Reduce the number of nations

[Most Lee Harmless]

I havent proposed any particular mechanics for my suggestion : its intended to be discussed and maybe from that something can be produced for the devs to consider : Unless involved in port control, there is precious little for a nation to be doing as it stands : I reckon fewer nations will create bigger nations, with a better income outside of port tax income : this may push them to not just consider port control but be in a position to fund such a move, rather than as now, rely on an individual with ambitions and deeper pockets than most.
I see 20 nations (plus pirates) coveting 21 ports as a splendid recipe for action, intrigue and combat : with or without diplomacy adding to the mix. In fact, with diplomacy, the prospects for conspiracy and intrigue as alliances form to take down another nation then disband and reform to defend against another could provide hours of entertainment.

[TheLoveTiger]

+1 I agree that the nations are too vast right now for the game, dropping some nations should create a stronger game play.

[DezNutz]

I'm on the fence. From one perspective, I agree that the number of nations is too large and we should narrow the field to smaller selection of nations. The draw back is that the more developed players will likely be all the kings making it even harder for newer players to achieve the rank.

[QwertyStan]

I don't want my country to disappear, albeit I am the only (active) one in it, but still!

Though I also feel, until the new nations stuff that may be implemented, you can't really tell whether shrinking nation pool is a good idea or not.

[DezNutz]

I don't want my country to disappear, albeit I am the only one in it, but still!

The only active player in it? Did you forget about your 4 inactive (assumed) comrades?

[Sir Henry Morgan]

I don't want my country to disappear, albeit I am the only (active) one in it, but still!

Though I also feel, until the new nations stuff that may be implemented, you can't really tell whether shrinking nation pool is a good idea or not.

I feel the same way, Qwerty - right now, nations don't do a whole lot, but as other features, such as national navies, forts, diplomacy, banking laws, other laws, etc., I foresee this as a means to even put nations without a port control into contention.

As the player base grows, one of the few things a new player can do is become the king of their own country, tiny as their influence may be. It provides an excellent means for them to learn the ropes of playing on a national scale. They then get the idea of what nations are about, then seem to either stick where they are at or move to a more active country that fits their way of play.

For now, the player base, especially the more experienced players, are squeezing all the possible angles of national play within the very limited features that are currently available. Ideas and suggestions for national play are seen more often in the forums.

Limiting the number of nations now to enhance those few features currently available may not be the wisest move until more of the national feature is finally pushed forward - even then, it might not be in the best interest of play for all levels of the player base. I think it is a wait and see proposition.

[Lana]

In my view, there are simple too many nations and an awful lot of them are anachronistic or plain silly : Vatican City, Andorra, Switzerland, for example : all land-locked countries : Why have England, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man AND the United Kingdom? Israel? hardly a key player in the Pirate Age, and the same applies to minor pacific island nations like Midway, Wake, for example : Then there are a whole host of countries that didnt exist until the early 20th Century and the fall of the Ottoman Empire: Iraq and Syria, for example.

I propose, to tighten up the nation part of the game and add some numerical spice to the pot, that the total number of nations available be reduced to 20 plus the pirate flag : The nations should be relevant to the Pirate Age and which are open to debate.

Any how, : discuss.

I agree, but don't touch Montenegro, for example, because this State is much older than pirate era in Caribbean (formed in 15th century as Montenegro - after being Zeta and Duklja and Otoman Empire couldn't subjugate it when was the greatest, although it was recognized as a state later, at the Berlin Congress). Also, one of the most notorious female pirates was Illyrian queen Teuta, with her royal seat in Rhyzon (Risan), in the Gulf of Kotor, (modern Montenegro).
So, whatever you do, don't delete that little country.

[ChaIbaud]

-1, I don't want the top players to dominate the king seats of the nations.

And the Wallet Warriors would have an easier time taking over nations

[William Pitt]

Lana is that so call pirate.....actually well known around the world.
I've never heard about her.

[TheLoveTiger]

The wallet warriors already have an easier time taking over King seats. I don't understand the infatuation of the king seats. You can do everything a King can do as a Duke. It's not like the king seat is needed. If anyone wanted to take over a nation all they need to do is have enough backing and vote power. Personally I would say make up nations, do not use real nation names as people will never be happy with what stays and what goes. The idea of having less nations would put more fish in a bowl per say. It would create people having to work together, if you don't like it then you over vote the king.