General Discussion / OOC / Archived

First topic message reminder :

OOC goes here, not on other boards.

starting a career sucks. thats all. hi peeps.

why do rich ppl even have jobs?

So they don't get bored and often in order to continue doing something that they enjoy... or support their (or their spouse/kids') lifestyle.

Kazatul wrote:

Troops: I'll wait for Shin's response to that one because this situation came up at H2H where a member had multiple cities/villages under their control and no troops to defend them from what should be natural elements of the environment (i.e. brigands, mercenaries, or other rogue elements that would naturally exist in the world).

The Advanced Building System doesn't really keep track of population and your military force and all that stuff. I agree that the ABS should be included in any template that might be made, but the buildings alone don't cover everything.

Which situation are you referring to?

By the way, Soothe, I'm "Little Kitsu" on LoL

i think he means this as a template. not sure bout the situation.

Territory Name:
Map Location:
Description:
# of Troops Based there:
# of Workers:
Civilian Population:

so i'm thinkin i should prolly have ppl fill out some type of form so that the actual structure/idea/organization of what's being claimed has a foundation before it's build upon for tracking and "making sense" purposes.

Situation = Domen having 3 cities and 25 troops that were all stationed in Domenance but no one in the other 2 locations except for like 1-2 inactive member characters that he had to take over in the last 2 sagas to defend the land. So when Shin sent an NPC force to attack one of them, there was no one there.

Before the NPC attack, I had raised the question of how someone could defend so much land with so few troops even with Domen being one of the strongest characters on the site.

@Template: Yeah, something like that.

Cities dont equate to claimed land. At least not in my mind.

This is why people need to differentiate between land simply claimed, and cities/villages. If you'll notice Iskra and I have done just that, with our individual cities/villages being marked by our own symbols and the abundant mini sun representing simple claimed land.

You shouldn't need a bunch of troops on each claimed square of land. Cities/villages? Most certainly. But regular land heck no ... you think the big Roman Empire had soldiers every mile or so? Absolutely not.

You know, I actually thought about having a little map to have my city's layout.

So I was like, "2.5 square miles. Fine. Let's do it."

So a plot of land is 500 square feet, but 2.5 (square miles) = 69,696,000 square feet

And even if I had every plot of land be a pixel, that only reduces the map to 139,392 pixels, which isn't that big, but it's pretty lame because you've got a big ol' city with a few dots on it.

By a few dots, I mean that you could build 139,392 huts in that space, and I'm sure most people will want is one or two.

But I'm very much for the idea of a city layout for developed land. I'm just not sure how to go about it.

---

On the topic of a strong person owning a lot of cities, however, I will point out that the US generally doesn't have to justify its borders with armed gunmen. Other countries and people just know that if they came onto the land and said "Hey, this belongs to me. I'm making a sovereign nation on the US's land and/or attacking, and I don't have to pay attention to your laws," then there would be unpleasant repercussions. A person or group's reputation is worth a lot when defining borders.
But yes. I think there should be a difference between a "City" and outlying land that the person just wants to develop without interference (e.g. making a highway).

See, now that's where I draw issue. If you don't control the land then why claim it? Kitsu and I were discussing this earlier and as I told her, if I want to control a trade route from Point A to Point B, then I would need to police it in some way, otherwise, anyone can use said trade route without me being compensated for my claim to it (or the fact that I built it).

In regards to the Roman Empire & US analogies, answer is simple:
1) Both placed garrisons in key locations in order to police their interests. This is why we STILL have bases in Germany, Japan, Korea, and several other locations from previous engagements.
2) Kitsu, you're right that the reputation is key (just look at the Assyrians) but they all flexed their military muscle FIRST to the point where most forces didn't wanna mess with them b/c they knew the consequences. (US vs. Japan - WW2 Kaboom for example)

So again, it is simply that their military prowess was flexed so that it didn't have to be continuously flexed. Same could be done here. I'm not saying that every inch needs to be patrolled at all times (especially when you're not at war with anyone), but I am saying that I would probably need more than 30 ppl to CONTROL 6 plots of land all at once.

