Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

VirtuallyIdiotic

Members
  • Content Count

    1,582
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,583 Excellent

4 Followers

About VirtuallyIdiotic

  • Rank
    Commander
  • Birthday 04/06/1990

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,758 profile views
  1. Exactly. There is enough US timezone players that have filled these PBs. Last night Danmark hit Road Town for the second day in a row close to 3 AM for most of us and we showed up. Doesn't help your case either Danmark never put a timer on the port to start out with.
  2. The removal of the cooldown was such an idiotic move for such a trivial issue in comparison to other issues that the RvR system has like mission stacking for instance, an issue that can be solved and the public did show how but were ignored. Just horrible timing as well with COVID-19 running amok in most of our countries forcing people to be at home. There was close to 18 port battles today and that is just too much. A cooldown, cost, limits, must be placed are RvR. To remove it completely in such an abrupt and poorly timed manner without a temporary replacement system was just foolery.
  3. 1) I can get behind making hostility missions cost doubloons or something of equal value. A major issue with Naval Action is the ability to achieve great wealth with very little need to spend it on anything. Creating new markets could help with this. 2) Yes. It may seem cheap in a video game I can understand. The crew that is boarding though might weaken its boarding strength however to fight the fire of the ship they are attacking is something I could get behind. Might also not allow a ship to board if it is on fire as well. But I still believe that you should be able to turn off survival during a board. 3) I think you should be able to see the battle timer but that is all. Otherwise you are asking around to find out anyways. 4) I do not think the port controller should have complete control over the PB but I do think they should be able to choose the PB type as if choosing a game mode, and maybe set the rate of ships under a limited pre- selection depending on the port itself. 5) Yes. 6) No. 8 port slots is enough. Cannot manage that, then you have over extended your lines. 7) If it has a timer then it should cost something. If not, the cost should only reflect on how developed a port is of non-indigenous resources and defenses. 8 ) yes 9) No. Otherwise, there will be a lot more multi-flip targeting of nations. 10) Seeing how fast it is to raise hostility I think it should alert the ports owner as soon as a hostility mission is active.
  4. Even calling that alt a clan is a joke. It is one alt with the soul purpose to exploit the holes in the RvR system to prevent a total loss of Truxillo. HAVOC and the other Danish clans burned bridges between one another far in advance and the Danish clans were removed from the Friends list a long time ago as requested by the Swedish clans who were requested to help flip San Juan for HAVOC and their return to Sweden. Hence, why it never went Neutral. It was not something that occurred in a day or even a week. This was going on for a full month after HAVOC had enough with the other clans of Danmark and vice versa. The deterioration of Danmark was not a single individual or even a single clans fault, but rather the inability for the clans to come to compromises and work together in a functioning manner. If Danmark was a much larger nation their inability to see eye to eye could easily be overcome much like you see in Great Britain where obviously not every clan is on the same page but are still able to function as a nation. In a smaller enviroment this is not sustainable.
  5. Lack of variety in certain aspects of the game. What I mean by this is certain parts of the game like RvR and even PvE have become at times almost a routine. PvE it is a grind. Hard to get new players committed into the game when most go through PvE to grind through the ranks and try to improve themselves safely in the game. The missions do help with this but still are very grinding. Then with RvR there is only one gametype, capture and control. There were other port battles in early battle that did things differently to a degree. Otherwise things become dull and repetitive. It is not that things in the game I do not like but rather the game can be pushed farther and expanded upon.
  6. If you were able to see how many people are actually in our nation you would see how incorrect that term is. Especially when you look at who were are fighting, Russia and Great Britain. We may seem that way because we actually work together very well and are able to distribute our limited numbers to where they need to be to continue the fight.
  7. Who cares who started and who fired the first shot. The fact is that there is a large scale war that Great Britain have lost twelve ports as of 2/2/2020 and it looks like more will be lost unless diplomacy prevails. Rather than complain about what is being proposed or keeping your minds in the past over askew facts come to the table and negotiate. Keep trying to a solution is found.
  8. I just came back from a break since early summer, I bought a bunch of buildings and upgraded my shipyard, A major war is coming, mission rewards have been adjusted, another $40 dlc ship, and the in-game economy has inflated. Screw the economy! Screw this war over a childish hello kitty squabble! Not worth $40 ship! I just want to be a privateer!
  9. Does anyone have that Pirates of the Caribbean gif of him doing a hard turn of the ship with the letter "D" getting spammed across the image? Been looking for that image for a while but cant find it.
  10. And Danmark the same. But without giving it a chance you never know for certain.
  11. You do understand unlike with the Poles, who it was stupid to even make an agreement with those flakes, Sweden was not asking for a complete no PvP OW agreement right? If it was a complete no PvP ow agreement I would side with your opinion that it should not be accepted on the premise of the difficulty in maintaining such an agreement. Without all the major parties involved which Sweden was able to achieve yet Danmark failed to do, there was not going to be an agreement able to be maintained. Sweden would have lived up the agreement as long as it could tolerating for a time DNP attacks around our crafting and capital waters, but it would only tolerate for so long before everything crumbled. You know that. Sweden played ball and did not aggressively go against Danmark early after release focusing more on building up against Russia and giving space for our neighbors to move crafting material as unhindered as possible. Danmark did not share the same methods in return. Sweden then proceeded with a diplomatic route which was on every account faltered by not all of Danmark coming into agreement. During this time we continuously would help Danmark against Russia via screens and other means. Seeing that there was no agreement that was going to be compromised upon we dropped the diplomatic route and just accepted they would want open world PvP. We proceeded to do so and then Danish clans became upset. Sorry but we are not the United States or Great Britain. Sweden will not and is not going to sit idle and be farmed in such a manner.
  12. No and yes. It increases the chances of a drop does not guarantee a drop.
×
×
  • Create New...