to leave. Higher rewards only able to be gotten in PvP and out of safe zones. Only basic rewards in safe zones. 10 hours ago, Banished Privateer said: 1. We can try to set differences between nations. Just like we have French Refits, British Refits etc. there is close to 0 differences between nations, just their capital and zone. Same for the pirates, right now pirates are 100% same just like every other nation, ironically saying. Back when we had the perks for owning certain ports there was Pirates, French, British, and Spanish rig stuff, the problem was that other nations snagged them up and controlled them. I posted back than each nation could have there own perks. I would do this with the core nations to encourage more players to play them. Still think we have way to many nations even before we brought the three into the game. 4 hours ago, jonnysweden said: Only an ignorant brit could say prussia, poland, denmark are unhistorical Typical ************* edited out by mods No Britain in these waters in 1500. Keep only Spain/France. Replace Britain with Pakistan, and Barbary Coasts Time period is 1700-1820, there was not 1500.......But I do think we might as well add the Barbary Pirates...I'll join them over the normal pirates. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of Crowns Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 (edited) 12 hours ago, admin said: I am sorry but you are asking the game to do something for you that you can do yourself. you can remove the nations youself by using in game tools. Capture all the ports controlled by Prussia and many players might re-roll as they lose access to admiralties and life becomes a bit harder. see @admin gets it. he understands why we gank nations out of exsistance. he knows how to truly win at naval action. and the answer is to make everyone else quit the game. do that and you win. this has been WO strategy in every war.SO PLEASE REMOVE THE FRICKEN R ZONE SO WE CAN PUT AN END TO GB ONCE AND FOR ALL! BE CONSISTANT MAN! Edited February 20, 2019 by King of Crowns 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallsOfSteel Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 I thought we were testing it not killing it before release. Seems though PVP server is more likely Pr&ck V Pri#k. Long live PVE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 7 hours ago, admin said: Those pesky invaders You should file a complaint with the Admiralty or the house of lords. As a lord you already knew importance of colonies, so as other nations are slowly recognizing that. If you do not like other nations sending fleets to take your colonies you should maybe declare war on them? There are no unhistorical nations there are just unhistorical wars. Which COULD happen. We are not going to change the number of nations and the number of nations (impossible) will not go down and might tend to go up. I have heard Qing Dynasty roleplayers are extremely eager to take revenge on the GB under the dragon flag. Except they couldn't. Naval tactics, warfare and above all logistics was not created simply by sending a fleet to the carribeans.. For all intents and purposes a fleet sent to the carribean without adequate logistics would lose more than a third of it's sailors and marines, more for nations not accustumed to the diseases that could ravage far off colonies, and the fleet would be rendered inoperable in a matter of weeks due to lack of ressources that we today find readily available - like rope, tar, wood, masts, spars and ofc some pesky items like.... food. Without the support of shipyards, drydocks, stores, smiths and supplies the fleet would be as usefull as a ball and chain around the neck of a deep sea diver. Russia did not have the capacity to project large fleets across great distances, the pirates never existed as a nation, Prussia didn't even have a homefleet and disregarding the fact that Poland-Lithuania actually ceased to exist during this timeframe, they never had any fleet what so ever. In short - they are cartoon imaginary national fleets that could not, would not and never had any large scale military operations in the carribean. Where, may I ask, would the PL, Prussia or Russia build up the knowledge of tactics, logistics and infrastructure to support the fleets? The early colonisers like France, Britain and Spain had the advantage of settling the islands with the best natural harbours, the most fertile soil and the easiest defensible points of access. Even they didn't have any assurance of measurable success from large scale naval operations in the carribean untill the mid 18th century. Why did britain win the seven years war? - because it was the first nation to have an infrastructure in place in the carribean to ensure a sustained naval presence and thus successes in the area. As France, Spain, Denmark-Norway buildt up their logistics and infrastructure in the area Britain spent hundreds of thousands of pounds keeping an upper hand, not just in warships (the british homefleet always constituted the bulk of the british battlefleet) but in ports, docks, storages etc. What you're suggesting is that efforts that took the actual, historical colonial powers centuries to develop and hone, could be done by three upstart nations in a matter of months. It is folly. Did I mention one of them ceased to exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 29 minutes ago, Lars Kjaer said: Except they couldn't. Naval tactics, warfare and above all logistics was not created simply by sending a fleet to the carribeans.. Previously games were inserting only 3 nations into age of sail games (sometimes 4), we actually bothered to research the map and ask questions why Christiansted exists in the Virgin islands. We also wanted to get USA into the game right when we started development As for small nations. You can conquer the world as