Battles System / Plunder Revision

[PFH]

Surprise has always been an essential gameplay element that every PG legend you have named has used. Sky hawk wouldn’t have been a legend if surprise attacks weren’t mastered.

It’s a difficult element to master and it’s not always about timing for surprise.

The fact this part, this critical piece of warfare, is being taken out, I do not like the sound of it one bit.

I appreciate the attempt to make the game more strategic, but this is contrary to more strategy. This is diminishing a huge aspect of it.

Ships won’t be taken overnight if you have a good guild watching your back

And you should definitely be viable to sail big ships, but not make it where they are impossible to lose.

The difference between what is possible vs what is worth it, are two different factors being viewed here. Sure it’s possible to spend 803 turns and a truckload of voodoo to steal a cutter, but is it really worth it? Same with overprotected capital ships.

Just making something unattractive makes it one sided.

[Haron]

I'll try to interpret CJs posts as best as I can. And I'll write this post as a numbered list, for ease of reference. I'll use letters for CJs points, and numbers for my comments to these.

A) "Good ships must sail"

A1) They are. There are a LOT of SoLs on the water. Surprisingly many, in my opinion.

A2) MoWs are not sailing, though. There may be several reasons to this. One is that people are willing to pay 600 credits for a MoW they can have in their marina. I'll rather sell my MoWs for 600 credits than using them, because:

A3) WHY sail big ships? Rather than make it safer, there should be more incentive to do so. Big ships do not get more gold when they plunder trading fleets, so why should I use big ships? We need reasons to use them. And I think THAT is where we should start. Not by a new combat system, but by introducing REASONS to use big ships. Maybe port wars. Maybe blockades. Maybe some form of "external political events". Maybe have national honor decline over time, so Marquesses need to maintain it by fighting tough NPCs. There are lots of options. But this is what we need. REASONS to use big ships.


B) "No one can steal my full strength ships when I am sleeping"

B1) I am not sure I agree with this. But I would rather turn this around: It should be possible to attack a player who is online and steal his ships. If you want this, then an entirely new combat system which actually makes it possible to attack active players, should be introduced. It would need to be almost an entirely new game. Some games have "delays" in their attacks, for instance I may have to send an army to attack a target's city. And it takes that army many hours, maybe over a day, to get there and attack. Mechanisms like that would be needed. It would be an entirely different game. But making it impossible to steal ships from someone who is sleeping, just means it will be impossible to steal ships at all. That is something I hope we do not want.


C) "Strong fleets will get upgraded roles in Port related combat"

C1) YES! Something like this is EXACTLY what we need. But this needs to come first. Then Big Ships WILL be not only be sailing (as they already are), but they will be used actively as well. And when we see how this works, THEN it may be time to adjust the combat system. But THIS is what we need first.


D) "Kits idea and desertion of level system is a requirement for stronger fleets"

D1) Why? Also, why do we need stronger fleets? I want fleets that give me income. That goes for traders and pirates alike. And for traders, LMMs make more gold than SoLs. For pirates, frigates are better suited for plundering LMMs than SoLs are. Why make a level 20 ship? Also, does the game become more fun if ships can have higher levels? More strategic? I don't think so. I don't see why we need this.


E) "And yes, some players have teamed up and protect each other. This makes it harder but these are the results of teamwork. Pirates can still team up. I cannot compare 1 pirate to 20 traders and create the game in a way that the pirate still wins. That's nuts. But this is a common argument I hear."

E1) I agree. However, I have now taken the consequences of this. When I plunder a player, I consider myself not attacking that player, but that guild. And I will not do so alone. I will do it with a gang of pirates. Targeting the same guild, over and over. To wear down the defenses. This is the natural response. So "one on one" action is no more. With the guild "alarms" and protection system, it's always group vs group. And attacking the same group repeatedly is more effective than hitting a new one each time. So the consequence is that pirates need to team together. And they need to keep hitting the same targets over and over. Is this desired or not?


F) "Continuing on the ships plunder case, we need to see what kind of ships are usually plundered. Cutters, Howker and at best, you get to see some big merchant ships like LMMs. Of course, we have the pirate attacks , loaded with heavy voodoo , that target war fleets. Such tactics can pay off a whole war fleet which consists of 4 SoLs at best. If you are lucky, you could find 1 SoL 60 there, for a total gain of around of 300 + 300 = 600 credits. 600 credits at some time will barely cover the attack costs. But... what I am saying here? Shadowood already covered the same topic above."

