Rule Proposal: Territorial Volume

[Tiermann]

Hi, to avoid the risk of the map turning into a game of Risk I would like to propose the following.

I will grid the map to a finer level and come up with a number of grid squares that approximate the average amount of territory currently held. We've tried in general to keep things pretty even but there hasn't been a clear guideline. It was approximately one large grid square but the land shapes have caused that to be tricky to do. Gridding at a smaller level would make it easier to be sure lands are equal in size. Once we decide upon the number of grid squares, that number will become the new maximum territory size for any player. You can choose to have a smaller area if you like but nobody would be allowed to have a larger one. If you want to have some territory change hands, or start a colony in a different part of the map you must still remain within the grid maximum per player. You could give up some of your current territory to gain new lands elsewhere as long as you remain within the grid max.

There would be no possibility of members taking over the map or turning it into a territory gaining game.  In order to facilitate stories, conflict is always a good storyline - especially for the period we are depicting. Trading territory back and forth in battles would be ok if arranged behind the scenes and played out in a photo story series. Starting a new colony from scratch could be an interesting story line to pursue, with possible conflicts with natives and the elements. If you've chosen to start with a smaller territorial area than the max you could get more if it's available - provided it is played out in a story. The cost for territory is the agreement to present stories about it using Playmobil and photography. Possible conflict story lines are endless - but there is no possibility of gaining more territory than anyone else.

Your thoughts on this?

[bonniebeth]

I think that sounds like an excellent plan, TIm! A very helpful suggestion.

If two members who already had the maximum number wanted to create a conflict story, they could do a photo story series where one acquires land from the other, but the other one gets some other land back from them, or wins the same land back, so that in the end of the series they both end up within the maximum squares. In a case like that, the map could not be updated until the series was over and everyone was back to having their proper number of squares.

[Baron Marshall]

I agree that this is an excellent solution to some of the elements... and civil war is always an option too 


ARLESIA is my Kingdom's name and it has 5 territories that will be interacting with each other... gosh I hope to get some stories done soon 

[WarriorOfToys]

Is there a need for this?
I agree, the grid could make battling with another player easier,
But the kingdoms have generally been the same size,
Or a size that the player wants.
Have they not?

And so far there hasnt been too much taking over happening...
Erm... Well not against another persons kingdom.

[Elric]

No one has ever taken over another kingdom. There was some claiming of unclaimed lands but that was put to an end. I'm with WoT on this.

[Tiermann]

My concern here is having a way to keep things fair for everyone when territory is getting shifted around during stories about wars etc. We could just say that all borders are permanent and that's it, but I think it makes it more interesting to allow some shifting of the map lines around as long as we can keep it fair.

[Wolf Knight]

That means you'll keep making updates all the time in the map, Tim, as one kingdom takes land fourth and back from their opponents. My concern: perhaps it will make things a bit more confussing for anyone who is new to the forum and for anyone who wants to participate in the project... I like your idea but as Elric said, this was requested before but prevented from happening. Unless we decide that its indeed interesting to happen and allow people to expand their borders or until all the territories are filled and people become more active?

[tonguello]

It's a great suggestion and it would make stories a lot more interesting but it will complicate the whole thing. Im with WOT, Elric and WK here.
One of our guidelines was to keep it simple and we already had to deal with a lot of trouble modding these topics just as they are imagine going back and forward giving and taking territory 

I think territories should stay as they are now.

[Giorginetto]

I think that the lands should stay as they are and if two players agree to a battle and conflict depending on the outcome the lands or parts of this land cnage owners - that will make things more exciting . the battle with ithaca would determine if Krull gained a small outpost in the south for commercial purproses or visa versa - in line with the rules i am in discussion with the participating members of how the story would progress. if we take out of the map the possibility for agreed changes to the land owneship we are taking off the map a rather exciting aspect of it. remembering of course that such things can happen once all participating countries agree to it . i think such possibilities make it all more realistic and live and interactive something this wolrd and its stories need  in my opinion

Though i can see Tims rationale i will have to say for example the northern territotires were conquered by Krull and Melnibone and photostories supportted them etc , i wouldnt like it if all that was 'deleted ' now  from the map. For example if a major battle and photo conflict takes place between Krull and the Empire ( romans which i have plenty so very possible  ) and if say krull wins the day i would expect to see and it would only be fairr that some lands were moved over to krull - agreed beforehand with the person/player   'behind' the empire- only fair and logical if you ask me ....

[Tiermann]

I have no problem with changing the map when one of these things happens - keep in mind this isn't a roll the dice kind of game - it's photo stories. It takes a lot of time and effort to properly show a war in photos. How long has George had this 'newest' war in the works? A year? With the current activity level I doubt there would be all that many map changes. Most of us are happy where we are at anyway. With a break in there for the Krull joust it would be in the fall of this year at the earliest that George's war storyline would be at the point of a treaty and the actual map change. Storyline discussions between members for any other map changes within this calendar year would have to get started pretty soon to have anything actually get done. I think if we focus on this having to be photo stories, and any battle scenes to win a war would have to be extensive enough to convince the rest of us that a territory change would be a reasonable result, then it isn't really that easy of a hurdle to jump. It's not enough to say what's happened like a role play - you have to set up your Playmo, take photos, and convince us it's happened. I'm sure right now that George is at or beyond any size limit we would set, so for him to get a colony under a flux version he would have to give up some of the land he holds now. So that would have to be part of the results as well.

Having said that, if we really want to just lock things in I am fine with that. But it must mean just that. That means the results of your war George, or any other war, will not be any change in the map. The only way the map would change in the future is if someone new comes along and takes a territory. That's not the way it's been done in the past with the last war that happened, but most of that war was out of the rules guidelines anyway, something that wont happen again regardless.
If we're not going to set a size limit and allow flux within that, then I don't see any other way to remain fair to everyone than to just lock it in and be done with it.