Individually controlled player access to hostility missions + port battles on PvE Peace Server

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

Purpose of this suggestion:

No restrictions on side of clan who organizes hostility mission or port battle, regarding who is participating in their conquest activities. After all, players of different nations are not seen as enemies here. That should reflect in the choices we have in teaming up. We should find agreements with them and enter them in our list of allowed participants of hostility missions and port battles (right now it is still possible to join into hostility missions but we have a thread in support section which talks about ending this by decision of admin, due to exploits on both servers).

That means:

- clan can invite ANYONE who is asking to a group which does hostility mission or enters port battle against Neutrals. Also foreign captains, who adapt his flag, just like in OW battles. This way large instruments of help are opened, or contract options, mercenary services, whatever people invent. The power of a few major clans will get shattered, who are now dividing up most of the map among themselves.

That ends:

- restrictions of admission to clan, clan friendlist, fellow nationals. Which is the reason small clans have no chance to get a port as long as they don't agree to terms of a big clan, in exchange of help. A great way to dictate conditions to small clans or abuse them anytime as big clan sees fit.

That also prevents:

- abuse by alts of hostile factions, because they still stay outside. YOU will be personally responsible WHOM you invite into the event. When you have been fooled, next time don't allow him to join. It's pretty much the same responsibilty which is on you when inviting people into clan and giving them rights over the inventory.

--

With access for small clans to other human resources than what major clans and their "alliance system" may have to offer, competition for same major clans will increase. The field of conquest will less likely given to them exclusively. Effect is more diversity on the map, less power to major clans, more freedom to small clans. Or just a better negotiation standpoint for them, as they may anytime call cooperation with the big ones off and seek assistance somewhere else, if this suggestion of opening up their teaming options would come true.

Offenders will be singled out individually, as they will get known by name. It will be micromanagement on a personal level and not much room left for foul play. But then you would have to ask yourself how you could be duped to invite them in your group list, in the first place. No blame on game mechanism possible.

[Reorx Redbeard]

it seems to me that you are just angry/ jealous that you clan dont have enough members to take and hold a port of your own. as I remember you startet a tread about the same issue yesterday

 

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

2 hours ago, Reorx Redbeard said:

it seems to me that you are just angry/ jealous that you clan dont have enough members to take and hold a port of your own. as I remember you startet a tread about the same issue yesterday

 

Where is it?

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

Care to stay on the topic and not wonder about the inner motives of the author? Or are you afraid your big clan loses its grip on the small ones in your nation, after they can help themselves by other means? Suggestion has a mighty impact on whole server, not just my petty inner motives to move away from oligarchy to more democratization.

[Reorx Redbeard]

my clan dont demand anything from small clans, but if small clans dont wont to contribute or invest in ports. why should they benefit from those ports

 

[Raekur]

While I understand the issue that faces a small clan, there are ports that only need 900 BR to go after. These ports can be captured by 2 people.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

13 hours ago, Reorx Redbeard said:

my clan dont demand anything from small clans, but if small clans dont wont to contribute or invest in ports. why should they benefit from those ports

 

Nothing wrong with that decision of yours. It just does not fit the topic. Nobody is proposing here that small clans should profit from your precious ports just like that. I want more creative ways to compete in conquest, that's all.

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

7 hours ago, Raekur said:

While I understand the issue that faces a small clan, there are ports that only need 900 BR to go after. These ports can be captured by 2 people.

So why should be be restricted to shallow ports (while still facing competitors with ten ships which makes the effort useless), when we can hire some clan in another nation to work for us when targeting a deep water port, for our doublloons, rare permits, edinorogs or whatever they ask in return? It's not that the big clans don't profit from this free contracting either...

[Yoha]

Why don't you just do a better job of recruiting and keeping members? If your clan culture sucks and not a lot of players want to hang out with you, then that's your fault...not the game's fault.

Clan friends lists are meant to force cooperation. Otherwise, everyone would make their own solo clans to take advantage of the warehouse.