Anzoon

Application: [*]In-game name: Anzoon [*]Age: 18 [*]Where do you come from: The United States [*]Native Language (must be able to speak english): English [*]Read all server rules?: Oui [*]Where did you hear about our Server(s)?: Aqui

And with this I return. It's been a scary busy week what with my birthday and then the start of college. I'm amazed to see how far things have come and how much I've missed; those introductory stories were stellar.

Or, to make things very simple and to keep the best of both options, towns would decide upon the "permadeaths" of their members the extent of reclamation and repossession and possibly whether or not the extent is the same across all members. Imposing delays of action as a result of deaths wouldn't really improve anything but the levels of anti-fun.

What's the difference between assassination and murder but for the word that one describes it by?

So, before we get off topic I'm try and make a summary of what we've agreed upon so far and the things we've not yet settled. Mostly Settled Rules: PVP is forever limited to wars and duels Deaths can be permanent or temporary in the form of "unconsciousness" The destruction of property within areas such as towns as possibility owned land is limited only to sieges. War: War can be declared upon factions, alliances, or towns. The notice of war declarations are required to announced 24hours (Or possibly longer) before action can be taken Periods of siege must be set at agreed upon times between both parties to limit abuse for when members in active. During war the death of an individual is permanent (Unless unconsciousness and capture is granted) until the end of the war i.e. a killed player cannot rejoin his or her faction until conflicts end. Character Generation: Shipwreck? There will be no granting of supplies or tools upon joining Currency: Yes Unsettled Rules: Player run courts and town by town laws Punishment for rule/law breaking The effective authority of courts War: The rules of how wars can affect non-participates and the limiting of wars if at all Character Creation: Yes. Currency: The fact of the matter, currency has simply been agreed upon but not established in a physical form or in how it would be implemented. There's still either the bank loan method for towns, or the later implementation when towns are fleshed out for it to be distributed based on land ownership of individuals, or some other mystical option. Nor has it been established whether items collectible in TFC can be exchanged with an OP for the currency. I certainly left out a considerable number of things so please do add and correct.

Neanderthals died out due to a series of ecological disasters and the aggressive spread of Homo Sapiens. They were smarter but we pooped out more babies. (That is unless you believe, as some do, that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens were still at a point where they were genetically similar enough to interbreed) I was just being silly.

For a brief moment there I couldn't help thinking about Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens, NPCs and Players, and the fun that would be. However, castaways certainly work if you need to flesh something out. Names should be a consideration in opening plot writings. Some people are going to start earlier and others, as such it would be best to keep things generic.

No matter what we do, providing people with starting items will either be stage skipping or simple to the point of pointlessness and always a hassle to implement.

That should work.

If it could, it would be the perfect grounds for the testing of how Kingdoms should work in Beta 3. It would also be so very beautiful.

As far as the problem of death in a town or faction during war, we could require members to not be able to rejoin their faction until conflicts end, if there is a faction left to join. Property inheritance upon death is something we'll have to settle some time or another if at all.

As far as I can think at this moment, property damage should be the only factor truly limited. A system where the destruction of towns is limited to certain periods, forms, or cases would need to be implemented. Town's redistributing loans given from banks would be the best way to circulate currency in most cases. Mayors, dictators, congresses, leaders, would then be able to use the currency to invest back into the town and collect resources which they could potentially sell to the server bank for new currency and to pay off the cost of loans.This would circulate said currency, create a value for it, and produce a front for economic gain. In the beginning people could just start out having to work through the stone age together or not until they're to a particular stage of development. Then groups could be established with leaders established who could then take out a loan to build their town, the creation of a town potentially being something a group must muster the cost to pay for it's creation.

Which is why a large and singular server purchased and funded by multiple individuals with the specifications required to support the number of people that would want to play would be the best answer.

Providing stone age tools would be rather pointless because the moment an individuals finds two stones they could make all of the things that you suggested as being spawned with. Agriculture does work to some degree in the stone age. A person can make a hoe and start growing wheat with fair ease. The only upper hand that could be received by giving out stone age supplies would be that in saplings, a bonus that would only save the ten minutes to a few hours it would take to find the sapling on one's own. This would also require constant moderator intervention as someone is going to have to be there when the individual joins to give them their stuff. I only see this as either being a hassle which grants stage skipping or a hassle that grants the skipping of ten minutes. Fiscal imbalances aren't necessarily a bad thing in the game or in real life. It provides the driving force for economies and society. Everyone wants to strike it rich and become "the big man on campus." In fact, it was, for nearly the entirety of its history, the foundation of the United States of America. From the European wars over the Caribbean to Cold War, the US stood as a symbol of prosperity and free chance. The massive economy that it once had was created by this concept of prosperity. In TFC, the chance to be a mayor or just some wealthy individual would drive many in their efforts on the server. If cities form there's surely going to be competition between them in who can be the best and wealthiest, a competition which would surely be a factor in war and conquest. As far as the war system, why pick one option when you can have them all? Wars aren't linear "I shot this guy so he'll shoot me back and we'll fight over it until we're all dead or one of us gives up due to emotional or psychological strain" they're complicated networks of ties and relationships. If a city-state wants to be neutral, let it and we'll see how long it takes or if it all that the neutral faction is drawn into warfare. If a group of towns or cities wish to unionize into the young start of a country, why not let it? If you want to create a true political system don't bother implementing regulations on how it works and runs. If you want things to be casual and wars to be simple battles between two groups only then should you push some limit. Ideally, things should as moderation-less as possible. On an unrelated note, I've been thinking of a way on how the loan system would work if you so chose to implement it for starting an early currency-driven server. As I just said, things should be as moderation-less as possible and with that said it could made that moderators are not allowed to ever enter creative mode or ever spawn in any items. This would create the base equality you first stated in your post. The bank would be set-up within spawn protection and the money to be loaned would be left in chests within this bank. OPs would be permitted to withdrawn the currency from the bank as requested by a player and would need to log this withdrawal in the bank. In this way, there is always only that set worth and OPs remain without ever being separate from normal players. Only in the case of extreme cases of griefing or rule breaking would they be able to use console commands.

It would be simplest to instead have server owners band together in financial contribution in purchasing a large server with considerable specs. Having a server that would be able to support the act members of this forum could be done so long as people are willing to consolidate. Raisercraft alone has the room for a 100 members, though I wouldn't know if it was capable of hosting all of them without lag. A macro server would be a brilliant idea which would work beautifully for kingdoms and economies. It would just require community contribution and support. Not to mention the willingness to part with maps when new updates come out. So long as people could settle their differences and work together such things would prosper.