RARE HERBS WITHIN 5SQ's!

Policy is posturing, 100% agree. 

It's not an issue for me, Dre...I sov any tile I'm interested in...violations are therefore violations of national sovereignty...a separate, and very grave issue.

That said, we DO have ongoing cooperative harvesting in place, which answers your previously asked question.  :)

Okay sir/ma'am...we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I've outlined for you the way that we're using cooperative harvesting RIGHT NOW in the game.

Edited by BlindScribe - 21 Sep 2012 at 13:36

re: Meagh and this:  

Edited by BlindScribe - 21 Sep 2012 at 10:09

belargyle wrote: With respect to claiming... if you can't enforce it or plan on enforcing it, then your claim (forgive the pun) is a bunch of hot 'air'.

This is true. Sov does not stop another player from countering the claim. However, with respect to Sov... most who use the game mechanic are willing to enforce the claim. I know that I do and would. I consider my Sov mine as much as my city is mine and if someone attacks my sov claim then I consider it an act of war and will respond as if they attacked my city.  Likewise, if someone harvests on my sov without my permission, I will treat those harvesters just like the thieves they are. I do not think that I am alone in this regard.

With respect to harvesting in proximity cities... If a sov claim has not been made over the tile, then it is excusable. I will contact the player about it and work something out or wait until they are done harvesting... how could the other player know that I was using the square. This is the real difference between sov and any other claim of ownership. Sov is clear and unmistakable, anything else is not. Even army encampments are not as clear as sov claims. They are limited in duration and who says someone may not send their army before yours arrives or in some brief moment after fourteen days when you are switching off the troop.

In the end with regard to sov claims, if a player decides that might gives the privilege to disregard another players claim then that is their choice. Nothing stops another person from being stupid. However, the intention will be unmistakably clear. He will have committed an act of war by violating that other players sovereignty. With sov, there can be no confusion on either side. This again is how it differs from any other method of claim.

@Star, having said that, I think your five square / working with neighbors policy is sound. I think most alliances give the same advise to their players. However, imho if you want to make sure your claim is clear to all and unmistakeable then claim sov over the square or at least place a defending army on it. As others have said in this thread, not everyone reads the forums. In the end you need to plant some kind of flag on the tile that people can see and respect.

@Blind and Rill
The cooping you guys are advocating comes through diplomacy, trade and just good play with your neighbors. I think it is fair to say that near every group in game supports that. However it seems to me that this kind of cooperation has little to do with control over tiles. If you control a tile, you are free to work out whatever cooperative agreement you like. Claiming a tile does not preclude this and I do not think belargyle or anyone else was advocating that it does. - M.


Edited by Meagh - 21 Sep 2012 at 03:00