Alliances discussion + Poll

[Lancelot Teggin]

Just edited it hehe meaning these sveriges,dans and russians will move for historical factions like Spain,France,Brits..making nations more active and things will engage with time..we have to many nations on  NA it is a problem..ppl asking for Portugal faction for a good while they should remove these ridiculous factions from the caribbean and add Portugal make the Sverige capital region capturable and give Portugal the Barbados Island as capital

Edited May 4, 2019 by Lancelot Teggin

[Marques]

4 hours ago, LeBoiteux said:

IRL alliances often changes over time. NA has no strict date. I guess devs focus on balancing the number of players.

As far as I know,  Naval Action is Not only from 1780 to 1815....is not Napoleonic war's only....if the DEVS would wanted this way, they had done a Naval Action in Europe, not in the Caribbean.

I allways believe that this game is from aprox. 1715  until 1815 , so that because they are Ships like  Belle Epoule or anothers made built around 1750.

Anyway the issue here is if  NA  need 11 Nations, or only is enough with 4 main Nations ( Spain , UK,  France and Dutch ).  Actually  I think  is better only 4 Nations but very strong border lines, very strong capitals, and more cities unconquerables. We need to do things easier for new players because this game is to much hard to play and very difficult to learnt.  So please come back to ships with 3 lifes.

So in my opinion  we can have 11 or more FLAGS, no nations,  with portugal and Italy as well,  BUT  only  4  Big  NATIONS.  Then everybody has their flag but should be fight only under 

the King of this 4 Nations. Alliances is the KEY, and DEVS  ruled this alliances in order to have allways  2  BIG  enemies. Only pirates should be free out the coalitions, but limited in his number of players. Devs can rule the Alliances every two months as well they did the KINGS in this time.  Sailors and Captains don't had the right to sign the war or peace.  Only Kings  ( DEVs  for Us ) decided this wars. Is historical unfair , but easy to implemented, and much better for this game.

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Marques

[Sir David Green]

Why not allow nations to choose alliances, but big nations can only ally small nations. Like Britian allying Poland for example. Smaller nations can either ally larger nations or nations of similar size. Or just something along those lines.

[Marques]

7 hours ago, Rufus Swipe said:

 

If one nation (11 nations at war) or coalition (4 fixed coalitions at war) conquers most of the map it will be no fun for anyone.

Is true.  So this is why is so important the DEVS  rule the alliances, as the KINGS  did on this times.  If one faction become the winner, the best, or the bulliest   the game will be ruined. I think is better to do the balance with many flags, many players but joined in only 4 main Nations. 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Marques

[Chess]

As long as you leave my Norwegian flag alone (!) I can go with whatever - I paid money for it

[GVT]

We could also imagine a system of limited alliance in three groups, to avoid the harmful consequences of the old system...

Legendary Factions : 1. Great Britain 2. Pirates (No possibility of alliance)

Great Factions : 1. Spain, 2. France, 3. USA (Possibility of alliance with a Minor faction)

Minor Factions : 1. Dutch, 2. Sverige, 3. Danmark, 4. Russia, 5. Prussia, 6. Polish (Possibility of alliance with a Great Faction or Two Minor Factions)

[Barcucu]

But... don't you get it yet?? What's wrong with you people??? Factions are crap!!

For starters, i don't want anybody telling me what allies i need to catch up with...Secondly i don't want to have two countries less to fight with..... What's gonna happen then??? I will move to a country without faction, and like me, a lot of people who thinks like me!  Where is the bloody balance then???!!

The only reasonable way to accommodate again the low population is.... less countries!

[Captain Cid]

45 minutes ago, GVT said:

We could also imagine a system of limited alliance in three groups, to avoid the harmful consequences of the old system...

Legendary Factions : 1. Great Britain 2. Pirates (No possibility of alliance)

Great Factions : 1. Spain, 2. France, 3. USA (Possibility of alliance with a Minor faction)

Minor Factions : 1. Dutch, 2. Sverige, 3. Danmark, 4. Russia, 5. Prussia, 6. Polish (Possibility of alliance with a Great Faction or Two Minor Factions)

Russia +Prussia + Sverige 

Sounds great

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

31 minutes ago, Captain Cid said:

Russia +Prussia + Sverige 

Sounds great

Sounds boring and absolutely carebear.

Edited May 4, 2019 by Davos Seasworth

[Bull Hull]

600 players daily?  Seriously?   EXACTLY how many of those "players" are really unique individual players, and how many of those "players" are really alts that are artificially inflating the player count?  Most of the players I know "personally" by speaking to them on TS have at least one alt, and more than a few of them have multiple alts.  I bet the REAL player count of unique individual players is more likely around 300-400.

