9.0 Your View - Building on Roads

[Amayonnaise 1535]

5 hours ago, argonian said:

tf are you getting off your horse for? if there's no person there stopping you, just keep riding. if there is someone there, then gg you've found rp.

 

and like if you hate following endless turn-offs to get to nation capitals, why wouldnt you want capitals to be on the road? the whole reason they're always at the end of long-roads and turn-offs is exactly because they aren't allowed to build on roads. the one time a town was let actually go on a road this map was with adria and it hit like 16% activity.

 

Thin passages or gates that horses can't physically get through.

 

And Capitals have been on main roads this map - or very close to them. Elvenesse is positioned very far out, and Yong Ping was ridiculous, but they were still at the end of very long main roads. My argument wasn't against Nations building on main roads - it was against building choke points, blockades, randomly positioned gates and towers etc. that serve no purpose other than just being physically in the way of traveling. That is what I expanded upon in my third paragraph - permit this during times of war, and it would make much more sense for their existence.

[argonian 12839]

1 hour ago, Amayonnaise said:

Thin passages or gates that horses can't physically get through.

I don't think those are banned. As long as passage is unrestricted, there's nothing to say how wide it's gotta be AFAIK. The Orenian Ranger fort at Eastfleet has been let stand the entire length of the map because there are no gates there, even though it's literally just the tiniest path surrounded on all sides by a fort. 

 

1 hour ago, Amayonnaise said:

And Capitals have been on main roads this map - or very close to them. Elvenesse is positioned very far out, and Yong Ping was ridiculous, but they were still at the end of very long main roads. My argument wasn't against Nations building on main roads

The reason every nation only has builds at the ends of roads is because road-blocking rules stopped them. You're only blocking a road if the road continues on past you after all.

 

They did start making some exceptions to this towards the end of the map, as described in the OP, like by approving Adria for example, and that was a roaring success. So shouldn't we want more settlements to be placed like that? 

 

I think it'd be cool and only increase RP if, to get to Aaun from Haense, I had to go through Petra or whatever. Maybe I'll run into some interesting RP there and stick around if I'm not in a hurry. If I'm barred from Petra, I'll take the other road through Adria instead. And so on. Instead of running circuits of some big empty road system where the only way to get anywhere is to take a turn-off which, as you described, may just end up being a 10 min detour to an utter ghost town.

[Amayonnaise 1535]

33 minutes ago, argonian said:

I don't think those are banned. As long as passage is unrestricted, there's nothing to say how wide it's gotta be AFAIK. The Orenian Ranger fort at Eastfleet has been let stand the entire length of the map because there are no gates there, even though it's literally just the tiniest path surrounded on all sides by a fort. 

 

I never said they were? I was just giving examples of what tends to cause me to have to get off my horse

 

34 minutes ago, argonian said:

The reason every nation only has builds at the ends of roads is because road-blocking rules stopped them. You're only blocking a road if the road continues on past you after all.

 

They did start making some exceptions to this towards the end of the map, as described in the OP, like by approving Adria for example, and that was a roaring success. So shouldn't we want more settlements to be placed like that? 

 

I think it'd be cool and only increase RP if, to get to Aaun from Haense, I had to go through Petra or whatever. Maybe I'll run into some interesting RP there and stick around if I'm not in a hurry. If I'm barred from Petra, I'll take the other road through Adria instead. And so on. Instead of running circuits of some big empty road system where the only way to get anywhere is to take a turn-off which, as you described, may just end up being a 10 min detour to an utter ghost town.

 

And I agree with all of this, absolutely. I was unaware of the road-building rules. If cities are being pasted in on tiles before we even start on the new map, road building should occur afterwards imo. Then you can have main roads lead directly to nations' builds.

[argonian 12839]

14 minutes ago, Amayonnaise said:

I never said they were? I was just giving examples of what tends to cause me to have to get off my horse

Point was that thin passages are allowed and idk what else would force a dismount. A gate guard doesn't care whether you're on horseback or not.

 

[UnBaed 8953]

letting nations build on roads just gives any nation closest to CT the ultimate advantage of screwing over anyone behind them

 

"sort it out irp" isn't a solution and is just a piss poor excuse to avoid having to deal with something as this - rules can and have existed on how things are conducted on this server.  don't give NL's the power to further dictate where players go around this server, stuff has already been bad for a while with how activity checks are 

 

sort it out irp excuse can also be applied to literally any other existing rule protecting players from BM

"hey this guy griefed my build, could mods help me?"

"duhhh sort it out irp!" 

 

 

if this ultimately DOES end up passing though and nations block off roads to funnel players into their cities - then side roads should be immediately built for detours so players aren't left to get lost and roam in the wilderness 

[Sarven 1716]

48 minutes ago, UnBaed said:

letting nations build on roads just gives any nation closest to CT the ultimate advantage of screwing over anyone behind them

 

"sort it out irp" isn't a solution and is just a piss poor excuse to avoid having to deal with something as this - rules can and have existed on how things are conducted on this server.  don't give NL's the power to further dictate where players go around this server, stuff has already been bad for a while with how activity checks are 

 

sort it out irp excuse can also be applied to literally any other existing rule protecting players from BM

"hey this guy griefed my build, could mods help me?"

