PresidentDavid Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I made this thread in order to have a discussion on what ways we could create some type of penalty for having land in certain conditions. Should there be some type of limit to the amount of land a player can acquire? Or should there be a penalty for every square mile a player has past their IG stats? Maybe a player shouldn't be able to own a certain amount of land outside of their home continent? Or maybe we should revert to the rule that says a player cannot have IC land past what their IG stats are - which means that once you have DoEd, you still can't get more land then what your nation is IG. These are all just suggestions but I was curious if anyone else had any input or ideas regarding this subject? I think it'd be nice to give something to a GM for them to propose and the community take a vote but before blatantly doing that I wanted to hear what the community had to say on the matter. What do all of you think? Is the status quo just fine, or should there be some type of reform? Discussion.... Go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 No. Having all that territory to defend is its own issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishabad98 Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 agreed. No need for reform. It's your problem or benefit now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 No reform. Keep the status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xoindotnler Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Afraid to lose some land? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Edit: Never mind... Edited January 3, 2014 by TheShammySocialist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justinian the Mighty Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 There should be a penalty for not having enough land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 A monthly sacrifice should be required to be paid to the god of war in the blood of your enemies or the lands of your decadent empire, otherwise you should know his wrath and torment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) And beyond paying the god of war, we always need lubricant for the gears of war themselves... Seriously though, we continue to see reform suggestions come up, they keep getting quashed. I will say that I would personally like to see large landholders posting more, and justify all that land that is taken up. But that is just a thought... or a hope... Edited January 3, 2014 by TheShammySocialist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Personally, I'm ambivalent on the issue. On one hand, the big landholders have done -something- right to get all that area. On the other, imposing penalties for too much land could make RP more dynamic. There's possible advantages and disadvantages, but I could see myself backing a well-thought out proposal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 No, due to a lower amount of nations there already is less interaction and imposing artificial OOC limits will only further reduce interaction as there is no need for confrontation when you have someone on your border. Don't like if someone has a lot of land? Get a coalition together to attack him/her/them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Personally, I'm ambivalent on the issue. On one hand, the big landholders have done -something- right to get all that area. On the other, imposing penalties for too much land could make RP more dynamic. There's possible advantages and disadvantages, but I could see myself backing a well-thought out proposal. Speaking for myself at least that logics a bit flawed. I'd still want to fight. If anything I'd just be more grumpy and want to fight more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I would like perhaps enough open space to freely create new countries. *Sigh* That would be kind of nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 You can actually ask people to make a country in protectorate space too you know. Its ahistorical for people to suggest protectorates are restricting land. There is a lot of protectorate white space, white space which otherwise likely would be conquered by other powers as was the time during the scramble for continents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Personally, I'm ambivalent on the issue. On one hand, the big landholders have done -something- right to get all that area. On the other, imposing penalties for too much land could make RP more dynamic. There's possible advantages and disadvantages, but I could see myself backing a well-thought out proposal. I cannot remember, but have we ever had any rules in the past that did this? I think it use to be a rule that your land IC can't go past your IG land but I'm not positive on that one. I would like perhaps enough open space to freely create new countries. *Sigh* That would be kind of nice. Some people are very particular with the players whom they'll allow in their protectorates and then be picky what kind of government they set up - however I guess they have the right to do that since that is the land they own. Do you think these penalties should also extend to protectorates? That could possibly encourage actual white space to exist. You can actually ask people to make a country in protectorate space too you know. Its ahistorical for people to suggest protectorates are restricting land. There is a lot of protectorate white space, white space which otherwise likely would be conquered by other powers as was the time during the scramble for continents. Well I suppose if there was a rule that would restrict/penalize someone for the amount of land they would have they wouldn't want the burden of having massive protectorates that would add to their land count and thus wouldn't want to gobble up that land either. But I understand your point, I think, for the most part, protectorates are a good thing however it would be nice for there to be some white space in the world where anyone can make any type of nation with any type of government