balancing the game

[M0nkeydluffy]

i think the game needs to be balanced a bit. .voodoo is too powerful. .the players who has lots o voodoo can dish out dozens of voodoo on a single target thus crippling him totally the same goes to guild with many members it takes out the challenge in the game coz it leaves the opponent no fighting chance. .i suggest a limit in the number of curses active in one target good or bad. .cast by user or enemy at say about 7 at one time. .this doesnt include instant curses of course only active ones. .plus certain curses could be cast only once at a time like bless or swarm of worms. .what do you u guys think?

[Hellfire]

I agree with this, but i think it should be something more like 4 negative cards and 4 positive cards, so that you cant block somebody from casting on you by just spamming seven or so low level 24 hour voodoo cards on yourself that wont amount to much harm to yourself.

[Xepshunall]

i think the game needs to be balanced a bit. .voodoo is too powerful. .the players who has lots o voodoo can dish out dozens of voodoo on a single target thus crippling him totally the same goes to guild with many members it takes out the challenge in the game coz it leaves the opponent no fighting chance. .i suggest a limit in the number of curses active in one target good or bad. .cast by user or enemy at say about 7 at one time. .this doesnt include instant curses of course only active ones. .plus certain curses could be cast only once at a time like bless or swarm of worms. .what do you u guys think?

Sounds to me like somebody doesn't feel that they should pay for making a bad decision. I think I can guess your Player ID. You have the same chance as anybody. Of course there is a guild that once did the exact thing that you are complaining about. Hmmm! I wonder what guild that was. It doesn't feel the same on the receiving end. Does it?

[Xepshunall]

I agree with this, but i think it should be something more like 4 negative cards and 4 positive cards, so that you cant block somebody from casting on you by just spamming seven or so low level 24 hour voodoo cards on yourself that wont amount to much harm to yourself.

Hippocracy is not a virtue and should not be rewarded.

[M0nkeydluffy]

i think the game needs to be balanced a bit. .voodoo is too powerful. .the players who has lots o voodoo can dish out dozens of voodoo on a single target thus crippling him totally the same goes to guild with many members it takes out the challenge in the game coz it leaves the opponent no fighting chance. .i suggest a limit in the number of curses active in one target good or bad. .cast by user or enemy at say about 7 at one time. .this doesnt include instant curses of course only active ones. .plus certain curses could be cast only once at a time like bless or swarm of worms. .what do you u guys think?

Sounds to me like somebody doesn't feel that they should pay for making a bad decision. I think I can guess your Player ID. You have the same chance as anybody. Of course there is a guild that once did the exact thing that you are complaining about. Hmmm! I wonder what guild that was. It doesn't feel the same on the receiving end. Does it?

it has nothing to do with u bro. .its all about making the game work and challenging. .if we keep beating up our opponents with such impunity sooner or later there wont be anyone to beat up lol. .and to set the record straight we never crossd swords yet. .my id is 2835 im PK. .also i want to add about ship battles. . A losing fleet shud be sent to port for repairs and be given a 10min penalty b4 it can set out again. .this will prevent a losing fleet to take out a winning in its 2nd round so making battles more realistic. .its all for the game. .lets make it better

[Xepshunall]

i think the game needs to be balanced a bit. .voodoo is too powerful. .the players who has lots o voodoo can dish out dozens of voodoo on a single target thus crippling him totally the same goes to guild with many members it takes out the challenge in the game coz it leaves the opponent no fighting chance. .i suggest a limit in the number of curses active in one target good or bad. .cast by user or enemy at say about 7 at one time. .this doesnt include instant curses of course only active ones. .plus certain curses could be cast only once at a time like bless or swarm of worms. .what do you u guys think?

