Discovery Gaming Community

Full Version: Discovery Faction Battle System
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Faction Battle System (Ruleset)


This is to propose we add a system of rules to the forum that would govern the 'macro' activities of the Houses and sub states. They would effectively turn all of the Houses and sub states (some factions) into active 'entities'. This was already done somewhat during the Gallic war, keeping track of battleships and battlegroups. This system however will break down the situation so that more complicated backdrop events can occur, within a system that keeps them making sense and balanced, and will allow for a new level of RP that will hopefully take the lead in influcencing where and when pvp occurs, and how other non pvp roles may fit in to participate.

1. Step one would be for all houses and factions that have npc cruisers and above to tally all of their npc warships. All of these warships would be able to be moved by the faction upon request for the next patch, to keep them moving around at regular intervals if desired. Some small factions may only want to move a cruiser around a system, but a house, especially if at war, would have a navy it would literally have to split to cover its territory. Covering territory by having ships within the area would add to the value of the ships. I'll use Rheinland as an example. If another war broke out, it would divert X battleships the faction leaders deem appropriate to take up a new formation. Remember these ships are all mobile bases as well so they bring with them spawn points. Later I'll go into more detail on how they cover bases from siege.


2. Step 2 would be to make all of those ships 'mortal' by giving them limited HP. Proposed numbers:
Cruiser - 400 million HP (like current core 1 POB)
Battlecruiser - 700 million HP
Battleship/Carrier - 1 Billion HP

These ships could be attacked by anyone at any time. Even during peace time, a house navy's ships would be vulnerable to random attacks (terrorism) from insurgency groups looking to just take a bite out of their enemy, even if just for show. Maybe they plan to pick away at a ship slowly. Regardless, a new situation of strategizing around having and eliminating NPC battleship/cruiser bases emerges.

Which means an 'industry' around repairing and maintaining them can also emerge, and around the need to keep track of base status. That is, in conjuction with step 2, Repair ships would have to be programmed to work on those mortal NPC bases. In theory, if a Repair ship added 10000 health to a damaged object, that would allow them to repair up to 36 milliion HP in one hour, if uniterrupted the entire time. So that makes keeping up on wear and tear from the odd attack by newbs or terrorists fairly simple, and also allows for a group of repair ships to try to keep a besieged npc capital ship alive during a battle, especially during the lulls.


3. Step 3 would be to hammer out the numbers surrounding houses and their fleets. Each house must determine how many warships they need to cover their territory. Whether from war or not, low ship count means a house may want to make more. That requires a shipyard, and that requires a consumable commodity combined with time. Meaning, for now, we could even just use SciData (example 200 units) could be needed to make a new battleship, and they could be pumped out at a rate of 1 BS per construction moor at a shipyard. So big shipyards might even be able to make 2 ships at the same time, if you have the data. Then we can put a time limit on it, like 2 weeks. So that means every 2 weeks, the average shipyard could 'make' 1-2 capital ship, as long as you had the data to spend as well. 2 weeks is just a suggestion. It seems reasonable that within that time, a faction/house heavily involved in conflict may also lose that many ships.

From there each house and state would work out how big an NPC fleet the should have. GM's and devs can work with faction leads but on average lets say each house has around 10 battleships (which inrp would be main battleships) and a few other BC's or cruisers. So if some are lacking, the navy factions can get moving on making more. Limits can be set oorply so there isn't a huge imbalance. However, if a house wanted to build up ships to their max for an attack (invasion) that should also be possible.

As from here, the point will be to allow on some level, the houses themselves (councils of factions that vote at least) to decided on how to best defend their territory.

The other purpose of the capital ships has a seconary and actually more important purpose than just spreading guns to a new area or a spawnpoint;


4. Step 4 Covering Bases would be to include in the rules set that all bases and planets MAY become siegeable, IF, their house or faction's battleships are all removed from the area. Meaning if a house wants to stop terrorists factions or enemy militaries from destroying, capturing or sieging their colonized planets or civilian bases or non-ship military bases, they would need to keep a battleship in the system, within 10k of those bases.

Example: If during the Gallic war, when they invaded Leeds, they would have had to have moved several Battleships into the system first. Then, stations would only change hands if they were sieged, and that can only be an option if the battleships are moved into range.

