Saint George

On behalf of all of players who chose the PVE server because we just cannot invest more than a few hours a week in the game, please revert back to having all RAIDER attacks on clan owned ports populate on Friday for the following 7 days as it used to be. Furthermore make it so that there will be a minimum of 48 hours between the time the RAIDER attacks are populated and the first attack happens. Perhaps even make it so all RAIDER attacks occur on weekends. Due to real life demands and obligations there are a great many PVE players that just cannot log onto the game each and every day to see if one of our clan owned ports is threatened and try to defend it. Lately so many time we log on the one day a week or so that we have the opportunity to play only to find that a port we worked very hard to capture and developed is now owned by a clan from another nation. No doubt the couple hundred full time players with nothing else to do probably love the current way and will resist this suggestion. But there are literally hundreds of other "part time" players that are playing less and less because of changes that are making it very difficult to enjoy the game. PVE server has begun to feel a lot like PVP without the PVP.

Would like to have the ability to fight from 3rd person perspective. Wondering if we could get the ability to target an enemy ship and fire on it from the 3rd person, zoomed out view. Perhaps a simple method of clicking the enemy ship you are targeting, along with a set of brackets projecting from the ship in 3rd person view, similar to the aiming brackets when in deck view. Bracket firing arc could remain grayed out until guns are aligned with the target at which point the bracket would turn green. Player still fire manually using either spacebar, left mouse or bracket keys. And thus it would require careful timing on the part of the player still to shoot accurately. Nothing with how we control sailing should have to change with this.

At the New Smyrna defense week before last we defended against the Raider AI attacking fleet. Per the original post explaining the mechanics if the Raider attack and how to defeat them, part of which I have quoted above, we did exactly what that post said to win. And we still lost. 1) We sunk every one of the enemy trader ships before they ever got near a capture circle. According to the what the developers wrote, this should have been enough to win, since the enemy requires 1000 points for victory and the remaining warships, all Essex, could only generate 270 points total even if the ya all got to the capture circles. 2) We also sunk 25 -30 percent of the Raider warships before they got to the capture circles. Once again, per the developers instructions, the Raiders should not have been able to generate enough points to win. However, we did notice that once the first enemy warship entered a cap circle that circle instantly went Red indicating the enemy captured it. Then we noticed a slow but steady gain in points by the enemy, perhaps 2-3 points per second, and the rate at which the enemy earned points seemed to increase as more enemy warships entered the circles. We continued to fight the warships at the circles but soon and very rapidly, the enemy points reached 1000 and the battle ended giving the Raiders the victory. The player fleet however was not accumulating points over time for owning all three circles in previous defenses against Raider attacks. We were not even allowed to capture them once the capture timer had expired. In the developers instructions there is no mention of the enemy being able to earn points over time just for owning a circle. It does not say that the enemy instantly captures a circle when one ship enters it. It does not state that players cannot capture circles and earn points over time for holding them. The enemy does not "pick the best wind". The wind does not match open world wind in Raider attacks as it does all other battle instances. The wind is instead is positioned to favor the Raiders wherever they spawn and the Raiders will spawn based off of where players enter so as to force player to sail against the wind. Essentially Raiders get to "scout" but players don't. So is the enemy supposed to be able to accumulate points over time for having one or more ships in a circle IN ADDITION TO the 35 points they get for each warship that gets in and 325 for each trader? And is the player fleet not supposed to be able to capture circles, accumulate points over time for holding the circles, and stop the enemy from doing so by having more ships or BR in the circle than the enemy? It seems the battles are either not working as they are supposed to or the developers post describing how the battles work is very inaccurate. Because if the Raider PBs work exactly as the developers posted then we should have won the battle at New Smyrna week before last.

Lets try to keep some reality in the game. Yes storms happened while ships were at sea. But very rarely would captains engage in combat under such conditions. The likelihood of loosing a mast or flooding would have been far too great. They would be more concerned with keeping their ship afloat than engaging any foreign vessel that they might rarely encounter in such conditions. Some rain in battle with the mild/moderate seas we already have would be okay. But certainly not tropical storm/ hurricane conditions.

Nice boat. Thanks. Feels very under gunned with 9 pounders. So the "5th rate" label feels misleading. But that may because of the AI "Buff". 32 Lb carros may be the way to go.

