Monday, March 15, 2010

Proposal: Fighting Machine

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 17 Mar 2010 07:00:18 UTC

In Rule 2.4, replace “A Commoner with a Walking Fortress may only Scavenge once every ten days. Whenever they may Scavenge, however, they may elect to instead take 2 Resources from each of the four Commoners to have Scavenged immediately preceding them, while also gaining their usual stipend of coal.” with:-

Whenever a Commoner with a Walking Fortress may Scavenge, they may elect to instead take 2 units of Resources from each of up to four Commoners located in the same County as them, while also gaining their usual stipend of coal.

Changing the Fortress so that it makes sense under the new movement rules, and powering it up and clarifying it slightly.



03-15-2010 17:39:27 UTC



03-15-2010 18:18:29 UTC

against If mobility becomes more of a factor then we’re likely to see far few incidences of multiple Commoners being in one place, except in Dorset. As a Commoner in Dorset with no protection I’d rather not get so repeatedly and indiscriminately thumped.


03-16-2010 00:53:31 UTC



03-16-2010 04:10:49 UTC



03-16-2010 14:04:30 UTC



03-16-2010 15:50:50 UTC



03-16-2010 18:03:10 UTC



03-17-2010 13:31:29 UTC

against This is very close, and has a lot of DEFERENTIALs, so I had to think a long time about this one. The Fortress was pretty weak before, and this proposal only seems to make it weaker (OK, it works weekly rather than 10-daily, but it’s too easy to run from it.) I’d rather see it powered up significantly, such that it’s actually a decent idea to build one; and it’s also strange to have this caring about Location when most other actions don’t.


03-17-2010 13:58:05 UTC

The only other direct player interactions are trading, aren’t they? Which could feasibly be undertaken remotely. It seemed a little strange that building a Fortress in Cornwall would let me steal bits of metal from a Commoner scavenging in Northumberland.

against Self-kill to keep the queue moving.