Alliances discussion + Poll

[Beeekonda]

3 minutes ago, Tac said:

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”.

I doubt 

[Hawkwood]

1 hour ago, admin said:

Proposed coalitions will have separate starting capitals but will act as allies allowing clan alliances between nations and port usage rights

Please underline this. Too many are still against some fixed alliances, having bad experiences from the past?

[HachiRoku]

I like the idea for rvr but for pvp I do not. Its nice being one of the 2% players in danes because there is always a 98% chance the next player ship is enemy. Especially now that I only can do 1-2 battles a week. If you were to do this it would be nice to make outlaws for pirates work. There needs to be a real hardcore nation. 

[Teutonic]

For the Simple fact that Nations would be able to sail with other groups in different nations - but they wouldn't be forced into that nation - I'd do this.

but this is definitely one of the least effective ways to fix our nation problem.

We keep saying there are too many nations, but for some reason the Devs are keen on keeping all 11 nations and even thought to add a couple in the form of different Chinese fleets?

This Alliance proposal is just a bad way in saying "we have too many nations"

That's it - that's the point here boys. 

[Beeekonda]

Whats stopping you to do so right now, without it being hardcoded? 

[Angus MacDuff]

The coalition idea might be better if each coalition only had one capitol.  Keep their flags....

[John Sheppard]

2 hours ago, El Patron said:

yes

brits are zerg 😂

zerg that can't fill 2 PBs? yeah.. right.. 

half of british population are ppl who don't cooperate with the rest of nation and 25% of the remaining is Chineese so

[Sir Texas Sir]

4 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

For the Simple fact that Nations would be able to sail with other groups in different nations - but they wouldn't be forced into that nation - I'd do this.

but this is definitely one of the least effective ways to fix our nation problem.

We keep saying there are too many nations, but for some reason the Devs are keen on keeping all 11 nations and even thought to add a couple in the form of different Chinese fleets?

This Alliance proposal is just a bad way in saying "we have too many nations"

That's it - that's the point here boys. 

It's actually not 11 nations, it's 3 nation groups and pirates.  Pretty much what POTBS had, but we can pick diffrent flags in our alliance by picking one nation or another.  For exactly If I don't want to fly the Sweden flag but me and your are buddies I can make a Danmark char, fly that flag but we can group up and fight int he same PB's.  All this really does is allow you to pick a sub nation within a Coalition of nations.

[Sir Texas Sir]

1 minute ago, John Sheppard said:

zerg that can't fill 2 PBs? yeah.. right.. 

half of british population are ppl who don't cooperate with the rest of nation and 25% of the remaining is Chineese so

That sounds more like and organization and team work problem.

[Severus Snape]

All I know is back in the old alliance system the game was exponentially more active and vibrant than it currently is.  Only 2 nations really are doing meaningful RVR / 3 if you add in Spain's PB the other day.  3 our of 11 is not very good ratio.  If the alliance system increases participation throughout the nations, I'm all for it.  What we currently have....is not working.

[John Sheppard]

Just now, Sir Texas Sir said:

That sounds more like and organization and team work problem.

you can't force ppl who don't care to actually care 

The only solution would be to make KPR capturable

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, John Sheppard said:

you can't force ppl who don't care to actually care 

The only solution would be to make KPR capturable

 

@ admin                              ^

Edited May 3, 2019 by Guest

[Angus MacDuff]

Just now, Severus Snape said:

All I know is back in the old alliance system the game was exponentially more active and vibrant than it currently is.  Only 2 nations really are doing meaningful RVR / 3 if you add in Spain's PB the other day.  3 our of 11 is not very good ratio.  If the alliance system increases participation throughout the nations, I'm all for it.  What we currently have....is not working.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that the current gameplay situation is steady state.  Only a few players are participating in the testing of these changes as they roll out.  Many are waiting for release and since we didn't even do a full wipe with the map reset, what we are doing is very artificial.

[Jorge]

3 minutes ago, John Sheppard said:

you can't force ppl who don't care to actually care 

The only solution would be to make KPR capturable

lol +1 🤣

[Baptiste Gallouédec]

Once we had swerg vs dansk, now russians vs brits.

Maybe this game is made to works best with a two nation RvR + pirates/privateers for those that want to hit whoever they want.

 

Make it a republicans vs royalists RvR game, each players/clan can pick a side no matter your nation, reset map & ress/ships if a side win, everyone can pick a choice again, etc..

