Monument Destruction

[Pure_Dunga]

It may have been talked about before, but will there be any way of destroying existing monuments in towns?

[DylPickle]

Slow decay would be nice. I don't think there should be too active a demolition though. Personally, I kind of like that landmarks have a sense of permanency.

[Wolfsong]

Yeah, there's nothing else quite like having to stare at "YOU ALL SUCK (blankity blank)" for all eternity.

[DylPickle]

True, those are stupid. But the legitimate historical ones are nice.

[Surly]

I think it'd be better to have them destructible than rotting, to be honest. I'd much rather people had to actively destroy in-game history than just lose it over time.

[Wolfsong]

If monuments could be willfully deconstructed, it'd be cool if at the end of the destruction project a moveable object was produced, IE, something like:

Stone Landmark: John wuz here lol

would morph into, when torn down:

stone rubble: John wuz here lol (which would be entirely moveable/draggable, though heavy)

You'd have a way of cleaning up a location, but also have a way of preserving history, too.

[Chris]

How about ...

1. being able to change the writing with a chisel?

2. a monument's writing decays over time, but the monument itself remains standing and available for a new message? After all, pyramids and ziggarats and burial mounds have survived for thousands of years.

[DylPickle]

How about ...

1. being able to change the writing with a chisel?

2. a monument's writing decays over time, but the monument itself remains standing and available for a new message? After all, pyramids and ziggarats and burial mounds have survived for thousands of years.

When the writing decays off a pyramid, you can still tell it's a pyramid.
When the writing decays off a cantr statue, you can't even tell if it was a statue or an obelisk, or a tombstone, or a pyramid.

I guess it would be alright if they could be destroyed, so long as they require some combination of tools. (For some reason I never took tool necessity into account).

I'd be down with a requirement of a crowbar or a sledgehammer (or both.).
And I favour complete destruction of a monument rather than renaming. If you're going to build a monument, you should have to build it. Recycling it seems a little cheesy.

[Wolfsong]

Not to be a stickler, but relatively few pyramids have actually survived to modern day. The Great Pyramids of Giza mostly survived intact, but there are many many more that are completely unrecognizable as pyramids and just resemble a big pile of debris in the desert.

/offtopic

[DylPickle]

Not to be a stickler, but relatively few pyramids have actually survived to modern day. The Great Pyramids of Giza mostly survived intact, but there are many many more that are completely unrecognizable as pyramids and just resemble a big pile of debris in the desert.

/offtopic

Don't do that! Now I have to be a stickler and make the comment that when someone refers to "The Pyramids", they refer to the ones at Giza. Pyramids of lesser importance usually just look like hills, because the majority of them were made out of mud, and we're never constructed with any approximation of the time and engineering grandeur that deliberately went into the great pyramids.

/equally offtopic

[Surly]

I'd be down with a requirement of a crowbar or a sledgehammer (or both.).
And I favour complete destruction of a monument rather than renaming. If you're going to build a monument, you should have to build it. Recycling it seems a little cheesy.

This sums up my stance on this topic.

[RedQueen.exe]

I'd be down with a requirement of a crowbar or a sledgehammer (or both.).
And I favour complete destruction of a monument rather than renaming. If you're going to build a monument, you should have to build it. Recycling it seems a little cheesy.

This sums up my stance on this topic.

Agreed, plus recycling would probably increase the likelihood of someone defacing a historical monument to replace it with the equivalent of the "john wuz here, lol" someone mentioned earlier. I'd almost prefer that monuments didn't refund resources when torn down either, so that it would be even more likely that only eyesores were removed and less likely that Jerklips-the-newspawn didn't tear down a historical one in an empty town so he could make a stone hammer.

[Doug R.]

Agreed, though, most characters won't know they won't get anything back until they tried it once.

[Addicted]

I object to the destruction. So little history remains, this is the only way I can think of. If it's obscene, PD can arrange for removal, otherwise let them be.

[Surly]

I object to the destruction. So little history remains, this is the only way I can think of. If it's obscene, PD can arrange for removal, otherwise let them be.

Believe me, in-game history is important to me. But if people want to destroy landmarks, I see no reason to have a problem with that. History really survives in Cantr through stories and notes, not landmarks.