Just my opinion, based on how the Land Claim system worked (quite well too) at H2H, but the difference shouldn't be made between where my cities/villages are and where my unprotected, "claimed but not controlled territory" is. It's quite simple, if I don't control the area, then I shouldn't "claim" it. It seems far easier to post on your territory page, {Has influence/presence in Squares 2-5 where trade route is located.} and leave the map squares blank. In the previous system, you only claimed what you had villages on or what we were currently building a village on. We didn't claim the territory in between b/c it's more along the lines of what you were getting at, Kitsu, you come too close to my land without my permission and there could be a problem, but as far as someone who would've looked at a map knew, it was unclaimed land, b/c it was. Can it create conflicts? Yes, and that makes having an army fun here since there aren't Pillars or a Dem unveiled yet for the site to battle against.

The template setup of stating where your troops are always prevents someone from always claiming that their full army is always really close to where the conflict is.

It just seems more sensible to build up your starting one or two squares and then once you grow/repair your village, THEN you expand and claim more territory. B/c right now this looks like a game of Monopoly not Risk.

Well, about your "30 people to control 6 plots of land"

We're living in a world with billions and billions of people, so yea, of course 30 people doesn't seem like a big army if you're looking at it from a modern context. 30 people is about a classroom, yea, but I'm assuming that the population of the WORLD is only a fraction of that size and that everything's much less organized, so I'd think that 30 organized people would be able to make more of a difference.

And if you just put on your map info page "Oh, if you try to claim land x-z, I'm going to attack you," then that makes actually going and claiming a spot more complicated because people tend to embellish what's on empty spots always and there's no way for the person to know that you put a trade route or a road or something there that you want to protect.

I was looking at it in terms of this world (DOR) and even compared it to what I saw in Camelot which is a similar setting where they were sending relatively small forces to battle against brigands and such, but the season finale is what kind of illustrates my point. They sent out a force of 10 knights, had to leave a garrison of maybe 15-20 at Camelot to protect and patrol it, so when brigand attacks starting running wilder, they didn't have the manpower to protect all of their territory.

Hmm... the embellishment is true, but you would still have to pay for anything that you try to claim/use, so the trade route would be listed on the Territory page as something that was under construction or completed and you would obviously have the RPs to back it up. The embellishment issue was one of the things that led to the whole "storyline NPCs and stuff not on your bio/approved by the site" thing came to be. So I could say that there's a river right there and a pit that I used to hear stories about as a kid, but if I haven't paid for a moat (the river) and spikes or a trench (the pit) then yeah, that embellishment means nothing unless we agree to my description of the terrain.

The current land claim system is just that; someone claims a piece of land. As Kaz is seemingly understand, because someone yells, ‘I claim this in the name of me’ it’s IC relevance is null assuming any person, loon or savvy, can perform an RP where they should in all reality physically walk up and do the same thing at the exact same piece of land.

It’s an underlining and pre established thought process that you cannot physically control land without means unless you plan on simply standing in one place for the remainder of your days so no one can come and build a Moonbucks Shack on it. If there’s nothing on the land, then it’s not controlled, that doesn’t seem to be the issue that’s being disputed, but if someone says ‘I’m claiming this land,’ basically all it does is seemingly lift an OOC flag to let others know that one is interested in this area. Thus the land claim map is nothing but an OOC indicator of presence in an area. There’s nothing IC stopping anyone from actually counter claiming or building upon that land, especially if it’s void of any structures. Considering the vastness of each square on the map being just over 6 sq miles each, if an area is not walled off and patrolled, there’s really nothing more someone can do than simply ‘claim’ they own that land.

For this reason, I believe that claimed but uncontrolled land should somehow be marked differently than land that is controlled somehow, be it by patrols, military presence or homesteading.

I would like to point out that military presence isn’t the only, albeit the safest, way to control an area. In the site storyline already there are NPC clans and tribes that basically claimed land and control it by living and hunting on it. But as far as ‘taking land,’ these mentioned NPCs are very similar to the members doing RPs to come and kick them off; because apparently if someone can come in with a character and conquer a small village that did not have a sufficient manner of protecting itself, the same rules will apply to that group.

Though we can compare to our world with billions and billions of people, the current world of DOR is arguably smaller than New York City. I remember that the original dimensions of the 50-mile city were somewhat comparable to Greater Los Angeles. Though 30 people would comprise a fairly decent village militia, most of the organized areas on the map have population densities of over 100 per sq. mile.

But my opinion on the land claim map is that perhaps there should be a legend so that there can be a greater difference between what’s controlled territory and what’s ‘influenced’ territories with the ability for more than one group or person to have influence over an uncontrolled areas; this is mainly because of my believe that the map should be an ‘at a glance’ OOC indication of the world. Getting any more intricate than that could start to get worrisome due to the scale of the map and our inability to ‘zoom in.’ I also believe the land template is a good step in the right direction. Perhaps something more like:

[ Image ]
Territory Name:
Description:
Map Location:
Square footage of controlled land: (based on walled in area or summed structural sq. footage)
Population Density: based on population, troops, workers, and square footage of controlled land perhaps
# of Troops Based there:
# of Workers:
Civilian Population:
Structural Breakdown:

Mariko, good job on the map shading so far as well as the build point suggestion.

Well, I'm going to think about it tonight and I think that we can do some really exciting stuff with the army system and the map.

Namely, it'd be nice if I could code something that demonstrates how many troops you have stationed in your monopoly square. I think things like sneak attacks and such would be really fun. Probably depending on the number of troops you have stationed and the population of the squares (Adv. building system), there's a percentage chance that you could be noticed, but you can buff that chance with stealth skills or NPCs who know "spy".

Of course, only places with buildings on them would really be worth attempting to conquer. Otherwise you're just fighting and not gaining anything back.

But yea, I don't put much vestment in shows like Camelot because they aren't quite exactly realistic, and even though DoR isn't realistic either, I prefer to use realism in these discussions because it's a "standard".

And I thought it said that each square was 2.5 miles...

And thanks, Kyro =D It took me all day <3

I was going to write out a big thing, but I pretty much agree with what Kyro said.

RP wise we just went around planting banners in most areas while taking over smaller villages in others. Could you roll in and kick the banners over and claim it as your own? I guess but you'd have to contest it with us.

Ty, Lydeck. And yes, I believe that each square is 2.5 miles, but when you times 2.5 by itself you get 6.25 squared miles.

Quote :

[ Image ]
Territory Name:
Description:
Map Location:
Square footage of controlled land: (based on walled in area or summed structural sq. footage)
Population Density: based on population, troops, workers, and square footage of controlled land perhaps
# of Troops Based there:
# of Workers:
Civilian Population:
Structural Breakdown:

In addition to what I said previously, I believe there should be a small summary of 'how' land was taken over along with the link to the take over page to go with this temple as it seems it would make auditing a bit easier. Additionally, if someone 'conquered' a place by force, it could leave options for them to be counter attacked by the site, which would be interesting as well in pursuit of this pseudo realism.

Also, I always figured the outside city/village land claims were about "influence" instead of actual establishment of the land. I think that people should be able to claim "influence" over the land regardless.

A 1 troop to 1 square trade off would be acceptable, IMO. Two and a half miles isn't an overly long distance fora single patrolman.

aѕceпxion wrote:

In addition to what I said previously, I believe there should be a small summary of 'how' land was taken over along with the link to the take over page to go with this temple as it seems it would make auditing a bit easier. Additionally, if someone 'conquered' a place by force, it could leave options for them to be counter attacked by the site, which would be interesting as well in pursuit of this pseudo realism.

Couldn't somebody just check the claims map if they want to know how the land was taken over? The summary method seems like it'd produce a lot of additional clutter unless it was only a short phrase, and that we could put on the actual claim thread.

By small, I mean a sentence or two basically saying "I took it" or "I bribed the village elders" etc; obviously the TL:DR version in this case.

just popping a small message in here, again! >.< Have graveyard shift this week a.k.a 4pm to 4am so my posting and stuff will first happen on saturday, unless they get me to work then as well >.< So yeah, its this week and then next week which will be my last two weeks of working, meaing that after the 29th im free and can go shit again

Phew wrote:

just popping a small message in here, again! >.< Have graveyard shift this week a.k.a 4pm to 4am so my posting and stuff will first happen on saturday, unless they get me to work then as well >.< So yeah, its this week and then next week which will be my last two weeks of working, meaing that after the 29th im free and can go shit again

come back when u get a phew minutes... aha! i made a funny!

everyone good w/this then? or does more need to go t'the template

[ Image ]
Territory Name: --
Description: --
Map Location: --
Claim Style: (conquered, settled, etc)
Controlled land in Sq. Ft: (based on walled in area or summed structural sq. footage)
Pop Density: (based on population, troops, workers, and square footage of controlled land perhaps)
# Troops Homed: --
# Workers (by Types): --
Civilian Population: --
Structural Breakdown: --

Looks purdy to meh, Shin.

@Shin: That looks fine to me.

@Lydeck: you're gonna need at LEAST 6 troops per square. Patrols go out in pairs so that if they are attacked, it is possible for one to flee & warn ppl. Also assuming a 24 hr day, ur patrols shouldn't do more than 8 hr shifts so you'd need 3 rotations. That's literally a bare minimum.

@Kitsu: If the code is already in place on the current map, is it difficult to make a "land influence" map? Since a lot of the threads seem to be for influence more than actual control, that would be the most frequently updated map & then like once a week the Land Claim map can be updated as needed. That way a new member or someone looking to set up a base, they can see what's open on a fairly clean more official map yet check the influence map to see where conflicts might arise.

@Shin: It's sufficient, we can add more as we go if needed.

Apologies for my lack of posting. I've hit a bit of a writer's block that I will hopefully be getting over soon. Should be back up and running at full steam in a few days at most.

Kazatul wrote:

@Lydeck: you're gonna need at LEAST 6 troops per square. Patrols go out in pairs so that if they are attacked, it is possible for one to flee & warn ppl. Also assuming a 24 hr day, ur patrols shouldn't do more than 8 hr shifts so you'd need 3 rotations. That's literally a bare minimum.

lolwut?

If I need 6 troops to cover two and a half miles for an entire day I'm firing their asses for being inept.

If you think you're gonna have 2 troops on duty ALL DAY then you'd never be able to use your full force b/c let's say you do that and you control 5 squares... 15-20 of your troops are either out on patrol or sleeping b/c I can tell you that when you stand guard for 24 hours straight, your body is ready to shut down or at the very least, definitely not as alert as you need it to be to handle a conflict.

So 10 ppl are out on patrol using the bare minimum and you would hope that your enemy doesn't take the time to spy on you and learn the rotation times to catch them around hour 18 of their shift.

Then the other 5-10 is yesterday's or tomorrow's patrol duos b/c one of those two pairs will probably be sleeping b/c they just finished a long day or they're trying to rest before their shift.

So the easier option is to have multiple rotations... technically you might be able to get away with only 2 shifts of 12 hours each, so at best 4 people.

Do the NPC villages have 72+ troops each? Because they all have 12 squares.

HEY!

it's hip to be a square

You're not a person unless you're acting!

lolwut?

lmao /confused

What is the instrument on the actor's body or soul that helps them the most?

Your heart?

WROOOOOOOONG! ...Casty?

Hip bones? Jaw bones?

DO YOU THINK I'M AN IDIOT?! IT'S YOUR NOSE!

O.O

Kazatul wrote:

If you think you're gonna have 2 troops on duty ALL DAY then you'd never be able to use your full force b/c let's say you do that and you control 5 squares... 15-20 of your troops are either out on patrol or sleeping b/c I can tell you that when you stand guard for 24 hours straight, your body is ready to shut down or at the very least, definitely not as alert as you need it to be to handle a conflict.

So 10 ppl are out on patrol using the bare minimum and you would hope that your enemy doesn't take the time to spy on you and learn the rotation times to catch them around hour 18 of their shift.

Then the other 5-10 is yesterday's or tomorrow's patrol duos b/c one of those two pairs will probably be sleeping b/c they just finished a long day or they're trying to rest before their shift.

So the easier option is to have multiple rotations... technically you might be able to get away with only 2 shifts of 12 hours each, so at best 4 people.

Side two of this :
Jack, Mariko, Kyro, Kaz, and myself could easily handle 20 humans in a frontal assault.

Ashurei wrote:

Jack, Mariko, Kyro, Kaz, and myself could easily handle 20 humans in a frontal assault.

Pretty sure you guys could handle just as many Hybrids, Kami and Oni as well for the most part.

1) I'm still quite weak actually... I don't even have transformations. (but thanks for including me)
2) Nope... there would be in fighting b/c Jack, Kitsu, and Lydeck want to kill you, I'd probably want to help keep you alive and so we'd more than likely have a repeat of Tonberry. Most likely...

We don't want to kill Ash anymore. =P

Yeah... uh huh. Maim, burn alive, w/e. :p

Lydeck wrote:

We don't want to kill Ash anymore. =P

We don't? When did he stop being a kami?

Kazatul wrote:

Request: Since you brought up the valid point of the effect, DMG, being exclusive to Strength in terms of physical attacks, I would like to request either permission or an open to all quest that I can provide a write-up for.

Reason: Said allowance or quest would allow for characters who use physical fighting styles based on technical skill and accuracy to combat on par with the KO power brawlers. Bruce Lee (and SEVERAL current MMA fighters) wasn't overly strong. He was extremely precise and struck vital areas to disable his opponent.

Also, in most systems, the "rogue" character (or a someone with weapon finesse in D&D) is able to inflict damage based on their Dexterity/Agility for the same reasoning.

Strength: how strong someone is. General lifting ability gauges near the max someone should be able to lift.
Dexterity: how quickly someone can react, like swatting a fly or moving out of the way of a punch. This controls short ranged evasion.

So if you'll allow it, I'll write up the quest so that if other members want their characters to be finesse/rogue style fighters, then they can also utilize this. I think it would fall in line with the whole customization culture of the site.

Not to butt in, but why not use the momentum rules for this?

Momentum actually does the opposite is the style. Momentum would fall under the brawler aspect more than the technical, precise striking. Plus, when you use the momentum, you're "out of control" so it's not a sustainable fighting style.

Oh and I don't mind the butting in (by some ppl) b/c you might notice something that I missed or an easier way to accomplish what I'm trying to do.

You guys are actually discussing Kaz wanting a custom effect on a pre-made custom system? Anywho. The numbers used in the building system are a bit inefficient due to the dividing and multiplying you have to do in order to put together custom structures. I would propose basing everything on 1 BP and adjusting the value as below:

Construction Result per Build Point
Wooden Walls - 3 ft wall segment up to 1 story (10 ft) high
Stone or Scrap Metal Walls - 2ft wall segment up to 1 story (10 ft) high
Flooring - 50 sq ft segments
Ceiling - 40 sq ft segments
Landscaping - 30 sq ft segments

It might also be better if the site structures had their BP requirements listed with them in order to reduce confusion when building structures. For example:

Hut
Type: Building
Requirement: 1 Story, 500 sq ft (50 BP)
Bonus: +3 Civilian Population Limit

Math:

Medium House
Type: Building
Requirement: 1+ Story, 1000 sq ft (85 BP)
Bonus: +5 Civilian Population Limit

Math:

Large House
Type: Building
Requirement: 1+ Story, 2000 sq ft (150 BP)
Bonus: +10 Civilian Population Limit

Math:

Though if you were nice and gave up to 4 ft of wall for 1 BP, then you could get the approximate perimeter of the walls by simply squaring the square footage; i.e. it gets rid of:

2000 squared = 44.72 * 3 = 178.88 / 3 = 59.62 = ~60 BP
and gives
2000 squared = 44.72 = ~45 BP

Walls alone would cut costs across the board for building structures. On the case of perimeters, I could only do an approximation based on a square since you could have a structure that's 100 square feet and be either 10 x 10 (40 feet perimeter) or 20 x 5 (50 feet perimeter).

^ this

Actually, I asked for a quest to avoid having to make a cookie cutter-esque template and provide a potential different option that would be open to anyone who wanted to run their character in the same fashion. Quit being such a hater. Someone is trying to be HELPFUL... something you tend to suck at.

Build Points
It still seems like an excessively long time to build certain things. Taking 5 IRL days (aka 15 IC days) to build a HUT just seems like a lot. Heck the Large House take 15 IRL aka 45 IC days to be built with 10 workers.

Oh and in case anyone is wondering... due to rounding... building all huts is more cost/time efficient than Medium or Large Houses since they seem to have the same density and such.

1000 sq ft = 2 Huts vs. 1 Med House = +6 vs +5
2000 sq ft = 4 Huts vs. 1 L-House = +12 vs +10

Actually, I just looked at the page and the Hut beats out ALL building types except for the Estate. Interesting little fact/loophole.

The terminology of 'hut' is a bit misleading. Generally when someone thinks of a hut, it's a semi permanent residence that consists of a single room that's normally no larger than Tipi (~10 BP); at the moment a 'hut' could withstand a Stage 2 fireball. Being generous would say that a hut is 10 x 10 giving it an area of 100 sq ft (~18 BP). The site's definition of a hut is actually x5 larger than this (avg living room size), which might lead to the surprise that it takes longer to build what someone is thinking in their head.

Suggestion

The current walls listed are very sturdy by definition, so when someone thinks about something like this we could add a 'straw' or weak version of a wall which is primarily for shelter or the poor. The straw equivalent could offer 5 or 7 sq ft for 1 BP and perhaps animal skin or cloth at 10 sq ft per BP, thus making structures such as these cheap and fast to put up, since people seem to want 'true' huts that can be put up in a day. Then we can rename our current hut to a more appropriate name and adjust the living ratio's accordingly.