Sounds to me like somebody doesn't feel that they should pay for making a bad decision. I think I can guess your Player ID. You have the same chance as anybody. Of course there is a guild that once did the exact thing that you are complaining about. Hmmm! I wonder what guild that was. It doesn't feel the same on the receiving end. Does it?

it has nothing to do with u bro. .its all about making the game work and challenging. .if we keep beating up our opponents with such impunity sooner or later there wont be anyone to beat up lol. .and to set the record straight we never crossd swords yet. .my id is 2835 im PK. .also i want to add about ship battles. . A losing fleet shud be sent to port for repairs and be given a 10min penalty b4 it can set out again. .this will prevent a losing fleet to take out a winning in its 2nd round so making battles more realistic. .its all for the game. .lets make it better

My mistake about the identity. Took you for someone I punished. I still feel that, as a game for intelligent players, precautions should be taken such as casting Crystal Ball and/or Spy Network before attacking which should prevent a skilled voodoo user with massive amounts of voodoo and the good sense to conserve turns from having cause to target a player. Even PK has a hitlist that is known to last 24 hours when they feel that they are being unduly pestered by attacks from a single player. Things should not change because the shoe is on the other foot. Even if reform is in order, The degree of magnitude you PK guys are asking for is unreasonable to say the least. Proper planning prior to biting off more than one can chew is all the change that is needed. So, the game works. No need for repair.

[Captain dungeness]

Xep, You have some big talk. That's fitting for a pirate game but take it easy on insulting other player's decisions.

I agree with Monkeyluffy, Voodoo is incredibly powerful and can take people from the top to the bottom in just a few hours. When you buy many voodoo packs you are so much more powerful than if you try to fight with only the free cards. Even with one of the largest, if not THE largest trading fleets I am no match for someone with many voodoo cards. If a fight starts I can retaliate once or twice but an opponent with many cards can easily overwhelm.

I have played other free-to-play games and most of the time by paying money you get something instantly which you can also earn by playing for a long time. In this game the same is true except for HOW LONG it takes to earn the same amount of cards without paying. For $19.99 a player can get the same amount of cards as if they played for 4 months getting 4 cards/day. Since voodoo hasn't been out for 4 months it's impossible to compete at this point (of course this will change the longer voodoo is around so it might not be a problem).

The game won't be fun to play if it seems like the only way to stay on top is to out-pay everyone else because non-paid rewards aren't strong enough. I want this game to do really well and I want everyone to support the developers but right now the reward for paying DWARFS the reward for playing the game for a long time.

[Xepshunall]

Xep, You have some big talk. That's fitting for a pirate game but take it easy on insulting other player's decisions.

I agree with Monkeyluffy, Voodoo is incredibly powerful and can take people from the top to the bottom in just a few hours. When you buy many voodoo packs you are so much more powerful than if you try to fight with only the free cards. Even with one of the largest, if not THE largest trading fleets I am no match for someone with many voodoo cards. If a fight starts I can retaliate once or twice but an opponent with many cards can easily overwhelm.

I have played other free-to-play games and most of the time by paying money you get something instantly which you can also earn by playing for a long time. In this game the same is true except for HOW LONG it takes to earn the same amount of cards without paying. For $19.99 a player can get the same amount of cards as if they played for 4 months getting 4 cards/day. Since voodoo hasn't been out for 4 months it's impossible to compete at this point (of course this will change the longer voodoo is around so it might not be a problem).

The game won't be fun to play if it seems like the only way to stay on top is to out-pay everyone else because non-paid rewards aren't strong enough. I want this game to do really well and I want everyone to support the developers but right now the reward for paying DWARFS the reward for playing the game for a long time.

If you can support the hopes of the PK who want to change things after what they did to eliminate your rule then I can come up with SOME flexibility on the issue. However, no individual player should ever be able to be so devastated by the combined efforts of a guild that it has the same effect as a single player with many of each card. As it stands, I have nothing to fear from a guild that they don't also have to fear from me. I have, of course, not abused my power in any way that would violate a pirate's code or that of a merchant who only wants to preserve his gold and future prospects. I do not voodoo innocent players. In fact I contact them and advise that they join CTC to get tutored on how to be safe and profitable. I've never used destructive, diminishing or disruptive voodoo on anyone who didn't attack my fleets, my prospects or my character. So I am hardly a villain. Cold wars are fought without unnecessary violence. I fight a cold war. If things change that make me an easy target, I may have to change my tactics and that would not be good for any player who attacks my fleets, my prospects or my character. I enjoy being able to enforce my right to trade and grow. If you limit the number of active curses placed on a given player by a given player, then you have to limit total undesirable curses that can affect a given player regardless of caster. This will place players in a long line of would-be curse casters who have cause to go after a particularly unscrupulous pirate. It will not, however protect the would-be victims of that pirate. So then there would have to be limits to the total undesirable curses cast by a given player. This would be unfair to a player who's hopes and dreams are being endangered by the group efforts of a guild. This is why there are stack limits on certain cards and why others are un-stackable.