600 CHARACTERS daily is far more accurate and truthful.

[Farrago]

It’s incredible how close the polling is.

Some have suggested non static alliances which are changed by the Devs or AI. Caution about that: imagine helping improve and building in an allied port and then suddenly, you are no longer allied through no fault of your own. No chance to defend. It just happened.

My preference would be to keep a lot of nations (although it could be less) but have a mechanism where 1 or 2 foreign clans could be given very temporary letters of marque to enter battles on your nation’s behalf. During the term of the letter, they can use your ports  

 

[Kopelent]

14 hours ago, Lancelot Teggin said:

Add Portugal as a faction and remove Poland,Dans,Sveriges and Russia these nations are ridiculous to have around the caribbean 

+1

[Marques]

10 hours ago, Captain Cid said:

Russia +Prussia + Sverige 

Sounds great

I like your proposal, but  main alliances should be ruled by de DEVS  ( Kings)  every three months,  as order come to Europe politics. ( this will regulate rate of players and balance the nations)  So  main  4 Nations are almost impossible to alliance each other,  regulated by KINGS..(devs), . But the others  10, 15 ,  Yes they can ssupport biggest one.  (whatever number or nations, small or medium, have not ports, and are mandatory to ally with only one of the main nations).   In this way everybody  has their nation, also their  own Flag, but in battle the smallest nation have to sign, or fight under the big nation flag.  This system will need a politic interfaz, place to see how the nations support  one big country or another .(   Spain- U.Kingdom- France- Usa- Ducth R.) Should be only cities under the  4-5 Big nations. Small nations cannot ruled cities. So the game would have only  4-5 players, and the others will give support.  As well  minor

nation as Portugal can be added. Piratas and minor nations cannot win the game under his Flag.

Edited May 5, 2019 by Marques

[Marques]

11 hours ago, GVT said:

We could also imagine a system of limited alliance in three groups, to avoid the harmful consequences of the old system...

Legendary Factions : 1. Great Britain 2. Pirates (No possibility of alliance)

Great Factions : 1. Spain, 2. France, 3. USA (Possibility of alliance with a Minor faction)

Minor Factions : 1. Dutch, 2. Sverige, 3. Danmark, 4. Russia, 5. Prussia, 6. Polish (Possibility of alliance with a Great Faction or Two Minor Factions)

I like your proposal, but  main alliances should be ruled by de DEVS  ( Kings)  every three months,  as order come to Europe politics.  ( main alliances will be Legendary with Great Factions in your squeme) ( this will regulate rate of players and balance the nations)  So  main  4-5 Nations are almost impossible to alliance each other,  only if regulated by KINGS..(devs), . But the others  10, 15 ,  are FREE to ally, so they can ssupport biggest one.  (is possible whatever number or nations, Minor, but those have not ports, and are mandatory to be allied with only one of the main nations).   In this way everybody  has their nation, also their  own Flag, but in battle the smallest nation have to sign, or fight under the big nation flag.  This system will need a politic interfaz, place to see how the nations support  one big country or another .(   Spain- U.Kingdom- France- Usa- Ducth R.) Should be only cities under the  4-5 Big nations. Small nations cannot ruled cities. So the game would have only  4-5 players, and the others will give support them.  As well  minor

nation as Portugal can be added. Piratas and minor nations cannot win the game under his own Flag

Edited May 5, 2019 by Marques

[martenMK]

every nation should have a capital non pvp (high security) area to trade between capitals
the rest of the map is a clan territory (low security)
less dependent on the nation
with the possibility to ally with anyone ...... for money
an alliance with a clan with the same nation ....... little money
an alliance with a clan from a hostile nation ...... more money
that is all

Edited May 5, 2019 by martenMK

[Sven Silberbart]

16 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

What is clear is many people see that the current diplomacy (or lack of it) as well as the splitted playerbase among 11 nations should be adressed.

Many nations are dead due to these issues. And no release or wipe is going to fix that.

 

Keeping the 11 nations as it is now wont make the game better.

Is having these proposed coalitions the best solution? Dont think so.

 

Devs, for once. Be brave and cut on half the current nations. Keep the main nations and make that minor nations sail for the main ones. For example, Portugal inside GB, Barbay states inside Pirates...

Making coalations as admin post is the same than you say. In the result there a less factions. (wich is a good thing)

Edited May 5, 2019 by Sven Silberbart

[shunt]

whole idea is crazy   t didnt work before it wont work again ,

we tested alliances it failed ,, why test again ,,, especially when alliances will be forced alliances

 

 

Edited May 5, 2019 by shunt

[LeBoiteux]

not sure that removing nations is even possible, as a flag DLC has been released. 