This AI change feels more like a serious AI "Buff". All AI regardless of wood now absorb damage as if they were Live Oak and White Oak with all the armor upgrades and books. And their guns hit as if they are always shooting Double Charge or Double Shot or both. Going 1 V 1 against one AI of same rate is usually a win, but rough still. But going 1 v 1 against a higher rate is a serious gamble. Going 1 v 3 against even AI one rate lower and you better have plenty of repairs on board. Almost got sunk in a Live Oak White Oak Pandora fighting 2 Mercs and a Navy Brig. Had to repair 4 times and when the last Merc went down I was taking on water. Even being in a Live Oak / White Oak Pandora maneuvering and angling with them wasn't an issue. But 1 of the 3 usually had a pretty straight shot. And their reload rate were extremely fast. Almost twice as fast as mine. As it is this AI "buff" may turn every fight into endless stern raking as the only sure means to victory and that is quite boring. Perhaps the AI have been made inadvertently too strong in all other areas except those that were converted to "weak spots". This change forces us to make more realistic choices when choosing what AI fleets to engage and which ones to avoid with the ship we are in. And we like AI to be challenging. But GEEZ. Maybe dial it back a bit.

Exactly.

Ship Rates as most of us know were historically based on number of guns. For example the history books state that "A third rate was a ship armed with between 60 and 84 guns, usually on two or more continuous decks, with the 74 gun ship of the line being the most common." Now, since firepower can vary considerably between ships of the same gun number, but having different gun sizes, it makes sense in a game like this to base rates on the maximum attainable broadside weight of a ship as armed with the largest caliber / pound shot guns it can equip. Other factor like Hit Points should only be used to determine rate if the ship is sort of "on the fence" between one rate or another. This would prevent ships with similar HP, like the Constitution and Bellona, being rated the same, even though the Constitution can only muster a broad side weight of 704 in game but the Bellona can achieve a broadside weight far greater at 1064 in game.

"Rates" as used in the British system, and really the standard for rating, since few other nations used such a system as widely, should be based 1st on the number of guns, 2nd on gun size, 3rd perhaps a small amount of consideration for number of continuous decks, but only after the first two criteria have been accounted for, and only if one more factor is needed to determine rate, in such case that a ship is sort of on the fence of being one rate or the other. HPs should have nothing to do with it since ship tonnage/displacement could vary wildly due to materials used even when the ships were of exact same dimensions. And because using such a factor as HPs could make one build of the same ship a lower rate or higher rate, depending on the wood types and upgrades used in game. Of course then there are the historical reasons. For example the history books state that " a 3rd rate was a ship armed with between 64-80 guns, usually on two or more continuous decks, with the 74 gun Ship of the Line being the most common!" And thus, for example, in no way should the 54 gun Constitution be classified a 3rd rate, since it is clearly 10 or more guns short of what any 3rd rate would have carried. Never mind the fact that it's guns were smaller than those carried by most 3rd rates at the time. The fact that you can get its HPs close to that of a Bellona is irrelevant.

Precisely Texas. Someone gets it. Keep the zones as are and make the gulf a PVE zone as once planned. Finding the balance for those that want to be hard core full time PVP'ers and those that prefer a more casual play experience is going to be key to keeping game alive and players coming back. And we all know those "Safe Zones" around capitals are not at all that, as Chris knows all too well. They are the favorite hunting grounds for PVP'ers to prey on noobs and casuals for easy rewards. Balance is the key.

There is a bug with the Open World trading feature that was implemented that allows transfer of cargo between ships at sea. It allows a player to move a full load of cargo from ship of much greater hold size to the hold of a much smaller ship and do so as many times as the smaller ship has hold slots for. The cargo transferred occupies a single hold slot of the target ship without a load restriction. In the example pictured, a player has moved 133 Danish Beer from the hold of an Indiaman to the hold of a Basic Cutter 16 times, once for each hold slot on the Basic Cutter.

Yeah the guy just being a prick, using any game mechanic he can to just waste peoples time. He has no honor. Guess he gets a laugh out of it. Never seen him do anything in any battle but run around in fast 6th rate ships staying just out of range. Rarely fires a shot if at all.

I don't understand why we need the new currency"s, other than the historical accuracy perhaps. And I belive most currency of the time, regardless of the nation that minted it, used Gold, Silver and Copper to do it. Adding actual national denominations Seems like it will complicate the economy unnecessarily. Using Gold and Silver and Copper is simple and easy to utilize.

Yesterday saw a WO plank Bucentaure get sunk by 3 shallow boats very easily. The thickness changes are probably too much. A ship of the Line getting sunk by a large fleet 10 or more 6th rates, given enough time and shot, is understandable. But for 3 of them to sink a 2nd rate so easily is just poppy cock.

Just get rid of CONTROL all together. If I want to keep an enemy in a fight then I need to keep him tagged. Once he is able to maneuver out of range of my guns or if I cant hit him due to my poor gunnery skills he deserves to escape. The current escape two minute escape timers cool down works fine for keeping enemy in battle if a player can shoot worth a damn. We don't need what amounts to a Star Wars Tractor Beam or Interdictor Gravity Field Generator on 1800s sailing ships.