F1) Yes, trying to steal ships can be both expensive and risky. We recently had an attempt which partially failed, causing us a net loss of around 1000 credits. Earlier, we had an attack which was very successful, and we ended up 2000 credits in plus. But the very high costs involved when stealing ships result in one having to steal as many ships and as valuable ships as possible while doing the attack. And this cost is also why so many SoLs are actually sailing today. Can I steal a SoL from you? Yes. Can I do it with a profit? Only if you have a poor setup and no guild watching your back.


G) "Last but not least, I want a final word here. I DO WANT SHIP PLUNDERING. I want many ship plunders. Ship plunders of valuable ships. But I want ship plunders to be strategic and fair."

G1) Ship plunders and gold plunders, under the existing rules, must be seen together. The peculiar thing about PG is that your "gold on hand" is the most important factor during combat. And this is why, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES (except an entirely new system), should the max plunder cap be lowered. Carrying a high purse keeps your ships safe from being plundered. However, it means that when your trade fleets are plundered, you lose a lot of gold. So you have to weigh these factors against each other. So a lower cap would mean both less gold stolen, and even less opportunity than today in stealing ships. A lower plunder cap is something I fear a lot. It would be very destructive for piracy.

G2) What is "strategic and fair"? Let me first say that making it easy to retaliate against attacks is NOT making things "strategic and fair". That is simply killing conflict. If I know it will be easy for you to hit back against me, that will NOT lead to me attacking you and you attacking me back. It will lead to me not attacking you in the first place, since I know I will not profit from this in the end, after your retaliation.


H) "I want people to plunder a ship in order to USE it. Not sell it, not hide it. USE it."

H1) When I steal ships, I do not want the ships. I want the value they represent. For a pirate, his weapons are in his voodoo chest. I spend a fortune buying voodoo. This is where the ships I steal and the gold I plunder, end up. In my voodoo chest. It may seem like pirates profit a lot from their plunders, but that is NOT TRUE. Because you need to deduct the costs. Three FFJs are currently 15 credits (this changes, of course). That's over 5M gc with the current credit price. And in addition, 24 turns were spent casting these cards. And I'm not even factoring in the possibility of the target having a MB or CC. Or the TMs or SNs needed in preparation.



One final comment about strategy: Strategy in this game has so far not been about "fleet vs fleet". It has been "setup vs setup". Sometimes even "group setup vs group setup". It is the totality of your setup which determines how successful you are, both as a trader and as a pirate. And the strategies are about having setups which makes you safe while allowing you to earn as much as possible. I don't put any thought into my "fleet vs fleet" battles. I put a little thought into my "setup vs setup" battles. And I sometimes put an unhealthy amount of thought into strategies involving Grand Schemes.

[Zephore]

Here are the objectives that this design wants to achieve (we are still not there):

• No one can steal my full strength ships when I am sleeping
If you are awake and online, no one can. So, why this should happen when you sleep? You call this surprise? I call this a gameplay element that I do not want in PG.


• Plundering ships from an active player should be possible.
So, what you have now? You can only plunder ships from inactive players or players sleeping or newbies. Well, time for a change. If you want to steal a ship, this should be doable. Doable but strategic.


• Strong ships should be sailing, not hiding
Again, no one wants to really risk their ships. They prefer to keep then in Marina and I cannot wrong them anymore. You have little to earn by pulling a much bigger ship out. Especially when your incomes are not tied to fleet activity.


• Strong fleets will get upgraded roles in Port related combat
We do want stronger fleets to clash. For example, if SHM is using a very strong fleet to protect Aiora, you will need to get that fleet down before attacking Aiora. How is this supposed to happen right now?


• Kits idea and desertion of level system is a requirement for stronger fleets
You cannot continue with current system beyond level 10. No one will spend coin on a ship that can lost this value so easily later.

About pirates, I will answer separately.
There are many more points, but I will keep it this big, not bigger. Please reply with arguments on points and if you can, suggest solutions/more.

Haron and i would like to debunk this!
Yes, you can steal from an active player.
You can steal from right under a guilds nose.

We did it. More than once. Time it.

[Leo the Conqueror]

I'll try to interpret CJs posts as best as I can. And I'll write this post as a numbered list, for ease of reference. I'll use letters for CJs points, and numbers for my comments to these.

A) "Good ships must sail"

A1) They are. There are a LOT of SoLs on the water. Surprisingly many, in my opinion.

