That said, I don’t think the mayor position should be tied to the prestige system anyway, but your point still stands; the beacons closest to the nearest network will receive the most ‘thumbs up’.
Then again though, I’d have absolutely nothing against people liking a portal network like @Jeffrotheswell’s. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if it got the most ‘likes’ anyway.
I was just thinking out loud, but yeah - maybe scrap the objective idea and go with something more in line with what @james suggested.
This mean that inhabits in settlement is not incorporated in who is major in the settlement, it is decided by foreigner player.
And maybe its not the player that build the biggest building that is the best mayor, Maybe it is the player who mine all good material, or collect food to the town or the best fighter that protect the others, but they live in small huts and never get any high prestige.
If you have a prestige system for builders, you need to have a prestige system for hunting, mining and so on, for all the other class that help the city to survive.
So split prestige from mayor and use prestige to show off good building worth seeing.
Mayor can be selected by a token (1 time crafted?) that you put (anonymous) into the ones beacon you want to have as mayor.
If he misbehave you can take your token out and favor some one else.
I am not sure what the benefit of be a major will be, but today it is new mayors every day, it look a little chaotic.
I’m not entirely sure what the purpose of Mayor is? Perhaps just rename it to Patron or Highest Benefactor? Top Contributor? Or just do away with it entirely and keep the list of players and their contribution ranks.
Leaders can be selected within clans, but organic settlements should remain democratic in my opinion.
The Mayor of Therka Market technically hasn’t changed since the system was implemented. It’s been @SWProzee1 the entire time. It only looks like it’s changing because he renames Therka Market and adds a Mayor name at the end.
