Port Diversity

[Shadowood]

Not entirely accurate Shadowood.

With a goal as ambitious as that, I recommend that you talk to PhoenixKnight. He single handedly took multiple ports by himself and held them. He may have some good advice for you.

I need to get to know PHX better true. But I did stat it wouldn't last long. I don't believe if PHX was by himself 100% he would be able to hold out against the masses. Yes he took the ports but he had to of had help in maintaining them. I am newer here so I don't know the full history of his course in the game. All I know is he left and was talked into coming back to help Egypt. Past that I only know him as the man who hold the top influence and fame spots every time I've logged in for the last 7 months.

I want to know if anyone has ever tested PHX resolve. Tested his defense. Who in the game has attacked PHX. How did it go? I have only heard rumors of such things. Rumors of Black Sparrow. Rumors of wars of the past.

Oh how I long for these rumors to be true and to come about again. Where is this famous Joe Boot. Where is this Pirate Roberts (well we know this one). I want to see some big guns come out to play. I have had fun in my short time here. I believe most know me now. But if I left would people tell stories about me. IDK but I want them to. This is my goal in the game.

[Sebena]

-1 why would you punish egypt or spain just because they had enough man power, voodoo and gold to take ports. If you want diversity on map then join nation without port and take one. This is plain stupid idea. If we want diversity then we needs more perks of owning the port which will cause players to fight for one. Maybe when nations get abillity to chose who will be governor we can add some special bonus according to resource they produce for example thoraks produce best tobacco gold smithers work faster but that tobacco price is 25 gcs max and so on quality will be decided by the gold invested in ports from governors and for how long nation holded that port...

So you agree with countries like Barbados taking the entire map because they have all the voodoo? Even Bermuda's ports?


Of course this is theoretical, and not actually going to happen. But what if it did, would you support their monopoly on all ports?

Barbados never succsseded in it midway and ZomB took care of it. Do you really think that spain or egypt can take entire map both nations know that it is impossible. USA tried that with spain ports and we know how it ended... That is mission impossible neither nation owns enough resources to do it.

Also with this you would punish players like PK who worked hard in raising his nation instead of reward someone for investing that much resources and time and I stay behinde my words that this idea is plain stupid

[Donald Trump]

-1 why would you punish egypt or spain just because they had enough man power, voodoo and gold to take ports. If you want diversity on map then join nation without port and take one. This is plain stupid idea. If we want diversity then we needs more perks of owning the port which will cause players to fight for one. Maybe when nations get abillity to chose who will be governor we can add some special bonus according to resource they produce for example thoraks produce best tobacco gold smithers work faster but that tobacco price is 25 gcs max and so on quality will be decided by the gold invested in ports from governors and for how long nation holded that port...

So you agree with countries like Barbados taking the entire map because they have all the voodoo? Even Bermuda's ports?


Of course this is theoretical, and not actually going to happen. But what if it did, would you support their monopoly on all ports?

Barbados never succsseded in it midway and ZomB took care of it. Do you really think that spain or egypt can take entire map both nations know that it is impossible. USA tried that with spain ports and we know how it ended... That is mission impossible neither nation owns enough resources to do it.

Also with this you would punish players like PK who worked hard in raising his nation instead of reward someone for investing that much resources and time and I stay behinde my words that this idea is plain stupid

You still avoided the question. I said theoretical, and even stated that it probably won't ever happen. But if it did, would you agree that if the players in Barbados worked hard and had the voodoo and spent the turns, do they deserve to keep every port in the game?

[Vane]

-1 why would you punish egypt or spain just because they had enough man power, voodoo and gold to take ports. If you want diversity on map then join nation without port and take one. This is plain stupid idea. If we want diversity then we needs more perks of owning the port which will cause players to fight for one. Maybe when nations get abillity to chose who will be governor we can add some special bonus according to resource they produce for example thoraks produce best tobacco gold smithers work faster but that tobacco price is 25 gcs max and so on quality will be decided by the gold invested in ports from governors and for how long nation holded that port...

So you agree with countries like Barbados taking the entire map because they have all the voodoo? Even Bermuda's ports?


Of course this is theoretical, and not actually going to happen. But what if it did, would you support their monopoly on all ports?

Barbados never succsseded in it midway and ZomB took care of it. Do you really think that spain or egypt can take entire map both nations know that it is impossible. USA tried that with spain ports and we know how it ended... That is mission impossible neither nation owns enough resources to do it.

Also with this you would punish players like PK who worked hard in raising his nation instead of reward someone for investing that much resources and time and I stay behinde my words that this idea is plain stupid

There was so much more behind Barbados' fall. ZomB and Midway were simply players in the game.

[PhoenixKnight]

The illusve goal of world domination! Truth is it takes tremendous resources to keep a port up let alone take it over first! Examples: right now the population is under attack. Every now and then I log in to find someone got like 30-70million influence points and I have to spend a lot to recover it. Personally speaking, I was happy with one port. The only reason I grew up to 4 was to accommodate the rising population. The rest of the 7 came with immigrants. I think port control is synonymous to population and strength. So the likelihood of map takeover is virtually impossible. Right now, Egypt has a NAP with virtually every country on the map. Spain has no expansion aspiration as far as I know. There will come a time when some ports will change hands whether we like it or not.
Sure I would like to support aspiring nations but I rule by democracy, so I cannot just give someone a port. I will tell you this though, port control benefits everyone in the nation but the ones least benefiting from it are those who maintain it!

[Admiral Nelson]

How do you know that, Edward Hawk?

Its way before your time?...

[Vane]

How do you know that, Edward Hawk?

Its way before your time?...

Was it?

[Admiral Nelson]

Unless you have been used another account...

[Vane]

Unless you have been used another account...

I have been around for 4 years, I have done many things.

[Admiral Nelson]

Your player number suggests different.