Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
talk:people:vladimirr [2013/02/23 03:09] v1adimirr asdgasfh |
talk:people:vladimirr [2020/11/08 04:02] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| =====Proposed Limitations on Expansion in the New Map===== | =====Proposed Limitations on Expansion in the New Map===== | ||
| In the proposed new map, nations, as described in the constitution, may not claim any land beyond an arbitrary limit of 1500 blocks in any direction. Settlements and non-political players are not bound by this restriction and are free to settle freely around the map and beyond the limit. If it is found by the players at any time and confirmed by the mods (through a majority vote) that this limit has become restrictive, it will be the perogative of the mods to institute a laxer limit or indeed abolish it entirely. | In the proposed new map, nations, as described in the constitution, may not claim any land beyond an arbitrary limit of 1500 blocks in any direction. Settlements and non-political players are not bound by this restriction and are free to settle freely around the map and beyond the limit. If it is found by the players at any time and confirmed by the mods (through a majority vote) that this limit has become restrictive, it will be the perogative of the mods to institute a laxer limit or indeed abolish it entirely. | ||
| - | >I don't think a 1500 block limit in any direction is a good idea. I think a nation should be limited to claiming 1-3 biomes (I prefer large biomes, so I was thinking large biomes initially), and MUST border another nation, and additionally must register with a mod by that mod signing their wiki page at the bottom of the page before it may be officially considered a nation (on a side not the benefit of registration with a mod could mean that the current qualifications for becoming a nation could become more loose and act more as guidelines). The limit on biomes claims could create opportunities for trade, conflict, unique cultural development, and serve as a good fundamental unit for nations and borders, also allowing for each biome to generate unique cultures and names for structures (mountains/etc). Possibly, this limit of 1-3 biomes could never be expanded, thus creating an incentive for imperialism. | + | >I don't think a 1500 block limit in any direction is a good idea. I think a nation should be limited to claiming 1-3 biomes (I prefer large biomes, so I was thinking 1 large biome initially, MAYBE 2 or 3, and it would also depend on the landforms, I wouldn't mind a thin strip of mountains + the biome being considered as a single biome), and MUST border another nation, and additionally must register with a mod by that mod signing their wiki page at the bottom of the page before it may be officially considered a nation (on a side not the benefit of registration with a mod could mean that the current qualifications for becoming a nation could become more loose and act more as guidelines). The limit on biomes claims could create opportunities for trade, conflict, unique cultural development, and serve as a good fundamental unit for nations and borders, also allowing for each biome to generate unique cultures and names for structures (mountains/etc). Possibly, this limit of 1-3 biomes could never be expanded, thus creating an incentive for imperialism. --- //[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/02/23 03:12// |
| - | + | >>I don't think that forcing nations to fill up biomes is necessarily a good idea. I think that would be a good upper limit, but I don't think we should include a minimum size, especially since the threshold to be a nation has been significantly lowered, or will be in this next map. An entire biome (esp a large one) is far too great to grant to just 4 or 5 people. | |
| - | >I don't think that forcing nations to fill up biomes is necessarily a good idea. I think that would be a good upper limit, but I don't think we should include a minimum size, especially since the threshold to be a nation has been significantly lowered, or will be in this next map. An entire biome (esp a large one) is far too great to grant to just 4 or 5 people. | + | >>Additionally, forcing them to be next to eachother I also don't think is a great idea. I think we should do everything we can to promote nations setting up near eachother, but I don't think we should force all nations to be touching- again, because there might be 2 or there might be 20. I think having a limit (1500 I think is generous enough to provide diversity of choice for locations but also constricting enough to keep everyone close since it will be only nations and not EVERYONE) is a better solution to the problem of keeping nations close than artificially forcing them to be friends/enemies. That should come organically and we should do everything we can to foster that, but we shouldn't try to create it artificially. |
| - | >Additionally, forcing them to be next to eachother I also don't think is a great idea. I think we should do everything we can to promote nations setting up near eachother, but I don't think we should force all nations to be touching- again, because there might be 2 or there might be 20. I think having a limit (1500 I think is generous enough to provide diversity of choice for locations but also constricting enough to keep everyone close since it will be only nations and not EVERYONE) is a better solution to the problem of keeping nations close than artificially forcing them to be friends/enemies. That should come organically and we should do everything we can to foster that, but we shouldn't try to create it artificially. | + | >>As for the idea of mods having to sign off on nations, I'm ok with that. It would be good to have a small amount of beaurocracy to keep track of this stuff, at least at the early stages of the proposed new map. |
| - | >As for the idea of mods having to sign off on nations, I'm ok with that. It would be good to have a small amount of beaurocracy to keep track of this stuff, at least at the early stages of the proposed new map. | + | >>So to sum up, I think we should encourage nations to form as you suggest, but I don't think we should force them to. |
| - | >So to sum up, I think we should encourage nations to form as you suggest, but I don't think we should force them to. | + | >> --- //[[people:vladimirr|V1adimirr]] 2013/02/23 03:02// |
| - | > --- //[[people:vladimirr|V1adimirr]] 2013/02/23 03:02// | + | >>> Personally, I prefer a large buffer area between my settlements and having a lot of room for expansion - I DO NOT like having my nation being completely urbanized, I prefer some countryside, so am not bothered by having a nation of 4-5 people control between 1 or 3 large biomes. It somewhat restricts where nations may develop, but it is still possible for a nation to choose, they simply must choose a biome that is bordering another nation, or wait until their biome is bordering another nation to officially become one. This restriction could be eased to allow nations to form within 1 biome of another nation's borders. I do not feel that nations should be allowed to grow their initial territory except through conquest on the new map. I additionally do not see moving settlements to another part of the map as a necessarily good idea. Perhaps we can consider them as free cities, the territory associated with the <del>nation</del> the land on which they've built, with the land possibly belonging IN NAME to the nation which claims it, but the settlements having their autonomy and rights to the specific area in which they build on (and perhaps a buffer area) and not to be interfered with. With large biomes, a nation should be able to accomodate itself and independent settlements. --- //[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/02/23 03:12// |
| =====Proposed Updated Rules of Engagement===== | =====Proposed Updated Rules of Engagement===== | ||
| Nations are bound by the limitations in the constitution. The Rules of Engagement are needlessly specific and limiting and should be revised as follows: | Nations are bound by the limitations in the constitution. The Rules of Engagement are needlessly specific and limiting and should be revised as follows: | ||