Nalyd

-AI fleets : I have a mixed opinion about them. The fact that you can't customize the ships in your fleet being one of the thing lacking to this feature plus the AI being a bit retarded when given orders (ask your bots to demast, they just switch to chains and keep shooting at the hull). AI fleets could be a good way to deal with the many unfunny part of the game. Especially when it comes to travelling and trading. I would like to be able to send a fleet of traders from one port to another (or just simply ships) so I don't have to make boring round trips and can focus on another part of the game that I enjoy. -About officers : So far, I like the general idea. I Don't really enjoy having 1 officer doing everything. I would rather have the officers working as in World of tank or any wargaming game. Having multiple officers on your ship with different sets of skill to select. A master for every skills concerning navigation ; a Surgeon for every skills related to crew regeneration, health ; The gunner with skills about reload time, accuracy, men needed per gun etc... -About fishing : I don't really care about fishing, it's nice and shiny but that's pretty much it, no really a game changer like I would have expected, if only fish meat actually have a purpose outside of being a crafting ingredient. You should be able to use fish meat to regen crew at sea, of course not at an incredible fast rate but still, 1 crew for 5 fish meat for example could be great. -About new graphics and sound : I like them so far, my only regret is that the new sounds are too inconspicuous, seagulls chirping should be louder and you should hear them from further away at sea for example. Voices in battle are also great, but too limited, I would like to hear the gunner shout "fire" when I shoot. Hearing my men screaming in pain and fear when I get hit by a broadside etc... -About the crew : I absolutely hate it. And the major reason for that is because medkits don't work like the actual repair kits. It shouldn't be something you have to put in your cargo but it should be on the side like the repair kits. The problem with having the medkits in the cargo hold is that you lose them if you ever get sunk or just surrender. It encourages again people to fight in gank fleets to preserve their ships. Right now if you want to PvP, you either have to get back to port after every fight and rehire crew, which is frankly boring, or you take the risk of bringing with you 300K worth of crew in medkit that you might lose at the first fuck up. Just making them work like the repair kit would solve most of the issue I have with the crew system. -About crafting. Not much to say, I guess it's cool that I don' have to click hundreds of time the craft button for some ingredient now. there is still too many "in between" craft. Like gold -> gold ingots -> gold coins, It would be great if you could craft gold coins directly from gold and coal without having to go through the "gold ingots".

Same goes for the Food supplies too. 250 to produce and 250 to buy from the NPC

Keep dreaming about having this game hitting a stable population of around 10K players without making any effort toward the "casuals" who only play a couple of hours a day. Even with a system like NewClearPower proposed you would still have to travel there once, making an outpost and having to organize to send your ship there in time. But I guess some people are just really into S&M and want to share this passion with other.

Or cheaper crew

By that, do you mean only 1 officier per ship (since we could see 3 officers slots per vessel) but you can have 24 officers if you have 24 ships. Or only 1 officer that you'll have to switch from one ship to another ?

all this concerns the PvP server 1 EU

And what prevents me from making 2 accounts to farm hostility point near a port I want to attack with this new system ? Now about the new design and the things that need improvement : This need to be changed, imagine that everybody is fighting around 18-20h, at the end of the day where most activities stopped the hostility level reaches 98%, then at 5AM, there is a dude that log into the game and finish the remaining 2% with PvE missions. At this point everybody will be forced to fight at the port battle at 5AM because the hostility level happened to reach 100% while most of them were playing between 18-20h. Keep the "2 days later" concept without the "in 48 hours exactly", so that if the hostility level reaches 100% the 24th, the port battle will happen the 26th. But for the port attack timer, just select the timer in which most of the points have been accumulated. If the majority of the hostility points happened to be earned between 18-20h, then the port battle should be set between 18-20h. Those port should be limited by nation. let say only 3 ports can reach the port battle state for each nation, so it prevents all the port battle to happen at the other end of the map where 2 big nations are fighting leaving the others smaller nations with nothing to do. I sincerely hope that the port battle didn't already begun for the first 10-20mins in which only people with war effort commendations can enter. If it's the case it's a very bad system because you won't be able to fight fully for the first 20 minutes and elaborate a strategy if all 25 people with a war commendation don't show up. The solution for that is to make a lobby system within the port battle. When the port battle is launched and people can enter, you would have 2 sections : -The usual one with the front/middle/rear where you can decide where you'll be at the launch of the fight. -At the bottom, a lobby section where everybody who enter the port battle will be placed. -During the first 10 minutes, only people with a war commendation will be able to move from the lobby to the front/middle/rear sections and participate to the fight. -After those 10 minutes, everybody can switch from the lobby to the front/middle/rear sections, as long as there are still open slots obviously. -5 minutes later, the battle start. So basically you'd have 15 minutes of preparation time before the fight begun. People who stayed in the lobby at the start of the battle will be placed as "spectator" and will be able to witness the battle the same way you do when you're dead. This will prevent the recurrent issue when you attack a port and managed to gather like 27 people and 2 players will be left outside of the instance like a sacrifice to the screening fleet because the port is limited to 25 people only.

