Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Poll on enforced alliances  

561 members have voted

  1. 1. Please vote on your choice on the political situation in the Caribbean

    • Keep 11 enemy nations at war with each other
      264
    • Enforce game rule coalitions
      297


Recommended Posts

Yes, we need alliances!

Yes, we need them forced by game! Simple reason is: you cannot trust the players to make "good" decisions, i.e. good for the game as a whole. I would not even trust myself on this one ūüėČ

BUT... the alliances should not be STATIC!

Changes to the alliances be done manually by server admin in reasonable intervals. Announcements from the sovereign nations should give a lot of story telling potential.

Add "neutral" status as well, please. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was several topics on these forums about creating 4-5 starting nations and then a "catch all" action that is just pure RVR and runs off clan based alliances to fill port battles.  Any thought to a system like that?

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF we were to go with this type of alliance, there would have to be some changes to make it work.  Map positioning would have to be adjusted so that allied nations were together.  All nations have a capitol.  I really think Portugal would have to be in the game.  And I know I keep repeating this (but I believe its a game changer), but no hostility from free ports.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the game is to have enforced coalitions it would have to be a dynamic system managed externally from the game so that large active RvR nations did not ally together to form super blocs. It would need someone actively monitoring the effectiveness of Nations in RvR and deciding to allow weaker nations to ally. But even such a system would be open to accusations of bias if an allowed alliance became too strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, admin said:

Let's discuss the number of nations for the release state of the game.

You just can't discuss that at all based on your current player numbers. Firstly you just can't tell if the players are really active or passive so you can't know if you should count them or better not, and secondly I am pretty sure that many players will change their nation if they are forced to start from scratch by release wipe. So your proposal is nothing more than a decision on white paper worthless after release.

The third fact is that with alliances the distances to go to meet some foes will significantly increase which is bad for gameplay.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, admin said:

Captains.

Let's discuss the number of nations for the release state of the game.

  • Should we keep current 11 nations at war with each other, where smaller nations have less chance to compete in RVR
  • Should we enforce alliances from Europe by game rules.

 

Current populations

  • Pirates 14.52%
  • Spain 8.83%
  • France 10.21%
  • Great Britain 26.86%
  • Dutch ¬†4.88%
  • Sverige 8.76%
  • Denmark 2.87%
  • United States 9.15%
  • Russian Empire 9.33%
  • Prussia 3.61%
  • Polish Commonwealth 0.97%
     

Proposed coalitions

  • Northern Coalition 17% (based on historical agreements during napoleonic wars
    • Dutch
    • Sweden
    • Denmark
    • Poland
  • British Empire 27%
  • Western Coalition 28% (based on historical agreements during napoleonic wars)
    • USA
    • Spain
    • France
  • Holy Alliance 13% ¬†(based on the historical holy alliance against france)
    • Prussia
    • Russia
  • Pirates 14%
     

Proposed coalitions will have separate starting capitals but will act as allies allowing clan alliances between nations and port usage rights.


Coalitions will increase minimal size of the nation from 43 average daily players for the smallest nation to 600 average daily players for the smallest coalition, greatly increasing the potential and ability to have effect on the map.

What is needed, in my opinion of course, is random "Diplomacy Changes from Europe" happening only a few times per year.

This would reduce the amount of salt in the community as well as provide ever-changing content for continued interesting game-play.

Static alliances and perpetual war with the same enemies day after day clearly causes burnout, which is marked by extreme frustration and inevitable toxicity.

If you make it so that enemies must become friends at some point, I feel like this would be a good thing.  

As we have seen over the past few years, humans will always choose the path of least resistance.  Letting a computer randomly generate some changes now and then is a much better idea.

