Morkin's Island Takeover Policy

[Ruku]

Yea thats kind of what I mean. I find it wrong that when somebody does all the work then another sneaks in there and snipes the isle (due to unsuccessful colo's) it's 'tough luck'. I can understand the forgery problems, and can understand more than one person clearing the isle, but as 2k said, in cases like the several clearers, it should go to the people who destroyed the most.
I also cannot believe that if I went around sniping isles and then telling the people who cleared then, tough luck, that the alliance would back me! (all the way to war?)

[Arminius]

But then, you need to identify the isle first, make sure that it's been cleared, so during that time the original attacker should have had enough time to colonise it. And if you lose your fleet clearing it and have to wait to rebuild a fleet for colonisation, then you shouldn't have started in the first place.

Clearing isles is a risky business. The rewards are high, but the price to pay is that you'll have losses and you need to be aware that somebody else can snatch it off you.

[eproxy]

We still don't actually have an official colo-policy. We have two policies drafted up that just need to be voted on but that process never seems to get underway. I'm not even sure which is the best way to undertake the vote; perhaps just a poll on the forum? Those who don't come on here much will miss out but that's tough luck.

[Arminius]

I wasn't aware there were two versions; what's the difference between the two proposals?

[Gornall]

Second version was 2ks. Basically the same but if you cleared the you had some claim or entitlement to compensation.

Inyati's seems to promote sniping and as I said, we lose a lot more than we gain from sniping. Surely a policy we are trying to establish should give us some kind of even chance.

If it stays this way I will actively look and snipe isles cause surely morkin will back me up if I am within the rights of the policy?

[Arminius]

Well, I tend to prefer the hard evidence aspect. There's nothing that can be disputed, all the facts are clearly visible and can be verified. No chance for fraud or deception.

As I said, if you go for a built-up island it's a risk, but if you get it the rewards will be higher than a measly 1pter. Otherwise, I see a rulerless high-score island, send a suicide fleet against it, and then it's mine? That can't be right.

[RapSO]

arminius said:

Well, I tend to prefer the hard evidence aspect. There's nothing that can be disputed, all the facts are clearly visible and can be verified. No chance for fraud or deception.

As I said, if you go for a built-up island it's a risk, but if you get it the rewards will be higher than a measly 1pter. Otherwise, I see a rulerless high-score island, send a suicide fleet against it, and then it's mine? That can't be right.

I know there's a risk involved in clearing a high-score rulerless isle, but nevertheless if I did clear everything from such an isle, I would expect to get it.

I see a bigger problem when people start clearing and claiming isles before they turn rulerless. Under such circumstances, I have knowingly taken/sniped an isle that had been cleared once it turned rulerless. For all I know, the guy who cleared the isle drove the other player from the game deliberately, and as such I felt I would be a better administrator of the new rulerless isle

[Ruku]

arminius said:

Well, I tend to prefer the hard evidence aspect. There's nothing that can be disputed, all the facts are clearly visible and can be verified. No chance for fraud or deception.

As I said, if you go for a built-up island it's a risk, but if you get it the rewards will be higher than a measly 1pter. Otherwise, I see a rulerless high-score island, send a suicide fleet against it, and then it's mine? That can't be right.

Why isn't that right?! You've done the work, you've suffered the losses!

I agree with part one though, thats why it's hard to come up with a decent policy.

[kae]

I prefer Inyati's. The point of it is to establish a policy where the Alliance WILL go to war over something. I feel strongly that needs to be based off of confirmed, verifiable evidence. Clearing is not one of these things.

I have run into a few situations recently where someone says they cleared 50 LWS, 500 stoners and lost pittance in the process, but use that as a basis for their 'stronger claim' on the island. In a situation like this, I often tell them to take a hike, because they should have gotten there before I did.

Likewise, if I were to take a 1k point isle, and someone cleared 400 LWS, 2000 spears, etc. from it, and demanded the island back, I'm not going to be stubborn over it, and give it back. The point is not the be all and end all of how you deal with others, but instead to establish an alliance policy on where we back members with military force.

It is not a reason to get your pants all up in a bunch over, and the hope (at least for me) is that everyone will continue to be reasonable about how they deal with others. And if you clear an island, most people will be reasonable with you. However, if you don't colonize that cleared island, and lose it, don't expect the alliance to go to war.

[Ruku]

But I can expect them to go to war for me if I snipe and isle off someone, then tell them tough luck it's our alliances policy, I got here first.

/edit punctuation

[Clausewitz]

Clearly copy/paste clearing reports can be doctored, but is there much room for skepticism when it comes to screenshots?

My concern is that by adhering to this policy, we are placing ourselves in a unique position on this server, as clearing, by and large, implies "rights" according to the vast majority of alliances. I would hate for our reputation to be tarnished as we lose honor and become known as "island vultures".

[Gornall]

clausewitz said:

I would hate for our reputation to be tarnished as we lose honor and become known as "island vultures".

That is what the new policy is seeming to promote though sadly.

[Arminius]

Well, we just need to make sure everybody is aware of our policy. As for faking: screenshots can be as easily faked. And for our reputation to be tarnished we'd have to do some actual vulturing, which we're not doing anyway.

[Clausewitz]

So if we do not intend to vulture, what is to prevent others from asserting the same policy when they run into the situation with us?

Basically, if we do not vulture, I foresee this being used against us ten times as often as it is used in our favor Every alliance on the server will declare "I don't care that you spent 400 LWS clearing the isle, your own rules say that since I snuck in and got it, it's mine".

[Gornall]

clausewitz said:

So if we do not intend to vulture, what is to prevent others from asserting the same policy when they run into the situation with us?

Basically, if we do not vulture, I foresee this being used against us ten times as often as it is used in our favor Every alliance on the server will declare "I don't care that you spent 400 LWS clearing the isle, your own rules say that since I snuck in and got it, it's mine".

Absolutely what I meant.

It really makes no sense creating a policy that is going to go against us.

Hell we might aswell clear an island then just leave it to be coloed by someone else. The risk is getting into a dispute not you owning the isle. If its dont genuinely and cleanly then the isle is yours.