> > The point here is that if I want to stop player X from coming into my
> > province, I also probably want to kill him.
> I don't think so. For example, one big motivation for controlling
> regions is to control access to resources.
The only way to prevent movement is to be willing to initiate combat.
If you don't wan to initiate combat, would you really restrict
movement? I'm sure that the "big guys" aren't going to want their army
stopped by some pipsqueak tinpot dictator. Will the tinpot be willing
> More importantly, Combat is simply *not* a viable mechanism for region
But province attitudes use combat, automatically. You take a huge risk
when you stop someone. If you don't see the risk, well, I hope I don't
kill you by accident. Then again, maybe I hope I do kill you by