A2) MoWs are not sailing, though. There may be several reasons to this. One is that people are willing to pay 600 credits for a MoW they can have in their marina. I'll rather sell my MoWs for 600 credits than using them, because:

A3) WHY sail big ships? Rather than make it safer, there should be more incentive to do so. Big ships do not get more gold when they plunder trading fleets, so why should I use big ships? We need reasons to use them. And I think THAT is where we should start. Not by a new combat system, but by introducing REASONS to use big ships. Maybe port wars. Maybe blockades. Maybe some form of "external political events". Maybe have national honor decline over time, so Marquesses need to maintain it by fighting tough NPCs. There are lots of options. But this is what we need. REASONS to use big ships.


B) "No one can steal my full strength ships when I am sleeping"

B1) I am not sure I agree with this. But I would rather turn this around: It should be possible to attack a player who is online and steal his ships. If you want this, then an entirely new combat system which actually makes it possible to attack active players, should be introduced. It would need to be almost an entirely new game. Some games have "delays" in their attacks, for instance I may have to send an army to attack a target's city. And it takes that army many hours, maybe over a day, to get there and attack. Mechanisms like that would be needed. It would be an entirely different game. But making it impossible to steal ships from someone who is sleeping, just means it will be impossible to steal ships at all. That is something I hope we do not want.


C) "Strong fleets will get upgraded roles in Port related combat"

C1) YES! Something like this is EXACTLY what we need. But this needs to come first. Then Big Ships WILL be not only be sailing (as they already are), but they will be used actively as well. And when we see how this works, THEN it may be time to adjust the combat system. But THIS is what we need first.


D) "Kits idea and desertion of level system is a requirement for stronger fleets"

D1) Why? Also, why do we need stronger fleets? I want fleets that give me income. That goes for traders and pirates alike. And for traders, LMMs make more gold than SoLs. For pirates, frigates are better suited for plundering LMMs than SoLs are. Why make a level 20 ship? Also, does the game become more fun if ships can have higher levels? More strategic? I don't think so. I don't see why we need this.


E) "And yes, some players have teamed up and protect each other. This makes it harder but these are the results of teamwork. Pirates can still team up. I cannot compare 1 pirate to 20 traders and create the game in a way that the pirate still wins. That's nuts. But this is a common argument I hear."

E1) I agree. However, I have now taken the consequences of this. When I plunder a player, I consider myself not attacking that player, but that guild. And I will not do so alone. I will do it with a gang of pirates. Targeting the same guild, over and over. To wear down the defenses. This is the natural response. So "one on one" action is no more. With the guild "alarms" and protection system, it's always group vs group. And attacking the same group repeatedly is more effective than hitting a new one each time. So the consequence is that pirates need to team together. And they need to keep hitting the same targets over and over. Is this desired or not?


F) "Continuing on the ships plunder case, we need to see what kind of ships are usually plundered. Cutters, Howker and at best, you get to see some big merchant ships like LMMs. Of course, we have the pirate attacks , loaded with heavy voodoo , that target war fleets. Such tactics can pay off a whole war fleet which consists of 4 SoLs at best. If you are lucky, you could find 1 SoL 60 there, for a total gain of around of 300 + 300 = 600 credits. 600 credits at some time will barely cover the attack costs. But... what I am saying here? Shadowood already covered the same topic above."

F1) Yes, trying to steal ships can be both expensive and risky. We recently had an attempt which partially failed, causing us a net loss of around 1000 credits. Earlier, we had an attack which was very successful, and we ended up 2000 credits in plus. But the very high costs involved when stealing ships result in one having to steal as many ships and as valuable ships as possible while doing the attack. And this cost is also why so many SoLs are actually sailing today. Can I steal a SoL from you? Yes. Can I do it with a profit? Only if you have a poor setup and no guild watching your back.


G) "Last but not least, I want a final word here. I DO WANT SHIP PLUNDERING. I want many ship plunders. Ship plunders of valuable ships. But I want ship plunders to be strategic and fair."

G1) Ship plunders and gold plunders, under the existing rules, must be seen together. The peculiar thing about PG is that your "gold on hand" is the most important factor during combat. And this is why, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES (except an entirely new system), should the max plunder cap be lowered. Carrying a high purse keeps your ships safe from being plundered. However, it means that when your trade fleets are plundered, you lose a lot of gold. So you have to weigh these factors against each other. So a lower cap would mean both less gold stolen, and even less opportunity than today in stealing ships. A lower plunder cap is something I fear a lot. It would be very destructive for piracy.

