Plans for Reputation and Sailing changes

[Archaos]

3 minutes ago, Despe said:

They dont need craft in russian ports because they have their own ports, but if he want and we are allies and friends they can do it, it is logical i guess put the things easy to your friends on game. Like real world with the real exisiting alliances and deals between countries. And they have this ports because we have a deal in which the 3 factions have a profit, you can ask brits or danes about if they think they are vassals of us. Both were in "NATO" and both draw, you can ask them for that.

And of couse if they attack us we try to take that ports, but you forget to said that maybe we can lose on that, and you forget too that this is the goal of game: war.

We are not dictators for allow brits or danes make his own alliances, or put in friend list the clans that they want. We play together for profit of all.

I think you actually believe what you are saying, but cannot see the truth in the situation. Many clans have some access to ships crafted in VC because it is a 74 point port so it can have better bonuses than a 55 point port. Why would you craft in a 55 point port if you had access to a 74 point port?

You keep comparing the game to real world, but its not real world its a game and in order to keep the game interesting to play it should not be the same as real world otherwise many nations would just surrender and Russia would be the ruler of the world.

Yes they can attack you and yes you could lose, but is that really likely???? As I said if they attack you they risk too much, losing access to their alts crafting in VC and most likely losing their own crafting ports. Note how close Russia remains to the two major Brit and Dane crafting 55 point ports, a constant reminder. And in any port battle they would be at a disadvantage anyway because Russia can craft better ships in their 74 point port so even if the Brits or Danes built up their fleet using Russian alts and had same quality ships they could not replace losses because their access to that crafting would be cut off.

You think you are not dictators but the subtle demands and threats are as bad as any dictatorship.

Anyway we have discussed this at length and I can only hope that the Devs read both sides and make a choice that is best for the game.

[Conte D. Catellani]

Danes and Brits were  in the Nato? 🤔

[Archaos]

6 minutes ago, Tiedemann said:

If you own the port, you control what clans has access it's features. There is nothing here to adress. Same as you home, you paid for it and you decide who can access it

I do not mind if we remove upgrades, skill books, port bonus, wood types and different cannon types. And then have all battles start with neutral wind. Then player skill in battle would be the only difference. But this has never been the direction of this game. This has always been a grinding game, and you grind to get an advantage.

If your writing about Sweden here I totally agree. 

I am afraid that port ownership and clan access is one of the biggest causes of nation disharmony in the game. The owner of the port controls who has access yet they expect the whole nation to contribute and then at a later date others that have contributed can be excluded with no recourse due to some petty argument or personal vendetta. If you do not feel that needs addressing then there is something wrong.

I agree removal of those things would not bother me and may actually make for a better game.

Why do people always try and trun the discussion into a Russian/other nations (you the zerg/no you) discussion. The same situation would occur no matter which nations were or were not in the game even with fictional nations the same would happen. There is an imbalance in the game and karma I feel goes a small way towards addressing some of the imbalance and it does not matter who the dominant nation are.

[Redman29]

9 minutes ago, Archaos said:

I am afraid that port ownership and clan access is one of the biggest causes of nation disharmony in the game. The owner of the port controls who has access yet they expect the whole nation to contribute and then at a later date others that have contributed can be excluded with no recourse due to some petty argument or personal vendetta. If you do not feel that needs addressing then there is something wrong.

I agree removal of those things would not bother me and may actually make for a better game.

Why do people always try and trun the discussion into a Russian/other nations (you the zerg/no you) discussion. The same situation would occur no matter which nations were or were not in the game even with fictional nations the same would happen. There is an imbalance in the game and karma I feel goes a small way towards addressing some of the imbalance and it does not matter who the dominant nation are.

Think about it for one second. 

I have 15 accounts. 13 I never fight with. Which means positive karma. Which means I can craft anywhere I want to.

So by your reasoning it levels the playing field. Ok so be it. If that is the case and you are fighting an enemy and see that their ships are being crafted by neutral players in your crafting port then by that reasoning they are no longer using their own crafting ports. So it should not longer be a big deal if you decide to take that port right? But what about the players who have just one account or a few alts to help their main as we all know how hard it is to craft solo? What happens to those players who don't have an army of alts to be able to craft wherever they want to?

If this system would benefit true neutral players then I would have no issue with it. But by in large it will benefit more from those with armies of alts. You think it will level the playing field, no it won't, it will level the playing field for the 1%, those of us with armies of alts and more money in game than we know what to do with. I mean I stand the most to benefit from this, hell take VC for all I care, I'll still be able to craft there with this system.  If you want to level the playing field then let's revert the game back to the way it was in 2016 with no port bonuses and refund the clan who owns the port the investments, I would be all for that.

