Dallane wrote:Taipion wrote:So, mind to explain?
Yes, you don't know what you are talking about
Thank you for clarifying that you were just talking cheap with no argument to start with.
Dallane wrote:Taipion wrote:So, mind to explain?
Yes, you don't know what you are talking about
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
JohnCarver wrote:This would make raiding inactive providence bases easier. This new system makes raiding ALL bases a bit 'easier'. but then again we are here
I would happily do it raiding 10 bases a day----------------------I hate my life----------------------------------------------------There is no chance in hell I would use this system
<.....................................................................................................................................................X.............................................>
With the new system we are here
I would happily do it raiding 10 bases a day-----------------------I hate my life----------------------------------------------------There is no chance in hell I would use this system
<..................................................................................................X...................................................,.............................................>
TotalyMeow wrote: Claeyt's perspective of Salem and what it's about is very different from the devs and in many cases is completely the opposite of what we believe.
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
JohnCarver wrote:If you are referring to a store item for raiding. That is certainly not going to be the case. If you are hinting that there will be more raid structures that should be built for a successful siege then yes, I hope to give the aggressors more options to invest more to lesson the pain of a siege.
JohnCarver wrote:If you are referring to a store item for raiding. That is certainly not going to be the case. If you are hinting that there will be more raid structures that should be built for a successful siege then yes, I hope to give the aggressors more options to invest more to lesson the pain of a siege.
jorb wrote:(jwhitehorn) you are an ungrateful, spoiled child
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.
Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
JohnCarver wrote:The new system has a design method to cause defended waste claims to self-destruct with some reasonable level of reliability, but like with most things in Salem, those who go to extremes may still find ways to gain limited periods of defendng their siege pods. Also, in a world where the breach of walls is more readily available then the destruction of bells becomes more negotiable. I do have a system for this as well where for example a single border stone can fall each 8 hours that the siege remains going for example, and the bell would require an active siege for weeks. Keep in mind these are providence figures. Expedition #2 would be a very rapid acceleration of this entire system.
jorb wrote:(jwhitehorn) you are an ungrateful, spoiled child
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests