PVP Factions

[Jackard]

I must say I really hate the idea of destroyable claims. Having your steel stolen is manageable. Having your whole damn farm stolen isn't. However, it needs to be possible to reoccupy abandoned buildings that are under an inactive claim. As you can't claim over a claim, inactive claims would need to expire. So yeah, I'm sticking with my guns here.

what about this

rendering claims impotent over a set amount of time not logged in sounds interesting - not decaying, but no longer having any effect. "ghost claims"

you could remove ghost claims with new ones, but allowing people to "leave their mark" only adds flavor to the world history

[Junkfist2]

What if (assuming decay is extended to houses) claims persist as long as there are built items within them? And when the built items have all disappeared, then the claim starts to decay and eventually fails? So If you maintain your house, goods, and walls, and build a lot of them, a claim could persist for a long time...but if a player tosses a claim over a forest and quits, the claim would disappear more quickly?

What if after some dude/group goes through the trouble of removing or destroying EVERYTHING on a claim they can then destroy the claimpost?

[kobnach]

What if (assuming decay is extended to houses) claims persist as long as there are built items within them? And when the built items have all disappeared, then the claim starts to decay and eventually fails? So If you maintain your house, goods, and walls, and build a lot of them, a claim could persist for a long time...but if a player tosses a claim over a forest and quits, the claim would disappear more quickly?

I presently have a claim that consists entirely of forest - planted woodlot to be precise. This seems like quite a reasonable thing to do, at least for someone who doesn't need to live within their claim. (Perhaps they live in a village, or in someone else's claim.) It will probably be even more reasonable with the quality changes, as plants/trees will have variable quality,and might need to be somewhere other than one's main living area for best results. I don't think it makes sense to put a building within such a functional claim just to keep it around - provided the area is being visited and (perhaps) used.