As it stands, every clan that currently crafts in VC has contributed to upgrading the port and that effort should not be negated by opening it.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Redman29

[Cap Trujis]

We will have sales soon to buy others accounts. What whould be a good incentive to buy? 

Maybe craft in Vera cruz xD

[Archaos]

53 minutes ago, Redman29 said:

Think about it for one second. 

I have 15 accounts. 13 I never fight with. Which means positive karma. Which means I can craft anywhere I want to.

So by your reasoning it levels the playing field. Ok so be it. If that is the case and you are fighting an enemy and see that their ships are being crafted by neutral players in your crafting port then by that reasoning they are no longer using their own crafting ports. So it should not longer be a big deal if you decide to take that port right? But what about the players who have just one account or a few alts to help their main as we all know how hard it is to craft solo? What happens to those players who don't have an army of alts to be able to craft wherever they want to?

If this system would benefit true neutral players then I would have no issue with it. But by in large it will benefit more from those with armies of alts. You think it will level the playing field, no it won't, it will level the playing field for the 1%, those of us with armies of alts and more money in game than we know what to do with. I mean I stand the most to benefit from this, hell take VC for all I care, I'll still be able to craft there with this system.  If you want to level the playing field then let's revert the game back to the way it was in 2016 with no port bonuses and refund the clan who owns the port the investments, I would be all for that.

As it stands, every clan that currently crafts in VC has contributed to upgrading the port and that effort should not be negated.

Okay lets look at this another way. You have admitted that you allow certain other nation alts in your clan so that they can access the crafting bonuses in certain ports, so how do I get my alt on that list so I can access the bonuses? What do I have to do to become one of these preferential alts?

I take it I would have to not carry out any offensive actions against your nation on my main and not side with your enemies and aid them? If so it means you are exerting control over other nations actions using the threat of removal of access. If on the other hand you provide free no strings attached access to your clan for crafting purposes then how is that different from what is being proposed apart from the fact it takes away control from you. (maybe if I was a well known player like Liq then you would always have a place for me in your alt clan).

As it currently stands to be able to craft there I would need my alt to be in your nation so it means I now have characters in at least two nations, which can lead to some divided loyalties. With the proposed system at least my alts can remain in the same nation and my loyalties are not divided.

What is the fear about facing ships that were crafted in the same port that your ships were crafted? You already run the risk of that by allowing alts from other nations in your clan to craft, who is to say they do not craft and then sell the ships in a free port. Or maybe that is the issue you fear that others will now have access to craft and make money from your port investments. If so a solution could be as I suggested that neutrals are charged a fee per ship paid to the port owner to craft there. But I dont think you like that solution for some reason.

If you go from the angle of solo players and players with alts then you are opening up a whole new can of worms that solo players have been complaining about for a long time. The simple answer is that the game seems to have encouraged alts for a long time as long as they are not used to cheat the game systems. But the definition of what is classed as cheating is sometimes a very grey area. Yes we all know that sinking your alt for PvP rewards is wrong, but what about having an alt in another nation to spot ships sailing so your main can intercept? is that cheating? Does having multiple alts give you an advantage in crafting? The list goes on and yet you do not call that a slap in the face for others but now that there alts may be able to access the crafting in your ports it is a problem.

The playing field is not level at present and although this may not level it it takes away some of the lumps and I cannot see any issue with it as long as some form of compensation is given to the people who invested in the port by way of an additional tax or some other recompense.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Archaos

[Despe]

22 minutes ago, Archaos said:

I take it I would have to not carry out any offensive actions against your nation on my main and not side with your enemies and aid them? If so it means you are exerting control over other nations actions using the threat of removal of access.

it is not correct. It will be correct if there will be only a crafting port on game, but is not. All factions have their own ports. If you want the best ships, work in their investemments, using an alt for that is not moral.

[Cap Trujis]

5 minutes ago, Despe said:

no es correcto. Será correcto si solo habrá un puerto de fabricación en el juego, pero no lo es. Todas las facciones tienen sus propios puertos. Si quieres las mejores naves, trabaja en sus sistemas de inversión, usar una alt para eso no es moral.

People use alt to follow a PB fleet all time, use alt to spot enemies in PvP... If isnt moral craft with alter maybe we have to delete all alt? 

