Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 allow us to colonize small nations we get several options... 1. attack them with small amounts of troops 2. give them smallpox 3. set up trading posts 4. industrialize they would get the option of attacking us or cooperating with us or just leaving us alone but we would be able to station troops there and could automatically have a % of their economy go to ours in addition to setting up cheap factories in their cities it would encourage player cooperation and would additionally be fun 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirohito Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 No for many reasons, the first being that genocide is not a game feature; it's a crime against humanity. Secondly, it's metagaming. 1 Quote Grand Moff Hirohito of Dromund Kaas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 No for many reasons, the first being that genocide is not a game feature; it's a crime against humanity. Secondly, it's metagaming. it is not mechanically any different than normal warfare except that it is more limited in scope. this game has nuclear weapons, i think we can handle colonists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 It may be realistic but I think it would get out of hand and just create problems with new nations leaving. So I am not for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRBOOTY Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 ... Who would you be able to colonize? And for how long? Everyone shouldn't be able to be terrorized And extensive colonization is just wrong Quote MR BOOTY IN DA HOUSE http://i.imgur.com/R5WWAB1.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 the idea is that alliances would colonize within themselves and have colonies be primarily mutually beneficial colonies outside of alliances would be limited and no more threatening than spy attacks are now besides, the majority of active people are safe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirohito Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) it is not mechanically any different than normal warfare except that it is more limited in scope. this game has nuclear weapons, i think we can handle colonists. It is different, specifically in that it removes the ownership of part of someone's nation and awards it to another. For example, you do not roleplay, but if I attacked you, and colonized part of your nation, I could claim that I now have a permanent settlement in your lands, without your permission. It is metagaming for someone to alter the political or geographical makeup a nation either in RP or by mechanical means without consent. Edited March 11, 2015 by Sindorin Quote Grand Moff Hirohito of Dromund Kaas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard; it is impossible for game mechanics themselves to be "metagaming". on ignore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jodo Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Most poorly thought out suggestion 2015, right here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirohito Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard; it is impossible for game mechanics themselves to be "metagaming". on ignore. Good. Still doesn't mean that people, like myself, whose nation exists solely to roleplay on the forums, will feel metagamed against when some tin pot communist declares a colony in his nation. Quote Grand Moff Hirohito of Dromund Kaas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jodo Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Good. Still doesn't mean that people, like myself, whose nation exists solely to roleplay on the forums, will feel metagamed against when some tin pot communist declares a colony in his nation.It's all fun and games until someone plays puppeteer with his nation. Again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 i mean at its most basic level it is a recreation of tech deals but in a way so that it is also a recreation of colonialism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jodo Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 That is nothing like a tech deal. At all. All this does is allowed bigger nations to crap all over little ones. Be honest. This would be a lot less fun of an idea if I went over there and made your economy my work horse. There would be no feasible way for you to resist. None. I'd turn it into a polluted pile and harvest resources off you, and use them to roll the rest of your alliance. I get stronger, you guys slide down into a toxic death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 That is nothing like a tech deal. At all. All this does is allowed bigger nations to crap all over little ones. Be honest. This would be a lot less fun of an idea if I went over there and made your economy my work horse. There would be no feasible way for you to resist. None. I'd turn it into a polluted pile and harvest resources off you, and use them to roll the rest of your alliance. I get stronger, you guys slide down into a toxic death. ^^ pretty much what would happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Agree, I never saw a weak guy can knock down a strong guy......I mean we could have a balance on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Warburg Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 How about this. "Colonization" has a little twist. First 8, the empire would be forced to pay all 8 the expenses. second, the total resource production of both manufactured and raw resources is added to the empire for only a week. However, the new nation is not being stolen from. For those confused, here's a bulletin Expenses are paid for by empire Resources are added to empire, but colony keeps It's base production Empire must always have 10k of soldiers defendining nation Colony must rebel to be "freed" by a single battle or a request. Now, this is not how it happens in real life, but this has benefits for everyone and may Increase people staying while potentially adding politics and possibly war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diocletian Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 It's amazing someone would so gleefully call for what would equate to a destruction of P&W. It's hard enough finding new people that'll actually stick through with it and stay involved in the game. By making them even more attractive targets it'll only lead to much, much more inactivity. While this may be an interesting concept to possibly implement when (and more importantly if) the game witnesses a massive surge in active players (I'm talking 10's of thousands) but in its current state it'll do far more harm than it's worth. Quote "The happiness of the people, and the peace of the empire, and the glory of the reign are linked with the fortune of the Army." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filthy Fifths Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 There's a few nations here I'd like to give AIDS too. 1 Quote "In an honest service there is thin commons, low wages, and hard labor; in this, plenty and satiety, pleasure and ease, liberty and power; and who would not balance creditor on this side, when all the hazard that is run for it, at worst, is only a sour look or two at choking. No, a merry life and a short one, shall be my motto." - Bartholomew "Black Bart" Roberts Green Enforcement Agency will rise again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 we already have a system in P&W where weaker nations are pumped with bank money in alliances to grow them faster. this could even allow nations to invest in other nations in a more direct sense, rather than the idea i had, wherein i envisioned that colonial settlements would be cities completely separate from those of the colonized nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elsuper Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) wherein i envisioned that colonial settlements would be cities completely separate from those of the colonized nation. This could work and leave a path upward and outward for the colonized as long as: 1) The colonized got something out of it during the occupation (passive income boost?) 2) The bar for the indigenous to "liberate" a colony were sufficiently low 3) Colonial cities scale in price with the number of cities/colonies the colonized nation contains It opens up lots of opportunities for drama, as well: "Why are you colonizing members of our alliance?" "You stole my colony before I got my money's worth!" If I understand your idea of colonies, it amounts to a city subsidy for the colonized at the cost of (temporarily?) not controlling that city. Or am I just projecting my own ideas into it? Edited March 11, 2015 by elsuper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saeton Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 it is not mechanically any different than normal warfare except that it is more limited in scope. this game has nuclear weapons, i think we can handle colonists. In theory I would support this if we had NPC nations that could be taken over, but not actual players. That is nothing like a tech deal. At all. All this does is allowed bigger nations to crap all over little ones. Be honest. This would be a lot less fun of an idea if I went over there and made your economy my work horse. There would be no feasible way for you to resist. None. I'd turn it into a polluted pile and harvest resources off you, and use them to roll the rest of your alliance. I get stronger, you guys slide down into a toxic death. On second thought.... let's do this. 1 Quote (TEst lives on but I'm in BK stronk now and too lazy to change the image) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jodo Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I still say this is a bad idea. Though I do have an alternate idea I may post shortly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 No, no, no. No colonizing of player nations. A thought would be to make another "Project" called "Colonization". Not sure what the requirements would be to get it, maybe something like having 10 cities or something. Is what this would allow you to do would be to build future cities on other continents, which would in turn allow you access to that continents native resoures......which is really what colonization is about anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Honestly if the option to colonize was something that didn't affect another player made nation but a small territory that you make yourself, then it would be fine. Anything affecting another nation is a no. So if this was an option that could be like a project only affecting your nation, it is not a bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicboyd25 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Come on guys! Just ¨give them smallpox¨! No that is pointless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.