As you know a lot of faction are growing with capships, Including mine
But in my opinions and from other players (Not naming names)
find that there should be done against overpower each other in battleship wen a faction go's to battle against another
here the idea
1. A faction is allowed to have more battleship/cruiser/gunboats what the faction desire, Except for going to battle
2. If a faction go's to battle against another faction, They are allowed to take 1 battle ship 2 cruiser's or gunboats and for fighters unlimited (except for arranged battle between faction agreement)
3. As for hiring merc's it is allowed to join a battle with a faction, But only in fighters
Battleships could be allowed (except for arranged battle between faction agreement)
This is a partial of the idea that i have
PS: Keep this please on a adult level (Means no flaming)
Well actually there is a standing agreement between HF and SA. And even though neither one of us obeys it. The agreement was no more than two battleships in one engagement. Now factions at war should have some rules of engagement to ensure fair play. And also if a faction no longer desires war there should be some kind of Admin protection to keep those people from having to fight them. I mean if one faction no longer wants a war, and the other faction continues to launch attacks. That looks to me like harassment. I think this is a good thing to delve into. Rules of engagement and the like, or basically requiring factions to hash out an RoE if they want it.
Well, HF mostly plays by that. But SA says "Well, these are Freelancers that just joined along, so they're not technically ours."
We just have to shut down all the loopholes. However, I don't think it's right to create a rule of thumb about faction conflicts. It's different per-situation.
I am a long-absent Supreme Commander, Executive Commander, Grand Admiral, Fleet Admiral, and Captain in the mighty Hellfire Legion. I have returned, and am on an urgent mission from Drake Thastus to return the Legion to its former glory, and to claim the galaxy for its own. Only then will I be able to rest.
RP Story (Still deciding whether or not to finish)
That's why we need a comprehensive RoE hashed out at the beginning of a war. Basically an agreement of war. And remember we don't even follow our RoE. One of the rules was no lopsided battles...and we have attacked en masse a few times. Although we do often fair better when we have less fighters as opposed to more.
This is to be debated by those who are more well versed in fleet battles then myself but I must say that I support Vtech theory. Whether or not it is practical I do not know.
I do agree with John. I feel that major factions can work out what are the conditions of battles that can be decided. If there would be a problem, then a neutral moderator / admin can step in and give their input. This should just eliminate another rule that will bog down our admins...
--- " I might not be much help, but by God, I'm all the help you got" ---
EFFIN' ROLEPLAY GUYS ... off to flood we go for that - Hoodlum
Even though most factions try to do this, many fail. I know a lot of factions that were mostly fighters and that tried to keep it that way, but they end up getting more and more cap ships to counter the other factions that had mroe and mroe capships.
I think that even only 2 battles per battle is a bnit much. Shouldn't a fleet just have one battleship as its flagship. And yes, RoE need to be ironed out before war, otherwise you end up with an RP mess that quickly deteriorates into an occ flame-fest.
Well this sounds like a good idea to me, as for the HF/SA war Tank whether or not we continue is your decision also we should re-write the RoE because in the first war it worked pretty well. but Vtec has come up with an excellent point.
![[Image: Panic2.jpg]](http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x2/RonG777/Panic2.jpg)
![[Image: qvsigaz9.gif]](http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m37/Quintinius-Verginix/qvsigaz9.gif)
![[Image: sig-9566.jpg]](http://www.clintonio.com/sig-9566.jpg)