Hotfix for port capture - Capital first rule is no more.

[Mad Dog Morgan]

11 hours ago, admin said:

i believe free towns should be player choice or pirate choice not system choice - but it will ruin gameplay for many. What do you think

Yes and more please to change Pirates from Nation Black to Pirates and therefore an alternate way to play NA from any other nation. 

• Move Pirates from MT to Secret Islands
• Pirates can only raid and loot ports not capture them
• Return of Outlaw Battles
• Remove ability of Pirates to craft ships larger than 5th rates. So only level one shipyards.
• Any Pirate Ship becomes a Refit so slight boarding and crew size bonuses for any ship sailed
• Return of the Smuggler Flag option for Pirate 7th rates so they can enter and raid from any port. 

If Pirates don't like the changes there are plenty of other nations they can move to for sailing ships of the line and RVR.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Mad Dan Morgan

[Gregory Rainsborough]

Look how many port battles there are for the lower BR ports!

It's almost as if people prefer to fight in lower BR ports.

Who'd have thought.

Maybe time to reconsider lowering all BRs across the board?

[Salty Sails]

If the changes are so important, why not make an announcement 1-2 days before your new fantasy frontline system is coming into the game? You had time to make a post while you are looking for some special book, but you don’t have time to give us informations about the changes? 

Many players in my small nations are pissed, because we will probably lose 2 ports against 2 nations while they flipped ports at night without a chance to defend or set a timer! 

good job 👍 

[z4ys]

16 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

Look how many port battles there are for the lower BR ports!

It's almost as if people prefer to fight in lower BR ports.

Who'd have thought.

Maybe time to reconsider lowering all BRs across the board?

look how many battles are actual not in the primetime of the owner.

I would say people prefer empty portbattles

Edited December 12, 2019 by z4ys

[Barents]

1 hour ago, Gregory Rainsborough said:

Look how many port battles there are for the lower BR ports!

It's almost as if people prefer to fight in lower BR ports.

Who'd have thought.

Maybe time to reconsider lowering all BRs across the board?

Maybe there wasn´t any notice from admin and people couldn´t set timers for their ports.

And you know how desperate people are for ports they don´t have to fight for...

[Thonys]

17 hours ago, Atreides said:

@admin

Small clans hold a lot of these small satellite ports, and some of these small clans make NO income from taxes.  These small ports are now bang on the front line which means defense timers are vital.  I would strongly suggest reduction of the timer cost for a tiny port to at least not be so prohibitively expensive.  Some of the larger clans are making 10s of millions in taxes, this new mechanic puts a severe disadvantage to defending the front line.

 

i agree  

with the new hotfix port tax for hostility,  timers needs a overhaul.

small clans possessed {{for a reason }} most of these ports ....

\satellite ports are in need of a reduced tax amount for timer expensis..

(to overcome the will to be able  to protect satellite ports, or just abandoning ports without nation (clan pb) fights and becoming neutral )

 

otherwise it will be harder to maintain satellite ports for some small clans now. 

 

                    tax      (~50.000 reals ?   perhaps )

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Some thoughts)

also in conjunction with this tax phenomenon a second issue occurs

*  since the pb BR  fix * 

huge clans with more than 20 active players can easily posses 20k ports and maintain and hold those ports

but small clans with around /5 -10 active players are now also in the possession of 20 k ports  and can not suddenly hold those ports on their own .

we are in need of a dynamic mechanic where small clans automatically have some kind of reduction or extention  on their port BR number

>> let's say for every active member (weekly ) 900 BR .

what means that satellite ports in the possession of (mostly ) small clans  will automatically have a smaller  pb BR rating. (fair deal)

 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2019 by Thonys

[Thonys]

i think we need a fix on the  total amount of BR    ... on attacking a nation.(~25.000 BR ??)

if muli flipping is a daily business it s important a nation can defend itself

perhaps a restriction >> no more than 3 pb a day on a nation 

because i see a huge mess around the corner  for the future.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Thonys

