Re: Safe Havens, and Garrisons

Patrick McLaughlin (
Sat, 17 Sep 1994 14:43:21 -700 (PDT)

Well, since we are dealing with an artificial mechanism, by definition,
one that I've seen work well is in Rimworlds. New players are safe from
attack. Period. Unless they opt to drop that protection. THis lasts
(there, and it's a slower moving game) for six months and then declines
for six months.

There, with a "base speed" the atifice is a device installed on all new
ships that simply accelerates them to speeds that let them escape after
the first round of combat.

Here, I'd think something like: new players (needs defining) are granted
a +1000 defence bonus per unit ON DEFENCE. If they attack, or DEFEND
someone else (other than another new player?), they lose the bonus in
that combat.

After all, the safe have gives them a place to be penned up, and safe,
but not to get out and develop.

Personally, I think that opening the option of other safe havens (if we
stick with that, as seems likely) is a good one. But rather than opening
a new area to new players, I'd suggest that the mechanism be in the hands
of existing players. Otherwise, people will have something new to
complain about.

On Sat, 17 Sep 1994, Rich
Skrenta wrote:

> > I think doing away with safe havens is a truly terrible idea, just about
> I don't plan to get rid of safe havens (or some foolproof anti-attack
> mechanism). I have no intention of letting newbies get slaughtered on
> their first turn in the game.
> But what does intrigue me is seeding the cities of Olympia with
> default garrisons which would have to be removed by those wishing
> to claim those lands for themselves, or to pillage them. Carl's
> idea of allowing players to stack with the default garrison, and
> earn a small sum also appeals to me.
> --
> Rich Skrenta <>

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links