[Implemented] Skirmish Revision

[Most Lee Harmless]

Here is a thought : as a fleet with Treasure Fleet cast upon it collects no danger, surely it should not show up on port gossip : after all, it isnt 'seen' as a usual port entry, is it?

[Haron]

Danik: Nothing should be safe. Any action that yields profit has to come with a risk. The higher the potential profit, the higher the risk should be.

Making gold trade safe is NOT a good idea. I don't know this, but I believe that introducing a risk to gold trade may have been the reason skirmish was introduced in the first place (although with the academy, it has gotten other aspects as well).

[Most Lee Harmless]

It's a logical notion : Treasure Fleet allows fleets to enter port without gaining danger : they are not 'seen' or noted, thus, in effect, they are invisible to the watchers in port : surely then a similar effect should occur in port gossip pages?

I'd allow that any fleet carrying danger on port entry should be noted in port gossip, regardless of TF status : but with a TF cast, it's a fair extension to the benefits of the card. Bear in mind, TF was created long before port gossip pages or skirmish : it's function was to create an un-noticed fleet travelling in and out of ports : that element has been lost by port gossip/skirmish, so lets put it ( or some of it) back.

[Haron]

I don't care about "logical notion" or "real world references". I care about game mechanics and their consequences. This would make gold trade safe, which would not be good for the game.

I could of course argue against the "logical notion" too, since I don't entirely agree with you there, but since I don't care about such, it hardly makes sense for me to argue about it, does it? :-)

[Most Lee Harmless]

Well, the game mechanics seem to be headed in the direction that GS's must risk daily loss of the days income for the privilege of being a goldsmith : let's not forget, they must also face the other trials and tribulations of game mechanics : plunder raids, ship loss, etc : as well as actually generate the income to fund investment in their smiths, their fleets required to import wage stocks and all the same stuff non-GS's have to endure in the game. Game mechanics also seem to be headed towards port wars and blockades disrupting trade: so, yet another drain on income : a good example was your own comedy routine in Regis : all very amusing, but 4 days of total aggro for any GS based in Regis, such that I, who was based there, moved my whole hide-out to avoid the crapulent episode. But hey, we are all making so much money we can lose a days income to skirmish, another days income to plunder raids and still be rolling in it!
Ever since the introduction of skirmish it has been tweaked and modified to make it more onerous for its victims and easier and more profitable for its proponents : so, lets just put a smidgeon of relief into those extremely unequal scales and allow that a voodoo card might possibly be permitted to fulfil its original function : logical or otherwise.

[Sebena]

I am not really concerned about skirmish but I agree on this TF card what danik mentioned TF is rare card so it should be able to cover fleets when active

[Lefty]

Lowe, what gives you the right to declare yourself as the Skirmish King?

The lack of other qualified individuals.

If there was a statistic for total gold coin gained, or even total gold bars during a pirates skirmish career,
then that metric would stand out as the qualifier for skirmish king.

Until another comes forth and presents a suitable challenge,
I Tom Lowe, shall remain the Skirmish King.

Additionally,

I Tom Lowe, also claim the title of Bounty King.
And welcome any challengers in their attempt to take my crowns.

[OG Deadking]

i had no idea

[OG Deadking]

No he does not. Why get a hideout before 200 captains if you are a merchant? A bit wasteful in my opinion.

I am more of a warring merchant of any

[Mack]

I do see lowe up there way more than anyone esle