Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Raxius

Members
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

48 Excellent

About Raxius

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I believe i answer this question with my above post. no need to change nation if you can compete with a 55 point port with a 45 point port.
  2. I dont think this is at all the issue..the main issue with 55 point ports is the bonuses it gives to ships, my suggestion is to allow max bonuses of up to 45 points for shipyard allowing several spare points for econ within the same port, this will also enable more contest as contesting a 55 point port would put both sides on level playing field. there are multiple 45 point ports to allow players to build the strength to take on a 55 point port in this case. remaining points could be what is fought over for additional econ within the shipyard port or even dare i say be able to place say a teak forest and max ship bonuses in a 55 point port? this will gage attention to all as each nation would appreciate the benefits of having some mat production in the same port as shipyard, the main issue with content in my oppinion is not enough outpost slots and the dramatic differences between a max port bonus ship vs a semi port bonus ship. let me know what you think
  3. you were in reinforcement zone which was why I didnt tag you.
  4. I have sat here for over 4 hours watching this occur repeatedly.
  5. I have taken some time out of the game in the last few months and have returned following several patches. I understand new players need space to grow however to many times are capital zones exploited. A change needs to happen on the "capital zone" mechanics. It is unrealistic for hostile warships to sail in and out of capital zones and this leaves it possible for all nations to exploit because pvpers cannot enter battles in capital zones. If this was the only issue then I could live with that however certain nations are physically refusing to leave capital zones in order to pve safely (rear admirals with hours and hours of experience). This is supposed to be a pvp server and I really feel the devs need to change something to prevent players exploiting the capital zones.
  6. For a long time sweden have lived in shadows of diplomacy refusing to ally with anyone but instigate wars and pull strings in conflicts that has nothing to do with them. HAVOC has overcome treacherous times as have UWS and alongside HAVOC we stand. both clans are Pure and begin true friendship looking forward. congrats on santo domingo campaign look forward to working with you. Raxius
  7. shouting the game will die every time something does not go your way is not the answer if you lose a ship in an hour does that contribute to the gaming dying? you should be happy you have a capturable port in centre of safe zone infact this should mean its your SAFEST and most VALUABLE port because of the benefits. but you dont own the port now.. an all a sudden its NOT fair. why wasn't this issue raised prior to france taking it? perhaps when it was lost before by russia? the game is more likely to die by players making excuses and request intervention from devs rather then enjoying the game and looking at achieving a victorious retake. infact you can join the portbattle from the safezone which already creates advantage since we cannot screen u. so please enough with useless excuses and requesting handicaps, rally up an fight for it.
  8. nations rating be it easy or hard depends on the safezones. sweden have one safezone and is rated hard. US has 2 large safezones (1 either side of little river) and is rated easy. little river was not intended to be a uncapturable port it only belonged to US recently.. because it used to be a freetown hence the trading capability and all capitals have a relative close freetown nearby gustavia and christiansted and fort royal have ays/ la mona habana has tumbado kpr had navasse (which is now french used to be free town). so all capitals needed a freetown before that had changed an now your requested a previous freetown to become uncapturable meaning there is no means of latching to US coast in conflict if say for example US held all ports on US coast there is nowhere to stage from or come from which is why little river was sought after since the day it lost freetown status
  9. so childish comments are your points against this rumor? dont troll a thread for the sake of it please. grow up and have some respect for others who are placing a legitimate discussion
  10. thank you - so please keep comments relevant or if not then to yourself. @moderator please can you clean irrelevant comments ?
×
×
  • Create New...