New Rules for Maritime Territories and Naval Battles

[Hawk Thanatos]

You kinda answered this but I just want to make sure, if an enemy enters a patroled area once the patrol fleet detect them do they have to fight the enemy or can another fleet be sent instead?

Who gets victories from the battles? If a ship wins do all units get victories or is dependent on how the ship is destroyed (long-range, boarding etc)? If it's all units does this include extra members in the cargo ships?

[Vextor]

I fa ship wins, all of its occupant gains a victory. However, a "win" is only when an enemy vessel is destroyed or captured. A battle can end with no winner.

As for patrols, yes, you can have a weak patrol fleet police the waters, while a stronger fleet stays put at a port one maritime territory away, or anchored in another maritime territory one territory away. Yes, I just made this up.

By the way, thanks to everyone for the questions. It has helped me see problems with the way things are set-up and makes it easier for me to think of a better system. I haven't written the battle code yet, but I have a pretty clear idea of what needs to be done now.

[Exile]

I know you have stated that lending ships to allies is not permitted but what about the possibility of a joint fleet between coincidentally located and allied vessels. Ie. say Nation A is attacked by a superior force of pirates could the close by vessel of Nation B lend it's assistance?

Thinking about it this wouldn't just happened because you don't place vessels as such on the map, so I guess I'm asking if you purposely voyaged your ships somewhere, where you knew your allies were voyaging theirs.
_________________

Cry woe, destruction, ruin, and decay -
The worst is death, and death will have his day.

[Vextor]

Nah, that'd be a bit too complicated for me to make. It's a cool concept though; but I don't want to promise anything I can't do--which brings me to another point.

The whole concept of "active patrol" would require a lot of work by nation leaders and admins, so I would like to scrap the idea altogether. It would be a lot more simpler if territorial waters functioned just like other regions, with the only difference being that other nations can pass through the waters as long as they can negotiate, bribe their self through, or ram through the defenses.

I'll probably have to re-write the current rules to reflec this (although if someone else can do it, I'd pay the person handsomely).

[Leb]

Hooray! Now the En Kuldes will definitely see some action.

[Vextor]

I'm glad you're happy sir.

Username is helping me with the FAQ, so thanks to him. Just mentioning this so nobody else ends up wasting their time.

[Shrew]

Oh whoops, I already edited some of your original post. Ah well.

Anyway, I do have two new isses of vagueness that may have already been raised.

1) Do I understand it correctly that unclaimed waters (black dots) also cut off naval routes? Meaning that if the Nameless Lands took say, Dazin, the region would be called cut off because of the black dots inbetween?

2) Will waters close to ports (the old naval superiority ones) eventually revert the the original owner's if captured. For example, Highland's current situation at Zexen. Will the waters revert back to Highland's ownership after this turn, or must Highland spend PP to attack them and reconnect Black Dragon Island?
_________________


Fear our Vagueness.

[Vextor]

1) Yes, unless you take that black dot as your own, or send a supply convoy.

2) That's a good question. The waters should probably revert back to Highland's (in this example), so that's what I will go with.

[Vextor]

Thanks to Username for updating the rules. I will close this thread to avoid confusion.