They would have had to move at least 1 battleship up to the planet Leeds (within 10 k) to consider it under attack (or bases in orbit) with no defending npc base ships remaining.

In a 'war' in this case, the other side deploys its ships also to the area of the planet to block the siege as long as they can. The planet (or base) would not become mortal with an HP bar until the battleships were moved up to the planet, and one side knocked out the other side completely. Once you get your ships in range and alone, you can then siege with player ships any base/planet within that 10k. So if Gallia sent a fleet to the planet, Bretonia did the same, the Gallic side would have had to take out all the Bretonian ones before moving to the planet. It also means that even if Bretonia just jumped a bunch of ships into the system, if they can't move beyond that point until next turn, they have to wait to move to the planet. The siege isn't blocked anymore but they can still move to try to hold the territory.

The entire situation looks like this; houses have their navies, and use them to 'cover' their civilian and other military bases within their territory as best they can. In the event all covering ships are 'taken out' by enemies, those bases then become able to be challenged over. When a move is made to advance Battleships on a target, if not covered by allied npc capitals, the target becomes (switched by GM/Dev) mortal. This is why a house would then need to spread out its ships, and consider the reprecussions of wars. Where one front opens, other ares are left un-covered. Unless planning was done in advance to spread out battleships. Sometimes, even if a ship can't cover a base, it can be moved at the next turn (I imagine smaller weekly or bi-weekly patches for ship movements and adding HP bars to bases). So if a house is at war, and only 2 Battleships cover its rear border, they can still be moved around to cover territory periodically as they move back and forth. In most cases, to siege a planet or base, a faction will need to eliminate 1 military npc capital ship first.

The point of all of this should be fairly clear! This will hopefully create much more situations that should generate a great deal of attention and activity. It also turns the server into a much more 'living' place. The houses would have more thing's to do, more purpose. For those in house military factions and who RP as government, their roles would start to involve juggling fleets to cover territory so enemies can't just roll up and siege the civilians or planets, they would need to take out the mliitary battleship first. Then, if its taken out, a house can order a move to replace it, but that takes time. The whole game then evolves. If an insurgent faction like Unioners or Hessians took out a Rheinland Battleship, unless Rheinland already ordered a replacement when it started to look grim for the BS, the bases it covers would then be open to siege as well. Remember that nothing would stop players from using superweapons and player ships to attack the RM ships nearby. If they can take them out quickly in advance, that might be the time to move on a base or planetoid. Then, they'd make RM unable to send ships to block their siege when they made the move, or at least unexpectdly add a week or two to their reinforcement time. It will make keeping your battleships operational very important!

5. Sieges of NPC bases: The point would not always be to 'destroy' a civilian base. Say Unioners or Hessians wanted to attack Bonn station. If no battleships or cruisers are within 20k, and the insurgents moved one of their own capitals ships within range, the base would be open to siege by them (all of thse moves would be considered by devs and the move to place their ship from its last spot and open the base for siege could be done at the same time). If they could pull that off, they could roll up and start causing damage. Now, even if not destroyed, if they succeed, Bonn could be left to go 'dead' undockable with no weapons working, and be left there like that until repairs could be made. Repair ships can work on dying stations, but to 'revive' a station should require a supply event, and that could be similar to those already done. Ship in X amount of resources to the base or nearby 3rd party base, and it could be given X million HP and THEN repair ships can go to work on the base.

Capturing stations: So if the Hessians or Unioners took Bonn station down to nothing, and Rheinland had all its battleships deployed to cover other areas, why not just take the station? For this, a simple rule that you must keep at least one capital ship within the 20k range until a supply event could be complete. However, that situation is more complicated, but if they develop should be able to be accomodated.

For the first while though, we can try to rule out capturing stations until the majority of the battle system is familiar to players. For instance, if Hessians did try to take Bonn station with 1 battleship, remember, NPC capital ships take time and resources so you won't throw them away foolishly. As by the time move is made to advance the ship, RM has the option to divert ships to cover the base. If they get there at the same time, Hessians must eliminate the RM battleship before getting their siege of Bonn. Depending player presene, RM may want to only use 1 ship and gamble it will be enough, or send a few so there will be back up to go through and buy time if needed.