[GhostOfDorian]

1 hour ago, Archaos said:

The two ports you mention are only owned by Brits and Danes because Russia allowed it and they would lose them if they took any serious action against Russia, so it goes to reinforce my point as if they attacked Russia then they would also lose access to their alts crafting in Russian ports.

You have now started to change your tune regarding neutrals crafting in ports, originally the issue was because people were getting access to your hard work without contributing and when I suggest a way round that you now claim its a moral issue!!

It doesn't go about access to built ships. Everybody can craft ships in every port of his nation. And if Devs think that it is really important that players can start crafting ships also in foreign ports, it shall be that way. It goes about the special upgrades you get, crafting in special ports, which players and clans upgraded with a lot of work, money and time. It doesn't go about those players, who lost access to those upgrades to built their ships after. Since there is not one case known in this game, that a clan blocked a player or a friendly clan from the fruits of their work, when he was a real help upgrading that port. 

If I'm wrong with that tell me the name and what this guy contributed, and I guarantee you, if he really worked well for the benefit of his clan, he will immediately get at least 10 invites from the top clans in this game to join them. Since those top clans need nothing more than players who are willing to grind. That their ports have the best upgrades one can reach. They don't get it from alone. And that's the problem with the proposal you support so much. If a clan doesn't get an advantage over his enemies, players will not waste their time, to do that. The port upgrade mechanic becomes useless.

And in theory it would help, if those clans would get taxes from shipbuilders, which are not on their friendlist. But imagine that REDS alone paid chests worth not millions but billions of reals already to upgrade VC to 71 points. Such an extreme investment would require an attractive return. Therefore taxes crafters would have to pay in strange ports would be immense.

I can hear you already whining when you would have to pay 5 million reals extra taxes for crafting an Ocean in VC and 7,5 million after we have brought mast and rig to level 4. I can tell you that would be incredible cheap compared to the work we have to contribute for that goal. 

[Despe]

9 minutes ago, Cap Trujis said:

People use alt to follow a PB fleet all time, use alt to spot enemies in PvP... If isnt moral craft with alter maybe we have to delete all alt? 

maybe you need to read first about the allowed activities of alts, you have a post here in this forums on that. A post that seems you dont read, if you would have done you check that these activities are allowed. If yoy check a forbiddens activity on alt, report it. but stop trolling this post with comments like this and your first.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Despe

[Farrago]

I’m just spitballing here trying to address the legitimate complaints of those clans who have put in so much work with the idea of karma which I think is a good one for alliances and allowing a different style of gameplay.

1. Bonuses are available to clans on your friend’s list. Like we have now.

2. They are not available to those in your nation not on your friend’s list. Like we have now. An anti-ALT mechanic.

3. They are available to neutrals HOWEVER neutrals CAN NOT TOW ships in and out of that port. Maybe not even be able to teleport in and out. Clan owners will able to decide how much neutral traffic they want to allow in and out of their ports. Neutrals will probably need to escort in and out. Could generate PVP.

Obviously this restriction could be avoided by one more ALT in the owning nation. Neutral builds ship; gives it to someone in the owning nation who tows it out but selling more accounts is perhaps one of the secondary goals in this anyway.

(I must admit that my opinion is there never should have been port bonuses and if they had to be, each crafter should have to develop their own bonuses.)

[Cap Trujis]

15 minutes ago, Despe said:

tal vez necesites leer primero sobre las actividades permitidas de alts, tienes una publicación aquí en estos foros sobre eso. Una publicación que parece no leer, si lo hubiera hecho, verifique que estas actividades estén permitidas. Si comprueba una actividad prohibida en alt, repórtelo. pero deja de revisar esta publicación con comentarios como este y el primero.

Then craft with an alt it is prohibited? Its morally wrong for you but activities like using alt to interfere in pvp, spying following fleets etc.. Isnt morally wrong? 

[Despe]

16 minutes ago, Farrago said:

I’m just spitballing here trying to address the legitimate complaints of those clans who have put in so much work with the idea of karma which I think is a good one for alliances and allowing a different style of gameplay.

1. Bonuses are available to clans on your friend’s list. Like we have now.

2. They are not available to those in your nation not on your friend’s list. Like we have now. An anti-ALT mechanic.

3. They are available to neutrals HOWEVER neutrals CAN NOT TOW ships in and out of that port. Maybe not even be able to teleport in and out. Clan owners will able to decide how much neutral traffic they want to allow in and out of their ports. Neutrals will probably need to escort in and out. Could generate PVP.

