Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Budgie Smuggler

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About Budgie Smuggler

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You have that backwards. You're the clan that made the deal not to fight WO not me. I remained in US to continue fighting them after you left to make your alliance with them. Bottom line is i cant stand deals being done to avoid a challenge or crush a nooby nation like US. That is the main reason i didn't go back to pirate because i knew deals would be done. Rule#1 for VCO should be: It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees. Rule#2: Get your facts straight.
  2. Christendom, The Thrice-Banned Night King, Maker of Deals, Destroyer of Worlds the Screen Master, Santi Disaster, Amplify, CNN Reporter, former Lord of Key West ...........and bender of knee. Are you girls going to stand on your feet this time around and not do deals with anyone that poses a challenge?
  3. I'am not suggesting there would be no cost, the cost just reduces slightly per port for every port owned. The more ports you own is still going to cost more if we use 0.75% reduction/port. One nation would have to own 133 ports at that rate to get 100% cost reduction. Biggest nation atm are not pushing past 60, and they are avoiding it because of cost, that's my whole point. Ports constantly swapping hands is what we want, activity. If the nation was big enough to take it it should be big enough to defend it and when nations get to big they become bigger targets. Clans or nations owning more ports is not denying anyone content. Again, it just makes them a bigger target. Btw Haulover has been neutral for days if not a week plus.
  4. My suggestion wouldn't make much difference to how many ports have timers, just allow nations to expand to their full potential. Having more and more ports is still going to cost, this just eases the burden and makes it more viable while also removing the hesitation we are experiencing from nations to expand. 0.75% is a starting number to get some sort of balance.
  5. i like the idea of owning regions to get increase RNG for ship building. I don't mind the tax system it just needs a this tweek.
  6. Cost of owning towns seems to be discouraging nations from going full throttle conquest. I hear it over and over from different clan leaders and other nation players "we have enough towns". Today for example we couldn't get a group together in our nation to flip a town because no-one wanted to own the cost involved. If this was remedied i do believe the activity in the game overall would increase dramatically. Suggestion: A small percentage reduction in town ownership cost for each town owned (excluding non capturable) by a Nation. For example nation A owns 20 ports @ lets say .75% cost reduction per town :- 20x .75%= 15% therefor every port in that nation gets a 15% cost reduction (regardless of which clan owns). This would encourage nations to increase their ports owned to get a bigger discount.
  7. Simple solution. Have an additional separate timer for hull hits. 30 minutes no hull hits u get option to leave.
  8. That is an important question, will items stored in ships hold be transferred? I would assume so as a lot of people store stuff that way.
  9. Heaven forbid they can do PB's and sail Sol's. Such sin. Liberating says the US player. the whole post is about nerf and QQ (notice every poster is from global and none of them are pirates ofc). Guess we'll see you at the next lineship pb in your 5th rate doing some 'liberating' to show the pirates what they are missing out on. Can't wait for that.
  10. Didn't you watch Black Sails? Pirates were a nation. But yeah those pirates are a real problem on global. Instead of trying to compete in the game lets get on the forums and try to nerf them out instead.
  11. Do i keep playing or would there be some sort of rollback?
×
×
  • Create New...