Hethwill, the Red Duke

Fun is where the player wants to be. There's literally "infinite" funs out there.

They will join in the original areas. So depending on the battle flow until that moment they might be even closer.

Excellent of you to point this out because, for too many players, it seems like this "small" detail was missed due to selective memory or fixation only on negativity. And that makes a WORLD difference for the "safe zones" alone. And it was requested a LOT by a LOT of players, for the battles to be always open so they can be helped and helped their buddies. Rests to see if it is used. +1

Anything excluding 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st rates. Any AI ships that are player fleet are not ruled by this and can be captured.

Incentives to leave greenzones, even if the El Dorado was promised... ... game mechanics cannot be expected to replace player choices. As choices are what makes the mechanics worth. So no point in whipping the mule.

You can capture a ship without the fleet perk. You just can't keep both ships without the fleet perk. In the crew transfer window you have a transfer option to change to the capture ship. Regarding your first question, I am sorry I do not understand what is being asked.

You can capture a OW AI ship and get back to action in no time. Just NOT the 1st rate you want, how you want, when you want. For that you have to play a bit more than simple "gong farming".

RP has nothing to do with it. Actually and somehow this entire scenario is always about the SP vs the MP, unless we want to lie and convince ourselves that is "for the great common good!"... Funny that it reminds me of this

Looking at the discussions going on, and in a matter of jest a "disclaimer" announcement is needed everytime a captain presses SAIL in the PvP server warning of the dangers inherent and natural to a environment where, beyond the horizon there might be the entire invincible armada. Player presses "I Understand" button and there we go. Problems solved.

In ED a trader ( or a smuggler ) actions will interfere with the systems status quo. There's that. Is not about the coin at a point, but about what the results will be if you keep delivering forbidden weapons to a rebellious faction, just as an example, so drive a civil war in a system. Plus the galaxy is common. No separate map. A system lost is a system lost to everyone including the solo/group. No one cries. Everyone's actions are important to the outcome. Plus the AI patrols the areas actively, they scan you, they hunt you, you get bounties, you get actively hunted down no matter if you pvp. Had a hefty bounty just by smuggling forbidden goods and escaping Feds multiple times ( let a lone a mission where I was framed to murder a fellow ), let alone the way the wars are conducted with the conflict zones pair with the blockade running and opposition interdicting incoming traders, no matter if AI or human. If a group wants a system to fall it has multiple ways to do it. Comparisons are fairly moot. Like any game, if I play only my belly button there's a lot to miss, ED is no exception

Appropriate ruling on the issue using Solomon's law.

Rules are not opinions. Closed. Developers may reopen it or add input if they see fit.

Wow, crickets went silent. Anyway, that specific is over 100% baseless so stop acting smart in this case. Reply to this will be removed without any consideration. To the OP. The rules are very clear. - accusation of exploits without proof are not permitted. Instead gather enough hard data and present them to development team in private. My personal views on trolling are my own and not covered by the rules though.

Pro PvP powergaming ( it is a natural thing in mmo, to maximise the "toon", right ? ); should not be confused with efficient pvp with whatever ship build, which is more akin to "learn the qualities of the ship and the defects of others"; modules/builds are of no concern. Truth is no Pro PvPer ( or whatever you want to call them ) would play with a "whatever ship rng given by the admiralty". They must have the half win button, 80% of them. Equal fights... riiiiight.... Barely they talk about 1:3 like the 1% aces actually do, more glory to them. At least have the decency of raiding trade with proper privateering models. Just as a comparison... well not really but food for thought...been playing dynamic wars in another game where the captain of the ship has to use whatever he is given ( or the HQ can provide ) and with a high degree of uncertainty of what will be found on the way in and back from the missions. Perma death. Dead is dead. So it is a fight to win, and a fight to survive. Not a fight to gloat like hogs in pro pvp mud.

Huh... it can be a pickle thing...

A fellow that relays TS orders into team chat is a must. It helps everyone ( in many multiplayer games I simply mute like half the people as they really think they are being funny when they aren't. Especially those that call every other player a "retard", "idiot", etc )

How difficult is it to always respect anyone and everyone ?! A lot it seems... some captains win pvp marks just by being truly obnoxious. Somehow they expect everyone else in the world to accept their egocentric out takes. But...Rule 1 covers most of it.

On shore leave playing IL-2 Sturmovik

Wikileaks ?

Watch out, it is April's fool though.

Quality of Life is a way to fuse Distance ( and time to perform ) and Danger ( outside own choice ) and Time ( planning cruises ). In a sense it is all condensed to promote fast access to combat. Tilting the balance of QOL vs solo ROE is complicated in a sense that reverberates through the entire spectrum of solo/group/eco/pvp/duel/moba/sim miscellaneous groups we have. Less QOL means more logistics means timescale extends ten fold. Despite the shortcoming of fast access to action, also give way to more prolonged campaigns, weeks of raiding, etc. It is a double edge. More QOL, means total free reign of engagement wherever the forces want, with whatever force they can at any given moment. Despite the negatives of the weakest forces being swamped by concentration of effort, the big positive is exactly that fast access to battle. Reducing all to a full QOL + ROE scenario, to fit balance of force will be a odd result ( especially given the nature of instances ). I am all for anything and played all styles and I much rather lose the QOL than having a locked ROE to please faceoff arena instances.

Of course ! As I said, a mechanic must work both ways, equal opportunities for all playing parties.

Like taking a fort ?

As long as any captain can go on a "Cochrane" rampage type of thing and attack the outposts along the coast ( initiate a instance versus land structures ), sure. Bring it. Mechanics must be blind and work both ways. Equal opportunities.

They kept firing until something happened , hence so many close range combats, at the least you knew you'd be hitting AND if chance came, to board the enemy. Half the time they knew the battle was half won before the first broadside though - tides, wind, leeshore, and general knowledge of the enemy ship/captain. Yes, abstraction is present in all games based upon historical reality. Is information part of abstraction design to simulate a realistic outcome ? Maybe. I'd rather go with good old "unreliability" of the information aka. fog of war.