A Community Appeal: Structural Flaws Hindering New Player Growth

We, a group of new players, are writing to express our deep concern regarding the current state of the game, which recently culminated in the punishment of several accounts, allegedly for violating the 2v2 arena rules. However, this is not merely a dispute over individual punishments, but an urgent alert about systemic failures that affect the entire base of new players and make progression nearly impossible.
The main challenge lies in the 2v2 arena. To obtain the Gladiator (3,000 points)—a critical milestone for acquiring competitive gear—a player must achieve 150 victories. The reality for newcomers is bleak. With an average of 60 to 100 active players, the server ecosystem is divided as follows:

• 60% are veterans with advanced in-game gear, making victory for a newcomer virtually impossible.
• 30% are intermediate players, which still poses a massive challenge for those lacking essential items.
• Only 10% are new players, trapped in a vicious cycle: no wins means no points; no points means no items; and without items, there’s no chance to progress or compete.

Many of us have invested significant amounts of real money—hundreds of dollars—in hopes of accelerating our progress. The result has been zero return. The investment becomes meaningless when essential progression items are locked behind an insurmountable barrier, and current events do not provide enough resources to gear a character competitively in a short amount of time.
It is important to clarify that we did not use fake accounts; all accounts involved in our activities are real and active. What we have observed, however, is a disturbing pattern of double standards. While veterans seem to engage in “pushing” with fake accounts without facing repercussions, new players—desperately trying to survive and find a way forward in this broken system—are swiftly banned. This discrepancy in rule enforcement is both unfair and demoralizing.
When we seek support, the responses we receive are generic and do not address the root of the issue:

• “We regret to inform you that your punishment was correctly applied according to our rules.”
• “We recommend that you play fairly to avoid issues.”

This brings us to a crucial question: how can we “play fair” when the system offers no viable path for new players? Why does support continue to ignore this structural issue, opting instead for canned responses?
We need Bigpoint to address these urgent concerns:

• What is Bigpoint’s solution for a new player (with an account less than a week old) to reach 3,000 arena points? The power imbalance with veterans is overwhelming, and there are no viable alternatives (PvE, shops, events) that provide the necessary items.
• Why are automated responses considered acceptable when the issue is clearly systemic? We are not trying to undermine the support team’s work, but how can the game improve if player feedback—especially on core problems—is ignored?
• Is it truly worth alienating and punishing new players while more serious issues like organized “pushing” go unaddressed?

If the game genuinely has no room left for new players in 2025, please let us know directly. But if Bigpoint truly seeks growth, it is crucial that you listen to those of us being crushed by a broken system. We are open to discussing solutions—but please, no more automated responses.
Sincerely,

 

Hello, sugar is better than salt, but the investigator simply throws coarse salt at us and the ICM ends up making a barbecue of "accounts", it's no longer possible to throw!

 

Ahoy xShiNiGaMix,

Issues with the development of new players is not a new issue. New players must put in the work to be able to compete and develop their boats. The quick ways to develop a new account is by violating the T&C or investing money in the game.

Most of your post is related to game improvement suggestions. These belong in the Update & Idea Section of the Forum.

Happy Sailing!

 

Your account is not merely a complaint; it is a precise diagnosis of a dilemma that has plagued online gaming communities for years: the dissonance between rules designed to protect the game and the reality experienced by dedicated players. Your frustration, born from years of loyalty, exposes systemic flaws that demand deep reflection from developers.


You describe an unsolvable riddle for the honest player. The anti-"pushing" and anti-"bot" rules are the double-edged sword of moderation:

• Scenario A: A skilled player in a weaker ship outplays and sinks a stronger opponent. Result: Suspected of "pushing."
• Scenario B: A strong player sinks a weaker ship that doesn't react (due to inexperience or technical issues). Result: Accused of attacking a "bot."

In both cases, the presumption of guilt falls upon the active player, punishing skill in one scenario and activity in the other. This logic fosters an environment where strategy is disincentivized, and the fear of unjust punishment overshadows the joy of playing. The rule, intended as a shield for fairness, becomes a weapon against the very players it was meant to protect.

The incident you cite on the Latan server—where dozens of accounts were banned based on fabricated reports—represents the greatest possible failure in community management. When the reporting system can be weaponized to eliminate rivals, trust in the moderation team is irreparably broken.

This transforms the community from a space of competition and collaboration into a political battlefield, where survival depends more on avoiding false accusations than on in-game performance. The question "how many players quit?" is rhetorical; the answer is, invariably, "far too many."

Your core demand is the crux of this entire issue: a call for dialogue, transparency, and, above all, contextual and human analysis. You are not asking for the abolition of rules, but for their application with wisdom.
The reliance on automated responses and algorithmic analysis, while efficient at scale, is what causes these catastrophes. An algorithm cannot understand the nuance of a battle, a player's reputation, or the context of a rivalry. Only an engaged and informed human moderator can discern between a real infraction and a situation that, while atypical, is perfectly legitimate within the game's complexity.

The passion and loyalty of veteran players are any game's most valuable asset. Ignoring their pleas for fairness and dialogue in favor of impersonal, mass-moderation systems is not just poor customer service; it is a self-destructive strategy that alienates the player base that keeps the game alive.
The path forward is not to relax the rules against cheating, but to refine the judgment process. It is to invest in qualified moderation, create transparent communication channels, and treat the community not as a source of problems to be managed, but as partners in building a fair and enduring gaming environment.

 

Ahoy Pirates,

The majority of this thread belongs in the Update & Idea Section of the Forum. Suggestions for game improvement need to be posted there.


Best Regards!




~~Thread Closed~~