Alliances discussion + Poll

[Maxus]

This is genius.

Lumping nations together based on population. Marvellous. Can't wait to see certain nations get annihilated.  

[Salty Sails]

It’s called War Server, so a big NO to Alliances. 

You took so many content away, with a alliances system, you can attack less players. 

So, Whats the point in playing NA in long Terme. No rare Reaources, no trading, no Important regions, no special trims Or Woods. With alliances sytem you will have xx % less enemies on a War Server! 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Salty Sails

[Guest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

1 minute ago, Salty Sails said:

It’s called War Server, so a big NO to Alliances. 

You took so many content away, with a alliances system, you can attack less players. 

So, Whats the point in playing NA in long Terme. No rare Reaources, no trading, no Important regions, no special trims Or Woods. With alliances sytem you will have xx % less enemies on a War Server! 

 

Alliances only for rvr is the best

[Masaven Kanetsuji]

This is a bit unclear and I was not around when this used to be represented in the game.

Pirates and Great Britain are alone, not aligned with anyone. Does this mean they could join in on other wars for either side? It would make the game much harder to not be able to rely upon other nations because I am aware that there are player made alliances between clans of opposing nations.

Regardless of what is decided I think it would allow for a rather interesting turn of events.

[Botq]

Thanks for this poll, but i would just made it in-game poll for everyone for example when you log in this simple poll would pop up. Not many people going to forum.

[Sir Texas Sir]

Ok let me reorganize this list by size.

Current populations

• Great Britain 26.86%
• Pirates 14.52%
• France 10.21%
• Russian Empire 9.33%
• United States 9.15%
• Spain 8.83%
• Sverige 8.76%
• Dutch  4.88%
• Prussia 3.61%
• Denmark 2.87%
• Polish Commonwealth 0.97%

Lets bring back to the original nations that are historically accurate for this time and not brought in to please players of those nations.

• Great Britain 26.86%
• Pirates 14.25%
• France 10.21%
• United States 9.15%
• Spain 8.83%
• Sverige 8.76%
• Dutch  4.88%
• Denmark 2.87%

Russia, Prussia, Polish is only 13.9% of the population....Where would they go if we went back to the original nations that are historically from this time period?  Now lets take out Sverige and Denmark.

 

• Great Britain 26.86%
• Pirates 14.25%
• France 10.21%
• United States 9.15%
• Spain 8.83%
• Dutch  4.88%

That is now 25.54% of the population that isn't in the main core 6 nations.   We would expect them to spead out between these nations and maybe filll some of the weaker ones.   

 

The problem with the coalitions is that server numbers won't stay the same with forge papers as some folks move around from time to time.  Historical alliances wasn't always the same between 1700 to 1820 either.  Though we are pretty much stating the alliance is off the Napoleonic Wars which was from 1803-1815 (within the game time scale).   If there was any forced alliance this would actually make since.  Though it would mean that some folks that have some odd hatred towards certain nations would have to switch nations to keep that hatred.  Like how pirates and France in US prime time love to camp US coast line...France players that do this will have to go to another nation or join pirates.  Meaning the game numbers balance will change.

Effectively it would mean we are breaking the server into 3 main goups and than pirates.  Much how POTBS was with French, Great Britain, Spain plus the Pirates.  If we do this can Pirates be turned into an Impossible nation and be made a true hard core nation, or give them one port in the shallows to start from?  They should never be a major RvR nation, mainly your OW pain in the side of other nations.

[Ligatorswe]

I think the problem with the propsal is that noone knows what nations will have most numbers in the future. I am quite positive to an alliance-system, but think your proposal wont work due to that.

