Posted by Ezder
at Nov 15, 2011 9:19:42 AM
Re: *Knockout's Outpost Blockade Policy*
I'll just once again point out the possibility of "total pay cap" instead, as at least worth a try. Say that you, and the attacker, can only add, say, 1 million to the job offer - no more. If you run out, you run out. Then both sides have to work to limit pay raises and keep jobbing even (if you outjob, you'll use the PoE faster), and are even in terms of PoE shortage. In the bes of worlds, it should give a blockade that is competitive, yet cheap. Of course, it requires some trust, but so do all pre-arranged blockades with terms.
Just an idea.
I personally don't want to do this because it takes some fun and learning experience out of the blockade aspect when your land staffs have to wait on a ship for 10 mins to job. Another drawback of this method is the reserve pay. If a side wishes to spend only 1 mil, they might need to add more for the reserve pay (at later stage when pay goes higher). Even though the entire blockade might cost them less than 1 mill, but the reserve pay may need more poes to keep jobbing. This again limits the blockading aspect. The last problem would be the trust issue which you already mentioned.
Edit: Just saw your edit - I used the term "pay-cap" just for the sake of it. I added the flexiblity word to it since I'll do whatever the attacker wishes. If they wish for no-paycap, that's absolutely fine.
Fair enough. Your islands, your rules. The promise of non-sinking alone would have been enough to make Legacy drop when we were new, and looking for our first blockade.
Qvintvs flag royalty chats, "I won't play for that much longer and when I quit, my pirate's dead body will be sent out at sea on a burning ship and let's face it, you will be on that ship as well.