Re: Safe Havens, and Garrisons

Patrick McLaughlin (
Sat, 17 Sep 1994 08:57:52 -700 (PDT)

Sounds like a good idea.

Perhaps the definition could be that any city with 100 pike garrison is a
safe haven (with whatever that may mean) and that players will be able to
request setup there, or may be randomly distributed there, if no specific
request is made.

Once the programming to redefine safe haven was done, it'd leave the
question of what safe havens there are in player hands. I imagine that
Rich would need to check that there was at least one in existence before
running a turn and adding people. But if (say) the AOO faction on Mt. O.
decide to close the safe haven... then people go elsewhere.

On Sat, 17 Sep 1994, Morton M. Charnley wrote:

> In principle, I agree with the guards, standard garrison idea. However,
> I do feel that the IC should still be a safe haven to allow characters to start
> the game without fear of having to deal with defending themselves immediately.
> In addition, I think that there should be some mechanism in place that would
> allow players to establish enough of a city, defenses, etc. to allow that city
> to be a startup location as well as the IC. I can see the day coming when
> recruit other players to join them but it will take the starting characters a
> dozen moves to get to them. Not exactly how *I* would like to spend my first
> half-dozen to dozen turns!
> Chip Charnley
> >
> >Mark writes:
> >> Does anybody else have a problem with allowing Garrisons in Safe Havens?
> >> Since combat is not allowed in Safe Havens (or Building), the only way to
> >> remove the garrison would be to attack, and defeat, the Castle that
> >> controls the Garrison.
> >
> >Personally, I disagree with the entire implementation of safe havens. They
> >are a hack and lead to all kinds of distortions. I propose to do away with
> >them entirely and instead place guard units and default garrisons in all
> >cities.
> >
> >These guard units would be standard, non-aggressive, non-moving NPC units
> >with 'defend all' set. These units would both prevent interplayer attacks by
> >coming to the aid of the attacked and the placing of garrisons by helping to
> >defend the default garrison as well. The strength of these units should vary
> >from location to location, but about 100 pikemen seems reasonable for the IC
> >with other cities having smaller guards.
> >
> >In time there will be factions willing to defeat the guards in order to be
> >able to place garrisons of their own and powerful enough to do it. However
> >even for such factions the cost in men will be considerable in particular as
> >to encourage other nobles to remain in the city they probably have to provide
> >a replacement city guard.
> >
> >If you want to get really cute about this, you can give the city guards
> >'admit all' status. This would allow any noble to stack with the guards, in
> >effect to join the guards. In return for this every noble (regardless of
> >fighters in his possession) would receive one or two gold a day. Not the
> >highest paying job for nobles and one carrying a certain risk if there are
> >battles. On the other hand, it requires no special skills and no monthly
> >investment of time.
> >
> > Carl Edman
> >
> >
> --
> Chip Charnley
> My opinions are my own and do not represent anyone but myself.

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links