Bregir

Improving fast, Silentwolf! This build is a really good interior scene by any standard! Lovely details all around, good photography and an interesting story! Looks like a full plate to me! Keep up the good work, and good luck with the WETEC! (Sounds like a tech-company! )

@Maxim: If the Sea Rats make an official attack on Corrington, we will consider it as an aggression. If an individual free agent conducts an attack, we will require justice and an explanation, and will then consider whether this is satisfactory. We are a civilised nation, and believe in order and justice, not just our bank accounts! You are not to tell us what we would do! @KB: I am pressed for minifigs, but should have the bricks for a small entry. (20x20 should be possible) If we can figure something out, I would be interested in joining the Mardier side.

I disagree that there should be a different mechanism for sea rats - I would much rather have this played out In Character. If the sea rats make enemies of us all, they will be crushed. End of story. But we need to remember that the sea rats are a group of independent agents, so judging a faction based on a few individuals' actions is unfair. Especially since no one seems interested in asking the sea rats (IC) to make an explanation, or make things right. The right reaction would be to put a bounty on those raiders' heads. And perhaps we need a bounty hunter mission fir the MRCA to allow cruisers to target specific enemies. Should be open for all, though, not just sea rats.

@Fuzzy I am not entirely averse to your sentiment, but will just add that all IC actions in an RPG like this will have IC consequences, for both Sea Rats and Eslandola. And as the Sea Rats is not a Nation, using one Sea Rat's actions as an excuse for actions against unrelated Sea Rats conducting lawful ventures is in my mind an unprovoked aggression against a neutral faction. And thus either criminal, or an act of war.

1) Sistershipping is allowed, yes. Been discussed plentifully. (Like a lot of other things - we are a sad bunch of democrats! ) 2) Eslandola should be able to predict the consequences of their actions. I call piracy - you attacked a neutral faction. And it wasn't just a rogue TC who did this. It was the Crown. Casus belli, anyone? 3) Well, I suggest you bring that raid up with the Sea Rats courts. If they are anything as efficient as the Eslandian courts, it is very likely you will get a reply early next year! 4) Yup.

Congrats too all - great entries, great stories and great creativity. Happy for Oleon for a well-deserved 2nd place too! Well done! And that without a King!!

Well, Captain Morgan, they have given you an honourable way out. And the way they have responded to your lawsuit, would you really want to fight for their interest? I see no tainting of your name for taking this exit, and shall hold you honour no less, if not more. Just saying...

Great, thanks! Sorry for the inconvenience!

I think that is just due to the charts being copied from each other, Sir Stig.

In Corrington, we always support following the conventions for war. But for now, were I you, I would send an official (IC) complaint to Eslandola, demanding your vessels back. They might concede to their error. If not, at least you know where you stand! And then, further consequences can be considered...

Thanks, guys - I have updated the first post. Let me know if there are any errors. Puvel, I put yours up as small plantation, as yours and Ayrlego's are of similar size. If we figure out yours can be a medium, Ayrlego's can be too, I guess. I will adjust it when we have a clarification.

Can someone tell me if I licensed my Governor's Office? Thanks

@Garmadon 1) Why doesn't it just sail on under the Marderian flag? (Same difference...) 3) It all adds up. A lot of player initiated challenges are not taken up (or so it seems). Perhaps they are not interesting enough, or perhaps people do not have the time or energy. 4) I am pretty sure we can dream up 65 different IC explanations. One could be the cost of refitting them after the battle, paying for the costs of the trial, etc. The point was to make the incentive equal for each side, as there is currently only an upside for Eslandola. 5) I am not getting through here. Leadership cannot deal with ill will, suspicion, or speculation. I really don't see why we do not just limit it to say that you cannot build against your faction interests. (And the same goes for other factions' members on the Eslandolian team. All the arguments can be turned round) You might not have a problem with it, and I might not. But you cannot argue that there isn't a tiny risk of this to lead to animosity. Therefore, let us take away that risk. I really do not see any significant downside to this. 6) Bring Corrington or the Sea Rats to court - that is fine - but the possible outcomes for Eslandola for this particular mini-challenge is status quo or free ships. There is no possible downside - at the very least, three builders are 10 db better off. In this case, there is no real opponent. And it can never be the same, when it is not our own interests at stake. And who agreed for Mardier to take this to court? And will you declare war if you lose? @Jacob: In fact, since Eslandola is not at a state of war with the Sea Rats, I actually think you SHOULD bring them to court to get back your vessels. A build off might not even be necessary - they actively sought out your vessels to hunt them down - a clear act of war... If I was a Sea Rat, I would at the very least do something about it... You might even find other nations supporting you! And your thoughts are a pretty good example for what I mean about loopsidedness. @Captain Dee: I agree entirely with your historical implications, your sentiments on the Eslandian aggression (Is anyone safe in these waters when such pirates sail these seas? Who will be next? And they call themselves traders...), and I share your questions...

