NATION

PASSWORD

Making Influence Optional

Bug reports, general help, ideas for improvements, and questions about how things are meant to work.

Which Options Would You Support?

Option 1
0
No votes
Option 1 + Option 4
1
14%
Option 2
0
No votes
Option 2 + Option 4
0
No votes
Option 3
0
No votes
Option 3 + Option 4
0
No votes
Option 4
0
No votes
None of them (Option 5)
6
86%
 
Total votes : 7

User avatar
Fit battion
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 161
Founded: Dec 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Making Influence Optional

Postby Fit battion » Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:44 am

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!
Cheese

User avatar
Dyr Nasad
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 182
Founded: Dec 26, 2008
Capitalizt

Postby Dyr Nasad » Sun Oct 11, 2009 1:17 pm

Imagine - option 4 + feeder .....

User avatar
The Blaatschapen
Tech Modling
 
Posts: 61577
Founded: Antiquity
Anarchy

Postby The Blaatschapen » Sun Oct 11, 2009 1:44 pm

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.
1. Tech modling. No idea what it means, but it has a fancy colour.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Size matters. Bigger is forbidden and won't give the mods pleasure.

User avatar
Pythagosaurus
Cute Purple Dinosaur
 
Posts: 549
Founded: Nov 24, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Pythagosaurus » Sun Oct 11, 2009 2:06 pm

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.

User avatar
Ballotonia
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5453
Founded: Antiquity
New York Times Democracy

Postby Ballotonia » Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:12 am

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
"Een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen, dan dooft het licht…" -- H.M. van Randwijk

User avatar
Fit battion
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 161
Founded: Dec 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Fit battion » Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:13 am

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.
Cheese

User avatar
Pythagosaurus
Cute Purple Dinosaur
 
Posts: 549
Founded: Nov 24, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Pythagosaurus » Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:37 am

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

User avatar
Fit battion
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 161
Founded: Dec 15, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Fit battion » Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:22 pm

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.
Cheese


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Technical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Midasia

Advertisement

Remove ads