Also I will point out the error with the earlier BP calculations. Those are assuming that the building only has 1 room (i.e. 4 walls); still remember with the system BP incorporates preparing the materials that one is working with so it assumes all houses will be made sturdy.

Yurt: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yurt

Kazatul wrote:

Build Points
It still seems like an excessively long time to build certain things. Taking 5 IRL days (aka 15 IC days) to build a HUT just seems like a lot. Heck the Large House take 15 IRL aka 45 IC days to be built with 10 workers.

Oh and in case anyone is wondering... due to rounding... building all huts is more cost/time efficient than Medium or Large Houses since they seem to have the same density and such.

1000 sq ft = 2 Huts vs. 1 Med House = 6 vs 5
2000 sq ft = 4 Huts vs. 1 L-House = 12 vs 10

Actually, I just looked at the page and the Hut beats out ALL building types except for the Estate. Interesting little fact/loophole.

You're forgetting to count the walls.

When you count the walls it works out like this:

Building	# of walls	sq.ft.	Fl.	BP	Citizens Awarded	Cost Per Citizen
Hut	4	500	1	60	3	20
Med House	5	1000	1	90	5	18
Lg House	8	2000	1	160	10	16
Manor	11	4000	1	270	20	14
Mansion	30	8000	2	940	50	19
Estate	16	10000	1	560	75	7

If you have flooring and ceilings and assume that all buildings are square-ish and not rectangles.
I know because I made the same mistake as you at first until I busted out my spreadsheet and started city planning.

Also, I'm in agreement with the idea of making wall segments smaller and cheaper.

Honestly, the whole system seems to be too complicated for it's own good.

When I say that I mean I'm not even sure why buildings are being built at a rate of flooring/walls/sections/etc. It seems overly complicated when you could just apply a standard build rate to a wider variety of building types to cover all that people could want to create in RPs.

A hut wouldn't be that big nor take a great deal of time to create. Being the most basic of the shelters and designed with speed of construction in mind you would want to get one slapped together and up in a short amount of time, day or less then that and you are using very basic materials to make it so its cost wouldn't be that expensive, hell all you are pretty much doing is going out, cutting down some good sized limbs and using them for most of the structure what you are paying for mostly is man power/construction time which shouldn't be much, I figure a single person could put a hut together fairly fast and the size would be small, you are making an economy home you aren't planing on having a large bedroom, kitchen, and all the things of the old world. It could be said that the bedroom, house, and kitchen would all be the same room, a hut could be a simple open structure with a simple bed or beds, enough for the occupants. When I think of a hut I seen the simple designs you would see in a medieval setting and the like.

Rune's very right, in my opinion.

Huts should be inefficient compared to more advanced housing, but very quick to build... maybe cost half as many build points as now and only house 1 or 2 people.

Or we could make a building called a "tent" that fills the niche. Right now it's sort of hard for someone who's not a dedicated builder to get off of the ground into the advanced system, especially considering that we don't start with a beginner population/building or anything.

I am? .... I mean, I am, I knew that >.>;. The hut probably wouldn't be to big, a 10ft by 10ft could possibly accommodate 3 people, though it wont be comfy and it wouldn't be to tall, more so tall enough for the tallest occupant to move around in with out hitting there head on the roof, it would also be a single story tall, no need having 2 story huts xD.

Also, as a solution to the whole land-influence problem.

I think we should have buildings that allow you to exert influence as long as you have military stationed in them. It can be like:

Outpost: Influences the square it's in (Relatively Cheap)
Fort: Influences an area (up to 2.5 mi. radius) (Standard)
Base: Influences an area (up to 5 mi. radius) (Really Expensive)

Of course, like a city, you would want to station troops in your military building, and only those troops who were presently there could defend the area or stop someone from coming in and destroying the fort (because of slow, primitive communications). When the fort is destroyed, you lose influence over that land until you can build a new one.

An upgrade to these could be magical or improved communications/couriers that would allow the soldiers to call reinforcements from a nearby (10 miles) place other troops are stationed in case of a threat or an emergency. Military outposts could also get the standard extra fortifications (e.g. spiked walls, moats, etc.).

Other members would still be able to build in an area influenced by an outpost, but the person with the influence would be "aware" of the encroachment and can choose whether or not they feel like it's worth mobilizing/risking troops over.