Anolytic

Yes. That's part of the UI. They are working on it.

So more PvE-to-RvR. I always find something to be excited about with every new patch, however much it is criticised by everyone. This time I'm dreading the arrival of the new patch.

There is nothing unfair or unsporting about this. It is not a matter for the tribunal. Switching to your fleet ship in battle is an intended game mechanic.

It looks beautiful. And a very interesting setting. I'm definitely buying this.

The rule is clear. No Green on Green except if both parties agree (i.e fireships, scuttling). There is no ambiguity there. It was also quite clear from the ruling you linked that it was an individual case ruling with no impact on how the rules are generally to be interpreted. And even if it had not been, the circumstances of that case were obviously very different. There is also this rule to keep in mind: Back to the actual case, if OP does not want his case dismissed I advise providing actual proof of the accusation he is making. As of now all we see is that his ship sank. There is no log to prove Green-on-Green, video or even picture showing that he gets shot at. The location is obviously La Tortue, but he does not say what time it was or which server. And there is no reference to an F11 report. As of now this tribunal does not contain enough evidence to warrant further investigation and will probably be dismissed on lack of evidence.

In that case, the green-on-green was in response to "stealing" loot (otherwise known as piracy). The ruling absolutely does not give a blanket approval of shooting friendly missionjumpers. In the above case there is no indication, unless the accused testifies to such, that the missionjumper, i.e the accuser, was stealing loot or attempting to do so. Without a conversation happening in battle chat there is no justification for acting on such an assumption either. If this is the first case of abuse for the accused, I would assume that the appropriate response will be a warning, but I'll leave that judgement up to the Admiralty, and so should you Skully.

You mean much slower. Enemy will be arriving in frigates to keep you tagged in battle for 1,5 hours.

Nice try, Brits.

I love the artwork. The Game-Labs' artists are fantastic. It is inspiring to play this game, look at the details of the ships and the game-world. And the promotional artworks that are sometimes published are what attracted me to this game in the first place, and what will make me never give up on this game. Game-labs attention to art, to details and to historical facts deserves all the praise I can give. I also love the community. It is not always pleasant, but there are so many interesting and friendly people in this community.

Nice!

What about making them all craftable, and with resources that drop in decent quantity and in more than one port? Otherwise, make a randomly selected skillbook drop directly to your redeemables or ship hold for every 3000 damage done in PvE and for every 1000 damage done in PvP (example). Or, like Peter said, move every single skillbook to admiralty shop, so we can grind for them without having to suffer the RNG as well.

No. That's the Vasa (though also often spelled Wasa). Vasa was about 100 years earlier and very different design. This is the Improved Wasa class, by Chapman.

Are these your spies?:

Another contribution from our arts and crafts department:

Coming to a shipyard near you soon! The Wasa, by Fredrik Henrik af Chapman. Look no further. Here is the leaked crafting receipt for the new Wasa. A ship that is coming to the game with Unity 5 and which can already be taken for a spin on the testbed server: (click and expand to fullscreen to see full size image) This announcement is sponsored by: To learn about how you can already test out this beautiful new ship devs are giving us - if you haven't already -, follow this link:

Guess this is why 80% of game population is always in port:

This is not a helpful nor relevant comment. Take it in another topic than a feedback topic on a specific patch suggestion. Come up with sourced and relevant criticism of the contents of this proposed patch, or don't. Also, predicting that a game in Early Access Alpha will gradually be loosing players is like predicting that the sun will come up tomorrow.

Completely agreed. Also if I understand how this will work correctly, the difficulty indication will quickly become inaccurate, just like it is now. The difficulty indication will only really be relevant at the start of the map, and if/when a nation is "one-ported", i.e all their capture-able ports are taken. For any newcomer/non-RvR-player the difficulty difference will be imperceptible if say Sweden has their capital + 2 captured ports, while Danmark has lost all their ports/not captured any ports. The difficulty indication here refers only to number of uncaptureable ports it seems, but the real difficulty in RvR comes a lot more from player numbers in the nation and the number of organised players. Boredom has more influence on actual difficulty than number of uncaptureable ports. If this suggestion is to stand there needs to be some bonuses to the small nations in the end-game, and channels for them to recruit players from the big, easy nations. So that players can grind up max rank in Britain/Spain, and then decide to seek out a challenge in the smaller nations when they reach the RvR-endgame. As small states historically with absolutist monarchies, Danmark and Sweden could get a bonus to tax efficiency for instance. Also, forged papers should be nation specific. To join another nation you should need to know someone high ranked in that nation who can retrieve forged papers for you at his capital and trade them to you, which will allow you to transfer to his nation.