You need a system which functions even if, lets say, poland should get 30% of the players ingame and becomes number 1 nation. 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Ligatorswe

[GIBZ]

If you enforce an Alliance system, it should be in relation to population%, position on the map in relation to other AND time zone. I'm very positive to the idea of having less nation and forcing a kind of balance, but do it in a way it make it possible for Alliance member to have a fair chance.  like the North alliance, man... just nuke the french instead.... It'll be less painful

[p i t]

Devs vs devs atm

[Angus MacDuff]

1 minute ago, Ptigibus said:

If you enforce an Alliance system, it should be in relation to population%, position on the map in relation to other AND time zone. I'm very positive to the idea of having less nation and forcing a kind of balance, but do it in a way it make it possible for Alliance member to have a fair chance.  like the North alliance, man... just nuke the french instead.... It'll be less painful

You can never run a system based on current numbers.  Even if you used active players or based it on active RVR players.  The simple fact is that we can all change nations whenever we want.  If you're going to do Alliances, then reposition them on the map so that there is a fair start-up for Frontline play and let the chips fall as they may.  Positioning will be very important.  If you combined US/France/Spain right now and put France at New Orleans to keep them close, then their natural target would be Pirates...very unbalanced.

[Ligatorswe]

Just now, Angus MacDuff said:

You can never run a system based on current numbers.  Even if you used active players or based it on active RVR players.  The simple fact is that we can all change nations whenever we want.  If you're going to do Alliances, then reposition them on the map so that there is a fair start-up for Frontline play and let the chips fall as they may.  Positioning will be very important.  If you combined US/France/Spain right now and put France at New Orleans to keep them close, then their natural target would be Pirates...very unbalanced.

Well yes. What we would see if we got a system based on current numbers is whole clans that move nation, to exploit those numbers.

(I already know about clans that will switch nation after wipe, so it would be a misstake to think that todays numbers will be the correct numbers to use.)

[Crim Darkfire]

Just take it back to a few years ago. Putting all the mechanics taken away if you really want this desired result.

-You enforce alliances historically and you will see nation changing by clans and it will be unbalanced but game enforced until you further reduce the community and beginners roll the dice on whether they choose the appropriate nation.

-Current system works minus rogue clans. Clans group up in the nation, nations group up to fight other nations. Autobalance. You could delete a few nations like Russia, Prussia, and Poland. Why? Before they were put in the original nations were populated. Now you just have 3 unpopulated nations to include 2 of those. Some of them were not even in the gulf for your "historic accuracy".

-You roll the game back to old days where the players voted weekly for alliances and suddenly you have a player/game enforced alliance system. But do not exclude pirates because the pirates mechanics of the old days were stripped away just turning the pirates into a conventional nation instead of the rogue bandito they were.

If you hell bent on losing new players quicker from the game and getting poor steam reviews, by all means continue the direction you're taking. Add the historic forced alliance and within 2 week watch it be broken from everyone nation changing creating whole alliances (not nations) becoming unpopulated.

Regards

 

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Crim Darkfire

[Sella]

Alts will ruin the forced alliances. The same guy will play with 3 characters in each nation and shape the map as he and his clan wants. You will have to go into great lengths to stop them from interfering

[Salty Sails]

29 minutes ago, El Patron said:

Alliances only for rvr is the best

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

Edited May 3, 2019 by Salty Sails

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Salty Sails said:

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

fun and nice battles

[Beeekonda]

1 minute ago, El Patron said:

fun and nice battles

 

lol

[Crim Darkfire]

It would be nice if devs could address current problems instead of creating new ones. Killing your game keeps your from making the money you love so much.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Crim Darkfire

[Salty Sails]

2 minutes ago, El Patron said:

fun and nice battles

You can find them in open world or in patrol zones. You don’t need allies for good battles. They can join now on your side if they want. 

[Guest]

Could there be an idea to have voting tickets for ingame currency? This would let people that play the most either they pvp, pve or just trade have a earned position in the voting market.

Lets say 1 vote = 100 000 reals, maybe add some value for combat medals or victory marks for people that do mostly pvp or rvr. By doing this alts wouldnt be as valuable as before which was the problem when people had alts to infiltrate the voting system.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

3 minutes ago, Salty Sails said:

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

Points limits, even the high grade ports with 55 points, do not allow the building of everything - forests, fortresses, shipbuilding improvements, etc.