 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Baptiste Gallouédec

[Sir Texas Sir]

13 minutes ago, John Sheppard said:

you can't force ppl who don't care to actually care 

The only solution would be to make KPR capturable

Wouldn't be the first time GB got one ported...lol

[Teutonic]

17 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

It's actually not 11 nations, it's 3 nation groups and pirates.  Pretty much what POTBS had, but we can pick diffrent flags in our alliance by picking one nation or another.  For exactly If I don't want to fly the Sweden flag but me and your are buddies I can make a Danmark char, fly that flag but we can group up and fight int he same PB's.  All this really does is allow you to pick a sub nation within a Coalition of nations.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

I agree with you that this proposal essentially makes it "less nations" but I was pointing out that you could essentially do the same thing by just having less actual nations.

Look, I truly believe this proposal is better than what we currently have, but I also believe it's a poor solution that doesn't quite solve the underlining problem.

[Sir Texas Sir]

Just now, Teutonic said:

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

I agree with you that this proposal essentially makes it "less nations" but I was pointing out that you could essentially do the same thing by just having less actual nations.

Look, I truly believe this proposal is better than what we currently have, but I also believe it's a poor solution that doesn't quite solve the underlining problem.

But but but than I can't have the cool flag and funny name/title before my name if we did that. Well the flag part could be part of the nation you pick from a large selection of flags in the coalitiions.   Maybe give generic titles per Coalitions?

 

[Angus MacDuff]

2 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Wouldn't be the first time GB got one ported...lol

That's why the definition "hardcore nation" makes me laugh.  GB has to be the most difficult nation on the map and if we were to do this coalition thing it would only get worse.  All of these nations who can no longer fight each other would look at the centre of the map and poor olde GB would be like a deer in the headlights.

[Angus MacDuff]

3 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

But but but than I can't have the cool flag and funny name/title before my name if we did that. Well the flag part could be part of the nation you pick from a large selection of flags in the coalitiions.   Maybe give generic titles per Coalitions?

A lot of players have the flag they fly as their top priority.  That's why we will never lose Prussia and Russia, even though it's silly to have them in the Caribbean (I can't explain Poland...).  I would switch nations right away to GB if I could have the Scottish Royal Flag (lion rampant).

[Anne Wildcat]

Revert to the old nations.  Introducing 3 new nations into RVR was a mistake. No hostility missions from free towns. Make 1 hardcore nation (true pirates) with no ports, can only raid ports, via old flag system, for resources, but the port doesn’t change hands. And give this hardcore nation outlaw battles. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

6 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

A lot of players have the flag they fly as their top priority.  That's why we will never lose Prussia and Russia, even though it's silly to have them in the Caribbean (I can't explain Poland...).  I would switch nations right away to GB if I could have the Scottish Royal Flag (lion rampant).

While off topic, thought they had one, or was that an Irish flag that GB has?

 

Back on topic the more and more I think of it if I had to pick the two options I would say lets do the coalition thing, but does this mean we aren't going to make a Spring Release of the Game or would it be something they can easily code in?

[Angus MacDuff]

Just now, Sir Texas Sir said:

While off topic, thought they had one, or was that an Irish flag that GB has?

 

Back on topic the more and more I think of it if I had to pick the two options I would say lets do the coalition thing, but does this mean we aren't going to make a Spring Release of the Game or would it be something they can easily code in?

They have a nice Irish ensign that is at least green and has a harp.  for Scotland they have a crappy little St Andrews cross in a red ensign.  Don't like it.  My previous point was to agree that if we were in coalitions, all of the flags would need to be available.  I don't think they should all have their separate capitols though.  Lets combine coalitions with a real reduction in nations.  If this were done, you could actually add in Portugal and tack them on to GB.  Sell a few more flag DLC's.

[Wilhelm von Seydlitz]

3 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

 

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? 

I finished and play another game ( or I go to the line infantry 😄😄 😄 )

 

3 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

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.  

This is Naval Action and not the old POTBS.

I do not like reading these comparisons with POTBS and EVE ONLINE anymore.........

Edited May 3, 2019 by Wilhelm von Seydlitz

[Georg Fromm]

Could you do me a favor? In a game with unhistorical city distribution, unhistorical distribution of resources and unhistorical ships for this period to refer to the coming nations or alliances on historical guidelines seems a bit ridiculous.

And who actually believes that a reduction of nations automatically leads to a better balance, does not seem to have much experience with this or other games. If the best RvR players in a nation / alliance come together then it's over with the balance. It does not matter if it's 5 or 11 nations. Already forgotten the PB reports where both sides were numerically equal in strength and one side has completely lost their fleet, while the other side has partially lost only 1-2 ships?

An attempt to balance NA in this way is already somewhat desperate.