Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

RubyRose

Members2
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    95

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by RubyRose

  1. RubyRose
    u dont seem to realize whats at stake here. 1. your risking what remains of the player population on a major update. 2. if this backfires the game wont have many players left to salvage it. 3. loss of larger ports especially to large nations like RUS, GB, Dutch it will likely force players to quit. could easily loose hundreds of players to this. 4. why arent the smaller nations being targeted this type of feature should put every nation at risk not just the large nations, 5. these raid should abide by the game mechanics which include the frontline system. 6. why not just turn war server into a pve server with a pvp flag system. thats basicly what ur turning it into.
  2. RubyRose
    why top why not make it random between all nations otherwise ur just pushing away the largest portion of the server player base
  3. RubyRose
    that would just have people moving their items to useless ports that have nothing in them tax or investment wise to prevent what u suggested
  4. RubyRose
    so the idea is to trash the large nations and kill off the remaining server population to a port battle by AI that dont show up on the map as an incoming fleet rather just materialize when the battle starts
  5. RubyRose
    lol the port bonuses are fine as they are there is no grounds to have them removed
  6. RubyRose
    they'd never take Vera Cruz
  7. RubyRose
    my mistake boss comment and post withdrawn
  8. RubyRose
    deleted
  9. RubyRose
    if the port of origin in a nation control port then opening the chest if captured from the raiders becomes impossible because u cant enter another nation port unless sailing a trading ship
  10. RubyRose
    wouldnt really change it just be 4 battles stacked with the same ships that it would take to insta in 1 battle
  11. RubyRose
    if i'm not mistaken but doesnt BL4CK have like 80 members they could easily insta flip ports if their active enough to do so. soo not really a zerg nation. and why only bring this up now about shallows when its clear its only to benefit BL4CK who wanted to get the port from spain when we took 3 ships to set la guanja. if nations had issues with shallow port hostilities with deep water ships actually existed it would be been brought up long before now
  12. RubyRose
    u lost alot of ships, speaks volumes of BL4CK ability to protect ports
  13. RubyRose
    there is no benefit to changing shallow water ports when its been known for over 2 years that u can use deep water ships to flip shallow water ports. nassau is a great example its been flipped multiple times with deep water ships
  14. RubyRose
    remember prior to release the hostility meter from battles was increased for testing purposes.
  15. RubyRose
    we have seen BL4CK clan members behavior in hostility missions repeatedly dying intentionally not only in the Spanish hostility for neuvitas but also in our hostility at la guanja earlier today, this is a clan who is intentional or more specifically contractually dying to trade a port with another nation. which by the admin's previous ruling on a similar type. is against the rules and 2 clans payed the price for it. i believe since its already known that this is unacceptable behavior that BL4CK knowingly broke this game's ruling should face similar punishment, for repeatedly and intentionally dying in hostility missions to ai/players. to either help an enemy nation to set a port battle or to hinder another pirate clan from setting a port battle. this shouldnt be tolerated
  16. RubyRose
    from same tribunal this is refering to the contractual exchange of neuvitas from spain to pirates does that not make it against game rules to trade ports, or more specifically to die intentionally to either hinder or excel another nations hostility percentage for a port. this was the admin's verdict on the tribunal post
  17. RubyRose
    seagul's name is longer then the current letter cap for new players for character names as a result it comes up blank when in battles which i believe should be fixed
  18. RubyRose
    its more funny that they complain when someone pointed out another nation was raising hostilites on their chat and then complain even more and tribunal post that its an "alt bait and trap (not the clans) by russia just because french players ended up getting sunk or engaged.
  19. RubyRose
    considering most alt account u cant tell apart from main accounts
  20. RubyRose
    oh no the small nation of france is being attacked by 2 nations and are crying on the forums about how unfair it is
  21. RubyRose
    so do u have proof that this alt ramses 2 is actually an alt of a player in NN like where is the evidence to backup ur claim
  22. RubyRose
    i give no flipps for france
  23. RubyRose
    ewww thats a wired keyboard go get better tastes darlin
  24. RubyRose
    its more for the smaller players that havent been playing thru early access the ones not looking for a grind from hell, thats worse then world of warcraft interms of lvl grind. the time it takes to get to max rank in NA u could lvl 3 charaters to 120 on wow. and this is driving players away its too grindy its not fun to constantly having to grind xp for days or even weeks to get to that next lvl to be able to field their next larger ships. from what i have seen watching the steam charts and reading in nation and global chats new players dont like the grind required for the game and arent likely to stick around because of it when there are quicker grind games out there.
  25. RubyRose
    there i fixed it
×
×
  • Create New...