[Thonys]

i am concerned

Admin we need a hot fix on the flipping capability 

if nation see the pottention on  the mechanic it becomes a uncontrollable mess .

for the first time is say> we need a restriction < (o my goodness i am unhappy now)

(we are out of control) 20 huge world wars... in 2 days 

Edited December 12, 2019 by Thonys

[HamBlower]

15 hours ago, admin said:

i believe free towns should be player choice or pirate choice not system choice - but it will ruin gameplay for many. What do you think

Free towns have to be system choice!
If free towns will get player choice most of the current gameplay will not be possible any more. 

1.) Access to PVP Areas: Right now it's possible to build an outpost in a free town. So I can store repairs, ships and other stuff far away from my home waters. If a free town will get players choice and the port will get captured by another nation, players have to hope that port stays open for all. Otherwise ... (you know the mechanics of a closed port)

2.) RVR: You will get very soon frontlines that will protect  the biggest nations. If "El Rancho", "Tumbado", "Great Corn", "Dariena" and "Guyaguyare" will not be free towns of the system any more, the whole coast line from "Swannsborough" in the North down to "Santo Tomé" in the South will only have hard frontlines (US / Spain / Russia / Brits / Dutch). I'm pretty shure that Prussia and Poland will be wiped out soon! Nearly the same Situation would be from Hispaniola down to the Lower Antilles. 

3.) Open World PVP:  Soon after the map will be divided (and this will happen, for sure!) you have your direct neighbours to do pvp. Every other pvp action has to be planed, you need a lot of time for the long trips and in the end it will be a "never-come-back tour"  

In my opinion the decission to change the former free towns "Hat Island", "La Désirade", "Carriacou", "La Navasse", "Bensalem" (did I forget one?) caused a lot of negative effects in RVR and mostly in open world PVP. Don't do this again.

[Knuddel]

AN i think we shoudl get all the alts out of those clans. so u see who is actualy able to fight? lol guys... i will make as well some screenshoots or better let admin do them

[Angus MacDuff]

16 hours ago, admin said:

i believe free towns should be player choice or pirate choice not system choice - but it will ruin gameplay for many. What do you think

I believe Free towns go directly against the Front Line concept.  Free Towns allow one to bypass front lines and parachute hostility in certain areas.  The concept of Front Lines SHOULD be that a Nation moves out from a single location, strategically choosing conquest so as to give security to their rear area.  We cannot have this with Free Town Hostility.  By having this combination, we lose any advantages of a Front Line in some Nations.  Other Nations may still have it.  It would have been good if Free Towns had never had the ability to generate hostility and all Nations had had a Capitol from which to start, but that ship has sailed (i'm not sure we could survive another wipe!).  Might as well drop the whole Front Line concept now.  Or get rid of Free Towns...

Edited December 12, 2019 by Angus MacDuff

[Despe]

2 minutes ago, huliotkd said:

hostility mission must start from national port to national port

but some factions have not national ports

[huliotkd]

11 minutes ago, Despe said:

but some factions have not national ports

not a server problem

you can start those nation after a 30 days period as a normal nation player.  then you can go in a FFA port and take a hostility mission after changed nation

[admin]

4 hours ago, Thonys said:

i am concerned

Admin we need a hot fix on the flipping capability 

if nation see the pottention on  the mechanic it becomes a uncontrollable mess .

for the first time is say> we need a restriction < (o my goodness i am unhappy now)

(we are out of control) 20 huge world wars... in 2 days 

Earthquake work this way. Unreleased tension explodes when limitations are removed. Which means A LOT of people wanted to have smaller battles and were right pointing at that. It will slow down after it. 

[Despe]

 

3 minutes ago, admin said:

Unreleased tension explodes when limitations are removed.

but some limits have sense for all factions, this a game, and player are here for funny. If you make one mechanic that can broke one faction, put easy change faction for their players. But this dont work in this way, change faction is a headhache

[Despe]

1 minute ago, rediii said:

frontline is finally how it should have been at the beginning to be honest.

frontline is one por, not three, one front is a line between 2 armies are in contact If this mechanic like you, is ok, but is not a front line.