G2) What is "strategic and fair"? Let me first say that making it easy to retaliate against attacks is NOT making things "strategic and fair". That is simply killing conflict. If I know it will be easy for you to hit back against me, that will NOT lead to me attacking you and you attacking me back. It will lead to me not attacking you in the first place, since I know I will not profit from this in the end, after your retaliation.


H) "I want people to plunder a ship in order to USE it. Not sell it, not hide it. USE it."

H1) When I steal ships, I do not want the ships. I want the value they represent. For a pirate, his weapons are in his voodoo chest. I spend a fortune buying voodoo. This is where the ships I steal and the gold I plunder, end up. In my voodoo chest. It may seem like pirates profit a lot from their plunders, but that is NOT TRUE. Because you need to deduct the costs. Three FFJs are currently 15 credits (this changes, of course). That's over 5M gc with the current credit price. And in addition, 24 turns were spent casting these cards. And I'm not even factoring in the possibility of the target having a MB or CC. Or the TMs or SNs needed in preparation.



One final comment about strategy: Strategy in this game has so far not been about "fleet vs fleet". It has been "setup vs setup". Sometimes even "group setup vs group setup". It is the totality of your setup which determines how successful you are, both as a trader and as a pirate. And the strategies are about having setups which makes you safe while allowing you to earn as much as possible. I don't put any thought into my "fleet vs fleet" battles. I put a little thought into my "setup vs setup" battles. And I sometimes put an unhealthy amount of thought into strategies involving Grand Schemes.

Very well said, Haron. +1

[Argo]

Here are the objectives that this design wants to achieve (we are still not there):

• No one can steal my full strength ships when I am sleeping
If you are awake and online, no one can. So, why this should happen when you sleep? You call this surprise? I call this a gameplay element that I do not want in PG.


• Plundering ships from an active player should be possible.
So, what you have now? You can only plunder ships from inactive players or players sleeping or newbies. Well, time for a change. If you want to steal a ship, this should be doable. Doable but strategic.


• Strong ships should be sailing, not hiding
Again, no one wants to really risk their ships. They prefer to keep then in Marina and I cannot wrong them anymore. You have little to earn by pulling a much bigger ship out. Especially when your incomes are not tied to fleet activity.


• Strong fleets will get upgraded roles in Port related combat
We do want stronger fleets to clash. For example, if SHM is using a very strong fleet to protect Aiora, you will need to get that fleet down before attacking Aiora. How is this supposed to happen right now?


• Kits idea and desertion of level system is a requirement for stronger fleets
You cannot continue with current system beyond level 10. No one will spend coin on a ship that can lost this value so easily later.

About pirates, I will answer separately.
There are many more points, but I will keep it this big, not bigger. Please reply with arguments on points and if you can, suggest solutions/more.

Haron and i would like to debunk this!
Yes, you can steal from an active player.
You can steal from right under a guilds nose.

We did it. More than once. Time it.

Thanks you Haron, SW and others who have tried to make it abundantly clear that these changes will not benefit pirates nor the game itself.
Last night working out if I could take a MoW in a fleet of 3 (lvl 11 and 10 sots) the cost to have a crack would have been over 300 credits and that's just the voodoo - so a starting price - not accounting for turns,moving fleets, variables such as guildies and voodoo defence (mbs, cc and whatrever is cast so you can continue) costs.
This was with a purse of less than 3 Mill. So the cost of running down a purse to the necessary can use 400 or more turns, leaving little room for any profit...high risk - high profit yes - but where is the balance for traders taking such risks?

It was 83,400,000 gold coin equivalent (at current market prices) to even have crack at the fleet. Which traders take this risk in their day to day efforts to profit? And after setting up you may not even get to take it - your efforts can be thwarted easily, cheaply and instantly. The 83+million is a starting price bid.

I was surprised to see what you wrote - bc while I haven't had a great deal of experience with deliberate ship stealing - I do not believe the comment to be correct. We have been taking decent ships while target and guildies are online as Zeph said from right under their noses - this does increase the costs during the process expedentially ( you know the word I mean)..and is near impossible without some teamwork for the most part. Teamwork is good. I love it. But even combining a teams turns can sometimes not be enough either esp if the targets/guild/nation are playing retal or carrying a much larger purse. It's true. Turns, or rather a lack of can be a problem when you s=consider the costs to take a good fleet.

And then of course. you may finally get to the prize only to find it is a lousy 36 pointer - no redeemable joy from the market or shipwright -???
It is far easier to disguise the attributes of a sot than it is to track it down (while researching and planning your raid).