Obviously this restriction could be avoided by one more ALT in the owning nation. Neutral builds ship; gives it to someone in the owning nation who tows it out but selling more accounts is perhaps one of the secondary goals in this anyway.

(I must admit that my opinion is there never should have been port bonuses and if they had to be, each crafter should have to develop their own bonuses.)

the problem is how you can controll the alter. With actual system you know who is the alter, but not with proposal system. Anyway you point of wiew is more interesting and playable.

And as i said, i have no problem with neutral players having port bonuses. BUT REAL NEUTRAL PLAYERS, and thats obvious that there are to few in PvP server. The most are alts of players that want to exploit this new mechanich in the case will be implemented.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Despe

[Cetric de Cornusiac]

5 hours ago, Castello Haufniensis said:

I am sure that the admin+moderators can tell me if I am overstepping any forum rules.

Where did I say so? I asked you about something else. You just shoot into the fog. Missed.

<<Are you some kind of selfproclaimed judge of which opinions  we are allowed to express?>>

--> well this delusion I am even too polite to name, when it comes to illness names in latin. Go see a doctor.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Cetric de Cornusiac

[Malcolm3]

5 hours ago, Despe said:

Of course is true thet there are a domination faction in game, there always was and always will be because the game is about this. But the correct way to destroy the dominat faction is figth against, not make tricks like crafting with your alts in their good ports. If you want a good ship work with mates for improve your ports or take that ports in a PB. Using an alt for that is a totally abuse.

Why you should try to wage a hard war with very likely possibility of losing your upgraded crafting port, if you can use benefits of already upgraded enemy port with alts and neutrals?
What should be goal of war with Russia, when most of server use VC and NO and with proposed Karma changes that use will grow?
And actually currently there are not much ports that are worth fighting for.

[Redman29]

6 hours ago, Archaos said:

Okay lets look at this another way. You have admitted that you allow certain other nation alts in your clan so that they can access the crafting bonuses in certain ports, so how do I get my alt on that list so I can access the bonuses? What do I have to do to become one of these preferential alts?

I take it I would have to not carry out any offensive actions against your nation on my main and not side with your enemies and aid them? If so it means you are exerting control over other nations actions using the threat of removal of access. If on the other hand you provide free no strings attached access to your clan for crafting purposes then how is that different from what is being proposed apart from the fact it takes away control from you. (maybe if I was a well known player like Liq then you would always have a place for me in your alt clan).

As it currently stands to be able to craft there I would need my alt to be in your nation so it means I now have characters in at least two nations, which can lead to some divided loyalties. With the proposed system at least my alts can remain in the same nation and my loyalties are not divided.

What is the fear about facing ships that were crafted in the same port that your ships were crafted? You already run the risk of that by allowing alts from other nations in your clan to craft, who is to say they do not craft and then sell the ships in a free port. Or maybe that is the issue you fear that others will now have access to craft and make money from your port investments. If so a solution could be as I suggested that neutrals are charged a fee per ship paid to the port owner to craft there. But I dont think you like that solution for some reason.

It is comprised of friends and a few others I choose to help out. You see most joined when SDC was owned by WTF and Belize was being attacked by the Spanish and it was looking like GB was going to lose most of their crafting ports. See, I tend to only open it up to people I like, like Liquicity, because I like and trust Liquicity and he is about one of the few Swede's I would ever consider allowing in. We might disagree on things, but that doesn't change my opinion and besides we used to fight together when we were both British in the 2016-2017 days. Where as you have insinuated that I have ulterior motives, well you clearly don't know me and have little chance of getting in because that's one of the easiest ways to piss me off. As for what people do with their ships, I don't really give a damn. You want to pvp in them against whoever, fine by me, hell even I've fought one and sunk it. Sell them, fine by me, I know one guy in which that's what he does with the majority of the ships he crafts. And to think I can threaten or manipulate other nations through my alt clan and crafting in VC. There are 15 guys with accounts in my clan spread across a couple different nations. If you think I can exert control over other nations by threatening 15 guys (13 of which are British spread across 4 clans) with removing their crafting ability then I would consider that an accomplishment. (Note that is sarcasm)

And I never said there were no strings attached, which if you read you would of seen two ways you get removed. If we are at war (RVR) because let's face it, now you are using ships to take ports away from the nation in which you are crafting ships in, so no I am not going to allow you to do that. Also, if you break the rules and cause an issue for me, like the tribunal post I used as example. Guy used his Russian account to commit Green on Green against another Russia so all his accounts got removed. If you would have read the original post that you quoted of mine you would of seen how I pointed out that under this system his crafting account which was not involved after the incident would still of been able to craft in as long as it has positive karma. Do you not think clans should punish players for breaking the rules of the game beyond the scope that is outlined in the tribunal rules?

