-1
Because I like to do what you do best.
Haron wrote:Seriously, though: Do you really think I comment on suggestions just to be mean? I try to express my views on presented suggestions. I try to explain what consequences I think certain rule changes might have. I also try to explain WHAT about an idea I like and what I don't, and WHY I don't like the ideas I don't like.
Really, I would appreciate more people making comments like that to MY suggestions. If they like anything, explain why. If they think something should be changed/removed/added, explain what and why. If there is something they don't like, shout it out, but explain why. THAT is the way to make better rules. Simply writing "-1" or "+1" doesn't do much to improve a suggested change to the rules.
At the end of the day, though, I obviously have no more say about what should be implemented than anyone else. That's the sole privelege of the devs. But I find that having such responsive devs as here is quite rare, and it's one of the things I really like about this game. And if they are to make changes, they too would probably like to know WHY someone thinks certain ideas are good or bad, and what consequences the players think the rules may have. I know I would, at least, if I were a dev.
Danik wrote:Nothing wrong with being over the top, those who dont aim for the stars will always end up... not as near them as those who do... um.. yep...
Haron wrote:If we are ever going to have diplomacy implemented, like declaring wars, forming alliences and supporting other nations for port control, we need some sort of barrier regarding nation changing. I'm not saying it should be impossible, but I think it should be costly, and never instantaneous. I believe the game would benefit from people feeling they belong to their nation, and that changing nations should be kind of a big deal. So here is what I suggest (similar limits has been mentioned before, in a post outside suggestions):
1) Whenever you want to leave your nation, you become a pirate.
2) You then lose half of your influence (see this as influence being partly built up for your nation, partly for you personally - this is the price you pay)
3) After becoming a pirate, you have to wait 7 days before you can join any nation
First after this, or a similar, suggestion is implemented, will diplomacy between nations be sensible. I have several ideas for this (wars, blockades, etc.), but without some barrier for changing nation, they don't really make much sense. Oh, and even without diplomacy, these measures would be advantageous to the game, as I'm sure several players have experienced recently.
ABOVE: 1st (OLD) SUGGESTION
BELOW: 2nd EDITION OF THIS SUGGESTION
I present two alternatives. Alternative 1 will, in my opinion, be somewhat helpful in reducing nation changes in a situation with the existing rules, and probably also with a limited form of national diplomacy implemented. If ever things like wars and blockades are to be implemented, however, I think alternative 2 (or some similar form) will be required.
ALTERNATIVE 1:
Whenever a player changes nation, he/she loses 50% if his influence. This is informed in an "are you sure?" box when changing nations. This loss is not applied to players the first time they change nations, to protect newcomers who have chosen an arbitrary nation.
ALTERNATIVE 2:
The concept of "changing nations" is abandoned, and the following options substitute it: 1) Leave nation 2) Apply for citizenship 3) Ask for a royal pardon. These would work as follows: Any player who is NOT a pirate, has the option to "Leave nation" (placed where the current "change nation" is). Whenever a player choses to leave a nation, two things happen: A) He loses half his influence, and B) He becomes a pirate.
Only pirates have the option to apply for citizenship or ask for a royal pardon. These alternatives appear for pirates where the "Leave nation" option is placed for non-pirates. A pirate can apply for citizenship in any nation. It will always be granted, but the process is slow: 30 days after the application, it is granted, and the player is now a citizen of the desired nation.
The faster way is to ask for a royal pardon (of the nation he wants to join). This starts a vote in the target nation. If the vote passes, the player is accepted as a member of the nation as soon as the vote is concluded. If it does NOT pass, he can still apply for citizenship, but will have to wait the 30 days (or he can stay pirate, or apply to another nation). Asking for a royal pardon in a nation with no king will always be accepted, although it will take the same time as an ordinary vote (3 days).
A player who has never changed his nation, may leave a nation without losing influence.
Ziggfried wrote:
-10 I don't see a problem with changing nations. Tho obtaining duke rank or higher could be restricted with a time period.
Ziggfried wrote:-10 I don't see a problem with changing nations. Tho obtaining duke rank or higher could be restricted with a time period.
Deznutz wrote:Captain Jack wrote:Time limits must be avoided too. If one can do it so fast, he should be allowed to do it. There is no time simulation here to implement such limits. We generally avoid time limits where possible.
I disagree with staying away from time limits, especially relating to nation changes. A perfect example is Danik and TheLoveTiger's take over of the USA, in retribution of the US - Spain war. They switched nations, quickly rose to the top and ousted the king who was working on fixing the war started by the now banned Rothschild. Now they are subverting the treasury. This is something that should not happen. There needs to be some sort of restriction that prevents this or makes it significantly harder to do. Nation stability is important, especially if diplomacy is ever going to be implemented. The most logical way to do this is through time restrictions on changing nations, whether it be through the process of changing nations or once changed a player is ineligible to be on the council or be king without being a nation member for x time.