Port Blockades (Large)

[Vane]

I have never said fact nor any realistic approach is unwelcome, personally.. I opt for it.

I am just saying what you guys said and others gams are not approapriate argument aswell because they have no connection with PG...

In other words, only what Wolfie says is relevant for any argument...

[Sebena]

I have never said fact nor any realistic approach is unwelcome, personally.. I opt for it.

I am just saying what you guys said and others gams are not approapriate argument aswell because they have no connection with PG...

In other words, only what Wolfie says is relevant for any argument...

I believe you +1 harons comment of it I might be wrong I am lazy to go and look but either way this is not something worth risking for if you are defender. If again is used term I will use it because it is game mechanic then here is solution. No reward is given to attacker expect shiney badge and everything else stays the same.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Okay, to keep it real, the defender must risk loss, okay?

Okay. So, if I defend and win, just like in real life, I get to hang the attackers?

No, not that real.

Oh, okay, just like in real life, I get to put them in prison?

No, not that real.

Um, just like in real life, I get to take their ships?

Nope, you getting too real again.

Ah, okay, sorry, what do I get?

You get to watch them sail away.

That real, huh?

Yep. PG, keeping it real since 2007.

[Vane]

Wrong, attackers attack for gain, defenders defend to keep. You want to gain something, go and attack for it.

But I completely agree, what we currently have is not worth defending, this is where the idea needs work. When plantations come out, the profit they will generate to the port owning nation, now that will be something to defend. Increase trade tax, another reason to defend. Allow port buildings for bonuses, again something to defend.

[Most Lee Harmless]

Then lets see this whole package : cos all we got at the moment is maybes, ifs, buts and perhaps, all way off in the dim distant future. There is no reason to pay large to defend, so no reason to defend equals nothing to attack equals walk-over plunders for attackers : the game needs more of them, no doubt, but its a lot of work for it.

With this blockade, as it stands, in place, I wont be wasting resources building plantations up : nor port buildings, nor worrying about phat new taxes : one blockade to defend, kiss all that income goodbye : second one, next years income flies out the door, third one, feck this for a game of soldiers... fourth one... call me when you done.

Do you pay more in insurance and security than the value of what you are trying to protect? Nope, thats very poor business, its much sounder to just give it away.

How come I get this feeling that no-body actually wants these big battles? Not unless they so firmly skewed to one sides point of view no person of any sense would even contemplate taking the losers role? Thus no battles at all, just no-risk plunders for some.

[sXs]

Defend or don't.
Be a trader or a pirate or both.
Be a banker or not.
Build a Goldsmith or not.
Be a shipwright or not.
Be an active nation player or a lone wolf.
Start a training guild or join an experienced guild.

Everyone of these things have had upgrades in this game. Everyone of these things is a choice. Just because you choose on side or the another does not mean the other side is wrong for their choice. It does not mean the upgrades should not be implemented. If i find no value in being a banker, does that mean all bank upgrades should immediately be void? If I find no value in Nation play, does that mean all future nation upgrades are useless.

According to Wolfie though, that is the case.

Again these are choices

[Vane]

And where is this apparently overly large risk and expense for defenders that keeps getting thrown about?

You win the blockade your fleets get 18 danger.. what else is there you are so concerned with? 1,2,3 days income? hardly a years worth of port profit..

[sXs]

And where is this apparently overly large risk and expense for defenders that keeps getting thrown about?

You win the blockade your fleets get 18 danger.. what else is there you are so concerned with? 1,2,3 days income? hardly a years worth of port profit..

Agreed, all the risk right now is on the attackers side. Defenders are risking nothing and yet want a reward for defending. And as Danik has pointed out, Traders will simply re-route on temporary basis. so attackers will make nothing. If that is the case why so much fervor?

[Most Lee Harmless]

And where is this apparently overly large risk and expense for defenders that keeps getting thrown about?

You win the blockade your fleets get 18 danger.. what else is there you are so concerned with? 1,2,3 days income? hardly a years worth of port profit..

So, the attacker 'risks' their MoW fleet : the defender will require equally powerful fleets to win : But, it seems, that is not a risk to them?

Does the attacker warrant reward for their risked assets? Yes they do. Should they warrant loss if they fail? Apparently not. Does the defender warrant reward for their risked assets ? No, it seems they dont. Do they warrant reward for success? No, again, they apparently dont. Do they warrant loses for failure? Yes they certainly do. Well, at least we can agree on the first and the last.

And Benjamin, if the defenders losses are so trifling, why the heck are the attackers bothering? Why are the defenders bothering? If its all so unbothering, where are the big battles the feature is supposed to be bringing us, its supposed reason for being?

[Vane]

Why do you need an MoW or even Sotl's to win?

And Benjamin, if the defenders losses are so trifling, why the heck are the attackers bothering?

Perhaps stunting any nation profit in that port or all ports held by a specific nation is a goal? Trade accounts for a decent amount, and coupled with BD barrages a nation may as well give it up. Thats only one reason.