6 hours ago, Archaos said:

If you go from the angle of solo players and players with alts then you are opening up a whole new can of worms that solo players have been complaining about for a long time. The simple answer is that the game seems to have encouraged alts for a long time as long as they are not used to cheat the game systems. But the definition of what is classed as cheating is sometimes a very grey area. Yes we all know that sinking your alt for PvP rewards is wrong, but what about having an alt in another nation to spot ships sailing so your main can intercept? is that cheating? Does having multiple alts give you an advantage in crafting? The list goes on and yet you do not call that a slap in the face for others but now that there alts may be able to access the crafting in your ports it is a problem.

The playing field is not level at present and although this may not level it it takes away some of the lumps and I cannot see any issue with it as long as some form of compensation is given to the people who invested in the port by way of an additional tax or some other recompense.

Not going to debate what alts are allowed for and not allowed for as that has been defined before.

460 Million reals spent on money chests. 1400 wooden chests(On average that comes out around 800,000 Seasoned Logs which is a market price of 2.6-4 Billion Reals) invested in VC (REDS hasn't made that much from all their ports since the game was released). 127 Privateer fleets on average 30-45 minutes per fleet. That's 63 to 95 hours of grinding AI. 30-35 hours sailing the chests back to Vera Cruz. 93 to 130 hours of time invested. And this is just halfway to a fully upgraded port. If you spent that much time and effort grinding stupid AI only for anyone to have access to your port with no effort at all other than not joining a battle, how would you feel? What level of compensation warrants all of that which I listed? 

Edited August 2, 2020 by Redman29

[Nixolai]

5 hours ago, Archaos said:

And in any port battle they would be at a disadvantage anyway because Russia can craft better ships in their 74 point port

Mast and rig bonus is also sooooooo OP in a portbattle...

 

[Archaos]

3 hours ago, Redman29 said:

It is comprised of friends and a few others I choose to help out. You see most joined when SDC was owned by WTF and Belize was being attacked by the Spanish and it was looking like GB was going to lose most of their crafting ports. See, I tend to only open it up to people I like, like Liquicity, because I like and trust Liquicity and he is about one of the few Swede's I would ever consider allowing in. We might disagree on things, but that doesn't change my opinion and besides we used to fight together when we were both British in the 2016-2017 days. Where as you have insinuated that I have ulterior motives, well you clearly don't know me and have little chance of getting in because that's one of the easiest ways to piss me off. As for what people do with their ships, I don't really give a damn. You want to pvp in them against whoever, fine by me, hell even I've fought one and sunk it. Sell them, fine by me, I know one guy in which that's what he does with the majority of the ships he crafts. And to think I can threaten or manipulate other nations through my alt clan and crafting in VC. There are 15 guys with accounts in my clan spread across a couple different nations. If you think I can exert control over other nations by threatening 15 guys (13 of which are British spread across 4 clans) with removing their crafting ability then I would consider that an accomplishment. (Note that is sarcasm)

And I never said there were no strings attached, which if you read you would of seen two ways you get removed. If we are at war (RVR) because let's face it, now you are using ships to take ports away from the nation in which you are crafting ships in, so no I am not going to allow you to do that. Also, if you break the rules and cause an issue for me, like the tribunal post I used as example. Guy used his Russian account to commit Green on Green against another Russia so all his accounts got removed. If you would have read the original post that you quoted of mine you would of seen how I pointed out that under this system his crafting account which was not involved after the incident would still of been able to craft in as long as it has positive karma. Do you not think clans should punish players for breaking the rules of the game beyond the scope that is outlined in the tribunal rules?

Not going to debate what alts are allowed for and not allowed for as that has been defined before.

460 Million reals spent on money chests. 1400 wooden chests(On average that comes out around 800,000 Seasoned Logs which is a market price of 2.6-4 Billion Reals) invested in VC (REDS hasn't made that much from all their ports since the game was released). 127 Privateer fleets on average 30-45 minutes per fleet. That's 63 to 95 hours of grinding AI. 30-35 hours sailing the chests back to Vera Cruz. 93 to 130 hours of time invested. And this is just halfway to a fully upgraded port. If you spent that much time and effort grinding stupid AI only for anyone to have access to your port with no effort at all other than not joining a battle, how would you feel? What level of compensation warrants all of that which I listed? 

