StarDock Alpha

The original intention is twofold: to limit bullying and encourage proper Player-vs-Player (PVP) interaction. However, nothing prohibits using diplomacy. If your goal is hindered by other players and your intent isn't to bully or completely annihilate them, then why should I mind if you try to negotiate an agreement? Your Three Proposals Based on this principle, let's look at your three proposed options for the traders in your desired bubbles. Trading Sectors: This is a perfectly acceptable form of diplomacy. You are offering a fair exchange of resources to achieve your objective, and the other players are free to accept or decline. Protection and Rent: This option is more complex. While it doesn't constitute a formal truce, a "protection racket" could be seen as a form of bullying or a coercive agreement that violates the spirit of the game. If the other player agrees to this out of fear of forced eviction, it becomes a problem. The rule is meant to prevent players from being strong-armed into disadvantageous arrangements. Forcible Eviction: This is a core part of the game's mechanics. Using force to take control of sectors is a legitimate strategic action, and it falls squarely within the established rules of player-vs-player interaction. If the other players do not agree to a diplomatic solution, this is the expected and intended path. In summary, you're on the right track with using diplomacy and strategic thinking. Option 1 is a great example of a fair and creative solution. Option 3 is a perfectly legitimate and supported course of action. I disagree with Option 2 because of the potential for it to cross the line into bullying. I hope this clarifies my stance. Keep up the strategic thinking, and good luck with your negotiations.