RULE PROPOSALS

1.   THE RULES CAN AND WILL CHANGE. “because the game isn't finished”

2. To be sieged  or Not to be Sieged ? EVERYONE CAN BE SIEGED   with prior notice. However, siege intent must be made public. If you’re destroying a person’s property for malicious intent, let it be known, as your property should be open as well. Everyone drinks at the bar, everyone fights at the bar, but NO ONE kills the bartender. My point is; if you want to break into a PVE/Non Siegeable house to kill them and steal their items, fine, don’t burn their place to the ground if it’s not necessary.

3. Insurance?   I don’t want my house to burn down, but that’s not going to stop good old Mother Nature. So I pay a company, "I never see" a monthly bill, just in case this happens. And being this is  medieval times, either the king protected his villages or they sought protection from bigger clans. Bottom line, our stuff will be wiped anyway during alpha. Please don’t become so attached to building something that is only temporary. That is why I propose insurance/protection.  This can create allot of roleplaying elements. Someone steals your stuff, they can be wanted. The insurance company can either rebuild, repay, or steal back what was taken.

4. On to sieging, why are we fighting?     You just want to take my stuff, fine. So what’s with this break my crest, place your own, tear my base down in 10 minutes “which probably took me days to create” and in the same night you now have two bases!  “I don’t think so” The build anywhere feature is a LUXURY and should not be exploited. Can you tear down a castle and move it to another place in one night in R/L, no. So why are we exploiting this feature in game. The same goes for the trebuchet. It’s a one click spawn item that would require build time if you were going to siege in R/L

5. Let’s talk castle defense. Why did the devs build such a nice, long, fake ass sword bridge   ? So you can defend it! Because it’s supposed to be the only way in or out to the castle. Stairways to heaven don’t exist and were never intended too. Build 10 ballista’s and take down the walls, raid the castle, re-crest..Epic..  But since we all want piece of the king’s pie, everyone tries to exploit this back door, just don’t.

Play by the rules and you’ll have more fun.

We've actually discussed rule 2 already, basically on the exact terms you specified. It hasn't made it into a post yet, so it isn't official. We're weighing the pros and cons of total base destruction as a retaliation vs. encouraging players to remain in the community.

3 is interesting. There would have to be a guild willing to be the "company" and deal with the claims. Fraccas is already working hard to keep the server at its best and taking claims and waging war to retrieve items or rebuilding someone else's base would be time consuming depending upon the amount of clients. Perhaps one of the larger guilds would be interested if you solicited them here or in game.

Rule 4 shouldn't be an issue if we can all agree to not siege while another player is offline. If you can't properly defend your base from a siege when your reinforcements spawn inside the base (assumed) then I think it is the attackers right to the spoils. We already limit sieges to reasonable levels, so I don't agree with placing more restrictions on the use of the trebuchet. I understand this proposal is mainly to address base/base material theft, so I will bring this up in the next staff discussion.

5 is already covered in the no floating constructions rule. This includes floating bridges, stairs, buildings, balconies, etc. If it doesn't follow the laws of physics as they can be applied to a video game, don't build it. That being said, if they built a road around a wall on the Kings Road, complete with support structures that reaches down to the water, well damn, they sure are committed...