Dont take my comments personally, as I said previously you may not do it, but you can be sure many others do. You cannot tell me that you are the only one in your nation that has allowed other nation alts into your clan so they can craft. But also cant you see that you giving that benefit to a few alts is wrong especially as you are so set against others getting access to the same perks. Is what you do not a "slap in the face" for other people in your nation and clan who have invested heavily in the port, or did you alone work for and invest solo into the port. Okay you like and trust Liq and the others on your personal friend list, but because I dared to insinuate what you or other people may do with that power, then I would have no chance of getting on that list because you are pissed off. Well you dont know me and how I operate in this game, how I help my clan mates and try to work with my nation. I think your comments just serve to prove that my insinuations are correct and you get off on that power trip of being able to give and take away access to people. Maybe this is why you are so pissed off with the proposed changes, because it removes that power from you.

To be fair your nation does not have it hard getting those items for the upgrades as it is so powerful and set up so the only real pain about doing it is the grind of fighting the HDF's and the sailing around, you dont really have much risk of being intercepted after your grind and having your gains taken away. There are many nations that are so cowed by your nation that even if they did see you returning from a farm of HDF's would not risk attacking you for fear of the reprisals.

Do you not think that any other nations are capable of doing that much farming? The problem is even if they did and upgraded their ports your nation could easily attack the port and make it lose levels or just stand by and watch while other nations did it. Would you have spent that much time upgrading VC if the port next door was owned by a strong nation likely to attack?

So what if they did introduce a special tax per ship crafted by a neutral in your port so that you had a return on your investment in the port to make all that grinding worthwhile. Why would you be against such a suggestion. Why are you so intent on restricting access to people crafting the best possible ships, as someone posted in the next reply the extra mast and rig bonus are not overpowered, so why dont you want others to have access to that?

I can fully understand why you do not want others to have free access to your hard work, but surely if you were receiving some income for it then there should be no issue? But apparently you still do take issue with my suggestion and I cannot understand why. If you started making enough income from your port you may not even need to go farming HDF's as you could afford to let others farm and you then buy the stuff from them to further upgrade your port freeing you from the grind.

As to what compensation would offset your investment, well in June this year over 3k ships were crafted in VC, I am sure you can do the math and work out what an appropriate income should be especially as the crafting numbers will increase when neutrals can craft there.

[Redman29]

1 hour ago, Archaos said:

Dont take my comments personally, as I said previously you may not do it, but you can be sure many others do. You cannot tell me that you are the only one in your nation that has allowed other nation alts into your clan so they can craft. But also cant you see that you giving that benefit to a few alts is wrong especially as you are so set against others getting access to the same perks. Is what you do not a "slap in the face" for other people in your nation and clan who have invested heavily in the port, or did you alone work for and invest solo into the port. Okay you like and trust Liq and the others on your personal friend list, but because I dared to insinuate what you or other people may do with that power, then I would have no chance of getting on that list because you are pissed off. Well you dont know me and how I operate in this game, how I help my clan mates and try to work with my nation. I think your comments just serve to prove that my insinuations are correct and you get off on that power trip of being able to give and take away access to people. Maybe this is why you are so pissed off with the proposed changes, because it removes that power from you.

To be fair your nation does not have it hard getting those items for the upgrades as it is so powerful and set up so the only real pain about doing it is the grind of fighting the HDF's and the sailing around, you dont really have much risk of being intercepted after your grind and having your gains taken away. There are many nations that are so cowed by your nation that even if they did see you returning from a farm of HDF's would not risk attacking you for fear of the reprisals.

Do you not think that any other nations are capable of doing that much farming? The problem is even if they did and upgraded their ports your nation could easily attack the port and make it lose levels or just stand by and watch while other nations did it. Would you have spent that much time upgrading VC if the port next door was owned by a strong nation likely to attack?

So what if they did introduce a special tax per ship crafted by a neutral in your port so that you had a return on your investment in the port to make all that grinding worthwhile. Why would you be against such a suggestion. Why are you so intent on restricting access to people crafting the best possible ships, as someone posted in the next reply the extra mast and rig bonus are not overpowered, so why dont you want others to have access to that?

I can fully understand why you do not want others to have free access to your hard work, but surely if you were receiving some income for it then there should be no issue? But apparently you still do take issue with my suggestion and I cannot understand why. If you started making enough income from your port you may not even need to go farming HDF's as you could afford to let others farm and you then buy the stuff from them to further upgrade your port freeing you from the grind.

