Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Shane_Martin

Alt clans keeping Major ports

Recommended Posts

Hi,

Can it be looked into why alt clans can keep major ports, such as Santiago de Cuba?

If a clan leaves a nation, they should not leave there old clan with the port as in my opinion this is a major issue with the game as it's funding the enemy.

Can we have an official verdict on this please @admin

  • Like 8
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still members in LAMA playing who don't play for Prussia. Cartagena is hold by one player. 

Can't see a problem. And I made offer to drop it ;)

And Prussia is not enemy of GB. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Captain Cid said:

Still members in LAMA playing who don't play for Prussia. Cartagena is hold by one player. 

Can't see a problem. And I made offer to drop it ;)

And Prussia is not enemy of GB. 

If it's LAMA that is playing in GB, why are they not in our session and why is it up to you to decide what to do with it?

And what players are currently in LAMA that we can speak to regarding the port?

Edited by Shane_Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LAMA was the primary investor and clan that capture the port right?

As long as they’re not withholding access they reserve the right to hang on to it.  Unlike what HAVOC did, at least GB still can use the port.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah as long as you dont scum whole nations out of playing the game competitively like HAVOC did you should be aight.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mouth of Sauron said:

LAMA was the primary investor and clan that capture the port right?

As long as they’re not withholding access they reserve the right to hang on to it.  Unlike what HAVOC did, at least GB still can use the port.  

Part of the issue is that they are threatening to withhold access to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Captain Cid said:

Still members in LAMA playing who don't play for Prussia. Cartagena is hold by one player. 

Can't see a problem. And I made offer to drop it ;)

And Prussia is not enemy of GB. 

That's funny

Lamagg.png

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin once mentioning they where think of a way to allow Nations to take care of alt clans,  dead or just bad clans not helping nation.  The easiest way I can see is a vote system where so many clans vote and than something happens to the port.  Like lets do an NPC raid on that port. If it's a dead clan, clan that has one member or alt clan that doesn't have enough players to defend than they loose the port, it goes neutral and some one else can pick up the port.  Again the only way to activate this is it has to take say 5-10 clans voting (maybe even doubloons payment from each clan).  The clans will need to be restricted to maybe land owners or over so many members to keep from random alt clans from doing this or clans that been in a nation for a certain amount of time.

Since there is no timer on that port it could be raided at any time making harder for the clan to get support to defend it.  Active clans can get timers and support to stop a raid if it's used as a means of inter war between a group of clans against another clan.

I bring this up cause a lot of the ports dutch lost since release where ports that didn't have timers or was held by inactive clans so we couldn't put timers on them or change the list of defenders.   It really hurt us on the front line loosing certain ports (along with the fact you don't know the two ports they can do hostility on).

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Sea wolf said:

That's funny

Lamagg.png

2nd line of bottom screenshot is funny too

955973eb9b52322f5d6657685c873dab.png

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Don't blame players for mechanic issues.

The issue with port bonus' and port ownership should be clear as day to all. The imbalance of the port bonus' has seen the quality of PBs decline (one side is getting lazy and the other resigned), but more importantly I fail to see how the game is advanced by one set of players being able to deny another set of players the ability to play certain aspects of the game. I think we can all agree that the friendslists removed the alt exploits from PBs, but to allow clans to deny players the ability to craft is imo gamebreaking.

Remove port bonus' and the problem is solved. Tie port bonus' to the individual crafter and ppl only leaves when their shipyard is captured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Lars Kjaer said:

Don't blame players for mechanic issues.

The issue with port bonus' and port ownership should be clear as day to all. The imbalance of the port bonus' has seen the quality of PBs decline (one side is getting lazy and the other resigned), but more importantly I fail to see how the game is advanced by one set of players being able to deny another set of players the ability to play certain aspects of the game. I think we can all agree that the friendslists removed the alt exploits from PBs, but to allow clans to deny players the ability to craft is imo gamebreaking.

Remove port bonus' and the problem is solved. Tie port bonus' to the individual crafter and ppl only leaves when their shipyard is captured.

It was the players that demanded clan based content instead of unified nations. That concept gave birth to everything you're bitching about. Congratulations, you played yourself.

Edited by Potemkin
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol cant go a single thread without crying about havoc leaving DK

We changed nations and retook SJ within a week. DK can still go and re grab SJ. But they cant even field the numbers to fill Pasaje 5700 BR. So guess that wont happen.

What he is complaining about here is that a clan is Keeping a nations main port over a very long period of time and using its tax (10 mil +) to fund another nation

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, Potemkin said:

It was the players that demanded clan based content instead of unified nations. That concept gave birth to everything you're bitching about. Congratulations, you played yourself.

I can't remember I've ever called for more clanbased content. Don't let the vocal group be representative for the majority.

And I wouldn't mind clanbased content IF it was balanced, and IF all players could get the shiny stuff IF they wanted to do the grind. As it is, the skill levels are dropping and the game is losing it's appeal as a skill based game.. Equipment, where one side is ensured best in class equipment for no effort and the other is ensured never to be able to get similar ships/mods etc, is not a skill based game. That's just poor gamedesign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

6 hours ago, Staunberg🇩🇰 said:

Time to be nice to Havoc.... 