and not be judged outright until they've actually DoEd. But with our current rules, protectorates are a good thing because it keeps some land free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Some people are very particular with the players whom they'll allow in their protectorates and then be picky what kind of government they set up - however I guess they have the right to do that since that is the land they own. Do you think these penalties should also extend to protectorates? That could possibly encourage actual white space to exist. This alone will merely mean annexation of land. If I don't want nazis/commies/retards in my backyard, I'd make sure of it. Be it via restrictive protectorate policy, annexing my protectorate or by rolling you after the nation was created. If you want to RP something "revolutionary and groundbreaking" (which I'd say most extremisms aren't), then get an IC reason to not get stomped in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 This alone will merely mean annexation of land. If I don't want nazis/commies/retards in my backyard, I'd make sure of it. Be it via restrictive protectorate policy, annexing my protectorate or by rolling you after the nation was created. If you want to RP something "revolutionary and groundbreaking" (which I'd say most extremisms aren't), then get an IC reason to not get stomped in. It wont mean annexation of land if there is a penalty for having too much land. But yes, it might mean having white space next to you and rolling people you don't like - I agree. This may have not been you - it may have been Kankou maybe - but did you propose in the past that the amount of land you own could be based off of the amount of soldiers you have? For example: you need 5 soldiers to maintain every square mile of land you own or something like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 It wont mean annexation of land if there is a penalty for having too much land. But yes, it might mean having white space next to you and rolling people you don't like - I agree. This may have not been you - it may have been Kankou maybe - but did you propose in the past that the amount of land you own could be based off of the amount of soldiers you have? For example: you need 5 soldiers to maintain every square mile of land you own or something like that? Kankou proposed that for territory that one had in excess of ingame territory, there was a penalty of soldiers deducted from one's soldier count. Protectorate counts less than actual territory. People did not like the proposal much though. Still, its differention of territory and protectorate would at least not encourage annexation. Two things though: Why do you bring it up? What is the reason people should actually vote for this? Your proposal offers no real advantage to anyone but people who'll abuse the regulation to be an annoyance to everyone and do it merely to cause headaches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Kankou proposed that for territory that one had in excess of ingame territory, there was a penalty of soldiers deducted from one's soldier count. Protectorate counts less than actual territory. People did not like the proposal much though. Still, its differention of territory and protectorate would at least not encourage annexation. Two things though: Why do you bring it up? What is the reason people should actually vote for this? Your proposal offers no real advantage to anyone but people who'll abuse the regulation to be an annoyance to everyone and do it merely to cause headaches. I thought it was a unique suggestion and could possibly have a few variables moved around to make it more appealing. And right now there is nothing to vote on, this is the discussion phase for community input. And I think it offers an advantage to everyone. Like Lynneth said, if a careful plan is implemented the right way, it could make RP more dynamic and possibly even strategical. I am of the opinion that there should be a line drawn as to how much territory someone can acquire - but that is what I think. I think it'd be much more reasonable to come up with an equation or some type of rule so that people can't abuse their ability to land-grab and acquire vast amounts of territory simply just to have it or so that other people who might pose a threat can't have it. We are all entitled to our own opinion though, I am more than willing to respect yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 You can actually ask people to make a country in protectorate space too you know. No guarantee you'll actually get anything. What is the reason people should actually vote for this? Your proposal offers no real advantage to anyone but people who'll abuse the regulation to be an annoyance to everyone and do it merely to cause headaches. I would like to rejoin CNRP yet asking for land is bothersome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 I'd also be happy if the state would pay for my studies without me having to request subsidies every semester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Just saying getting a foot in the door is hard right now. Land penalty seems like a potential solution for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Its only fucking hard because you wont fucking ask General. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Its only !@#$@#$ hard because you wont !@#$@#$ ask General. Was taking me slightly over a week getting started. Newcomers likely might be less patient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Was taking me slightly over a week getting started. Newcomers likely might be less patient. Newcomers are maybe less set on things? It took me 5 minutes or so to query Lynneth (whom I did not even know back then) to ask for my first country and 5 more minutes to figure out what to do with it (maybe it showed). The part of my country that took the longest was the translation of my DoE into French. Admittedly, I joined and asked Lynneth at the recommendation of Elrich, but it isn't really too hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.