Just an idea, but as more players are joining i think it would be an improvement to the game just to have a few more ports located in PG, or a larger map with more ports. This as an idea would give nations that have recently began playing a chance to gain a port as currently nations with ports have such a firm grasp on the ports that taking them is incredibly difficult.

Yuitui wrote:Just an idea, but as more players are joining i think it would be an improvement to the game just to have a few more ports located in PG, or a larger map with more ports. This as an idea would give nations that have recently began playing a chance to gain a port as currently nations with ports have such a firm grasp on the ports that taking them is incredibly difficult.

Yuitui, while the addition of 2-3 ports would be a nice expansion for the game in the future, I do not see it giving you the desired effect you seek. New ports would quickly be taken over by the established nations and this is just the way of things. If you wish to control a port you need to put the work in and I believe this is how it should be. It would however give a higher potential for more nations on the map which is also not a bad thing at all.

For now though, I think more development needs to be placed in the role of ports, nations, and their relationships which each other. Diplomacy, wars & blockades, or even port forts are the best places to start for this in my mind.

Don't let this discourage you from working towards your goals and making more suggestions though.

Rather than getting more ports, I want fewer nations. This has been discussed before, though. 5-10 nations should be sufficient. That would put every player in a nation with a chance to aspire for a port.

Haron wrote:Rather than getting more ports, I want fewer nations. This has been discussed before, though. 5-10 nations should be sufficient. That would put every player in a nation with a chance to aspire for a port.

I would split the difference. Same number of nations as there are ports. So 21 ports. 21 nations.

If you decide to reduce the number of nations, I suggest dropping the real-world nation names and flags and replace them with some Avonmoran nations. It could be a very fun community event where they are named, develop flags, and potentially some lore/history behind them.

I am undecided on whether fewer nations is a good thing to begin with though.

I agree with you, Lockreed; fictous nations would be a good idea.

Phoenix: I think 21 nations is far too many. Name the 21 most interesting nations in Avonmora today?

Lockreed wrote:If you decide to reduce the number of nations, I suggest dropping the real-world nation names and flags and replace them with some Avonmoran nations. It could be a very fun community event where they are named, develop flags, and potentially some lore/history behind them.

I am undecided on whether fewer nations is a good thing to begin with though.

Fully +1 to this idea. I like the fictitious names IF the game goes to fewer nations. If we go that way, I think that it would be fun to give the nations "home land" so that way there is some desire to keep ports in the home land versus someone else taking over "your" port. While I am not sold on the idea of decreasing nations, I am warming up to it.

Slindur

Haron wrote:I agree with you, Lockreed; fictous nations would be a good idea.

Phoenix: I think 21 nations is far too many. Name the 21 most interesting nations in Avonmora today?

Well the act of reduction by itself will kick a lot of kings out and make them start again forcefully.
If you are asking me about all 21 I think interesting since I started the game, here are the names of the 21 countries.
1.Egypt
2.Spain
3. Isle of main
4. Bermuda
5. USA
6.UK
7. Tokelau
8. Mexico
9. Vietnam
10. Russia
11. India
12. Midway Islands
13.New Zealand
14. Canada
15.Barbados
16. England
17. Portugal
18. Australia
19. Armenia
20. Wales
21. Pirates

I fully oppose the idea of reducing the nation count.

Let people choose where to place their loyalty and roleplay. Reducing the nation count does nothing but force players into certain directions. If you want larger nations, simply convince players to join yours...

Pirates are not really a nation, and should be considered separately.

There are six nations holding ports. Apart from that, all other nations have 1-2 players of significance, as I see it. Russia? That's mainly Ivan (oh, an Merdok). Mexico? Danik and LT. Vietnam? Grapefruit and McGowen. Nuie? CDV.

If there were only, say, 8 nations, then all the people in these mini-nations would have to either join one of the six port-holding nations, or one of the two other nations. Putting all these players in two other nations would make those nations matter, too. We simply are not enough players here to warrant so many nations. In my opinion, no player should "get a nation to himself". And becoming King is no "mission". Go for Marquess, maybe Duke.

How many players with some strength are really active here? Maybe 200? With 8 nations, that would be 25 players in each nation on average. That would be far better than having 25 nations with 8 players in each nation, in my opinion. Also, we know that the strong nations will go for control over more than one port. To get any strength to nations, and making wars between nations matter, few, strong nations is the way to go, in my opinion.