small nations in many historical games, THAT'S the purpose of the historical games - to re-live history or CHANGE history. The Rubicon has been already crossed in 2015 by addition of Denmark, Sweden and United States. We love community feedback, but its impossible to go to 3 nations for two reasons Reason 1. Many users do want their nation in game and want to sail their flag Reason 2. I like it. (but there is of course an option to have enforced alliances that will naturally reduce the nations) PS. On your They could not because logistics comment Even Brandenburg could https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_colonization_of_the_Americas Everyone arrives to the Caribbean in a basic cutter anyway. Its up to you to stop them from expanding. And here i will repeat our proposal. You will not remove them by typing on the forums If you do not like other nations - crush them, see them driven before you, hear the lamentation of their women in chat! 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 13 minutes ago, admin said: Previously games were inserting only 3 nations into age of sail games (sometimes 4), no-one previously even bothered to research the f***ing map and maybe ask questions why Christiansted exists in the Virgin islands . You can conquer the world as small nations in many historical games, THAT'S the purpose of the historical games - to re-live history or CHANGE history. The Rubicon has been already crossed in 2015 by addition of Denmark, Sweden and United States. We love community feedback, but its impossible to go to 3 nations for two reasons Reason 1. Many users do want their nation in game and want to sail their flag Reason 2. I like it. PS. On your They could not comment Even Brandenburg could https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_colonization_of_the_Americas Except "Krabbeninsel" was where Vieques is, and was only a reststop for tradeships - it didn't have the capacity to resupply warships. And it's a common misconception to denotate Brandenburg as the owner since some of the Hanseatic states were swallowed up during Brandenburgs ascension to what became Prussia, but it wasn't a Brandenburgian colony it was a Hanseatic colony.. And it stopped its operations after it was resettled to St. Thomas - in accordance with what I wrote. If you read the wiki page it actually states St.Thomas as a german colony which is objectively ahistorical and thus false. There is a huge difference between operating a colony and the capacity to project naval warfare. Many of the colonies didn't receive official visits from the owning nations more than once or twice a year, in the case of St. Croix (Christiansted island), it was originally a french colony and there were actually a brief colonial war between St. Thomas, St. Jan (danish colonies) and St. Croix in the 1670's due to St. Croix not receiving any ships from France for more than 3 years and supplies had effectively run out forcing the island to eventually settle into a trade deal with the danish colonies for vital supplies. Please don't let wikipedia be your only source of research. As to your first reason: Why not include China then? they atleast had a navy in the 15th century. Or Portugal, a great colonial power. Or Venice, likewise a great trade city and colonizer. Or the Ottomans, they actually had a naval force that for a while could compare with the western europeans. OR any other nation for that matter now that we've blatantly thrown any pretence of realism over the deckside. As to your second reason: Why do you like it? does it advance certain gameplay aspects? And if we are to throw historical reasoning and realism over the side, why then choose the carribean as the venue for our storytelling? - The area is probably the least suited for gameplay in the entirety of the globe. Polynesia would've been a better choice in terms of pure gameplay. Or, since realism no longer matters, why not make a fictive map? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo69rus Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 22 minutes ago, admin said: If you do not like other nations - crush them, see them driven before you, hear the lamentation of their women in chat! they can't it they are on the forum 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIONOFWALES Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Yes having more nations is good because of variety. The smaller nations tend to attract mavericks and hoodlums, but in the end there seems to nearly always be some sort of organized play going on. Having the smaller nations allows players to find a nitch. And of course... it is pretty cool being able to sail under your own nations flag, or a historical relic flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manbot Posted February 20, 2019 Author Share Posted February 20, 2019 hey guys when i started this discussion i wasn't implying the removal of unhistorical nations for the sake historical accuracy, i dont mind bending the rules to have some fun- what i see tho is some nations (like RUSSIA) having a good player base and they could be left as the "colonial fleet" with no hub for player who wish to play that kind of game. but other nations especially Poland and the Dutch have very low player base and while i respect that the devs dont want to force them to change why no consolidate all these players in one nation? Further i think to spice things up their should be a balanced difference between the nations- playing as pirates should not be the same as playing as GB- and each nation should have their own "flag" ship which other nations cannot craft but either buy in free ports or capture in battle. this means if i play as Britain i wont have the same experience when playing as pirate snd ect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njord Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 