Most of them are glamour boys. Few real good players, so they need a 55 port to be competive.

Can you name those who are the glamour boys?

They can then be singled out for particular scrutiny.

Buster (Polishing glass eye)

 

 

 

 

Edited by Busterbloodvessel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

@admin once mentioning they where think of a way to allow Nations to take care of alt clans,  dead or just bad clans not helping nation.  The easiest way I can see is a vote system where so many clans vote and than something happens to the port.  Like lets do an NPC raid on that port. If it's a dead clan, clan that has one member or alt clan that doesn't have enough players to defend than they loose the port, it goes neutral and some one else can pick up the port.  Again the only way to activate this is it has to take say 5-10 clans voting (maybe even doubloons payment from each clan).  The clans will need to be restricted to maybe land owners or over so many members to keep from random alt clans from doing this or clans that been in a nation for a certain amount of time.

Since there is no timer on that port it could be raided at any time making harder for the clan to get support to defend it.  Active clans can get timers and support to stop a raid if it's used as a means of inter war between a group of clans against another clan.

I bring this up cause a lot of the ports dutch lost since release where ports that didn't have timers or was held by inactive clans so we couldn't put timers on them or change the list of defenders.   It really hurt us on the front line loosing certain ports (along with the fact you don't know the two ports they can do hostility on).

Voting does not work. Too many trolls and alts. We have seen it with the alliance votings. You can never make it work. 

Having said that, I totally agree that there should be some sort of system to deal with rogue clans. 

Edited by van Veen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just go clan based, if you are in a clan, then you can be attacked by another clan. If you're not in a clan.. then your nation is your clan.

 

Then build a diplomacy system around it. There are not enough nations for all the ego's , alts and gamers thinking they are not noticed when they try and cheat

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the biggest mistake in this game was when devs allowed (or even forced) people to have/buy as many alt accounts as they want. Thus there will never be any kind of diplomacy system that can work. This is a dead-end road with no exit at all.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Smoothie said:

I guess the biggest mistake in this game was when devs allowed (or even forced) people to have/buy as many alt accounts as they want. Thus there will never be any kind of diplomacy system that can work. This is a dead-end road with no exit at all.

Alts closed a mind boggling number of developmental options. How many times has a potentially awesome addition to the game been shelved because "too easy to abuse with alts". This game was cut off at the knees because of them... but i still love it.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vizzini said:

Just go clan based, if you are in a clan, then you can be attacked by another clan. If you're not in a clan.. then your nation is your clan.

Then build a diplomacy system around it. There are not enough nations for all the ego's , alts and gamers thinking they are not noticed when they try and cheat

No, I don't think so. Even if I repeat myself. The age of sailing ships is an age of the great seafaring nations and not an age of clans.
The clans have enough freedom within the nation.
A war between clans of one nation would be a civil war and this war is not fought at sea. Apart from the minor naval battles during the American Civil War.

But we need a diplomatic system, I agree.

 

Edited by Karpfanger
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mouth of Sauron said:

LAMA was the primary investor and clan that capture the port right?

As long as they’re not withholding access they reserve the right to hang on to it.  Unlike what HAVOC did, at least GB still can use the port.  

LAMA is milking GB (taxes) and it seems like threatening them to remove them from friendslist, keeping GB hostage with it

We toom the port with us since there is no clan-nationchange mechanic etc. Keeping it real. Whats worse? :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove port bonus entirely. Let s wood and normal wood in. And all is fine as it was. 

 

Btw remove the open world wind boosts. Thanks 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Remove port bonus entirely. Let s wood and normal wood in. And all is fine as it was. 

 

Would be interesting to see what the communitys opinion is on removing port bonusses :)  I would vote for it. Problem then of course is what to do with the current existing ships?

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no tears no rvr

as rvr was done because of fun nobody was rvr'ing

Edited by z4ys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Liq said:

Would be interesting to see what the communitys opinion is on removing port bonusses :)  I would vote for it. Problem then of course is what to do with the current existing ships?

 

44 minutes ago, Lukas97Austria said:

Remove port bonus entirely. Let s wood and normal wood in. And all is fine as it was. 

 

Btw remove the open world wind boosts. Thanks 

The port bonuses makes crafting more centralized, in that way you dont have people crafting in random ports.

I actually like that the highest investment points for port bonuses, have been placed in historic harbours/capitals/important places.

The windboost thing just makes life easier for traders, and makes us aware of where the windboost are, so we dont afk sail for hours. 

 

I vote for the current system of points in ports, to stay as it is.   :)

Edited by Nixolai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Liq said:

Would be interesting to see what the communitys opinion is on removing port bonusses :)  I would vote for it. Problem then of course is what to do with the current existing ships?

Well hard to tell. I doubt that the devs and most of the people can't quit on there superior ships. I wish we wouldn't have that  . People that capture ais wouldn't be let out than. And the overall gap of people being competitive will be closer and more focused on skill ( also when some upgrades still might make super ships) 

 

I personally had no issue in giving away all my ships. Even when some of them are pretty good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...