My views on how to improve game experience

Infamy
My vision on infamy is that it must be liberated, becoming a mere output of ability and power. The system has a setup that make battles harder according the marker of the boat. Because of that, it is common dropping infamy when you upgrade your boat.
Huge infamy variations is also a recurring problem. Many players, especially those vary active, face variations of more than 800 in infamy within a single season. This is a result of what are called “losing/winning streaks”. On the other hand, many players control that drop with a playing break (generally +12 hours) after a sequence of three loses. In addition, those players that still playing (because of guild quests, for example) face punishments for losing non-intentionally. During losing streaks it is common for some players to make double of the sum of team mates damage. It is even statistically improbable losing too many battles, considering that a player is responsible for only 20% of the team results. So, or this is a huge programming error or an intentional and unfair “part of the game” that must be fixed by developers.

Fleet
Fleet battles are frequently unfair. It is notorious that battles when fleeting becomes harder. Frequently, the difference of infamies within the same team becomes bigger and the enemies team stronger. This is definitely a disincentive for fleeting, one of the most important features of the game to increase loyalty to the game. My suggestion is that fleet battles must be liberated (with no additional difficulty).

Rivalry
My vision is that rivalry is not only a matter of receiving tokens (or at least shouldn’t be). It is about the pride of build and being part of a victorious team. Therefore, the previous system was much fairer. It was about similar teams in power competing for doing more quests. The “activity” matchmaking could work for a lower amount of quests. The difference of 2 quests for guilds that complete only the quest board 3 is extremely different of two quest in the 5th quest board. In my experience as a leader, our guild can complete the 48 first quests in 24 hours and following 12 quests in 72 hours. Therefore, on average, 1 quest of the 5th quest board is as hard as 12 quests of the first four boards. In this sense, if you match one guild that made 64 with another that made 68 in the last season it is more unfair that match a guild that made 0 quests with the other that made 48 quests in the last rivalry. So the sense of “justice” is completely injured within the current system.
My suggestions is: make matchmakings be based on guilds infamy and make prizes more attractive the more quests are being completed.

Stars
There are many factors that should be valued in a battle: freeze bonus, fire bonus, stop capture, protect your fixer, hitting fast boats etc. it seems to me that the fire damage is over valuated when you have so much more aspects that can contribute to a collective victory.
The amount of star for fixers is also one thing that always has bothered me. It is annoying to see battles that were, literally, won by a fixer and see that a camper with a fire bomb had bigger awards than him.

Events
I understand the noble intention of allowing 4k~5k players to choose a nerfed boat to be matched with easier battles based on “power”. The question is: the gear power doesn’t consider talents trained (!). Other problem is: many players had upgraded all their boats (because they wanted to contribute on guild quests, for example), so they can’t choose to fight easier battles.
My suggestions are: rebalance the score given to gear power, considering the amount of training being “used”, and allow players to downgrade their boats, so it will be much more fairer for the whole community.

Server
This is a more technical matter, but the lag for peripheral countries is much bigger than central countries, therefore I think an investment on servers in those regions should be made.