As to what compensation would offset your investment, well in June this year over 3k ships were crafted in VC, I am sure you can do the math and work out what an appropriate income should be especially as the crafting numbers will increase when neutrals can craft there.

Well that was easier than I thought.......

Power lol, I wish I had less responsibilities to the clan than I have now and go back to being a lonely pion, maybe then I would actually enjoy more aspects of the game. I quit this game once in 2017 when I was organizing/coordinating the GB-Dutch-USA alliance because the game become too much like a job. I swore I would never let it get that way again, and here we are all over again. 

And for me that's the reason behind me being opposed to this. I have spent countless time doing HDF's and eventually when they were sailed back to VC, I was the one doing it. I want a reward for my time and effort in doing the leg work and I have that.  Why should I fell obligated to share that with others who haven't contributed and only have to avoid joining battles. I don't want this change because to me it feels like my time and effort has been lessened, that's the pure and simple truth of the matter at least from my standpoint. 

Anyways, we can agree to disagree. 

Happy hunting. o7

Edited August 3, 2020 by Redman29

[Archaos]

9 minutes ago, Redman29 said:

Well that was easier than I thought.......

Power lol, I wish I had less responsibilities to the clan than I have now and go back to being a lonely pion, maybe then I would actually enjoy more aspects of the game. I quit this game once in 2017 when I was organizing/coordinating the GB-Dutch-USA alliance because the game become too much like a job. I swore I would never let it get that way again, and here we are all over again. 

And for me that's the reason behind me being opposed to this. I have spent countless time doing HDF's and eventually when they were sailed back to VC, I was the one doing it. I want a reward for my time and effort in doing the leg work and I have that.  Why should I fell obligated to share that with others who have not contributed. I don't want this change because to me it feels like I was cheated, that's the pure and simple truth of the matter at least from my standpoint. 

Anyways, we can agree to disagree. 

Happy hunting. o7

Please remind me, were you in Russia when they captured VC and did you take part in the initial investments? Reading what you write it would appear you are the one solo to make the Russian nation the strongest in the game.

[GhostOfDorian]

4 hours ago, Archaos said:

Dont take my comments personally, as I said previously you may not do it, but you can be sure many others do. You cannot tell me that you are the only one in your nation that has allowed other nation alts into your clan so they can craft. But also cant you see that you giving that benefit to a few alts is wrong especially as you are so set against others getting access to the same perks. Is what you do not a "slap in the face" for other people in your nation and clan who have invested heavily in the port, or did you alone work for and invest solo into the port. Okay you like and trust Liq and the others on your personal friend list, but because I dared to insinuate what you or other people may do with that power, then I would have no chance of getting on that list because you are pissed off. Well you dont know me and how I operate in this game, how I help my clan mates and try to work with my nation. I think your comments just serve to prove that my insinuations are correct and you get off on that power trip of being able to give and take away access to people. Maybe this is why you are so pissed off with the proposed changes, because it removes that power from you.

To be fair your nation does not have it hard getting those items for the upgrades as it is so powerful and set up so the only real pain about doing it is the grind of fighting the HDF's and the sailing around, you dont really have much risk of being intercepted after your grind and having your gains taken away. There are many nations that are so cowed by your nation that even if they did see you returning from a farm of HDF's would not risk attacking you for fear of the reprisals.

Do you not think that any other nations are capable of doing that much farming? The problem is even if they did and upgraded their ports your nation could easily attack the port and make it lose levels or just stand by and watch while other nations did it. Would you have spent that much time upgrading VC if the port next door was owned by a strong nation likely to attack?

So what if they did introduce a special tax per ship crafted by a neutral in your port so that you had a return on your investment in the port to make all that grinding worthwhile. Why would you be against such a suggestion. Why are you so intent on restricting access to people crafting the best possible ships, as someone posted in the next reply the extra mast and rig bonus are not overpowered, so why dont you want others to have access to that?

I can fully understand why you do not want others to have free access to your hard work, but surely if you were receiving some income for it then there should be no issue? But apparently you still do take issue with my suggestion and I cannot understand why. If you started making enough income from your port you may not even need to go farming HDF's as you could afford to let others farm and you then buy the stuff from them to further upgrade your port freeing you from the grind.

As to what compensation would offset your investment, well in June this year over 3k ships were crafted in VC, I am sure you can do the math and work out what an appropriate income should be especially as the crafting numbers will increase when neutrals can craft there.

