What Do You Think of the 10 Square Rule? |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
Artefore
Forum Warrior Player Council - Biographer Joined: 21 Feb 2014 Location: Earf Status: Offline Points: 325 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 24 Feb 2015 at 08:07 |
What are your thoughts on the 10 square rule? Leave a reply expressing your take.
|
|
"don't quote me on that" -Artefore
|
|
auel
Greenhorn Joined: 23 Jan 2013 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 61 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think that these questions can usually be settled very amicably with the application of a little common sense and mutual respect. I do actually have a very close neighbour who has never been a problem to me. However I reserve the absolute right to say no and expect my view to be respected without quibbles.
Edited by auel - 24 Feb 2015 at 08:19 |
|
Azrile
New Poster Joined: 24 Feb 2015 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well, since so many vet players think it is a hard rule, then it has to be spread to new players as a ´rule´.
My personal thought is that there should never be a rule like this that is ´preached´ as a rule because it takes away the conflict and resource part of the game. Is the resources nearby worth the risk of offending that player? Is that player even active enough to care? If they do care, are they strong enough, or have any desire to start a conflict over it. Those questions should be the bread-n-butter of a game like this. The more socially acceptable rules that are in place, the more farmville this becomes. When you make it a rule then the vast majority are going to side with the person who was there first, since, well, that is the rule. Without a rule in case, then each side gets to make a case for the spot on equal footing and you create a much more organic atmosphere. TLDR - The more black and white socially acceptable rules there are, the more boring the game becomes. |
|
Jejune
Postmaster General Joined: 10 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 1035 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think that it also depends on whether you're playing in the BL or Elgea. Down in the BL, there is still so much space that there should still be enough opportunities to find the kinds of squares you're looking for to settle a city without it encroaching on someone else. In Elgea, however, that may no longer be the case.
|
|
Albatross
Postmaster General Joined: 11 May 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1118 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Given recent changes, the relevance of this question might be different in about a year or two: 10 squares might be difficult to enforce. Will there ever be a time where a new settlement has to just 'squeeze in' to be somewhere near a useful place?
|
|
|
|
Gragnog
Postmaster Joined: 28 Nov 2011 Status: Offline Points: 598 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I voted "Do whatever, I dont care". There is no 10 square rule and you can do whatever you like, as long as you are able to back up you position. If you do not want people within 10 squares of you you must be willing to push them out or raze them and thus enforce your own 10 square rule or your alliance wishes. If you are not willing to fight for it or it does not bother you, then there is no rule.
|
|
Kaggen is my human half
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I appreciate the automatic system buffer of 10 squares. It is always an individual's option to let a player approach closer.
|
|
Hora
Postmaster Joined: 10 May 2010 Status: Offline Points: 839 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I went with the mayority of the voters... if the first player at a certain place has the power/allies/etc. to enforce a 10 square rule, common logic tells you to ask nicely before ploughing across the lawn...
Automatic settlement is out of this question, of course. Here I expect mutual respect and a bit of common sense of BOTH players to work it out
|
|
Dragonwort
Wordsmith Joined: 10 Feb 2014 Location: Central USA Status: Offline Points: 139 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
[QUOTE=Azrile
My personal thought is that there should never be a rule like this that is ´preached´ as a rule because it takes away the conflict and resource part of the game. Is the resources nearby worth the risk of offending that player? Is that player even active enough to care? If they do care, are they strong enough, or have any desire to start a conflict over it. Those questions should be the bread-n-butter of a game like this. The more socially acceptable rules that are in place, the more farmville this becomes. When you make it a rule then the vast majority are going to side with the person who was there first, since, well, that is the rule. Without a rule in case, then each side gets to make a case for the spot on equal footing and you create a much more organic atmosphere. Even the game mechanics treat this as a rule since you cannot exodus or tenaril within 10 square of another player, so it is NOT just a "preached rule". There are plenty of wargames to play for the easily bored and teens with nothing but time to play. Illy doesn't need to become another one. Dragonwort |
|
Just another wrench in the works..
|
|
jcx
Forum Warrior Joined: 09 Oct 2013 Location: Tallimar Status: Offline Points: 281 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
dang, I miss to read the bottom 2.
what's important, is that whenever you are being siege, you can move atleast 2 squares away from your original spot. :)
My final vote: Do whatever, I don't care. |
|
Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.
jcx in H? | orcboy in H? |
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |