The only thing i know i get from owning harbor is free repair lol

So the main goal of proposal: to increase lvling-up speed for the members of the fleet, which owns harbor?
+ It is a quite nice initiative, which brings in a unique possibility of sometimes quite boring task: lvling the crew.
- Powerful fleets, which can take the harbor, most likely already have many enough 120 crews. So this is more actual for newcomers, so newcomers will join powerful fleets making them more and more powerful, not the ones which are a bit back. This can lead to absence of competition. Yes, there is 2 harbor limit, but as for now it is "a limit" and it forces to give up harbors without battles just to be able to have fun of attacks. And that's a significant disadvantage: any fleet should be able to have as many harbors as it can. Anyway it is impossible to have 24h HA/HD for several weeks :D

The thread is good. Something must be changed on those HA... investing credits in Harbour is like thowing them away into NF blackhole. The last time when i saw APA, wich main duty is to save the credits on "invested" harbour in NA was on youtube in 360p quality. With BB4s as main battleships. The rest times it was only for fun at 1 week holded harbours.


My opinion about the situation with give away HAs - mainly it happens because of 2 HAs per fleet as maximum. In this case - any fleet wich want to train an attack must give it away. Warming their eggs for long time on 2 ports in the end will result bad for any fleet wich play only defences.

Giving away an single (not needed harbour) - there can be several motives.
(to not be confused with the situations when the fleet WANTS to hold it but fails, because it's very easy to switch the sides everytime when it's comfortable).

1. The bad time for harbour to main core of fleet results into not possible presence. 1 not sleeped night may be ok but 2-3 is already not.
2. The second motive to give away can be the training for the fleet rookies - declared free presence without the most of experienced players  results into not serious deffence. That is the kind of "semi-giveaway". If the deffence is succesfull - it's cool, everybody happy, when they fail -"well - we don't need it anyway...:)" 
3. Also noone is saved from RL issues - that is rare but anything can happens with "main CVs, BBs, coordinators", 1 loss is acceptable but 3-4 at same time is far from ok, especialy when small fleet have no substitutions. So if they understand that  the playing will transform into massacre - they prefer to save their honour.

There can be more situations like that but those 3 are the main. The fleet must be leaded by 1 person who MAKE the decision (to be or not to be), when the fleet is leaded by "democracy in real time" - it's a mess, not an battle group. The democracy must be BEFORE the action starts.

Of cource not all can agree with him or don't understand the motives on different situations - that's when the chat war starts at the  forums. I call it "holywars".

About RM HA, in my opinion the issue with "Toronto" :) happened for BS just because of the season. On summer holidays most fleets have a lot of missing people, RL recreation is something what everybody must have. It is an normal thing. After all will return to the duty - the situation will change. The battlesip guns will speak better then any words on chat. Just wait... 

Very good thread, I am thinking about the same idea recently. Given the fleet union system will be online, the benefit of owning a harbour could be increased as more fleet have a posibility to own a harbour. 

 

This should be in suggestions... and the problem with some Harbors such as defending a harbor like RM is that people have other lives outside of navyfield. So its not as much to not wanting to defend a harbor or getting bored of the rewards, Its the times of the harbors that do not work for some players, because they have to get up for work in the morning, or have something planned out for the day…

Fleets that been around for years are getting older, which means more outside stuff going on in their lives, especially if you have kids. Summer time gets busy for most, vacation or work pics up and more social activities that are going on. Some fleets if they really wanted to could own all the harbors...or already have, at one point and time owned many harbors over the years seeing that navyfield has been around for over 10 years...

HA's are meant to be credit sink points, not for profit, the only thing you should gain from fighting over harbours is to play with a skilled team of your own chosing, vs a hopefully equally skilled oponent for a good fight.


and the only reason fleets give away a harbour, is because they can't play HA if they got 2 harbours to defend without any declarations being made. 

flag is pretty much on the money here.......

NF has been around for a long time..if you need extra incentives to take HA then your not thinking right...

Its about the winning or losing ....thats about all


If that doesnt cut it ..dont do it...and

Lots of people have ideas how to make the HA  "fairer"..

well Ive been on both the winning and losing fleets for years and all I see  now are people trying to shift the goalposts so that having a united ,well trained fleet is no advantage.. 

RA and BAMF and other good fleets didnt appear out of thin air ....and I dont think taking and handing on harbours is anyone elses business ...because if you can win it ..you can do whatever.....sorry Cracko ...your off track here

The problem lies in motivation as well.
Are fleet battles enough fair and interesting (even in sense of set-up suggestions)?
But how many fleet battles were played in last month or even half a year? 

did the credit hoarder of NF just ask for a discount when buying rentals?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Seriously tho...I agree with these proposals