Re: Province ownership and other subjects

Jay Luo (
Mon, 27 Jul 92 17:13:40 EDT

cedman quotes srt:
> > The idea of having "peasant revolts" over excess
> > taxation is very good, but would require a lot of
> > implementation. You'd have to add code to create units,
> > make those units attack, etc., etc.

cedman comments:
> Well, I didn't think that it would be _that_ difficult. Couldn't most
> of the Orc invasion code be reused, or is that all still done by hand
> ? Population death isn't as nice, but it is better than no province
> ownership at all.

Perhaps we could get the mighty Atnerks to comment on his opinion of how
hard it would be.....

cedman quoting srt again:
> > In keeping with Oleg's comment that 1 man can't rule 1000
> > peasants, maybe province control should require 1 man in
> > the castle for each 100 peasants. I also like restricting
> > Recruit/Impress to the province owner.

cedman's response:
> Instead of just saying that 1 man can't rule 1000 peasants, I think
> it already inherent in the situation that a 1 man won't rule 1000
> peasants for very long :-), so additional restrictions are not really
> necessary methinks.

I have to agree with cedman on this. I think the 1000 peasants should be
treated basically as sheep, who won't throw off the 1 man-goverment by
themselves; all the independent-minded people are already player characters,
their controlled units, or independent units. I definitely agree that the
solution to the 1-man government problem is having some player with a few
troops show up and oust him. No game mechanism required.

Additionally, if it requires a building of some sort to rule a province,
it would probably take more than one man to build a structure anyhow.

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links