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, AeRoTR said:

----------------------------------------------->

But my dream;

British Nation

Spanish Nation

French Nation

Dutch Nation

Privateers (remaining nations with flag of their nation but under privateer faction, where clans able to get letter of marque from nations)

Pirates (not a nation but clans, end game for best players, only level 1 shipyard, fame board, can retire from pirate with forge papers and join a nation (very expansive), but very profitable during pirate life if you are good)

 

I have proposed something like this.  Privateers would be your current pirates. Except no owning ports.  They can join either side of fights as long as it's not

a privateer first.  They can join hostility missions and help out a nation.  Maybe some how have it coded they can be aded as a friendly clan for a short time and work for a clan/nation.

Than have the outlaws/PIrates are the ones with free for all and can't do RvR or own ports.  Every one hates them and have no capitals (maybe one shallow port?) per say and can't capture any ports.

54 minutes ago, admin said:

 

no
if alliances come back they will be forced by the game

reason is simple: previous alliances system broke down because humans tend to ally with the strongest which will cause top 3 nations in power to ally and create the unbreakable status quo. 

The problem with the old system was there was no check and balance system to keep from teh two strongest nations from joining together (like GB and US did on global).   Make it so that the top nations can't join each other, they can only do one alliance with a weak nation.   Than have the other nations allowed to allied with up to so many nations.  This will have top nations changing out if folks move.  With forged papers the population that you have listed will go up and down.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is genius.

Lumping nations together based on population. Marvellous. Can't wait to see certain nations get annihilated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s called War Server, so a big NO to Alliances. 

You took so many content away, with a alliances system, you can attack less players. 

So, Whats the point in playing NA in long Terme. No rare Reaources, no trading, no Important regions, no special trims Or Woods. With alliances sytem you will have xx % less enemies on a War Server! 

 

Edited by Salty Sails
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a try of fixing a problem created by the devs long ago despite having many players against that idea.

It seems that listening to the usual suspects have made the game and the server balance way worse and now we need this kind of things to fix it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6
1 minute ago, Salty Sails said:

It’s called War Server, so a big NO to Alliances. 

You took so many content away, with a alliances system, you can attack less players. 

So, Whats the point in playing NA in long Terme. No rare Reaources, no trading, no Important regions, no special trims Or Woods. With alliances sytem you will have xx % less enemies on a War Server! 

 

Alliances only for rvr is the best

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit unclear and I was not around when this used to be represented in the game.

Pirates and Great Britain are alone, not aligned with anyone. Does this mean they could join in on other wars for either side? It would make the game much harder to not be able to rely upon other nations because I am aware that there are player made alliances between clans of opposing nations.

Regardless of what is decided I think it would allow for a rather interesting turn of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this poll, but i would just made it in-game poll for everyone for example when you log in this simple poll would pop up. Not many people going to forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me reorganize this list by size.

Current populations

  • Great Britain 26.86%
  • Pirates 14.52%
  • France 10.21%
  • Russian Empire 9.33%
  • United States 9.15%
  • Spain 8.83%
  • Sverige 8.76%
  • Dutch ¬†4.88%
  • Prussia 3.61%
  • Denmark 2.87%
  • Polish Commonwealth 0.97%ÔĽŅ

Lets bring back to the original nations that are historically accurate for this time and not brought in to please players of those nations.

  • Great Britain 26.86%
  • Pirates 14.25%
  • France 10.21%
  • United States 9.15%
  • Spain 8.83%
  • Sverige 8.76%
  • Dutch ¬†4.88%
  • Denmark 2.87%

Russia, Prussia, Polish is only 13.9% of the population....Where would they go if we went back to the original nations that are historically from this time period?  Now lets take out Sverige and Denmark.

 

  • Great Britain 26.86%
  • Pirates 14.25%
  • France 10.21%
  • United States 9.15%
  • Spain 8.83%
  • Dutch ¬†4.88%

That is now 25.54% of the population that isn't in the main core 6 nations.   We would expect them to spead out between these nations and maybe filll some of the weaker ones.   

