Scorpio Shirica

I think they found in testing that players are simply risk averse. The less amount of dura, the less amount of time players will actually risk their ships. This is partly due to the grind, players don't want to risk the hours it took to procure their ships. Crafters will have less people buying their ships, not more, with less dura, unless the grind is significantly reduced in how long it takes for players to accumulate the wealth to get said ship. At first glance, one would think ships would turn over more rapidly with less dura, but I think there is some serious underestimation of how risk averse players can be.

We did 25v25, that's the thread I was talking about. http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/8249-problem-with-25v25-port-battles/ It's not fun. People either run away if they don't have large BR and win by running. Or if the opposing side has super high BR, then they simply run over the other ships and win by ignoring them to destroy the towers. Unless something has seriously changed since we did that right before wipe, I doubt port battles have suddenly become much more fun. That's not to say they can't be, but we found after repeat battles, that mechanics can be abused really badly.

I posted a lot about this in... http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/8249-problem-with-25v25-port-battles/

I can't wait for a formal diplomacy system. Will make things like this so much less confusing.

The curse of success! Worse things to be had, I'm sure.

I'm in a guild that's pooling resources to build ships, so I'm less concerned for myself. However, I'd hate for small groups and solo players to struggle if crafters aren't selling ships larger than Brigs at reasonable prices. It's possible that people will only be in captured ships if they don't know a dedicated crafter to help them.

Broke a privateer's mast in my yacht, made fighting it a bit easier since they like to run off and snipe you from afar. Also makes boarding considerably easier. Also also, really fun to see splinters everywhere!

Would be nice for a formal rule of engagement to be against this sort of thing. Otherwise, notifying the large clans through diplomatic means is likely the best course of action. They can alert their members to be wary of that individual. It'll minimize their impact on the community and sort itself out in the long run.

And to clarify, doing missions solo appears to be the best way for EXP. However, when its changed back, group missions should be OK too.

No, thank you! And don't forget what I posted in the suggestions thread. I think the overwhelming positive reaction to this Steam release shows there are a lot of people who appreciate the hard work you developers are putting into this game.

Ah, so I wasn't going crazy when I came to this conclusion. Glad to hear it.

Mandatory subscriptions have not been added to the poll. Sorry for any confusion. It was never suggested by anyone here.

I agree, I think... in principal, they are a neat idea. However, I also think that they aren't being used the way the devs intended.

I like the -idea- of neutrals. However, I don't think they are being used the way they may have been intended. I agree that it might be best to simply remove them. The PvE crowd has their own server with its unique no friendly fire rules now anyway.

I will try to play twice as much in honor of your sacrifice.