The adrenalin pump is the best. I still feel my heart beat strongly when I cast ffjs and light someone up - this obv provides excitement - don't stem the flow of our adrenaline rushes - (Do traders experience that too?)

My view is from the perspective of someone still learning to steal capital fleets so may be different to those with much more experience.

As mentioned, I am not greatly skilled nor experienced in this area so if I have said some 'Guelerey' things - please educate. Thanks

[Anne_bonny]

I didn't speak up when I was first learning to steal ship's and was on the hunt for my first MOW and the mechanics changed so I could no longer have the option to commandeer one or Levi sink and shipwreck hunt for a pirates prize, obviously limiting options. I didn't feel like there was a need for me to speak up when ship traits were first mentioned for flag ship's and all the merchants cried that they wanted ship traits too so it came to be for all (after all seemed interesting). Nor did I speak up when the game moved off the seas and went to land farming to created the super safe most profitable way for the rich to grow richer. Nor did I feel the need arise when the only voodoo card to harm warehouse stock ( I always thought that the caster should gain the resources if permitted like a disgruntled theft rather then outright vandalism, anyway) was taken out of play just as a war started and it would have become coinvent to use with no compensation for the rare cards people already had in stock. (Timing still leaves me wondering)...

I feel that I must speak up now.

My head has been spinning for days just trying to think where to start with these suggestions and luckily for me, most of the points I have wanted to make have already been mentioned with in a slight variation of my own thoughts (I found some interesting points and agree with some of it but will only shine light on a few con's that I see as a Pirate that I feel may have been glossed over).

So firstly I tip my hat too Dman, Haron, Banger, Clockwork, SHM, Danik, Drake and Shadowood (winks at Shadowood) for all making good points.

My first point aside from the cost in voodoo to drop a purse let's look a little closer. For a trader carrying a purse of 40M using Nelsons tools that would require between 51 to 122 booty masters to drop the purse to 1M making it somewhere within range to have a go at taking a fleet. That's 408 to 976 turns for casting booty masters alone, an average of 77 booty masters for a cost of 616 turns still dosen't leave a lot of wiggle room for the greatest Pirate's to take their prize as is. A pirate could do plunder to drop the purse but even with the mentallity of "my profit's out weigh my losses running lmm tails" thats 176 plunders for a total of 704 turns with AP active, and against a more savy trader running hawker tails that's 186 plunders for 744 turns and where only getting close to being able to have a go... Not a lot of wiggle room.

My second is this, I have found people only run back to their guild once to say "LOOK LOOK AT THE HAWKER I STOLE" and honestly you can only really sell 1 in every 8 hawkers you steal (extra cargo trait) so a pirate isn't left with many options, sell to shipwright for less then the return of attacking a cheap NPC fleet? sell to players market and take up an auction slot for months for a single crt? (I won't make that mistake again). Are we really to believe the cost of a lvl 20 hawker would all of a sudden make it more attractive? Surely if a hawker would rise in value a galleon or LMM would be a sight to behold diminishing the new perceived value of the hawker rendering 7 out of 8 still worthless IMO. In short nobody wants to steal a hawker nor do they go out with the sole intention to capture hawkers to feed their children (maybe a porter, exceptions to every rule), As a Pirate I want capital ship's for a big prize/return and sale of trade ship's only needed (min profit) to keep me going looking for the next big pay day (I would rather traders kept their trade fleet's, making more gold for me to try to take later). Pirates want to steal MAN O WARS. Not hawkers.

A parting thought if we continue the thought process of lowering attack's on fleet's and keeping everyone's ship's safe. We could suggest that you can only steal a ship when flying the black but to keep it even if you fly the black your turn cap is dropped to 1/4 of a trader or privateers, so not a lot of damage could be done to an unlucky induvial and that allows a lot of retaliation towards those pesky pirates. Also every hour (just before the change of the hour) the trader could get a bonus insurance of twice the amount plundered during the previous hour paid from your nation (but generated from the game so we don't drain the national treasury that people have worked so hard to build). That would protect the merchants and privateers from FFJ's. Or we could just do everyone a favor, save the time and fast forward 10 years and go straight to something like this. Remove the option for a player to be a pirate and have only player paths as merchants, privateers, farmers, transport titan's and entertainment maestro's with more in depth politics at play, that way your NPC's could be the only ones who raid people and would work off a % plunder taken x time between last attack formula, so nobody ever has to have a bad day.