Before everyone assumes that we'll just have factions invading each other at random, remember, all factions need to watch out for multiple enemies, and every time you start a war, factions will likely leave themselves vulneralbe somewhere else. Even if this leads to a cold war where sides just maintain a balance to prevent major wars, it would be very cool.

Fundementally, the war part of the game would be like chess. Like chess, factions would think about how to start off, and eventually someone will make a first move.

Planets = Ore Points = Production

This then leads me to my last point regarding Planets. Planets should be given one additional feature of value to add a benefit to the Houses. To create capital ships, we could also have 'Ore Points' meaning to have a planet in your territory under your control means you are extracing Ore and get X points per month per planet. Those points could also be required for deploying new NPC battleships and carriers, meaning even if factions can deploy those NPC ships, if they don't have many planets, their production may be limited. 2 Ore points per Battleship/Carrier needed would add even more to make pumping out ships slower and more serious in nature. If you get 1 'Ore point' per planet or moon, then the value of planets and moons also goes up. Factions may want to try to capture planets in systems they invaded so they can literally increase the strength of their house or faction. They would basically be like industrial points.

Why add this features? Because if a house will lose more than just another NPC base by losing a planet, it should provide more incentive to get involved to fight for it. Keep in mind, the planet capturing scenario may be uncommon for some time, but I still think we should add the possibility to the ruleset, as eventually a situation would develop like that. Factions will also need to tally up their planets/moons.

Planetary Sieges:

I'll draw a reference to the game Star Trek Armada 2 for this. In that game, planets have HP, can be attacked from any angle, and as long as you hit the surface, it counts against its overall HP. I believe we should treat planets just like all of the other bases, and it would basically equal out to a planetary bombardment. Not at the same level as Leeds, but a more traditional military attack on imporatant infrastructure.

The point will simply be to allow fights over planets and moons for ore points. Sieges would only be necessary for colonized worlds, and moons could be counted as long as they are within certain range of house bases. Moons and planets in peripheral zones would have their claims maintained by the presence of bases aligned to their respective houses, which could be challenged by organized attacks and moves of npc bases by their enemies. So, who gets the points goes to who has more in the territory, and therefore who really holds the territory. Systems may be split, and eventually conquered.

This would give us the ability to really manage the environment and the different (more plentiful) things of value that can at least be managed by the houses (main factions) and allow for planets with bases to be fought over in a systematic way.

All the while, factions would be free to use POB's as additional ways to secure planets and moons. Effectively, if pirates or criminals build a POB near one of your moons, if would be fair to say the house has lost its claim to it, and suddenly that small group gets the Ore point. Even if they can't use it themselves, they can sell it to the highest bidder. That means navies and police must regularly fly their space to make sure no one's stealing their resources, and in invasions houses will always prioritize around defending planets (and shipyards).

Conclusion:

I know this is a lot of information and there would be a lot of rules, and a preliminary ruleset will follow. I will draw some paralelles with other games. Fistly, this turns disco into a sort of macro space chess. Yet, each side will be groups of people who will work together to strategize, and because the game is structured so uniquely (jumpholes, jumpgates, tradelanes), strategy will revolve around how well people know the game. The best thing to do will be to ease the community into the new ruleset slowly. This time between the Gallic War and Rheinland-Kusari war seems like a perfect time to spend a couple of months letting new rules and capabilities sink in for both players and devs. I know this volunteers the devs for a great deal of work, BUT, I do believe that if we get moving on the new system, within a few months, we could have a more active and alive game again. That means that as factions get used to the idea of having NPC navies that they can move around (within a structured system so all the sides are on the same footing), eventually, they'll decide on how best to use them. We may anticipate a new major war between houses, yet, under this system, even smaller factions can have more effect than before (as I'd advise allowing NEMP's be used on the mortal ships, as this will speed things up for smaller factions, allow for big acts of terrorism, and in the first while burn out the existing stockpile to cause more trading and scidata mining), and smaller wars may have bigger impacts than before. In total, we can re-invent Discovery Freelancer!. All the while, players can still RP around the events, develop characters, and better decide how to focus their activity.



Proposed rules:

Quote:1. All houses are allowed to maintain up to 10 NPC battleships/Carriers, with 10 additional cruisers or battlecruisers.

