Main > World

what makes stable borders 'stable'?

<< < (3/3)

Clockeye:
I have a theory about borders.
IMO, the influence of the capital is lower the farer you are from it.
This means, the cities/villages on the borders don't care that much about war, which creates a very
wide areas of grey land everyone's fighting for. There would be no way in that destroyed world to
protect such a wide area. The borders are just there to mark which cities respect which way of living, but outside the borders?
The Yeshan city could be surrounded by Angleans, but it'd still be Yeshan, becouse iceman can't breach their wall. That's why the
war doesn't change the borders, and just gets resoures to one side or another.

Helios.:
that might have been tue before teh flight of the icarus changed everything. the advent of airfleets means that control can be WAY better maintained than everyone walking or even riding horses or cars. we know that the chaledonians for example have a contract keeping hanat safe, and its on the other saide fo the map. i think its not abtou as much distance eating away loyalty, but so many powerful nations who will be leery and scared if one nation starts eating up neutral territory. also some of the neutral cities are incredibly well fortified. anvala for example is on top of a mountain with huge walls with the best gunners in the world protecting them

Clockeye:
Well then, maybe the borders are then stable not beocuse of distance, but becouse it's much easier to defend against airships than fight from them?
Like, imagine making a turret with 6 lumberjacks on it. Perfectly stable, since on the ground.
I guess the fights could be fought over smaller villages and outposts, but the boders still remain stable.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page