[Meliva]

I do agree with what Haron said about giving a reason to use bigger ships, rather then to make them safer to use.

I mean ultimately, if you changed it to where ships can not be stolen or even sunk, why would players use Man of War? They are not better at trading then LMM. Sure they may be the strongest ship, but how often do you NEED a super strong ship? Let alone multiple of them? A pirate can easily get by with frigates honestly.

I think once things like forts, and blockades happen, then you could make it to where using those super big ships is a good choice. One option would be that you could divide ships into size categories-larger ships would be better at fighting forts, as they have larger cannons and thus larger cannon balls. A man of War could be given it's own Special category, so that is becomes the BEST ship to use against forts. Then many players would be tempted to use them for fighting forts.

Regardless, looking forward to future developments.

edit-and to give an example, it would be fairly easy and simple to divide the ships into sizes. 18 ships that can be built, plus the MoW. First 6 would be small, next 6 medium, final 6 large, and MOW could be Massive.

[Shadowood]

(winks at Shadowood)

[Shadowood]

CJ,

After giving this some thought, I would like to see some more importance on CREW. I will try to explain best I can. These are just the ideas of a punch drunk sailor, but perhaps this will create some conversation toward a revised battle system and how my idea can fit in with your suggestions.

SHIP STEALING:
As I have stated already, there needs to remain a way that stealing ships remains in the game. Stealing ships should not be easy, there should be risk involved. The current system, is moderate to easy in execution (for me), but can be very cost prohibitive and does have risk. But it is FUN. In thinking on how to change this or better this, there is only one way that comes to mind. HAND TO HAND COMBAT.

I like keeping some realism in games... some. Looking back at how pirates did battle in Real Life, if they wanted to steal a ship, intact, they had to climb aboard that ship and fight for it. I feel if we do anything to the battle mechanics, it has to involve this.

This is where Crew Experience comes into play (and can tie nicely into FLAGSHIP)

CREW:
- The crew of an individual fleet gain experience daily. Just by being aboard the same fleet.
- The more battles a crew in involved in, the more daily experience they gain.
- The more cargo a fleet carries, the more daily experience the crew gains.
- Gold Bars fleets would get a multiplier to crew experience gain if those bars are traded (not simply just on board)
- There will need to be a way that crew can die. Of course in battle or by voodoo. Not the whole crew but this mechanic will keep balance and provide a way to "retaliate"
- Now all this experience will help the crew battle better/harder and defend better if attacked.

Skirmishes will be a great way for a Pirate/Privateer to gain experience. Hostile Natives/Fugitive of Justice will also aid in faster gains. Merchants and Traders will gain daily experience just for trading, but will also gain experience when getting raided (Skirmished or Lit up). Again a multiplier for Gold Bar Fleets and perhaps Immigrant Fleets. (?)

A very experienced crew of a Frigate, should be able to steal a Man of War if that crew is inexperienced

Not sure of the battle mechanic here CJ, I lean on you for that. My vision. During a battle a player can select 1 ship from a defending players fleet and up to 2 ships of his own fleet/crew to "Board a ship" to steal. Hand to Hand combat ensues. I see this much like the game of RISK and how the Attacker gets 3 DIE and the Defender gets 2 DIE. Each rolls. Any Ties go to the Defender. No we should switch this up and do 3 DIE to the Defender and 1 or 2 to the attacker as it shouldn't be a cake walk for an attacker to steal the prized ship. Crew Experience will aid in DIE rolls, much like how Drums of War and Bless are coded.
Defender = Ship of the Line = 250 Crew
Attacker = 2 Frigates = 150 Crew each, total 300 Crew
**1% chance, if a player is flying a Jolly Roger, that the defending ship surrenders instantly**

Attacker can only steal 1 ship in Hand to Hand combat per 24 hours versus same player. (this does not affect plunder attacks if target purse sinks below ransom value)
Crew on both sides will have casualties but shouldn't be less than the amount to sail a ship. 15 crew I think it is? Once crew gets to 15, the battle is over. Either the defender surrenders the ship and the attacker wins, or they fend off the attacker and the attacker must return to port and start over with a fresh inexperienced crew! See the importance of crew and their experience yet?

This mechanic would allow a pirate to steal a prize ship, but not the whole fleet. There is protection for the defender but a pay out for the attacker. I hope my pirate friends can see value in this proposal.

Thoughts? Feedback? Am I crazy??

[Soliel]

Thoughts? Feedback? Am I crazy??

I think you are crazy, but damn if I don't like the sound of it.