2. All NPC ships are allowed to move anywhere in a system within 1 'move', and can only make one move per 'turn' (which is determined by patch frequency, aiming for 1 week minimum intervals for movements). To move to another system, they must first be stationed at a jump point (within 5k). 1 move is required to get them to the jump point, 1 move required to jump to the next system.

3. All NPC ships jumping to an adjacent system must wait until their next move to take up a new position beyond the jump point within that system (jump moves are from jump point to jump point).

4. All NPC bases will become open to siege attack if a hostile/enemy capital vessel of cruiser or above has taken up position at 10k or closer to the intended target bases, and there are no defending allied military npc bases in that same ranged area (area is clear of enemy military npc base vessels).

5. Bases that exist within zones covered by 2 enemy (competing) militaries cannot be sieged until only one side remains in that area (at least 1 NPC vessel within 10k ).

6. Bases that have started to be sieged due to rule 5 will remain under siege even if friendly/allied NPC ships arrive to defend.

7. NPC military ship assets can be produced at respective faction shipyards, after 2 weeks from the submission of the necessary quantity of scidata and Ore points, and a construction moor is open at the chosen shipyard. Factions can roleplay with other factions to build additional warships for them at 3rd party shipyards. Such arrangements are at player discretion and subject INRP Laws.

8. Ore points are granted to planet/moon owning factions each month, at 1 Ore point per planet granted per month. These are not accumulative. If your faction/house has 5 planets, you will have 5 ore points per month max to use. Rules regarding consumtion rates are below. Ore points can be 'sold' or traded at faction discretion to allies and friendly parties.

9. Once a base is at 0 HP it may be left as a wreck or captured by the attackers. To initiate a capture, the faction must file for a capture event to 'reactivate' the base. Base IFF will change to that of the sieging party. Then, they must keep at least 1 ship used in the siege in range to cover the base until it has been repaired to 100%.

10. Consumption rules as follow:

1 Cruiser - 400 million HP - 100 scidata units, 1 Ore point, 2 weeks, placed at the shipyard upon completion.

(remember, a cruiser can cover a base from siege even against a fleet of enemy battleships, but it may not hold for long)

1 Battlecruiser - 600 million HP - 150 scidata units - 1 Ore point, 2 weeks, placed at the shipyard upon completion.

1 Battleship - 800 million HP - 200 scidata units - 1 Ore Point, 2 weeks, placed at the shipyard upon completion.

1 Carrier - 1 billion HP - 200 scidata units - 2 Ore Point, 2 weeks, placed at the shipyard upon completion.

(I also recommend we later add unique abillities to earn, such as the ability to skip turns and occasionally speed up events

This system is set up to allow the maximum of ships in production be as high as the faction/house's Ore Points, yet the true rate of construction is actually limited by shipyards in operation and how many ships it can build at a time, in most cases probably 2. Then of course, the opportunity arises for Navies to make deals with their corporations for additional production outside of military shipyards.

Some of this hinges on how often patches could be done, depending on how many changes are being requested by factions. If patches could be weekly, 'turns' could be weekly as well. Production is likely better at 2 week intervals to make the value of gambling with a losing a ship higher, but movement turns would be more ideal at 1 week intervals. That would mean, in theory, a ship takes 2 weeks to make, and it is placed at the shipyard. A week later it could be placed at a jumphole on the other side of the system, and a week later appear on the other side of the jumphole. Then, another week to advance towards another position.

If a house sent 3 battleships into a foreign territory, and lost 1 after the first week, it could have another there to reinforce that group within 2 weeks if it had more ships just one system away already at the jumphole/gate. 1 week to get to the next system, 1 to get to the battlegroup. All in that time, the player population would be (hopefully) trying to defend the other 2, while eliminating at least 1 enemy npc target. And if it is an invasion to capture a planet or station at a junction, the must eliminate the last military target present to begin siege on the base. Under the proposed rule, enemy reinforcements could still arrive but lose their chance to block the main siege. They still get to move the ships up to help defend the area and their spawn points, and would still need to be eliminated even if they lost a planet or base.