"duhhh sort it out irp!" 

 

 

if this ultimately DOES end up passing though and nations block off roads to funnel players into their cities - then side roads should be immediately built for detours so players aren't left to get lost and roam in the wilderness 

CT will be off map, next map though

[Burnsider 4542]

10 hours ago, Bonito said:

 

"Could I get pro perms to destroy your road blockade in rp?"

"No."

 

Why continue allowing region owners (exclusively) to hide behind OOC rules if roleplay and player agency is the intention of this change?

Giving tile owners more control over players without also guaranteeing players the chance to respond doesn't make sense.

 

also "RP-diplomacy" lol get real

 

If this happens, I say call them out and shame them for all to see. Let them defend their anti-RP stance.

[UnBaed 8953]

1 hour ago, Sarven said:

CT will be off map, next map though

whatever spawn point there is for players to move around to the hubs, idk what system is in place - clearly something that would involve roads

 

26 minutes ago, Burnsider said:

 

If this happens, I say call them out and shame them for all to see. Let them defend their anti-RP stance.

 last time administration told players that calling out others for something bad was our job and not theirs, it didn't go well 

[Xarkly 12618]

1 hour ago, Burnsider said:

 

If this happens, I say call them out and shame them for all to see. Let them defend their anti-RP stance.

 

anti-rp stances are seldom if ever cracked down upon 

[Burnsider 4542]

1 hour ago, UnBaed said:

last time administration told players that calling out others for something bad was our job and not theirs, it didn't go well 

 

I am not, nor ever have been part of administration.

 

3 minutes ago, Xarkly said:

anti-rp stances are seldom if ever cracked down upon 

 

Xarkly, you have been able to be part of this elite group of NLs. Culture change comes from within. Push for it, instead of making one-liners about it being impossible.

[Xarkly 12618]

2 minutes ago, Burnsider said:

 

I am not, nor ever have been part of administration.

 

 

Xarkly, you have been able to be part of this elite group of NLs. Culture change comes from within. Push for it, instead of making one-liners about it being impossible.

 

As someone with extensive experience of trying to navigate issues like these (and, I'm sure, being guilty of it at times), leaving it generally in the hands of the community is (a) ineffective and (b) inflammatory as it promotes open confrontation which will yield (at least most of the time) no resolution. I don't intend to come across as curt or dismissive with the previous reply, just stating that my experience without being superfluous. My opinion isn't necessarily the right one, though. 

 

Edit: I don't think Unbaed is holding you personally accountable for the Admin's ineffectiveness, but rather highlighting how a proposal to leave things in the community's hands as the Admins did before was ineffective, and therefore the proposal itself is ineffective. 

[SethWolf 1388]

As long as you don't physically block the roads, sure. But yknow, people build taverns and things on main roads for a reason. Besides, this sort of "Federal Staff Land" idea where no nation or group is allowed to touch these sanctified bits of land is stupid.

[argonian 12839]

1 hour ago, UnBaed said:

whatever spawn point there is for players to move around to the hubs, idk what system is in place - clearly something that would involve roads

There are none though. No spawn points. You can TP to wherever you want.

 

It may be that the staff prohibit fast travel to an inexcusable degree, but they should just justify it here then.

[UnBaed 8953]

3 hours ago, Burnsider said:

 

I am not, nor ever have been part of administration.

 

I never implied you were, I just said your point in having players be the ones to call out bad behaviors has never worked out well in the past.  It always explodes in a toxic mess on the forums and rarely resolves stuff.  Sorry if what I said wasn't clear, I've been dealing with a headache all day

 

3 hours ago, argonian said:

There are none though. No spawn points. You can TP to wherever you want.

 

It may be that the staff prohibit fast travel to an inexcusable degree, but they should just justify it here then.

Players can TP wherever they want next map?  Or are you implying that I can do that as staff?  I try to avoid warping around to places personally since I like riding around on my horse to find new builds around the server--the most I commonly do is warping to either spawn or one of the main hubs and heading to someplace mechanically

 

If any player can just warp to a nation or settlement next map, I am curious what sort of system will be used to ensure there's no BM/abuse -- I've been a bit distant from new stuff coming for the next map, so I wouldn't know.  I got my semester wrapping up this month

[Borin 5259]

Yo people reading this thread

 

There is no CT on map next map it is floaty in the sky

 

No hubs

 

Simply road travel and SS-ing (and mebe carts ? hope not)

 

@ staff make this shit rlly clear to every1 before asking these sorts of questions, as knowing and not knowing these things can b the difference between a yes and a no vote