What I would like to see is that you spawn in the open world at the exact same spot you were in the instance when the battle is over

What I consider to be good ideas from the OP : To set up a port battle Nation must build an Assault Fleet Building an assault fleet requires weapons, troops, transports and supplies (any player can add them to the project) Once the project is fully supplied the construction starts It takes X days to complete the project Once the construction starts it will generate pvp quests for the Nation and Target Nation in the port zone Once the project is completed the port battle will start exactly 48 hours (2 days) after completion Here are my suggestions/alternatives : Before the port battle The port battle will happen no matter what if the project is fully supplied and the construction starts. Accomplishing PVP quests as the attacker will earn you "Conquest points" that will fill an "Invasion bar". Accomplishing PVP quests as the defender will earn you "Defense points" that will drain the "Invasion bar". This "Invasion bar" will have an impact on the Port battle itself depending on how much the attackers/defenders managed to fill/drain it when the project is completed. During the port battle I'm going to consider that the port battles will work as followed in this thread : http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13784-minor-port-battle-changes-next-patch/ The "invasion bar" will have an impact on the defenses of the port and will determine the conditions of the towers/forts in presence. If the "invasion bar" is full, then the forts/towers will be extremely damaged ( or even destroyed) right at the start of the port battle lessening the advantage of the defenders. However, if the "invasion bar" is at 0, the defenses will be in top condition giving the defenders extra protections. The "invasion bar" will also have an impact on the victory conditions. If we consider that reaching 1000 victory points first is required to win the port battle for both side under normal conditions, this requirement might change and tilt in favor of the defenders or the attackers depending on how much the "invasion bar" got filled. If the bar is full, then the attackers might only need 500 victory points in order to capture the port while the defenders still need to reach 1000 to snatch a win. If the bar is at 0, then it's the opposite.

This, I would rather have SoL's masts that need 50 balls to break each single one of them with a lower caliber gun instead of having mast made of adamantine.

The problem here is that this roadmap doesn't mention "port battle rework" but just straight out the 7 days features. This is the kind of modifications that are supposed to be delivered in a bundle of multiples other features for it to makes sense. What I'm afraid of is to see the devs throwing those modification one by one instead of waiting to have the whole thing done.

This, It gives a ludicrous advantage to the attackers and makes zerging to snatch as many ports as possible much more potent. It also means that if you're on the losing side, you need to hold the front for 7 freaking days before being able to retake the initiative and push back, which means potentially having to defend each port near the frontline 7 damn times each in a row without failing, otherwise you're in for another 7 days of pain. In fact, it doesn't even creates any sort of frontline either, since you won't be able to take the enemy ports next to yours because of this 7 days stuff, you'll have to either wait for these 7 days or strike further back into the enemy lines which will end up in a bloody mess where both side will hold ports inside the other nation territories instead of having a clean front. In my opinion, this change is just bad unless : 1-You have to warn the defenders where/when you'll attack 1-2 days prior to the assault so they can prepare 2-This 7 days timer is activated if the port is attacked whether or not they manage to take it, so that the attackers still need to plan carefully their assault instead of just brute forcing everyday until they take it. 3-The cost for attacking a port should be much more than what we have now. The cheapest should already cost more than a Million gold. taking a port is supposed to be a national effort, not something the average joe can buy after 2 AI fleet mission. 4-Finally I find the 7 days timer to be quite long and I'm afraid it will slow the pace of the RvR too much. Something like 3-4 days would be already more reasonable in my eyes.

I love this feature, I'm no longer forced to tag sinking ships to be sure they actually go to the bottom of the ocean instead of just magically disappear by the power of the christ despite being condemned. If you're constantly taking water despite having fixed all the leaks, that means your vessel took too much punishment and is well beyond salvation. What was stupid and arcadey is that you could leave and live another day while having your ship completely obliterated just because you could bail out after 2 minutes while it would have required 3 minutes for you to sink. Unless you believe in divine intervention to repair your ship. A sinking ship, even if it manages to disengage from a fight will still sink if you don't have the stuff required to fix it anyway. And I don't see what the heck do pirates have to do with this game mechanic.

This never works, it only delays the issue but in the end, you'll still have your death ball of 25 first rate.

And I could also say that a lot of people actually dislike the new system, and they just aren't as vocal in the forums either, because they simply leave. But neither you and I have the actual statistics to confirm or deny both those statement do we ?, your point and mine are therefore null of sense.