Proposal for Andy

I would like to propose that the automatic deactivation of defensive arms when transferring from spacedock to country be rethought.

I understand the reasoning behind limiting offensive transfers but ask that defensive weapons be exempt or the reactivation process be expedited.

There is a Suggestions forum...

Weapon transfers between worlds should be totally blocked. Interplanetary war doesn't belong in a simulation anyway. At least deactivation of weapons on docking stations reduces the role of interplanetary war.

The space program has hurt the war game. War isn't competitive when some players have multi-year stockpiles they can use from multiple worlds. Newer and less active players have to worry about enemy weapons from multiple worlds. That's too much, on top of manpower issues, quality issues, logistics issues.

Defensive weapons aren't a threat to anyone, that is why I specifically mentioned them.

A predator with extreme defenses is a big problem. The transfer of massive defense stockpiles from multiple worlds makes war uncompetitive.

That is pretty much the entire point of warfare from having a bigger rock to the nuclear arms race.

Also having a deterrent isn't a predatory act, it's a preventative act against aggression.

Yes, extreme stockpiles of weapons, transferable from multiple worlds, is a deterrent. That deterrent works so well that 99% of players stay away from PvP.

I agree, I think weapons from CEOs accounts or different worlds should stay away from countries and should be only available to trade on worlds market. The budget limit makes no sense if one player is limited to buy everything on the market while another can simply transfer when it is needed without any limitation.

It is also clicking; then incentive...

Who is the 1% of players who are not away from PvP??

Last time i check before players who either cheat or don't play the game; diden't really know a damn thing. Just like how i was a player here a year ago in a sqaush match against someone who at over 10 times what i had and using strategy and their own neglgance; beat them.


2 players; about equally matched; fought and one was victories. The results? They both quit the game they could not keep playing. One to two wars not going to save this game.

All the players lost via any type of development in this game is probably whats really astronomical. Really the type of players are more reasonable.


Just a side note to: war game was dead by space. There was supposed to be another planet and space wars(that was a joke! but if it ha

"The budget limit makes no sense if one player is limited to buy everything on the market while another can simply transfer when it is needed without any limitation."

Because the player who played the game, took the time, and bought all the materials needed to protect their empire; should be voided and be put to contend with a player who can just buy everything on the market as needed?? That makes sense. Because thats the goal! players who barly play should just be able to get as much as long term players, since "the long term" are the ones who ruin the game!!!

Not like a multi player can't have 3 accounts full of assets on each world test it. I have seen it and own some of a mutlis properity.

Why there is no "new players" around and this are what? the last same players here since more then 10 years ago, and im the only "n

Everybody has his own opinion.

I just believe with all the breaks in the war game, there should be more focus on how to fix the concept of even using units and weapons. Not just focus on trying to tear players down or how someone can use defense weapons better off then offensive.

Such as nuclear defense batterys in garrisons! not a good thing!

Many things need to be fixed indeed. I really hope that the new pvp world will make these changes inevitable.