9 hours ago, admin said: Keep calm and rule the seas. I don't even mind the GB zerg ruling the server as it is historically somewhat accurate, I just wish the smaller nations had some incentive to fight the empire instead of simply joining it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhelm von Seydlitz Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 15 hours ago, troody said: the well known historic superpower in the carribean sea Danmark, Sweden, Polen , Russia , USA and Pirates are the historic superpower in Caribbean ?? LOL Remove all nations and leave only Spain, France and England !!! This is perfect for the ..... who make more and more senseless suggestions here..... I'm done and tired of the test will come back after the release, 800 hours are enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troody Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 can someone teach some ppl how to detect irony....? 🤦♂️ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 2 hours ago, Lars Kjaer said: There is a huge difference between operating a colony and the capacity to project naval warfare. Many of the colonies didn't receive official visits from the owning nations more than once or twice a year, in the case of St. Croix (Christiansted island), it was originally a french colony and there were actually a brief colonial war between St. Thomas, St. Jan (danish colonies) and St. Croix in the 1670's due to St. Croix not receiving any ships from France for more than 3 years and supplies had effectively run out forcing the island to eventually settle into a trade deal with the danish colonies for vital supplies. Please don't let wikipedia be your only source of research. This is a game and the only map is the Caribbean. This is the world. Nations and players build logistics for themselves. A player comes into caribbean and buys and apple for 1 real Then he sells it for 2 reals in a hub Then he buys 2 apples Then 4 Then he robs a trader brig and gets 5600 doubloons … And so it goes. I do not see how historical supply routes are relevant to the game we are playing. You sail what you make or capture. You own land if you captured it. 2 hours ago, Lars Kjaer said: now that we've blatantly thrown any pretence of realism over the deckside. This statement would be relevant for Caribbean in 1753 History channel tv series. Not for the game. Historical alliances and agreements have no relevance to the game we are playing. In 1814 after Battle of paris the french given the key to Paris to the Russian Tsar and Prussian King. Yet both Prussia and Russia did not go for the French colonies and (for example taking over the french fleets as reparations). In the game the choices are made by the player. In reality Prussia did not care much about the caribbean, and focused more on Africa. In the game there is no africa. Players go for what they can go for. Given things described above (sandbox where historical nations fight for a certain piece of land - in our case caribbean) and knowing that all nations are in permanent war - your comment is flawed. Because there are no a-historical nations present in the game and all could (if they tried hard) to fight for land available for them. The only questions on the table that are relevant are the followingLess vs More Less nations = better rvr, but less pvp (less targets) More nations = harder rvr for some, but a lot more pvp. Merging nations into alliances were tried and the problem remained - there will be 1-2 large alliances and one weak alliances. Players tend to unite and gang up on the weak. So we think that more nations is better, because there is always a choice available to be against all. 3 alliances will remove this option. But as many said here: its the game - we must think for the game first history second. Thats why Russia/Prussia/Poland was added. They increased the fluidity of the map and helped test that nations can live without non-capturable ports. Qing Dynasty Question If china is added and allowed - then all large naval nations (who at least are on the top buyers lists) could be allowed. But only china will change the dynamics. Turkey is not even on top 30 countries by sales. Barbary coast will take some players from pirates but it will be a minor force. Portugal will be a very low population nation. Without china the balance will always be 60-70% to GB/Pirates: 60% of players will sail for pirates and Britain. It was like that in POTBS and it will always be this way in age of sail games. With China - the main force by population will be Qing Empire. It will be great for pvp/rvr (great for the game and conflict) but for some players it will reduce immersion. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 14 minutes ago, admin said: Qing Dynasty If china is added and allowed If you really do this, you also have to introduce at least a Dragon Boat and a Junk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 To sum up. If the desire and benefits to create larger blocks will overcome everything else The potential solution in the future will be to have 3 Coalitions. Yet when starting to write the coalition compositions they all break down because we KNOW many players will want to sail under their historical flag AND will not want to be in a coalition with a forced country Example USA/France/Spain/Portugal? Sweden/Norway/Denmark/Poland? Prussia/Austria/Russia/Dutch? Britain +? Barbary coast/Turkey/Venice? East India Coalition (Qing Dynasty, Japan, Mogols,?) Pirates We are still ending up with 5-6 blocks anyway, and if we go above 3 it becomes irrelevant how many we have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 31 minutes ago, admin said: The potential solution in the future will be to have 3 Coalitions. Bishops, Knights, and Rooks 😁 ( @jodgi ) 1 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