I think we should be defining minimum sizes, not maximum. People need to exert minimum effort, but there is no reason why we would discourage them from building larger? And so far, I am pretty sure we have ruled based on minimum sizes.

1) If it is a warship, why doesn't it just sail under Bloody Bill's (insert any other privateer) name? 2) I strongly advice against letting people sign up against their team. In designing our game systems, we should avoid all possible sources of conflict both internally in factions, and between factions. (OOC conflict, that is. IC conflict is fun! ) 2.1) Signing up against your faction: Imagine the pressure from your countrymen to "do bad" and the resulting feelings against a player who puts his own bank account over the well-being of his faction. Or the temptation to "dumb" down your efforts to increase the chance of your faction winning. I am not saying anyone will do this, but the possibility is enough to give rise to speculations, suspicions and group pressure. 2.2) Bias between factions And imagine if, for some reason, Eslandola (or someone else) is almost always the one benefitting from these minichallenges (since you seem to throw your warships for the pirates to capture them! ) - would that not make it even more loopsided? There is no reason to expect this will be distributed equally amongst the factions. Therefore, I think a balance between the possible outcomes PER minichallenge is better. Perhaps the winning side is awarded the option to buy the vessels for 50 % of license value? (And may trade this option, if they do not wish to exercise it.) Then both sides would have an equal incentive to play. (We just need to figure out how to divide the spoils interteam, but I think people can handle that within the teams) 3) Vessel sink Most importantly, we are seeing a great inflation in vessels, income and fortunes, and with the sistershipping feature, we risk seeing A LOT of sisterships in game. Therefore (as people seem to object to limit sistershipping) I suggest that NPC captures are removed from the game. 4) Saturation The EGS has already given rise to a lot of different minichallenges, hosted by factions, mayors, trade companies, and individuals, and I am a little sad to see so few of these actually getting any attention. The brilliance of the economic game is reflected in the number of possibilities it opens up for. However, we can only get around to so much, and I think it might be better to tone down these official "forced" challenges a bit, and let the more emerging nature of the player challenges get a little more shine. (Yes, I REALLY want to have someone have another look at the great challenges some of the settlements are offering... *cough cough* King's Harbour *cough* Stormhaven *cough cough* ) 5) Immediate solution I suggest we change the prize of this challenge to a 50 % purchase option for both sides. It would be a shame to annul it completely, but if the general policy for NPC captures is up for revision based on the feedback in this thread, letting Eslandola have possible risk-less gains is too biased. Keep the 10 db per entry. And possibly ask Jacob to change to the other team, depending on to which extent we want to limit the eligibility for each team. The above are suggestions - it is my thoughts. I would like to point out that I generally like all mini.challenges, but they need to be fair, have a balanced outcome, and we shouldn't overdo it. And lastly, I would like to remind everyone that they should have fun, telling stories and making all these fantastic builds we are seeing, and remember: We are not building to make dubloons, we just happen to get dubloons for the stuff we build...

It is in its construction a loopsided affair, as Eslandola cannot possibly lose anything, but stands to gain two vessels. (Unless of course there will be diplomatic consequences of winning this challenge...) Thus, it is clear that the interests in this for Eslandola are much larger than for anyone else. However, as this is supposed to be standard procedure for all vessels from all factions captured by NPC's who have no use for them, that balances out. (Although it does have a bias towards those taking decisions that might result in capture.. ) On a challenge to challenge basis, though, I would say interests balances out. In the spirit of friendly (HAH! ) competition, we all (Non-Eslandians) have an interest in keeping them from reclaiming those ships. (Although there is a possible free rider problem) As a solution, I could suggest that the afflicted faction (i.e. Eslandola) must put forward three builders for their side, while each of the other factions appoints 1. (And that these cannot have been chosen for the last x challenges) And I very much object to letting people rout against their faction. Even if this is not mis-used, the suspicion of such alone will only lead to animosity (OOC). Generally, however, I do think this is a questionable mechanic, and I hardly see why these ships can't just sail the seas as traders, assuming Bloody Bill sold them to an NPC merchant. (Or taken out of the game entirely. They are likely to be sistershipped anyway, so we are at risk of flooding the market with vessels. And NPC captures was a good "vessel-sink", if you ask me.) In principle, this is a great story mechanic, and I don't object to minichallenges (but take care not to overdo it - the community has a saturation point.), but this just seems too loopsided. As to the lack of information on Mardier, I really do not see this as a big problem - you are welcome to elaborate on the faction yourself - that is really what this is all about.

