Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Valid Land Claims in the New Era
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedValid Land Claims in the New Era

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
Author
TomBombadil View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 78
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 00:35
Originally posted by Hewman Hewman wrote:

Recap:
- X square radius settlement prohibition - REASONABLE, generally accepted.
- X square radius military occupation prohibition - UNreasonable, unless the occupation is a siege, blockade, or is on your sov. square.
- X square radius harvesting prohibition - UNreasonable, unless you have sov. on that square.

Does anyone disagree with these principles?  Let's get a discussion and perhaps even a debate going so we at least know where the rest of the community stands on this issue... cuz it's not going away.

Some counterexamples:

-  X square radius military occupation prohibition :
Historically I don't believe anyone has ever liked seeing a foreign army march through their own lands without permission, be it barren wasteland or lush golden fields.

- X square radius harvesting prohibition:
If there are 2 rare mines with 5 alliance cities within 7 squares of both, and these in turn are surrounded by a large alliance cluster with the closest non-alliance player being more than 60 squares away, why should we claim sov or even keep armies on it just to show that it is ours?
Doing either would just create unnecessary upkeep cost.
Regarding it as not being owned simply because there is not sov on it would be unwise.

In opposition to this, coming as an outsider from 60 squares away and claiming sovereignty on these two mines would in no way be regarded as any form of acknowledged ownership from the surrounding alliance.

Any real declaration of ownership is only valid as long as you are capable of enforcing it, be it militarily, diplomatically or just by mutual agreement on terms of cultural norms.



Edited by TomBombadil - 07 Sep 2012 at 00:39
Back to Top
Hadus View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 545
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 00:40
Originally posted by Drejan Drejan wrote:

Originally posted by Hewman Hewman wrote:

The purpose of this post is not to merely ruminate on my personal views on land claim
followed by your personal views.

I do not understand why people say sov. is the real method to claim.  
Sov is a flag, you can place flags on the moon that does not make it yours, and if you have no flag in a populated territory is this no-one land?

Sovreignity is just a number in a sandbox, and not a cheap one, when sov will cost lot lot lot lot lot less i will agree on what you say.

Claim:
 
 
Posting my reply to a previous post because it answers this:
 
Originally posted by Hadus Hadus wrote:

Originally posted by SugarFree SugarFree wrote:

sov does not make it yours either
Harvesting on someone else's sov spot is like taking flowers from their front yard: sure, it isn't well protected like the valuables locked in their house, and maybe you'll get away with it once in a while, but the community consensus is that it's their property, and trespassing will by frowned upon/punished.
 
It's is the real method to claim it. You are making a visible icon showing it's yours, and are paying by the hour to maintain that. It's the equivalent of a property deed in real life. Are you gonna tell the cops that you had a right to steal the flowers because owning the deed still doesn't mean he owns the property?
Back to Top
SugarFree View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 00:58
real method ? no. it's a flag like the angry beard on legs said. 
Back to Top
TomBombadil View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 78
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 00:58
Problem is in a Feudal society the troops are the cops, and my troops don't like people claiming to own the flowers growing on my own lawn just because those people claim they have paid for a property deed.

You paying who for the property deed now? Certainly not me or any authority that governs me.

Your property deed would only be legally significant to me if it was enforced by the King's men. That is if we even have the same king.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 01:00
Originally posted by Drejan Drejan wrote:

Actually the claim is 5 square, and people should ask in 10 range Rill.
And we have many situations were we cooabitate more than happy under 5 square range with others.

Most of the time the issue you speak about are created by people who harvast 50-100 square from their  cities near yours, or place armies near your cities.
Here is my question: why should i allow a land claim becouse someone placed 2-3 troops on it?

Drejan, earlier in global chat folks from Dlords were saying they would automatically kill any army occupying within 10 squares of a DLords city.  Personally, I think the DLords' city policy is quite reasonable.  The policy on people who have encampments, for example after killing an animal, seems a bit silly to me.
Back to Top
SugarFree View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 01:05
i don't know if the dwarfs are that strong or if they just blow hot air, but i would also kill everything in my 10 sq if camped whit no warning. 

Edited by SugarFree - 07 Sep 2012 at 01:05
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 01:17
Sugarfree, everyone knows you are Kilotov.
Back to Top
SugarFree View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 01:33
 for real? lol
i just told one person who i really am on PM, and it looks like he didn't talk either XD
why you so focused on this kilotov? 


Edited by SugarFree - 07 Sep 2012 at 01:35
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 02:33
Originally posted by Drejan Drejan wrote:


Here is my question: why should i allow a land claim becouse someone placed 2-3 troops on it?

Because defending with a lot of troops on random terrain is a good way to loose a lot of troops.  Logically, those troops may be the tripwire for a much larger force.  If I see 2-3 troops, I assume that person wants that location and may (size dependent) respond with a more troops than I want to fight if I kill those 2-3.  So, if it were me, the reasons I would "allow" (not contest) the land claim are:

I feel the claim is right and the number of troops is irrelevant.
or
I feel the claim is wrong but I feel the number of troops backing the claim is more than I wantto fight.

It seems simple.

Back to Top
Hadus View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 545
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2012 at 02:38
If you read my earlier post, TomBombadil and Sugarfree, I said I am a supporter of "You own what you can hold." If you can hold the 10 square radius around you, then you own it.
 
But the same applies to sovereignty, and sovereignty is considered a real claim by a very strong consensus among a great number of players and alliances--who are willing to enforce this when one of their friends or members has their sovereignty challenged by an antagonist proclaiming it is nothing but a "flag."
 
Is that a big enough King's army?
 
@TomBombadil: Considering sov a real claim and saying it cannot be challenged/counter-claimed are two different things. I was stating the former, not the latter.
 
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Sugarfree, everyone knows you are Kilotov.
 
Relevance to the topic? Just wondering.


Edited by Hadus - 07 Sep 2012 at 02:44
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.