correct me if I’m wrong, but

“all Support Buildings in that District are removed from the game” could be interpreted as “from the ruleset”

I’d say not - that an instance of a Building is different from the definition of a Building - but it’s up to however a majority interprets it when it becomes time to interpret it. If you worry that there might be a consensus for a reading you wouldn’t want it to have, you could head that off by proposing to clarify the rule.

so like, do these just stick around after a calamity hits? are these just permanent?

As written, yes, although they can be destroyed by other disasters. If you think they should be removed in the process of averting the Fate, or something like that, feel free to propose an amendment.

(I don’t think there should be ways of defending against disasters, I think disasters should be much worse and much less avoidable, this is supposed to be about the destruction of Atlantis, and insurance should be as close to safety - at a cost - as you can get)

I think the fall of Atlantis would be more enjoyable if it had been built up in a meaningful, hubristic way first, rather than aiming to be eventually washing away random buildings at a slightly faster rate than they can be built. I like the idea of bigger scenes where an earthquake destroys a tower which fails to spot a fire, which destroys a barracks, which allows a levee to be broken, which floods a region.

I’m all for ramping up the disasters in some way as the dynasty progresses.

I think you’ll find it harder to get proposals enacted that take people’s progress away once they have some progress to defend

You think? Assuming we go for some endgame of “last player standing” or “most money made when Atlantis falls”, I’d expect turning up the disaster dial to be supported by players who’d made more progress, since they’d feel better positioned to weather it. (Whether that’s a well-Supported District under this rule, or just a heavily populated one under the current one.)

@Kevan is that an argument for most players opposing? At that point, accelerating destruction is basically bampam

I guess I feel like of the game is intended to be “build things, they might get destroyed” then that needs to be the promise of the game from the outset, consistently, rather than being an 11th hour twist that also needs player consent.

I mean, all victory conditions are based on progress made so far, it always takes a little finesse to get the middle of the pack on board. Are you concerned that adding Support buildings would widen the gulf between leading players and trailing ones?

I don’t see Support buildings as changing things much. Any given Support structure is only going to be useful in 1/56th of Fate rolls, and may get destroyed by a different Fate anyway, so they’re a waste of time to build entirely speculatively. Even if you learn a Prophecy, it may still be better in the long run to build an additional regular building elsewhere than to waste a whole turn negating it.

If they’re not going to change much then why are we adding them? Is it just complexity for the sake of complexity?

Sure, complexity for the sake of seeing if it goes anywhere, we’re still in the early days of the dynasty.