Exactly what I was trying to say...

I would say that if no one signs up, and no one builds for any of the sides, status quo remains, and the ships stay with mardier. I might volunteer for Mardier, but I first need to see if I can get hold of some suitable minifigs... :/ (I am away from most of my collection...)

32x32 is the requirements for a small plantation, so yes, I think this should be small. :) And btw, it is looking great! Perfect for King's Harbour!

Thank you, Garmadon! I agree about the tiling - and I am actually pretty sure I tried it (its been a while since I built her) but that it made the gunports too small for the guns. (Alternatively, I forgot.... Actually not sure ) This my first full-size vessel and I learned a lot, that I will incorporate in my next builds, but it will be a while before I venture this way again, since I am away from my bricks. I have had to content myself with drawing plans for the frigate for now, but I already have a pretty good idea how she will look! Glad you enjoyed it - and done! Erhm, yes, that was the idea - it wasn't just because I had some paper lying around from a school project with a multitude of similar figures on the other side... *cough cough* Mounting the sails like that is very much a simplification, but it really makes everything easier. Thanks alot! Those chains are actually what is holding the entire rig up - if they are removed, the bowsprit will raise up, and the masts will fall backwards. I doubt it is historical, but it was a way to distribute tension of the rigging to the hull! More different sail plans would have been nice - however, she lacks the proper stays to carry staysails between the masts, so it would mainly be different pictures of her carrying the same square rig. And you are not the first to struggle with "shippish"... You are forgiven, Titus - However, don't feel intimidated - I am sure there are some things you can comment on - if anything then from an aestetic point of view Often that has a direct relation to something technical anyways! Form follows function! Thank you, sir! It was actually struggling quite a bit with that part, so I am happy you noticed! Under Cooke's command she has proven her abilities as a brawler several times in the last war, so you are most likely right! But... what do you mean "if" she arrives? Thanks, Faladrin! However, were she to be armed with Olean (French...) 8 pounders, the Corlander 9 pound ball would not fit, and custom cannonballs would have to be forged, making resupplying rather complex! Glad you like it - I had a lot of fun rigging her! And actually rigging a moc to support the masts gives you a deeper understanding about the challenges of rigging! Thanks Kai! Technically, though, she is not a "ship" as she isn't fully rigged! (Square rigging on three masts ) Thanks Fuzzy - and yes, like Legostone suggests, her status as a hired vessel is why the marines are not in their traditional uniform. It was not deemed fitting for a non-navy vessel to carry proper marines. (At least, that is how I will explain it! ) Correct! Hence the HMHV And no, it is not typical - I am infact not sure why it is that far back, but I suspect her Olean constructor was used to designing cutters, with a heavy emphasis on headsails, and carried that over to the Athena. She does rely much on her massive headsails, which makes her fast in stays and good sailing on a bowline (close to the wind). Having her square sails so far back also makes her a bit apt to griping, but with an expert helmsman and a loving captain this can easily be handled. On the upside, she turns in her own length! The spritsail (below the bowsprit) does give her a bit extra stability, though. As to tumblehome, this was actually my first vessel on hull-pieces so I decided to skimp out on that for being too complicated. However, for my frigate, a full tumblehome is planned. The headsails simply have a fold (and a small pieces of tape to hold it in) "hooked" over the stays. You should be able to make it out on the lowest staysail. Thanks, Ayrlego - I really liked how the bow turned out too, and I see what you mean about the aggressive look! And yes, sailors have to eat Mr. Baker is indeed getting ready for a dive - well spotted! Hopefully, Cooke will stop to survey some interesting landing places, allowing Montoya and Baker to go exploring the reefs a bit! Thanks, Puvel - glad you like it!

Dear mr. Coyle, Your request has been granted, and the courts are very pleased with the efforts put into this. You have said the bar high. Best regards The Naval Licensing and Prize Court

I concur with the others - this is an exceptional example of an upgrade, and I have little doubt the Courts will accept your request! Transforming her to a more modern, fully decked hull worked out surprisingly well - really nice job, Mike!

Isn't it simply meant to be a money sink?

Welcome Wilhelm - very nice intro! I do hope he sobers up, though!

Name: King's Harbour Ownership: The Crown of Corrington Location: Cocovia Mayor: Military Governor, J. Cooke (Bregir) Who can own property in King's Harbour: Anyone. Who can freebuild in King's Harbour: Anyone.