Be more specific next time, then, and don't confuse me!

Why would you want to weaken or make paranoid your own villagers? Even if the type of influence doens't matter, just seems silly. I make ACKNOR paranoid, not our own people.

Precisely!

Weakened villagers die more easily, paranoid villagers don't act as they should (hindering commodity and other quests, which hurts us).

Well, villagers die anyways. If someone wants to kill one, it'll die. Might as well deny them a little chunk of xp.

They also get attacked accidentally by those who know better and mistakenly by novices (or near-novices) who don't. Villagers already being weak, making them weaker still increases the chances that the mistakes will be fatal instead of fixable, I'd guess?

I really don't see the reason for anyone who has a village to not be in conquest mode...

I don't use weakening, the success message makes me feel bad for doing it

Paranoia, on the other hand, is funny.

*********************POLITICS OF THE VILLAGE OF ACKNOR*********************
Sphere of Influence: The Dominion of Magnagora
Village Leader: Chieftain Grang the Horrible
Serenwilde: Neutral
Glomdoring: Neutral
Celest: Neutral
Magnagora: Chastened
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's the "seducing a brave person" message, and ya, it's pretty funny.


Edit:Xavius, this is even worse... I think...?
********************POLITICS OF THE VILLAGE OF ANGKRAG*********************
Sphere of Influence: The Dominion of Magnagora
Village Leader: Master Nasir n'Rotri
Serenwilde: Disrespectful
Glomdoring: Disrespectful
Celest: Sacriligious
Magnagora: Chastened
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


I wish there was an extended guide on what all the words ment, technically speaking.

Yeah. Is chastened good?

Chastened? No. It's not good. Think "chastized." Same root.

Well, it could be good, almost ... if you chastize someone, they should reform their behaviour and fall in line.

Er.. I think it comes from the worde Chaste, not chastized... the interent seems to agree with me

Chas·tened
a.
Corrected; disciplined; refined; purified; toned down. Sir. W. Scott.


Of such a finished chastened purity.
Tennyson.

I know what it means, but it could be interpreted several ways for how it's used there.

I myself have done little influence runs too. Way things look, we might as well switch to conquest.

It sounds like the messages are different depending on the governing style.

For religious governments, disrespectful/sacriligious sounds bad.

For conquest governments, I can see how chastened could be a good thing, the organization's power communicated through force and intimidation.

Guys! Focus!

Religious orders are NOT supposed to be an equal alternative for getting villages!

They are supposed to be a means to get more power for your village, AND give a bonus to mass influencers.

Commercial orders are the reverse: give more comms, less power, and give a bonus to quest doers.


If you're the type that WANTS alot of villages but doesn't want alot of comm/power from them then you want Conquest. You sacrifice the very reason for getting villages (power/comms) to just pick up more of them.

So each of you nations have to ask yourself: do you care for power, comms, or just 'more'? Answer then act accordingly.

*sits back upon her throne washed in blood as the world continues to fear her might*

*BUMP*

Is this bugged? Yes no? Is it working right? Is it really supposed to be this unnoticable of a change compared to Conquest? Is it really this worthless?

I'm still waiting for the IMC to review the Serenwilde governmental status. We've got an inactive GM or two sneaking around.

*cough*

Not sure if it's working right, but by how they suggested, Religious is to Conquest in village claiming as Mage is to Warrior in tankiness.

The two real questions are:

1. Are you getting a nice supply of power from that village, and?

2. Are you guys REALY that interested in power over comms/villages?