Making Influence Optional

[Fit battion]

I know this has been suggested before, but I believe that was on the Jolt forums in a single post within a massive thread so I thought I'd poke this idea out a bit and give it a few more idea variations. I'll put it in the form of different options for this idea just because it's easier for me to remember what I said.]

Option 1:

Make turning influence off something that can only be done by the founder when the region is created; meaning that once it has been chosen it can never be undone. I think this might work if we also make having a founder or not a feature in the game.

Option 2:

Make turning off influence in a region something that can only be done by a WA Delegate (although it would take masses of influence to do, ironic!), this might be interesting in the military side of things. However it would mean the person who this might affect the most has the final say over it.

Option 3:

This one is ofcourse make it available to the founder and the WA Delegate if the rights for WA Control are turned on.

Option 4:

This one was a spur of the moment thing, so I didn't think it out hugely but it might be another interesting thing that could either happen instead of the ones above or as an extra feature. It would be for the Founder/WA Delegate (with control on) to be able to wipe all influence, so everyone in the region starts again from the bottom at the next update. I'd like this in one of the larger regions I am in. This would include the Delegate and founder.

Option 5:

None of them.

I put up a mini poll, I know they mean nothing but I would like to se public opinion!

[Dyr Nasad]

Imagine - option 4 + feeder .....

[The Blaatschapen]

Option 4 would make empire building even easier.

While at this moment you have to gain a lot of influence to kick out each and every one of the natives, then you just gain enough influence to wipe the current influence level once. And then in the next few updates you kick out everyone. This would speed up region emptying by invaders, something I don't support.

[Pythagosaurus]

I'm going to table any discussion of allowing the delegate to do this. It would only be reasonable if he already has enough influence to eject and ban the entire region. Even then, that state of affairs is unlikely to last unless there are only three or so people in the region, so he still gains something by making it permanent. Also, note that the influence rules would still be in effect: if raiders come in and eject everybody in the region, it's legal since the game allowed them to do it. Appeals to moderation would be ignored.

[Ballotonia]

What's missing from this thread is WHY any of these options would be good. What problem are you trying to solve by suggesting these changes?

Ballotonia

[Fit battion]

Well there are still people that are not fans of influence and in democratic regions it might be useful to democratic regions to stop people becoming more powerful than each other.

[Pythagosaurus]

In other words, it's a solution in search of a problem. Please don't suggest features you don't want yourself.

[Fit battion]

I actually do want this feature, for one of my regions, it would be pretty useful, a few old nations for people who are no longer active hold alot of influence and I'd like to change that. Plus I'd like to see the raider/defender game changed.