Many traitors, such as the General, found it inconducive to be able to remove a weapon. Due to this, they destroyed this proposal, although they are WRONG and TRAITORS.
(Quorumed against)
Private Cliche
Adminned at 15 Feb 2009 15:05:48 UTC
Add the following text to rule Weapons.
A soldier may at any time, if they are not participating in a Skirmish, remove eir weapon. The removed weapon is no longer subtracted from the availability amount of the weapon.
Racing to claim all the weapons is No Fun (TM). Anyway, it’s more interesting strategically if you actually have to put some thought into choosing a weapon.
Sure. You have to strategically choose your weapon before you enter combat. Outside of combat, it doesn’t matter.
Changing weapons should cost something. What that something is, I dunno, but it shouldn’t be free.
Idk, in RL switching weapons doesn’t cost anything, it just takes time. A daily limit (or perhaps 2/3 times daily) would be reasonable. 
How about an experience value associated with a soldier and giving weapons experience limitations?
I wonder if the voting pattern here matches the have-a-weapon/no-weapon pattern in the GNDT?
Actually I like the idea of the longer you hold a weapon the better it is.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
Rodlen: