Port Blockades (Large)

[Meliva]

"After taking into the consideration all recent developments, as well as the proposed developments at hand and after taking in mind War and Blockades idea by Haron and all the discussion afterwards, we have came up with a Ports Blockade suggestion.

You realize that "at hand" essentially means something that is nearby or imminent. Many of the features you bring up are no where near close to being implemented. And even so the point stands- until those features ARE added there it no point in referring to them in this discussion. I agree that they can make blockades a much better feature when they are added- but until they are we need to discuss how to make blockades a good feature with what we have now. when those future features are added then we can discuss changing blockades to compliment them, but until then we need to make blockades able to stand without them-not how blockades could work when they are implemented.

[sXs]

I disagree again because the things that may make this better, may be better implemented in other upgrades but only CJ can answer that. We can not ignore those things that are already approved. Many of which CJ has stated will be implemented before the end of the year.

I have proposed changes to help disuade the concerns of others, so has Shadow as well as Hornigold..... sorry that name just doesn't seem to hold the same impact as the former, all of which were shot down. The only thing that makes them happy is ship loss or no profit for attackers.

Both kill the upgrade before it is implemented.

I have proposed a "permit fee" upfront. Shadow proposed a trial run of the game mechanics, I have proposed removing voodoo from the mechanic completely. None of which got more than a single comment. SO now I am going the other route. Defend or lose port population. Defend or lose influence and risk loss of port.

[Meliva]

I agree that a lot of ideas are getting shot down without getting much of a chance, Which I think is a rather bad thing. We should all be discussing any ideas that can help this feature and trying to make it so that when its added this feature wont just be a rarely used gimmick with no real impact. I encourage everyone to at least listen to what we all have to say even if its something we disagree with. I really don't want this feature to end up unused or pointless. That would be a real shame for something that is such a interesting concept.

[DezNutz]

Again i disagree. How can we know the mechanics and impact until we see it in action. This is one upgrade that will be very hard for admin to simulate or test run except in game play.

Danik and Wolfie are both arguing an all or none stance.

LOL. Not really. Closed Environment Development Server with data from the production system. A crappy development team could simulate this.

[sXs]

Again i disagree. How can we know the mechanics and impact until we see it in action. This is one upgrade that will be very hard for admin to simulate or test run except in game play.

Danik and Wolfie are both arguing an all or none stance.

LOL. Not really. Closed Environment Development Server with data from the production system. A crappy development team could simulate this.

You can't simulate player reactions. you can't simulate player strategy.

[DezNutz]

Again i disagree. How can we know the mechanics and impact until we see it in action. This is one upgrade that will be very hard for admin to simulate or test run except in game play.

Danik and Wolfie are both arguing an all or none stance.

LOL. Not really. Closed Environment Development Server with data from the production system. A crappy development team could simulate this.

You can't simulate player reactions. you can't simulate player strategy.

Yes, you can't simulate a specific player's reaction to a specific circumstance; however, you can simulate any defined scenario.

Development teams will simulate potential player reactions and strategies as a means to test for bugs. It would be foolish not to, as you should test for as many scenarios possible to ensure the mechanic is working properly and that it doesn't create issues elsewhere. However, not every scenario is tested, mostly due to the fact that the scenario wasn't thought of by the developer. If it was, you as the end user would never find bugs.

[DezNutz]

I have proposed a "permit fee" upfront. Shadow proposed a trial run of the game mechanics, I have proposed removing voodoo from the mechanic completely. None of which got more than a single comment. SO now I am going the other route. Defend or lose port population. Defend or lose influence and risk loss of port.

Defend or lose something doesn't solve a problem that the defenders get nothing out of defending and winning. They get to keep what they have, while the attackers can win and gain nicely. Creating a motivation to defend just so you don't lose something is a lose-lose-draw scenario for defenders. If you don't defend, you lose. If you defend and lose, you lose. If you defend and win, you gain nothing.

[Vane]

Well then, guess any country in the world shouldn't defend themselves should they get invaded or attacked. Why bother, you don't get anything in return right? What they have isn't enough to warrant defending based on the logic expressed in this thread by a few.

[DezNutz]

Well then, guess any country in the world shouldn't defend themselves should they get invaded or attacked. Why bother, you don't get anything in return right? What they have isn't enough to warrant defending based on the logic expressed in this thread by a few.

When plundering, if the attacker loses they get plundered.

Additionally, what if the port nation wants to implement a blockade on their own port. Should they lose because they chose not to defend it.

[Vane]

Aye, plunders and skirmishes simulate at sea combat, disable and commence boarding action hence the plunder. In a blockade, or any perceived "Naval War / Fight" Ships are typically taken to the waterline and plunder of sorts is very unlikely. Hence why during the blockade battles there is no general plunder won during each battle.


If a nation intends to blockade its own, and does not defend it, do they not win