Again, the secondary point of the system, is that not any change is truely finite immediately. Changes will be gradual, and moves can be logged openly so everyone can get their moves in every week knowing what the other side is going to do. And if something is lost, there will be time and chances to orchestrate events by players to lead the charge on their own to challenge for lost territories after the fact.

For one last example, lets apply this to the Omega-49 system. Say enemies of Bretonia want to challenge for the planet. Corsairs faction X sends 3 battleships out. It would take them time to get to the system, so Bretonia would know and also be able to send ships. Then, when Corsairs get to enter the system, Bretonia could decide to keep ships near the planet and bases to cover them, and/or send ships out to the invasion point to block the enemy fleet.

But, it would mean that the Corsairs + allies would not be able to challenge for the planet and other bases unless they disable all of the NPC capitals Bretonia moved to the areas of the bases. It would require GM to be called upon once they achieve that, to set now vulnerable bases and the planet to have fixed HP and be siegeable.

In theory, Bretonia likely has many ships to send to the Gran Canaria area to secure the area. So maybe Corsairs and interested parties build an alliance? Enlist mercenaries? Seek and use superweapons like NEMP's to compensate for less ships. Or they get allies to attack in another region to draw away ships? With this system, there are any number of possibilities that can develop and ways for the players to work towards the larger goals they create. There is also the possibility of expanding to also include the construction of shipyards, and the obvious value of attacking to capture a shipyard. Even if a faction can't generate Ore Points, if another house will sell them, they can still produce warships.

Other examples of ideas I began that lead to this one
https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=108592
https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=167448
https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=165351

I've consolidated aspects of all of these previous suggestions into this one unified system. If elected to be used, I'd suggest we take a month to prepare everyone and allow factions that are active enough to use such a system often to gather themselves and organize on how to proceed. This would also give us time to add the ruleset to the forum and all appropriate administrative threads. There are also going to wind up being added sub rules. I never even went into how to include police in NPC ship production, but that could be left up to House votes.

The hope would be that almost all factions that can produce such ships and move them would also within reasonable time need to replace them as they get consumed from battles. The overall hope is that adding such a system will give the server something new and unique to advertise, and allow us to compete better with more advanced games.
We don't have the spoons for this, man. We're an extraordinarily small, unpaid team who has no system in place for automating the kind of gameplay you want. If you absolutely have to have this level of player agency in a game, the only thing I can really do is direct you towards EVE. Until we have more people and more programmers - and most likely a better engine - what you're proposing is not only impossible, but doesn't simply doesn't mesh well with what Discovery is.
(10-30-2019, 07:18 AM)Durandal Wrote: [ -> ]We don't have the spoons for this, man. We're an extraordinarily small, unpaid team who has no system in place for automating the kind of gameplay you want. If you absolutely have to have this level of player agency in a game, the only thing I can really do is direct you towards EVE. Until we have more people and more programmers - and most likely a better engine - what you're proposing is not only impossible, but doesn't simply doesn't mesh well with what Discovery is.

+1
(10-30-2019, 07:18 AM)Durandal Wrote: [ -> ]We don't have the spoons for this, man. We're an extraordinarily small, unpaid team who has no system in place for automating the kind of gameplay you want. If you absolutely have to have this level of player agency in a game, the only thing I can really do is direct you towards EVE. Until we have more people and more programmers - and most likely a better engine - what you're proposing is not only impossible, but doesn't simply doesn't mesh well with what Discovery is.

Well that's a shame, I've volunteered to help and I believe there are many players here willing to step up to help impliment such a system, any system. It wouldn't have to be this exactly but it would be a good framework. If you need people, we're here. I'm not a programmer but good with logic, rules, forum stuff. Also, as far as I can tell, nothing described requires a new game engine. You guys moved around npc battleships/ cruisers for years and added objects that had measurable health bars in the past (so they can be sieged like a POB). Eve is nice but when I tried it you couldn't actually pilot the craft like in Freelancer, didn't interest me as such, but that was years ago. The rest I described is just a set of rules that could be on the forum. Nothing needs to be automated, devs would just get a list from GM's of requested ship moves or applicable sieges at the end of week and have until the next week to do them and update. One week intervals would be ideal but 2 weeks would work as well. GM's would just have to process the faction moves and verify they are valid under the rules. Perhaps there are some untapped volunteer developers out there still as well.

