I agree with The. Storage should be increased so that raiding inactives can once again become slightly profitable instead of just a waste of time.

It's not only about raiding inactives.
It's the fact that half of our building points come from storages
When someone just starts playing, 20k metal is a cr4pload of resources and he's trying to get some for colony ship or some research, but has to build a damn storage. That slows him down pretty bad...
How come the server is called Speed then?

To prevent the raidng of inactives which seems to be the counter argument for increased storage...

Why not have the storage scale by a larger factor rather than having an increase to the base storage limit?

This means that inactives will remain unprofitable as they do not build storage (Obviously)
Hence active players will continue to raid active players AND the issue over the storage would be solved.

I'm not quite sure whats the problem with those who quit after few days. Their production is still to low to be worth raiding...
I like Cypher's idea too, but not sure the devs can do that easily...

The wrote:Inactive raiding is also part of the game. Otherwise there would be some sort of protection so they couldn't get attacked.

The same can be said about miners.

neoshagrath wrote:

The wrote:Inactive raiding is also part of the game. Otherwise there would be some sort of protection so they couldn't get attacked.

The same can be said about miners.

True, but no one said people shouldn't mine. But some players rather fleet than mine and they suffer most. Even miners will be suffering 'cause the lack of fields.
You on the other hand don't want people to raid inactives 'cause you're to lazy to do it yourself and you actually admit it.

The wrote:You on the other hand don't want people to raid inactives 'cause you're to lazy to do it yourself and you actually admit it.

So?

The wrote: How the hell can someone say that it doesn't influence players growth in a bad way if most of their production goes to storage upgrade.

So you simply want things to become easier?

The wrote:I think you neo should ask yourself what is right and what is wrong since I believe you're the only player in this thread who is against the capacity enlargement.

Everybody has their own opinions of what is right or wrong. But don't expect that you are correct just because there are people who agree with you.

The wrote:I'm not quite sure whats the problem with those who quit after few days. Their production is still to low to be worth raiding...

Players build storage depending on their production. Need I say more?
And your arguments about points and storage? what if we remove solar plants since it too takes up most of your building points?

I (just like everyone else) want it to be the way it should.
This change made it difficult mostly for raiders/fleeters. It is as if they made metal and crystal mines have less hour production than deuterium synth or if deuterium synth needed less energy. Mostly fleeters would benefit from it and it would change the balance of the game in a bad way.
This is exactly what happened now, though fleeters suffer most.
And i believe CRs bring most of the fun and excitement in the forums (besides the topics that dont have anything to do with a game). I don't see many people talking about how today they produced certain amount of resources.

neoshagrath wrote:So you simply want things to become easier?
...
Everybody has their own opinions of what is right or wrong. But don't expect that you are correct just because there are people who agree with you.

Then Xtreme is easy...why did you quit then?!

neoshagrath wrote:Players build storage depending on their production. Need I say more?

If the production is low it wont produce much even if the storage cap was 10mil. I doubt someone can fill it fast with basic income of 400 metal and 200 crystal (or what ever it is).

neoshagrath wrote:And your arguments about points and storage? what if we remove solar plants since it too takes up most of your building points?

What if we made solar plants a lot more expensive and they give less energy. Jeez, wonder who would suffer most?
If you have a problem keeping your fleet then be a miner. But taking all the fun from the rest just because you're lazy is wrong.



I suggest a poll so the majority decides what is best. Looking at this thread, it seems there is only 1 vote against the upgrade.

The wrote:Then Xtreme is easy...why did you quit then?!

How many accounts have you used up in extreme?

Now this is getting confusing. Lets go back to the basic points.
Is it about the raiding and the inactives?

If it is about players going inactive after a few days, you said they have too low production you won't even bother.
If it is about raiding inactives who have stayed awhile," Players build storage depending on their production.". Which means their storage will only be full after about 12 hours (for players who play on the edge) more than 24 hours (for the regular player). The same goes with the active players. 12 to 24 hour raiding schedule is the norm for a raider.

If you really are a raider, you will would know by now that it is not because I am lazy that I am arguing my point.

Cypher wrote:To prevent the raidng of inactives which seems to be the counter argument for increased storage...

Why not have the storage scale by a larger factor rather than having an increase to the base storage limit?

This means that inactives will remain unprofitable as they do not build storage (Obviously)
Hence active players will continue to raid active players AND the issue over the storage would be solved.

I really like this suggestion it is a true compromise between what we have and what many want.