I just realized, that this means we will be able to one-port Sweden again! Almost makes me nostalgic.

I know. And I saw it on Testbed. But I much preferred the proposal that you discussed first in the other topic, rather than the one you discussed last. EDIT: Clearly I've been playing the game and not had time to keep up with the discussion of changes as they developed. I will have to read up on the previously mentioned topics. But my opinion stands. I liked the original idea much better than the modified one. EDIT2: I've expressed my reservations now. I will put aside any negativity and wait to test the update when it arrives.

These are all good things. Thanks. But why keep combat marks at all? At least remove combat marks/conquest marks/victory marks from ship crafting and keep them only for purchasing paints, blueprints and upgrades. This could go one way or another, but I fear that small nations will be doomed and clans unable to recruit as those who actually try to do something in those most difficult nations facing all odds will just be told to not complain about imbalanced and go play Britain instead... Then you might as well remove the small nations, because players are not going to chose nation based on difficulty, but based on history and affiliation. And as long as they can choose a nation, but are unable to play it due to the difficulty, they will just quit. Maybe I'm too pessimistic and coloured by past experiences in the game though. Please say that we can set friendly clans from other nations that can join our PBs. Maybe mercenary clans even, that do not own any ports of their own, but can be hired to help other clans expand control of regions. Why would you keep hostility grinding, but remove war supplies?

I always look forward to testing your developments, so too this time. There are some good stuff here, but overall, after reading what your clan wars idea was originally like, I cannot pretend that I am not quite disappointed by this new version. The previous proposal looked so promising on so many levels.

As you don't appear to put too high a priority on RvR I'd say you would be perfectly fine joining just about any nation on Euro. You could probably drop a pin randomly on the map and see where it falls. I am sure you would find good friends in Spain. RvR there could be difficult, but there is great potential for every other playstyle. The US is on the rise. They have a safe corner and some active groups from what I know, and new players and clans who have joined, so you won't feel like the only new guy. France gets you close to the PvP-action and fruitful hunting grounds in the Lesser Antilles. There's a language barrier, but you shouldn't have a problem to find a group who also speaks English. Ask King of Crowns how he likes it, as he also just came over from Global, though he might be more of a solo player than how you describe yourself. For solo hunters at least, France offers a lot of opportunities, especially when it comes to catching fat and overconfident Scandinavian traders. Dutch are quite possibly one of the most interesting choices. Although they suffer a bit from long distances within their core territories, they have shown great courage and spirit in RvR lately. With Brits you the variety is great as the player numbers are great. You will surely find a group that suits you. And there can be safety in numbers. Join Swedes if you like tight organisation, RvR, Group-PvP, and want the safety of numerical superiority. In Danmark we are a small nation, but with big ambitions and achievements. Diversity is a key word, and my clan, RDNN has players from all over the world and all continents. We have developed good cooperation in spite of many different languages and cultures coming together. By having a common national Teamspeak and working together towards common goals. My recommendation to you would maybe be USA or Dutch, but you would of course be very welcome to join us in Danmark-Norge and for instance RDNN:

I get the arguments for reducing the number of nations, although I believe devs have made it clear previously that it is not an option. However, why would you suggest removing the nations that are actually active in RvR and PvP? It would be more relevant to remove the inactive nations. If we wanted 3 teams, we should make it Swedes, Danes and Brits, and remove the rest. Since people also keep suggeting to reduce the size of the map, I've made a proposal that accounts for allt eh PvP- and RvR-action happening in the Antilles recently anyway: I do however agree with you that clan wars teams should not be limited by nationality. If we get proper clan wars, War companies need to be able to incorporate clans from different nations. Otherwise we make every problem the game has now in RvR even worse. With Clan wars and the War Company idea we have the perfect opportunity to make team numbers and sizes dynamic and self-balancing, taking a lot of the headache out of the hands of devs. All they need to do is make sure there is a mechanism to encourage at least two war companies to actually be in conflict with each other.