Personally I believe that allowing more interactive mangement by players and player driven sieges of various objects would give people more to do and keep players busy. No risk no reward! As it stands, I hear players complain every week that there is nothing to do here anymore, people have dropped off interest greatly because their ideas cannot be developed and they get suppressed for similar reasons. It seems to me this place is dying and going to waste and it doesnt seem crazy to me to want to put forth something different for once. This system also allows for players to be the driving force behind the moves, which I figured would be a thing people might be attracted to. Factions would be the driving force, and so people could join factions to get in on that perk.

There's been no announcements about plans for anything new being added, and it seems we're at that point where its needed. We're losing players over silly reasons. We need something new to do that isnt just surface deep, and a few simple changes could possibly attract back players who want to be here but are also at a wall. A system like this would be perfect for Discovery, so I have to disagree on that, seems more like it's years late.. After many years, if something different isn't done, nothing will change.

If there are players here that really wouldn't like this or something like it here, I'd like to hear their concerns. Dischord me if you want, I'm in the main chat TheUnforgiven / Jonas Hudson #7373. But to me, you have a server with people who still play here but population is dwindling for the same few reasons (boredom, lack of opportunities). It seems that there is still a chance to draw back players and attract new players by knuckeling down on something like this. Having said that, this will be the last time/place I'll raise this issue.
(10-30-2019, 04:02 PM)TheUnforgiven Wrote: [ -> ]If there are players here that really wouldn't like this or something like it here, I'd like to hear their concerns.

All of this, but especially this sentence sounds as if you spoke for the entire community. I've seen your posts about this a dozen times and people pointed out to you why your system doesn't work with Discovery. You keep making threads trying to start a dialogue with the community but then refuse to take criticism and counter-arguments into account. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate every effort trying to improve the mod, but your suggestion would be a major change that, if it was possible to implement, should be a community effort. In the end, you don't want to play the battle system alone.
(10-31-2019, 01:39 AM)Burning Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-30-2019, 04:02 PM)TheUnforgiven Wrote: [ -> ]If there are players here that really wouldn't like this or something like it here, I'd like to hear their concerns.

All of this, but especially this sentence sounds as if you spoke for the entire community. I've seen your posts about this a dozen times and people pointed out to you why your system doesn't work with Discovery. You keep making threads trying to start a dialogue with the community but then refuse to take criticism and counter-arguments into account. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate every effort trying to improve the mod, but your suggestion would be a major change that, if it was possible to implement, should be a community effort. In the end, you don't want to play the battle system alone.

Well I'm all for keeping it within the current engine. The repair ships, planet sieges and capturing stations are the advanced parts and are basically optional. I also fear some people think I mean using normal NPC's, but when I say NPC battleship, I mean the stationary ones you can dock on.

And I fully welcome the community taking this and running with it. It's here for public scrutiny. The community and devs can have this concept to do whatever with, even if it only inspires other ideas that make it to the server.
Civil Wars
And Small Faction Conflicts


Another potential benefit to setting up static NPC cap ship bases as solars to be 'destroyed', and attacked in real time, is the potential for cross faction conflict.

In the examples of the Outcasts civil war and the Kusari civil war, it could have added another factor to allow factions to keep the ball rolling against the other, and give them more things to keep the situation active.

So the recent 'almost' civil conflict in Rheinland was a perfect situation. Liberty is also, if you count Rogues, Separatists and HF, also in a near defacto state of civil war for years.

If the capship fleet (static ones) were 'mortal', anyone could attack them whenever. Rules wise it could simply be allowed that any ID can attack those ships. That's right, any ID. That way there's a lot more activity around them, and it opens the potential for a rise in navy/military faction membership. If there was actually something to defend in real time, it might create a situation that recruits players to the 'cause'.

But that means Separatists could actually launch raids into Liberty, attack a battleship or carrier, knock some damage off, and withdraw to RP about it. If they had their stuff together, they could still try to siege those ships without any need to have or move NPC bases around themselves, since you can still go on the offensive with player ships. In fact it would always be better to launch a surprise attack on an enemy battleship before making your own NPC warshi bases move into that system/area, so no one might see it coming until after you begin hostilities. The same goes for Rogues, Hackers (as participants), even the Unioners.