 

The problem with the coalitions is that server numbers won't stay the same with forge papers as some folks move around from time to time.  Historical alliances wasn't always the same between 1700 to 1820 either.  Though we are pretty much stating the alliance is off the Napoleonic Wars which was from 1803-1815 (within the game time scale).   If there was any forced alliance this would actually make since.  Though it would mean that some folks that have some odd hatred towards certain nations would have to switch nations to keep that hatred.  Like how pirates and France in US prime time love to camp US coast line...France players that do this will have to go to another nation or join pirates.  Meaning the game numbers balance will change.

Effectively it would mean we are breaking the server into 3 main goups and than pirates.  Much how POTBS was with French, Great Britain, Spain plus the Pirates.  If we do this can Pirates be turned into an Impossible nation and be made a true hard core nation, or give them one port in the shallows to start from?  They should never be a major RvR nation, mainly your OW pain in the side of other nations.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem with the propsal is that noone knows what nations will have most numbers in the future. I am quite positive to an alliance-system, but think your proposal wont work due to that.

You need a system which functions even if, lets say, poland should get 30% of the players ingame and becomes number 1 nation. 

 

Edited by Ligatorswe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you enforce an Alliance system, it should be in relation to population%, position on the map in relation to other AND time zone. I'm very positive to the idea of having less nation and forcing a kind of balance, but do it in a way it make it possible for Alliance member to have a fair chance.  like the North alliance, man... just nuke the french instead.... It'll be less painful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ptigibus said:

If you enforce an Alliance system, it should be in relation to population%, position on the map in relation to other AND time zone. I'm very positive to the idea of having less nation and forcing a kind of balance, but do it in a way it make it possible for Alliance member to have a fair chance.  like the North alliance, man... just nuke the french instead.... It'll be less painful

You can never run a system based on current numbers.  Even if you used active players or based it on active RVR players.  The simple fact is that we can all change nations whenever we want.  If you're going to do Alliances, then reposition them on the map so that there is a fair start-up for Frontline play and let the chips fall as they may.  Positioning will be very important.  If you combined US/France/Spain right now and put France at New Orleans to keep them close, then their natural target would be Pirates...very unbalanced.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Angus MacDuff said:

You can never run a system based on current numbers.  Even if you used active players or based it on active RVR players.  The simple fact is that we can all change nations whenever we want.  If you're going to do Alliances, then reposition them on the map so that there is a fair start-up for Frontline play and let the chips fall as they may.  Positioning will be very important.  If you combined US/France/Spain right now and put France at New Orleans to keep them close, then their natural target would be Pirates...very unbalanced.

Well yes. What we would see if we got a system based on current numbers is whole clans that move nation, to exploit those numbers.

(I already know about clans that will switch nation after wipe, so it would be a misstake to think that todays numbers will be the correct numbers to use.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just take it back to a few years ago. Putting all the mechanics taken away if you really want this desired result.

-You enforce alliances historically and you will see nation changing by clans and it will be unbalanced but game enforced until you further reduce the community and beginners roll the dice on whether they choose the appropriate nation.

-Current system works minus rogue clans. Clans group up in the nation, nations group up to fight other nations. Autobalance. You could delete a few nations like Russia, Prussia, and Poland. Why? Before they were put in the original nations were populated. Now you just have 3 unpopulated nations to include 2 of those. Some of them were not even in the gulf for your "historic accuracy".

-You roll the game back to old days where the players voted weekly for alliances and suddenly you have a player/game enforced alliance system. But do not exclude pirates because the pirates mechanics of the old days were stripped away just turning the pirates into a conventional nation instead of the rogue bandito they were.

If you hell bent on losing new players quicker from the game and getting poor steam reviews, by all means continue the direction you're taking. Add the historic forced alliance and within 2 week watch it be broken from everyone nation changing creating whole alliances (not nations) becoming unpopulated.

Regards

 

 

Edited by Crim Darkfire
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alts will ruin the forced alliances. The same guy will play with 3 characters in each nation and shape the map as he and his clan wants. You will have to go into great lengths to stop them from interfering

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, El Patron said:

Alliances only for rvr is the best

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

Edited by Salty Sails
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Salty Sails said:

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

fun and nice battles

  • Like 1

Share this post


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...