Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
talk:decisions:injungivun [2013/04/04 06:04]
hino
talk:decisions:injungivun [2020/11/08 04:02] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +>Build bombard towers in ally town
 +>Set stance to enemy.
 +>? ? ? ? ?
 +>​PROFIT!!
 +
 + --- //​[[people:​juinn|Juinn]] 2013/09/21 06:03//
 +
 I vote no --- //​[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/04/04 06:03// I vote no --- //​[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/04/04 06:03//
  
 No.  --- //​[[hinorashi@gmail.com|hino]] 2013/04/04 06:04// No.  --- //​[[hinorashi@gmail.com|hino]] 2013/04/04 06:04//
 +
 +I don.t grief other peoples proposals, I expect the same respect back.
 +
 +Perhaps the settlement should have to pay reparations in material + time cost translated to materials if they don't want their buildings removed. --- //​[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/04/04 07:17//
 +
 +I think people should simply just not build in a place where they will want to take something down. I am very much for a "tough shit" policy when it comes to this. I would say if a player wished to relinquish control of a building within a settlement, the settlement should be obligated to pay the player in some way though. I dont htink that the building should be used as a form of extortion though, it further limits a nation/​settlements power over its own territory.
 +
 +Generally the idea of the rules at play is that a nation shouldn'​t get in the way of players or settlements though, nations are not the favored group, but this is irrelevant as it should be framed more as settlements vs individuals,​ but then it is really just founders of settlements vs other players. --- //​[[sikandarmc@gmail.com|Sikandar]] 2013/04/04 07:17//
  • talk/decisions/injungivun.1365048281.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2020/11/08 04:00
  • (external edit)