In Rheinland, under that rule situation, another player faction, even unofficial, could form under the RM ID and also begin attacking their own warships, starting a civil war. If all the rules first mentioned were in effect, they could also build a shipyard out of core 5 to earn the right to their own separate ID/IFF and their own capital ship NPC stations (or achieve officladom and the GM's could split a fleet based on RP done). I'm sure it would be reasonably slow, and possibly best done in secret. But, under the system, even a group of unofficial MND or RM players could form up, and begin attacking official controlled RM warship bases. In theory, we could make it so if they knock out any nearby defending RM battleships/cruisers close to a shipyard, they could take that shipyard.

Unioners would be in the same boat. If they could churn out some NPC battleships, and make the moves to move them into Hamburg, and up to Alster Shipyard, that would qualify to make a siege attempt on the station. (if people think the ore points for warship construction is too much, the other option is to let a faction like this with a shipyard simply get 1 capship base per month granted to them, up to their max,, so in 3 months they could save 3 battleship up, or if under attack regularly, get 1 ship a month to replace whats being lost).

That would mean that RM would have to move (order the moves via GM) their own NPC fleet, or some of thier static warships, over to the shipyard to 'cover' it form the Unioner advance. Whoever keeps their ships alive has advantage. If the Unioners took out the RM ship, GM's would then be the ones to clear a siege attempt on the station. Devs would be needed to replace the shipyard with the same model, except its a solar with huge HP like a Core 5, if they can't just give it an HP of a billion or so. Then the game comes down to if the Unioners could stop the RM and allies from taking out their npc base ships. All the while, players are the ones that fill the void on both sides attempting to knock out each other's stations first. Heck, RM could have spies watching Bering, and try to attack a Unioner battleship right out of the shipyard (first place they should be put is next to the shipyard obviously). The game would be on! This is how alliances are born inrp! Houses might actually want to make pacts with others to help each other out eventually.

How many ships Unioners might want to save up for an attack is up to them! They also have to keep in mind, that if they leave their own shipyard un-covered by at least 1 warship, LN or RM could be siegeing them while they attack somewhere else! So really, these attack scenarios come after factions get to really think about their situation. Once they have themselves sorted out and all their loose ends covered, they could try such an 'offensive'. REALLY, in many cases they will be stalemates, but at least there would be big battles formed eventually if allowed to unfold in such a way. Liberty also has other enemies, so like chess, once everyone has their ships sorted out, where they are, etc, it will be a while before any side makes a 'first move'. And of course, there's all the wicked RP in between that comes with it. RP with more depth!

People want the server to have lots of life, well that does it indeed, but yes it would take some work from everyone. The only thing to go with such a change is to advertise to players and potential players that there is a new avenue of time/RP investment going on here. Really it will probably take 3-6 months before anything serious materializes. At least for a while though factions have some reasons to get working on something which usually motivates players to get involved. First there will be a build up for some factions, then some naturally forming attacks.

Now there are some obvious possible problems like factions building up many ships in secret before attacking, and I like that idea but we should probably establish limits on factions based on lore and realistic capabilities. Unioners have a shipyard but where do they get the resources to build? I'm sure there's an answer, but one might infer Unioners could only deploy 5 battleships (static NPC ones) at a time because of their size (not including player ships though, they can still show up with as many player battleships as they like). That way they don't take over the server, as they have enough to cover their current territory, and potentially go on the offensive with some reasonable risk. And, that doesn't stop their players from still going on the offensive against the RM on their own. Maybe they'd want to try to eliminate any RM battleship in Hamburg or neaby systems before moving 2 of their own in. RM might see what they're planning, but if they are plagued by problems elsewhere, they may lose the shipyard for a while! They will also want to build up to their max, and for a House, I think I suggested 10 NPC battleships.

