Re: Region Control

John Carr (
Tue, 28 Jul 1992 09:49 EST

I like the idea of region control and some method of taxation. Warlords should
have some goal in mind other than killing all the other players and region
control is a feasible goal. I have one comment though. Most of the talk has
been centered around what the warlord receives, when they control a region.

There should also be some work involved. Since a region is treated like other
structures (units), a region should have some maintenance involved. Who is
keeping the buildings from falling down and paving the roads, etc? The ruler
of a region needs to put some of the tax money back into the region. This is
the MAIN reason for taxes, is it not? Except for tyrants, who tend to horde
all the tax money. This is where peasants and merchants become hateful of the
new government.

As long as the taxes are fair and the region is being maintained, peasants
should be quite happy. At the start, regions should all be owned by someone.
Perhaps independant units with their own armies. The army strength should
correspond to the type of region. You could even have certain starting rulers
be tyrants, where the region is being sapped of its resources, without any
money being spent to provide for the region's upkeep. If a player overthrows
the tyrant, he would assume the responsibility of not only maintaining the
region, but improving it (by providing more than the necessary maintenance) to
increase the already depressed loyality of the populace.

John Carr

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links