Although when I FIRST started out that rule didn't seem to apply. I had new players sprouting up everywhere. They still do I think.

I personally think the 10-square request is a reasonable one, although it may be hard to get people to contact diplomats or directors in addition to the player.  Perhaps Harmless? could make an alliance rule that all such requests a player receives are re-directed to directors or diplomats?  That would seem a more practical solution from the perspective of someone who works with new players on moving.  Trying to explain each alliance's rule about whom to contact for a move could get pretty complicated.

KillerPoodle, would you be willing to amend your request to contacting just the player? And have the player clear it with the chain of command?  I think that would make it much more likely that people will give you the courtesy you ask for -- it sure would make my "job" of explaining things to newer players easier.

Thanks!

I'm not saying it's so much difficult as it is ridiculous. A 10X10 square around a city means 100 squares minus the one they're sitting on. That's massive amount of land considering a player can have up to 10 cites and so I'm expected to ask if it's okay that I can move into that area? This could be so easily abused too. You've been eyeing up those nice sov spots 8 squares from your city, Bob wants to move there and you say no and that's it's too close. Not because it is but because you want to save those squares for a future city. 

Like I said, 1-4 squares, okay I'll respect that for anyone. More than that and it's just a ridiculous land claim. While I don't think I will end up placing my 9th city anywhere near any H? members, if I do, I'm not asking their permission to do so. 

Why is it a problem if ANY player is within 10squares of a H? player or ANY other player for that matter?

You know actually I think an Illy restraining order is the best solution in this situation.

In regards to the OP, this is all well and good for the 5% of players that read the forums, but I hope you realize that this will do very little to reduce these incidents. 

Broadly: "what he said".

On the fine print: it is not  hypocritical of H? to claim the right to approve settlements within X of their holdings. They have never said, AFAIK, that anyone shouldn't do this. Of course there has been outcry over this sort of thing before, and if anyone were inclined to scream and shout in previous incidents, it would be fair to accuse them of hypocrisy if they didn't make noise now.

Edit: This post is not meant as an insult. Great tactic to control the server.

Simply because sov. squares for one,  secondly that it blocks city moving to the area, thirdly because there can be hostilities in the future, and finally you never know how the pathfinding or other updates will affect the game. 

 

Out of curiosity, what exactly are you guys going to do if someone ignores this and refuses to reason or move? I can't see you guys sieging them, if for no other reason than it would look bad on H? Especially since everyone seems to judge you guys harsher than anyone else. 

You can't make claims for future development. Roads may never make it to the game or they may not be released until well into 2012. Until they're in the game and you know exactly how they work, you can't plan for them. And as I said, if someone wants to move their city there, they can claim level 5 sov on the spot and move there regardless of nearby cities. That argument is void. I'm all for showing common courtesy but that's 1-4 squares, not 10. At least for me. 

You can't plan for something you know nothing about, save for the simple fact that it may or may not exist in the future. 

And really? You're going to force someone out of the area that you've claimed because he was unaware of your claim? You're aware very few of the total number of people playing actually use the forums right? 

theres 2001 rows each way,  -1000 to 0 and 0 to 1000 is 2001.  so 2001 * 2001 = 4,004,000 (not including the middle square.

IF H? said no to all requests to move within 10 squares, this could eventually cause a problem when the map gets very crowded.  However, there is no indication that H? intends to deny all or even a majority of the requests.  Why don't we give this a chance and see how it works out?  If H? is unreasonable in claiming territory, people will react.  Let's fight over it when it becomes an actual problem, not just a theoretical one.

I was complimenting you for the tactic. Not at all reffering to holocaust or something, because no such thing can happen in this game. I admire your tactic, it's an intellegent way of expanding. I don't know other examples from history where that tactic was used. It's a great way to win time to gather your forces and avoiding being attacked by other big alliances, because you are doing nothing wrong, but you are getting territory without fighting for it wich you can use in the future. I realized just after my post you would probably take it as offense, so edited the post. imo nazi Germany used very intellegent tactics before they attacked russia. This has nothing to do with all the wrongs they caused. 

That's why I said 1-4 squares is reasonable, because anything further from that isn't something you can really make great use of. And honestly, I don't see the difference. You don't own land until you're either on it or have sov over it. 

I'll just quote KP's original post to refresh everyone with the actual statement.

Please point out for me the specific sentence were and how you can misinterpret KP's post as a demand,  a claim on all territory within 10 of H? or even a refusal to allow a player to settle within 10 of an H? city?

Hint: look up the definition of "advised" and "discuss"

A reasoned dialogue was opened up and with a NAP in place both alliances were able to claim the spots they had their eyes on which in some cases were within 10 of each other.  H?, if they were the players and alliance some misguided posters claim them to be, could have very well used this as an excuse to wipe out LWO without so much as batting their eyes.  LWO at the time was barely in the top 40 of alliances and I had a little over 1K pop just enough for third city. 

Now I am in H? and very similar situations as the one above with LWO are cropping up.  Rather then wait for the individual fires to rear their ugly heads, it was decided to take a proactive stance.  So, based on prior experiences, such as above, and current experiences with exodus KP made his post.  

---------------------------------------------------------------

With that said, I am currently working on consolidating my cities in and about Ender/Speaker.  I spent over 4 weeks talking with nearby players that might be affected by my city moves or has cities on spots I hoped to move to.  I believe my offers were very beneficial pointing out spots that in most instances were better then the one I hoped to claim, offering resource compensation and help with rebuilding securing the site for them if they accepted.  If they didn't, I left them alone and modified my plans accordingly.  You can speak with both Lady Luvs and Astro82 for confirmation of both generosity and moving on when the offer wasn't accepted.  

I believe in the utilization of diplomacy to attempt to resolve potential conflict and/or disputes before they manifest; however,  I am not above the use of force and escalation to encourage a more reasoned discussion if the "dialogue" from one side is simply "pound sand", "suckaaah", or  "pleb."

That's it, my next wave of assassins to disband are heading your way!  :)

With more upkeep and diplomatic score then I hoped for before the exodus.  ;)

I'm not sure about the 10 square boundary for myself, but I do know I wouldn't be very happy with a city that popped up within 5 of mine. I've seen the 5 square zone applied in other games, so it's not an outrageous concept, and yes, I think it is a common courtesy to contact potential neighbors before a move, as well as being plain common sense.  But nothing says you are under any obligation to bow to the wishes of an established player city, or to even  take notice of a player's or alliance's territorial claims. They have set a policy and made it known. None of us outside of H? has to agree with or follow that policy. They've stated what the possible consequences of ignoring it are. That's good enough for me. I'm doubting also whether an H? member would just attack city that popped up near them without messaging them first, so whether a player reads the forums or not shouldn't be a big issue.

Honestly, do you really think H? would just set up a seige without at least giving warning?

I've never seen them do that or heard of an incident like that...

 

 

 

Well, the setup a siege part is true as it is impossible to do so given my current location.

And of course, there is a first time for everything. Not one mail in my mailbox, but plenty of system messages from attacks and bombardments.

Killerpoodle, Kumomoto or any other director of H?, since when has Rill been commissioned as a spokesperson on your behalf?

You imply that I can't think for myself, Jude.  That would be an incorrect assumption and perhaps, if I were not so good-natured, a perilous one.