First of all, the name is under discussion.

Law Mechanism

Simply put, players that attack the nation citizens extensively, will face an automatic bounty listing by the country that has adopted the law.

How?
The best way to define the enemies of the state, should be through hostility.
Nation officials will pick the hostility amount required before someone is considered an enemy. It should be above 75.
They will also get to pick the type of bounty and the amount they want to pay for it.

Why?
1.It will give nations treasury another spending area for the greater good.
2.Since the law will be visible, everyone will know at which point the automatic nation bounties start. This will help in defending players of the nation.
3.It will allow greater diversity in the nations of Avonmora.

Notes
-I understand that it is a bit bigger than a simple law to implement but it should worth it.
-You could put multiple points. For example at Hostility 100 -> Bounty 1, at Hostility 200 -> bounty 2, etc.
-Some limits should apply to avoid exploitation (ie 1 bounty per tier per 14 days).

This could be abused very easily to eat funds from a Treasury. (Tried to say s**k funds but stupid censor doesn't understand context)

Dez makes a good point, sure rich nations like Tokelau and Spain could afford this(at least for a while) but small nations would be unable to use this. also, what about urban legends? if someone wanted to drain a nations treasury while hurting a personal enemy, they could cast several of these.

Meliva wrote:Dez makes a good point, sure rich nations like Tokelau and Spain could afford this(at least for a while) but small nations would be unable to use this. also, what about urban legends? if someone wanted to drain a nations treasury while hurting a personal enemy, they could cast several of these.

Oh no, I cant imagine any player would even consider such a mean, nasty trick to hurt an enemy and have it rewarded by some innocent nation... I am shocked, truly shocked by such a notion...

Danik wrote:

Meliva wrote:Dez makes a good point, sure rich nations like Tokelau and Spain could afford this(at least for a while) but small nations would be unable to use this. also, what about urban legends? if someone wanted to drain a nations treasury while hurting a personal enemy, they could cast several of these.

Oh no, I cant imagine any player would even consider such a mean, nasty trick to hurt an enemy and have it rewarded by some innocent nation... I am shocked, truly shocked by such a notion...

Are you wishing you thought of that first?

That is a hard-hearted, cruel, cynical and astonishingly insulting accusation.

Yes.

I believe that most of the problems that have been mentioned can be balanced out by a nationwide vote for X bounty... If the majority of a countries votes say that guy deserves to die, then that guy is getting a mouth full of Cutlass steel. However, as it has already been done, yeah a nations treasury can be stolen or wasted by a large groyptof usurpers. This is why a VOTE should be required... So a variable "law" similar to the Treasury disbursements.

Rodney wrote:I believe that most of the problems that have been mentioned can be balanced out by a nationwide vote for X bounty... If the majority of a countries votes say that guy deserves to die, then that guy is getting a mouth full of Cutlass steel. However, as it has already been done, yeah a nations treasury can be stolen or wasted by a large groyptof usurpers. This is why a VOTE should be required... So a variable "law" similar to the Treasury disbursements.

It takes 3 days for votes to complete, with exception to 2:1 vote ratios. Hostility reduces at a rate of 1 point per hour. So for a 3 day vote, which for most nations is likely, a player will drop 72 hostility points. How effective is putting a vote for each hostility violator going to be?

This is how I think this might work:

First of all, none of it would take effect until the vote would pass... And you still have to obtain 75 hostility or more to be considered...

Example:
Player 1 currently has 69 hostility points towards nation 1

Player 2 of nation 1 is attacked by player 1

Player 1 now has 75 hostility with nation 1.

Nation 1's parliament page (could?) has a page with all players above or at 75 hostility.

Player 2 proposes a vote to make Player 1 an enemy of the state.

After 3 days, Player 1's hostility is now below 75, removing him from the list.

however, the vote passes for X gold coins to be placed on Player 1's head.

Player 1's hostility with nation 1 is still below 75, player 1 cannot be considered an enemy of the state until said bounty is claimed, or X waiting time has passed.

I am positive there is more to work out here....

Another consideration - As nations vote to deport citizens, the same can be done for an Enemy of the State. It can be based on hostility or simply principle (which most of the time, if hostile voodoo is cast, no hostility is gained.) In other words, the nations simply would be able to post bounties.

As with all laws passed, this would be made public, as all laws are available for review in the parliament (a new page may be needed to accommodate this.)

The only change in the mechanism would be that if the law passed, the nation would be posting a bounty. What would truly be interesting, and diabolical (I thought of this before Danik could) is one could post a bounty on a fellow country man....oi!

Just food for thought.....