Adding is.

So, for those who want less 'nations', the only way might be to gather them into coalitions of nations, whatever those coalitions are.

[Thonys]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23

1 hour ago, Marques said:

I like your proposal, but  main alliances should be ruled by de DEVS  ( Kings)  every three months,  as order come to Europe politics.  ( main alliances will be Legendary with Great Factions in your squeme) ( this will regulate rate of players and balance the nations)  So  main  4-5 Nations are almost impossible to alliance each other,  only if regulated by KINGS..(devs), . But the others  10, 15 ,  are FREE to ally, so they can ssupport biggest one.  (is possible whatever number or nations, Minor, but those have not ports, and are mandatory to be allied with only one of the main nations).   In this way everybody  has their nation, also their  own Flag, but in battle the smallest nation have to sign, or fight under the big nation flag.  This system will need a politic interfaz, place to see how the nations support  one big country or another .(   Spain- U.Kingdom- France- Usa- Ducth R.) Should be only cities under the  4-5 Big nations. Small nations cannot ruled cities. So the game would have only  4-5 players, and the others will give support them.  As well  minor

nation as Portugal can be added. Piratas and minor nations cannot win the game under his own Flag

 but in battle the smallest nation have to sign, or fight under the big nation flag. 

are you kidding me ?

lol......not in my lifetime (hello kitty up your own nation please)

if that happens steam gets a killer review i can tell you that  ...

 

[OjK]

Well, they can't really revoke the nations, as there is plenty of people who paid real money to get the flags of their selected nation.

Therefore, Alliances are probably the only way to go... 

But is there really any sense in hard coded alliances?

I don't see a point. With proposed values, people will quickly use their forged papers, to screw the balance one more.
What we're now proposing is basically: HAVOC, HRE, CABAL (plus some others not "revelaed" transfers) vs BF, REDS, HANSA, ALOHA

You really think other Alliances will want to fight that?

[OjK]

What came up to my mind - how to encourage people to NOT stack at biggest alliances?

Make the port upgrades scalable with amount of players in the alliance
And then, let nations make their own alliances

I wonder how would that encurage everyone to jump on bandwagons

[PaladinFX]

I say No to enforced coalitions.

Taking away the freedom of the players to choose which nation(s) they may want to have an unofficial alliance with just restricts choice in the game which would be a bad thing. We're not playing a historical sim game, we're here because we want to play a war game so the historical alliances posted have no need to be in this game. There are too many issues as brought up by many in this thread for the enforced coalitions to long term be enjoyable for the player base. Keep it a war server with no coalitions!

 

I'd rather see an idea brought in that adds another more fun dimension to the game, like Privateers that can operate on a Letter of Marque for a nation with rewards for capturing or sinking enemy ships! That would be a lot more fun than having enforced coalitions shoved down our throats! Having Privateers operating on this map surely is much more historical than having Russia/Prussia/Poland here! I'm guessing Sir Texas Sir probably has a thread on this topic somewhere but either way i think Privateers & Letters of Marque as an option should be explored further.

 

Edited May 5, 2019 by PaladinFX

[Bonus]

The fact is that this game needs more players per nation.

However this problem can be fixed.

 

 

Edited May 5, 2019 by Edward Canway

[Marques]

The poll  is very tight. 50% do not want to change,  vs  49 %  yes wants to be ruled. What is the problem to be ruled ¿?¿?  This is not a custom game... and you can choose many things. Someone said above that never will fight join with their enemies...it seems very ridicoulous, because the important thing is that NA has many players, and be fun and playable.

I think these  50 % first represent the "status quo" , British, Russians, Polish, and minor nations that do not want to disappear on their currently happy position.

But actually , in this game, there isn't  any kind of diplomacy, nor alliances, nor agreements between nations and clans...All is secret !!   and sometimes there are secrets alliances that can broken the game.

This problem should be fixed, because it is a very important factor that can spoil the entire game. Also we have time to test, before release.

So please let the DEVS  rule the game,  and I hope they thinking well how to contol the alliances and increase the number of players.  I prefer for a short time ,to be allied to the

British, or the other ugly nations , than to have a game closed, difficult to play and lack of the players. The Devs launch the poll because they know we have a problem with Nations.

Edited May 5, 2019 by Marques

[Barcucu]

2 hours ago, OjK said:

Well, they can't really revoke the nations, as there is plenty of people who paid real money to get the flags of their selected nation.

Therefore, Alliances are probably the only way to go... 

 

Really!!??? Do you truly believe that?? Don't you think there are  more solutions to fix that??  Let's say ... swap that DLC for another one...or even, just give back the money for those players...

Please! it is always better the writing after a bit of thinking!!!!