This only likes you because you expect to warm the players that you hate, not because this make a game more balanceable. Balance this game is necesary, to prevent one faction from being too powerful and others can be destroyed, but the last patch goes in the opposite direction

[Malcolm3]

22 minutes ago, admin said:

Earthquake work this way. Unreleased tension explodes when limitations are removed. Which means A LOT of people wanted to have smaller battles and were right pointing at that. It will slow down after it. 

With 250k timers it would be many empty battles, because even with buffed trade clans, owning non-capital ports (where no one sell goods for profit), can't pay for them. You made first move, now it's time to do the second one. And it shoud be made quick, before that great flip succeed.

P.S. Also what is with your reaction to my suggestions of supply etc.?

Edited December 12, 2019 by Malcolm3

[admin]

26 minutes ago, Despe said:

i think that the fire shock mechs broke the PBs and now this new front mechanic is broking RvR. sometimes in this game I feel like a laboratory rat

Both features were proposed by the community and implemented to perfection (explosions became more deadly, smaller ports can now be captured by smaller groups of people directly. There was no regional conquest for like 3 years in game and we had county frontlines only this year. 

Frontlines reduced RVR - it is obvious.

[BlameKK]

this is what i would imagine raiding ports would be like.     i dont think its the right approach to helping the conquest part of the game

[Despe]

7 minutes ago, admin said:

Both features were proposed by the community and implemented to perfection. There was no regional conquest for like 3 years in game and we had county frontlines only this year. 

And county frontlines are not a bad idea, it works like a good defensive strategy who prevent that little factions like Prussia dont be destroyed, and make RvR more balanceable that now. What are the consecuences of your new RvR mechanic? An explosion of RvR and Prussia probaly destroyed the first day that you implement that.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Despe

[Eyesore]

250k reals = one short sailingtrip with two tbrigs.

It's the clans own fault if they want to hold too many ports?

[Despe]

3 minutes ago, Eyesore said:

250k reals = one short sailingtrip with two tbrigs.

It's the clans own fault if they want to hold too many ports?

timers cost is not a problem

[erelkivtuadrater]

I dont understand.. the frontlines are now frontlines as they should've been half a year ago, fine thats great.

But there were no complaints afaik before the frontline mechanics were implemented when you could pull hostility missions from any port and attack any port, it was only about the timers by then

[Archaos]

46 minutes ago, admin said:

Earthquake work this way. Unreleased tension explodes when limitations are removed. Which means A LOT of people wanted to have smaller battles and were right pointing at that. It will slow down after it. 

I do prefer the new frontline mechanics and I do feel they would be almost perfect if the ability to take hostility from free towns was eliminated, but please do not misinterpret the sudden upsurge in RvR activity that happened yesterday as I feel that most of this was people taking advantage of ports not having timers and poor defenses as they were previously not subject to direct attack. Once this initial flurry has died down I do believe we will return to similar levels of RvR activity.

[Prince of Wales]

since i was warned for being apparently off topic, i will post again here the on topic feedback to this hotfix the admin has decided to give us with lack of a date when it would be introduced

 

The changes to the county system should not have been implemented, look in game at prussia now it is far too easy to multiflip a small nation to death. However to account for this and to allow there to still be a good amount of PBs, remove the frontline system, it makes 0 historical sense and I honestly can't see the reason for it even being added, if a fleet is able to reach a port from their home town or a freetown then they deserve the PB due to being able to either overpower or intimidate any potential enemies.

 

For complete transparency, i am a Prussian player and I am holding admin to blame for supporting the killing of our nation, of course i accepted this possibility when playing prussia, i just didnt expect to have to fight the devs as well as players, in the implementation and the method of implementation of this patch.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Prince of Wales