What's new

Protective Influence (The Safezones Discussion)

Reyo

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
#1
Protective Influence (The Safezones Discussion)

Yet another discussion I'd like for us to engage in, please do share your thoughts on this matter.

Here's what's written on this by far, however it's subject to change of course.
Nothing is concrete about this topic yet - but hopefully, we can make some interesting points and conclude on this together.


Share your thoughts on the matter!
 

theSerpent

Moderator
Moderator
#3
I think standards and requirements are to be met that automatically allows players to party up and raid a garrison with high presence, such as how many raiders are present in the party, the level of the person who is leading the raid and so on. Things that minimise the need for admin supervision and allows players the opportunity to rely on themselves for great change within a garrison.
 

Reyo

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
#4
Yeah standards are required and is something we should look into. I'm not entirely sure how we can allow players to determine what is greater for the situation at all times. People are prone to error if the system in place is not able to accustom the needs of the situation.
 

TheGod

Supporter
Supporter
Royal Guard
Member
#5
I feel like the Royal Guard Fortress should be a safe zone because no one in their right mind would commit a crime near there, it woud be unrealistic in my opinion.
 
#8
Here is my opinion. major roads and some roads in towns should be a safezone against crimes like murder, robbing and etc as realistically they would be populated and having a safezone there would prevent an idlestack 2.0, but alleyways and roads that would realistically not be populated are not safezones. Other safezones include the garrisons, castles barracks, prisons and etc.. anything that would include guards or garrison, they can have crimes in these locations if a moderator approves it.
 

Major Dedek

Ascomanni
Ascomanni
Member
#9
I agree that petty crimes at high presence places shouldn't be allowed. When it comes to raiding, I would differentiate types of rading based on circumstances. This differentiation would be based on 2 factors - War/Peace status and location of a raid.

War/Peace status
During peace time raiding would require, as has been suggested, moderator's permission. One of the reasons being that this type of raid doesn't have to be done by a group/faction with a political goal, but simply by a group/faction wanting to enrich themselves. It probably isn't best idea to let someone mindlessly raid just to get rich.
During a war the warring factions would be able to raid villages and other enemy buildings without moderator's permission. There would be a script in place allowing them to do so. The idea of raiding and burning down villages could work well with the possibility to murder enemy NPC peasants as stated on trello.

Location
Objects in the middle of a city probably shouldn't be allowed to raid just by some random bandits. Such places should be left to wars and greater political machinations.

Here is my opinion. major roads and some roads in towns should be a safezone against crimes like murder, robbing and etc as realistically they would be populated and having a safezone there would prevent an idlestack 2.0, but alleyways and roads that would realistically not be populated are not safezones. Other safezones include the garrisons, castles barracks, prisons and etc.. anything that would include guards or garrison, they can have crimes in these locations if a moderator approves it.
I do not agree. Roads should be a safezone only in close proximity to a city. Even major roads back then were not filled with people everywhere, and threat of bandits and other filth was very real. Merchants would often pay for an escort and travellers would group up to be safe from bandits. It would be much more interesting to see people pay for mercenaries to protect them than to rely on a safezone. The kingdom could also have soldiers patrolling the major roads if it was necessary.
 
Last edited:
#10
Location
Objects in the middle of a city probably shouldn't be allowed to raid just by some random bandits. Such places should be left to wars and greater political machinations.



I do not agree. Roads should be a safezone only in close proximity to a city. Even major roads back then were not filled with people everywhere, and threat of bandits and other filth was very real. Merchants would often pay for an escort and travellers would group up to be safe from bandits. It would be much more interesting to see people pay for mercenaries to protect them than to rely on a safezone. The kingdom could also have soldiers patrolling the major roads if it was necessary.
By major roads I meant major roads in a town, sorry I didn't clear that up. you know like a major street that leads to the town to most of a town's side roads and etc.
 
Top