Power of Freeports

[angriff]

I can understand why Freeports were put in but they offer unlimited power threat to the port upgrade efforts.  There is not a counter to the continual "Fleet in Being" threat provided by a Freeport.  There should be a method to reduce the ability of a Freeport to contain major fighting vessels.  This would allow a area fleet to attack the port and reduce it to just a trading port for a period.  My suggestion is to allow "counter-hostility missions" against the port.  Once successful then the port could not launch or accept via teleport ships of war above a certain rate (prevents sudden buildup). 

Raiders could still sally forth in 5th and below but 4th and above line ships could not for some timer period.  This would allow the clan that is area defending a method to counter the "Fleet in Being" threat not unlike a port blockade.   

While the port is being threatened with a counter-hostility the stationed fleet could sally forth and prevent the blockade similar to countering port hostility for other ports.  This would insure conflict around the area but allow the clan defending the area a method to reduce hostilities in the area.

As it stands now the ports are too powerful with teleporting ships and cannot be countered. 

[huliotkd]

as suggested before, freeports shouldn't give missions.  only national port

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, huliotkd said:

as suggested before, freeports shouldn't give missions.  only national port

Concur.  There is no possibility of "frontlines" as long as hostility drops from Free ports.

[angriff]

I dont think there needs to be an end but a method to counter.  This would reduce the abilities of free ports.

[Angus MacDuff]

Just now, Liberalism said:

And frontlines will never work with hardcore nations without missions from free ports.

There is no need for hardcore nations.  Give them all a capitol and then frontlines is a valid thing.  What is the point of "hardcore"??  The easiest nation in the game right now is Russia.  3 New capitols....Panama/Yucatan/New Orleans.  Or else ditch the whole frontlines experiment as a failure.

[Licinio Chiavari]

2 minutes ago, Liberalism said:

And frontlines will never work with hardcore nations without missions from free ports.

Well. Can be solved.

Case a) delete hardcore nations - we have already plenty nations.

Case b) (by Huliotkd) by the time the first player in an hardcore nation all same nations will be able to get only 3 random hostilities from a single random Free Port.

Case c) give hardcore a starting godforgotted port as "national" and uncapturable. But without C-area.

In all cases, cancel FFA towns hostilities.

[huliotkd]

7 minutes ago, Liberalism said:

And frontlines will never work with hardcore nations without missions from free ports.

once you switch to hardcore nation, you will find on map 3 random hostility missions for a random port...you have to accomplish that and take 1 port, whereever it spawns.    if you switch, you are supposed to be rich, full of ships and full of skill...so you can do it easy.

if you switch to hardcore nation after this nation took a port, you will not find any hostility mission set.

[toblerone]

23 minutes ago, Liberalism said:

And frontlines will never work with hardcore nations without missions from free ports.

I suggested the solution in another thread: each impossible nation should be free to choose just two freeports to start with (in the sense that once they took a conquest missions from a frist and a second freeport, they cannot take from other freeports).

Edited May 2, 2019 by toblerone

[Licinio Chiavari]

3 minutes ago, toblerone said:

I suggested the solution in another thread: each impossible nation should be free to choose just two freeports to start with (in the sense that once they took a conquest missions from a frist and a second freeport, they cannot take from other freeports).

In this case ONE. And no other hardcore nation could start from the same.

[angriff]

Well a mechanic that prevents the ability to take hostility missions might create the same mechanic but a little harder to prevent a large fleet from forming.  That is the tactical ability of an enemy to sail or form a large fleet instantly at a freeport is what I am trying to allow a region defender to use as a counter.

[Prince of Wales]

Why not just allow Hardcore nations to use any freetown to start initial hostility then once they have 1 capital they can only do mission from that national port??? (just a whim thought may have some flaws but may as well discuss it)

[Angus MacDuff]

23 minutes ago, Knight Stalin said:

Why not just allow Hardcore nations to use any freetown to start initial hostility then once they have 1 capital they can only do mission from that national port??? (just a whim thought may have some flaws but may as well discuss it)

Because any free port is a bypass  the frontier.  

[Prince of Wales]

1 minute ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Because any free port is a bypass  the frontier.  

but once they have a town they have to play frontier like everyone else... sometimes it seems you are just trying to be awkward for the sake of it on these forums

[Angus MacDuff]

14 minutes ago, Knight Stalin said:

but once they have a town they have to play frontier like everyone else... sometimes it seems you are just trying to be awkward for the sake of it on these forums

Thank you for the personal observation.  I'm really not trying to do that.  Using any freeport to establish themselves make a joke of calling them hardcore as they can choose the most advantageous starting point, while the other nations are stuck by their geography.  Why shouldn't all nations have a capitol?  Why shouldn't all nations have a specific start point, more or less evenly spread across the map. Free ports are great places to stage out of for PVP (we could use a few more of them), but they shouldn't be start points in a Front Lines format.  And that deems to be the format we will be using.  Might as well make it as even a start as possible.  

[Prince of Wales]

6 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Thank you for the personal observation.  I'm really not trying to do that.  Using any freeport to establish themselves make a joke of calling them hardcore as they can choose the most advantageous starting point, while the other nations are stuck by their geography.  Why shouldn't all nations have a capitol?  Why shouldn't all nations have a specific start point, more or less evenly spread across the map. Free ports are great places to stage out of for PVP (we could use a few more of them), but they shouldn't be start points in a Front Lines format.  And that deems to be the format we will be using.  Might as well make it as even a start as possible.  

You trade choosing your start for a reinforcement zone and a super strong capital port(The goods that drop and at the prices they spawn at)

Edited May 2, 2019 by Knight Stalin

[derekticus]

6 hours ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Well. Can be solved.

Case a) delete hardcore nations - we have already plenty nations.

Case b) (by Huliotkd) by the time the first player in an hardcore nation all same nations will be able to get only 3 random hostilities from a single random Free Port.

Case c) give hardcore a starting godforgotted port as "national" and uncapturable. But without C-area.

In all cases, cancel FFA towns hostilities.

AND, to kill the exploits of the Frontlines system, when a Nation scores Hostility vs a Port, have the code check, "Is this Nation allowed to gain Hostility here?", if the answer is "No", then Hostility level for that Nation should be reduced to 0%, AND, if it already was 100% through size of the battle, then the Port Battle set by this Hostility would be nullified.

In any case, there needs to be more time for testing.

[Prince of Wales]

10 hours ago, derekticus said:

AND, to kill the exploits of the Frontlines system, when a Nation scores Hostility vs a Port, have the code check, "Is this Nation allowed to gain Hostility here?", if the answer is "No", then Hostility level for that Nation should be reduced to 0%, AND, if it already was 100% through size of the battle, then the Port Battle set by this Hostility would be nullified.

In any case, there needs to be more time for testing.

Having ports gain hostility from killing players and AI in the area is part of the frontier system though from what i read of the system, but it wasnt meant to be loopholed through the use of alts. If it had to be done legitimately then it would be kinda hard building up the hostility off of places and the normal AI.

[Licinio Chiavari]

13 hours ago, derekticus said:

In any case, there needs to be more time for testing.

Yes.

But with an unbalanced server ATM it will be quite difficult...

[Ligatorswe]

15 hours ago, Knight Stalin said:

Why not just allow Hardcore nations to use any freetown to start initial hostility then once they have 1 capital they can only do mission from that national port??? (just a whim thought may have some flaws but may as well discuss it)

A great idea. Or at least that is how it should work for the three nations without capital. Once and no more.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Ligatorswe