Sebastien Dumont wrote:The change you have proposed, IMO, makes more sense for the name, and doesn't particularly hurt the cards effectiveness for pirating. And I would assume that the card was as powerful as it was as to make Pirating not to hard, because pirating really depends on voodoo... let's be honest without voodoo there would be no pirating, any players from the original server I think would agree.
+1 for suggestion
I 100% agree. Your post was what I was gonna say but you saved the typing
+1
Grogggy wrote:makes it too weak and fug is a lousy reason to do it--its not all that you guys think it is.
so traders run 15 fame and diversify so they are in every port--they are almost bullet proof.
anyone who thinks pirates are OP are nuts--only truly great pirates do well...and even then it aint easy.
Many people know that I've been a strong advocate of creating balance between pirates and merchants and no one says this is easy. The point of the game is to build fame and have more fame. By a merchant not having a lot of fame well it just makes sense. I can name you 3 famous pirates off the top of my head but I can't name a single famous merchant. Skyhawk's suggestion is very valid and doesn't throw off any sort of balance between pirates and merchants. I also don't think arguing to Skyhawk about pirating and the difficulties of pirating is the right place. Don't believe me? Well if you don't have many trade fleets and if you don't build big ships but instead play small to plunder big, then your using a tactic Skyhawk invented. We all know it isn't easy to be a pirate, but nor is it easy to be a merchant, nor is this suggestion to hostile natives not necessary. It is a common card.