Those 3k ships, crafted at VC in June, have been crafted by players being on the friendlist of REDS. They all contributed for the port upgrade. We cannot charge them again to use a port upgrade, they paid already for. That's why you cannot multiply existing ship built numbers with an imaginary tax on crafting ships and calculate how rich REDS would get with this proposal.

VC will be as vulnerable as any other crafting port on the map as soon as teleport to portbattles will be implemented in the game. Then only skills in portbattle will count not the numbers a nation can put up to screen the enemy out. We knew about this risk before we started to upgrade VC, since those plans are known long ago. Once more your arguments that other nations have a much higher risk to lose everything what prevents them to do the same grind, is only a cheap excuse for laiziness of players who prefer to exploit other people work.

Russia has the same risk losing their ports as any other nation who shows the same hard work we do. A random player who pays an extra tax for crafting in VC doesn't have the risk to lose anything, if VC is conquered. He paid for his ship and will sail it out after. Thats why he would have to pay a compensation not only for the investment into VC but also for the high risk to lose it.

You don't want to understand that access to the crafting abilities of VC is the most important diplomatic tool Russia has. This tool has always been open for every other nation. Also Sweden was able to allow its allieds to craft in San Juan and reward them for their help. The main problem of Sweden was their lousy diplomacy, which scared away their allieds instead of connecting them to Sweden. Our superior diplomacy was the result of work and player skills. Opening upgraded crafting ports to everybody will make those skills useless. The game loses a lot of playing depht.

Devs have to decide rather Naval Action shall attract not only the best players in fighting, but also the best players in diplomacy, economy and the hardest workers. The best fighters will leave the game after a while, when they have shown their skills to everybody. Maybe they show up once or twice a week to have some instant fun. But those players who log on every day for hours will lose a lot of interest in the game, when they don't gain advantages out of their play laizy players never will get.

[GhostOfDorian]

4 hours ago, Archaos said:

Please remind me, were you in Russia when they captured VC and did you take part in the initial investments? Reading what you write it would appear you are the one solo to make the Russian nation the strongest in the game.

Redman is one of the most important players in Russia. I'm very proud that it was me who proposed that he becomes officer in REDS. He speaks for the rest of us as well. No reason to divide who did what and when. We did what you want to exploit now. That's what has to be divided.

Edited August 3, 2020 by GhostOfDorian

[Genevieve Malfleurs]

17 hours ago, Archaos said:

And you never ask the question why these nation decide to ally with you rather than fight you and create more content? They remain allied to you because if they don't then they lose access to the crafting with their alts and you will threaten their crafting ports. Again this is how dominant nations work in the real world, but is it the best way for a game to operate?

Why do you keep ignoring the option of asking for neutrals who craft in these ports to pay some form of special tax as a way of recompense for the effort you have put in to upgrade? Such a tax would completely remove your argument against it as you would eventually get back what you invested. It could even be a tax per ship crafted there to give you a nice income, but you appear not to want that and just want to remain superior to others exposing the real reason you complain about this change.

Maybe these nations ask russian clans for help because the second largest nation otherwise wipes them out? Only in your dreams we have armies of alts crafting in the gulf of mexico.

[Nixolai]

7 hours ago, Archaos said:

Do you not think that any other nations are capable of doing that much farming? The problem is even if they did and upgraded their ports your nation could easily attack the port and make it lose levels or just stand by and watch while other nations did it. Would you have spent that much time upgrading VC if the port next door was owned by a strong nation likely to attack?

SHOCK upgraded Santo Domingo, its like 3 portbattles away from a swedish port...

Swedish upgraded Saint John's, thats like 3 portbattles away from aves...

7 hours ago, Archaos said:

As to what compensation would offset your investment, well in June this year over 3k ships were crafted in VC, I am sure you can do the math and work out what an appropriate income should be especially as the crafting numbers will increase when neutrals can craft there.

Thats because most of Russia either crafted in VC or NO... Look at GB they craft everywhere.

 

GB 4.2k ships(without KPR)

 

GB 6.1k ships(with KPR)

Russia 6.4k ships

So same numbers... Some might say that its alts crafting for lvl in KPR, but everyone in Russia do the same with our alts, even a chinese alt i saw was crafting without bonus in VC...

Edited August 3, 2020 by Nixolai

[van Veen]

13 hours ago, Malcolm3 said:

with proposed Karma changes

 

15 hours ago, Farrago said:

with the idea of karma

Guys, let's not mix things up. Karma system is one thing. 

Removing the clan friendlist for crafting/port bonus control is a completely different story.