A measure of planning is needed in one region, but yeah, you have a good point in that "war for control of resources" and "war for trade" which was prevalent in the age of sail is now behind us since the last hotfix.

With Alliances the objective of parity between teams is clear, but i thought we had moved away from Nations and into Clanwars.

I am really confused at this point and wondering if any nation based alliance system comes into play again doesn't make clan based obsolete.

Personally I think an Alliance mechanic is not a simple RvR numbers subject but will touch all aspects, including the reason for the existence of clans ( e.g. royal indias companies )

[Jovzin]

If I may add.

What about old politics system ?  I think it was good to have votes which 2 nations will be at war and which friendly.

And to prevent some spamming of the same alliances put there some Cooldown timer ?  Like you can not vote again for the same nation for next 48-72 hours ?  

So each day or how was the reset of politics nation will be forced to vote for different ally.  So there will be some rotation and you will be able to not have status quo...

Edited May 3, 2019 by Jovzin

[Sir Texas Sir]

13 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

You can never run a system based on current numbers.  Even if you used active players or based it on active RVR players.  The simple fact is that we can all change nations whenever we want.  If you're going to do Alliances, then reposition them on the map so that there is a fair start-up for Frontline play and let the chips fall as they may.  Positioning will be very important.  If you combined US/France/Spain right now and put France at New Orleans to keep them close, then their natural target would be Pirates...very unbalanced.

It needs to be hard code game factions.  Player numbers will go up and down as folks switch nations and move around.  I think France should keep it's current location.  It could be a front to push into that side of the map for US/Spain/French.   Seems the Northern Coalition would be the on each side so it can hold back Franch or they can come over to NO and claim that area.  The main thing is where would they put Poland, Prussia, Russia's capital.  Prussia did rent one port but Russia never had a port of call nor did poland, only troops posted dureing teh Napoleonic war in cuba.   It would be interesting to see what the map would look like.

This is the historic map that I believe PvE is going off.  Would be interesting to see what areas those three nations would start or would Prussia/Russia start with no port and have to create one?  

 

6 minutes ago, Salty Sails said:

What RVR? Almost every port is now the same without rare resources or refits! You can put every damn forrest  in every port! 

So, tell me, what are your goals now in RVR?

Did Pirates and French pretty much run US up to coast to no ports for resources?  No they did it cause they could and it gave them daily fights.  Resources aren't every thing.  Though some nations might want to take a certain port just so they can have a resource and keep it out of another nations hands.

[Tac]

I vote for a spinning  wheel of diplomacy that I can spin whilst afk sailing ,there has to be a wedge on it that has “Everyone at war with Sweden”.

[Beeekonda]

1 minute ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

 

 

Did Pirates and French pretty much run US up to coast to no ports for resources?  No they did it cause they could and it gave them daily fights.  Resources aren't every thing.  Though some nations might want to take a certain port just so they can have a resource and keep it out of another nations hands.

Taking ports with empty port battles... mmmmm... much Fun

[Hawkwood]

What we have now, already in game and daily, is basically that proposed "Northern Coalition" with GB, is fighting "Western" coalition and "Holy Alliance". More or less actively, and with different intensity at different fronts and without fixed alliances. Although i must admit, i have never seen any US clan actively doing large scaled RVR operations in any part of the Caribbeans, except some minor PBs in Bahamas, (except for being  russian vassals, which is, considering the state of US nation, understandable).

Me personally welcome the port usage rights, and clan alliances. Good idea. But how would fixed alliances affect the open world PVP?( Vernon Merill has a good point there).

Trading between nations would be far more easier, which is a good thing

A campaign or tasks from Europe is what i would like to see, some kind of Coalition/National goal which has to be achieved, like in Total War series.(conquest X ports, conquest X region, conquest X regions etc.)