The answer is obvious and given the eloquence with which some of you make your arguments, I am surprised that it hasn't been suggested rather than the suggestion made in this topic. There must be limits placed on the total number of any given card that can be held by a given player. If that player is part of a guild then the limit is divided by the number of members in the guild of that player. So, as a player is added to or leaves a guild, the limit on each card that a player can hold is recalculated and, if applicable, reduced or increased. There are no allowances made for cards lost by the approval of an applicant who is found to be a liability and is therefore expelled. Any card that is eliminated, upon inclusion of a new member to a guild, is simply lost to the sea (so to speak) and is not returned to the player who lost it if the member is subsequently banished. This would place more responsibility on Guild Masters to choose their members wisely and to organize group attacks with precision. This would also necessitate a limit of member number for each guild which would result in the expulsion of non-participating members, thereby improving gameplay. That is how this game can be balanced. If you disagree, please explain in detail.

[Captain dungeness]

I think that's a great proposal. Having a limit of how many of each card a player can hold would reduce the stockpiling of powerful cards. That wouldn't stop the player from buying cards- they would still keep all the cards they have not yet hit their limit on. I'm not sure about having a guild-limit because new players that dont understand that rule would be confused why they are not accepted into the guild.

My suggestion for the really powerful card (which I consider to be, of course, "Fugative from Justice" as well as "Swarm of Worms", "Call Leviathan" and "Confuse") could have a much larger turn cost to cast. I don't even consider the 8, 10, 3 and 5 turn costs to be of ANY significance. 2x Fugative + 1x Swarm of worms makes every fleet visible and damaged- all for only 26 turns. Someone with many cards could cast that on 4 people in a guild and still have almost 100 turns to spend attacking them. It seems like there is not a need for guildmates when you can do both the cursing and the attacking yourself. If the costs were doubled (or more) on those strong offensive cards I could see there being more of a need to work together or buy a 400 turn limit while you are attacking. This idea would make stockpiling a little bit less of an issue becasue the cards can't be played so incredibly fast as they are now. I would say double or quadruple the turn cost on theses cards. Then you need to choose carefully who in your guild will cast which curse in which order so your attack works well.

It would feel more justified if I had lost my fame lead because an entire guild spent 200 turns each to take me down. As it was there was only maybe 50 turns spent by 2 players and then all the other turns were spent on plundering. I have no hard feelings though. The PK guys seem fair.

What do you all think?

-Captain D

[Xepshunall]

If that player is part of a guild then the limit is divided by the number of members in the guild of that player. So, as a player is added to or leaves a guild, the limit on each card that a player can hold is recalculated and, if applicable, reduced or increased. There are no allowances made for cards lost by the approval of an applicant who is found to be a liability and is therefore expelled. Any card that is eliminated, upon inclusion of a new member to a guild, is simply lost to the sea (so to speak) and is not returned to the player who lost it if the member is subsequently banished.This would place more responsibility on Guild Masters to choose their members wisely......

The wisdom expected of the Guild Master would likely be enforced by the threat of departure of a valued member because that member lost several very useful cards when a new applicant was approved and failed to serve the interests of the guild.

My idea should also serve to make deciding on a guild a more contemplated action rather than a fashion choice. A player might communicate with a guilds members to ascertain the worthiness of that guild to gain from the prospective applicant's participation. He/she could check to see if all members responded to the communications and thus determine (sort of) the activity of the target guild's members. Perhaps a turnover rate should also be shown by each guild to help in this decision.

It should also be stated that not every card has an effect worth limiting so only certain cards should be affected. An example would be Favorable Winds which, when used in conjunction with Hostile Natives, can drastically increase danger rating. Therefore, Favorable Winds should be a quantity-limited card along with all other cards that shift the balance of power in combat. Cards that are, by nature, combat-inert, should be allowed to grow in quantity limitlessly.