Really I think we're better off allowing these situations to develop and if things get too out of hand, a hard veto by devs can easily stop any unrealistic advances. Hopefully though, if worked out well, and the one I put down does reasonably well I think, it will balance itself out. Factions would for the first while have the jobs of keeping watch over their 'fleet' from random attacks. There's also no reason that once they get pumped out of the shipyard, they can't order them to a secret location a week later to stay safe until they are needed. Or we could add a 'double move' earnable by 500 units of Scidata, which would let you bypass a week sitting near a shipyard, and could just move it to a secret spot right away. Then factions actually would have secrets again! To protect, or be investigated by other factions. Intelligence factions would have things to do again! Navies would have to routinely check their ships for damage and either ship stuff in to repair, or if an effort could be made on making repair ships repair those solars, we'd have yet another sub-industry, like repair companies, able to sprout up. LN could just contact out repairs to a corporation or FL group.

So I'm not saying I like or support civil wars but I still support the idea that adding this new dynamic will give us a lot more to do, and should generate some activity by declare a whole new field of possibilities. No engine changes necessary, just the use of solars, and moving around NPC battleships/cruisers at regular intervals (turns). Normally I hate turn based anything but for these big moves it still works just fine, like it would take X amount of time for the ship to move around anyways. Everything that goes on otherwise is still all real time battling as its always been here.

Everyone should take this system and apply it to YOUR faction of choice, and think about how it might work for/against. What would your chances be? Personally, I think if people hear we've gone more in depth with the sandbox and player driven scenarios, people will feel that drive to get invovled again!
tl;tr
Something to fight for

Posting to bump and underscore the continued need for a more long term/real time approach to gameplay and connected activity.

I'm still of the opinion that a more radical approach is often where a solution lies, in a situation where there's been a status quo for a long time.

In regards to factions, I believe that if we give factions 'something to fight for', it will stimulate activity, and draw players to factions as an outlet to contribute and invoke change. 'Something' in this case, means a greater principle, like maintaining territory and protecting bases. 'Blues' are fine but its the greater military/political situations that are possible here that always drove roleplay and character development. Without a more player driven system, there is still a huge lost potential for a game like this.

That is why I suggested making Capital ship npc bases the focus of faction efforts (maintaining territory/protecting normal NPC bases). Navy and military factions would be most effected, but all other factions essentially can contribute to the situation in some way. Police help navy defend the same territory and ships if need be, etc. Supply companies help bring supplies, construction companies help with repairs where possible. Freelancers join in with defenders, attackers, suppliers. All the while, people consume and generate for the same reasons as always, to get the best stuff they can with their efforts, and contribute towards a real goal with it all. When there is a real goal, the drive to play derives from a more real motivation. Motivation here gets people back online here instead of somewhere else!

Even a lite version of the battle system would be a good thing to advertise in other space game communities, that we'll have factions that maintain capship bases to maintain their territory in real time. Even one battleship base (essentially set up like a core 4 or 5) per system would create a capture the flag situation for almost every potentially disputed system (which is why I suggested multiple ships, able to be repositioned at request of their factions).

Those types of events should always be going on, and ongoing! Allowing this to unfold in real time over longer periods (not just events happening on single days for just a few hours), we'd get that 24/7 real time feel going again here. The potential for [near] real time actvity like sieges/wars always seemed like a great chance to keep activity going 24/7, keeping the player population up better during the lowest points. People would use that time more to trade for money for their combat ships they'd be using more, and in many cases be able to organize for attacks/defense at any time. Again, with the use of bots via dischord, any of these mortal bases could be set up to be monitored like POB's and send out an alert notifying the entire player population that action is underway, giving all a fair chance to jump on and join a side!

I believe that if we create these situations and give some value to the reprecussions, even small gains/losses, it would give more reason to advertise the server as a more active place, with the most player options and opportunities it's ever had. People love space sims, and space shooters, but people seem to want more in the lines of interactivity and real time simulation. All of which also greatly enriches the roleplay, which then has more depth, being more based on real events, and there would be more reason to forming faction ties and alliances.


(11-11-2019, 08:29 PM)Groshyr Wrote: [ -> ]tl;tr

Those who care about the server, take the time to read the OP, and the stuff about planets/ore points, capturing stations, planet sieges can all be sidelined as unessential/get around to it last.

Also, in regards to planet sieges, a more simple option would be to just place enemy battleships adjacent to one another at a planet, and let the winner 'claim' it, if/when such a situation develops.
(11-11-2019, 07:54 PM)Binski Wrote: [ -> ]In the examples of the Outcasts civil war

cough...CR...cough

Stupid and DOA if you ask me.
Pages: 1 2