I was tootling around Leeds in my privateer the other day and I came to the conclusion that although the system is on the front line of the fighting between Bretonia and Gallia, it really didn't feel like a conflict zone at all. It was more like a ghost system. I didn't even see any NPC ships.
My idea is this: Why not declare frontline systems like Leeds to be open warzones for pvp? By that I mean, any ship of either warring faction is free to engage any opposing ship without the usual RP restraints of having to engage them in conversation first? Basically, it's a KOS system. If you're in there, you're a fair target to enemy tagged ships and vice versa. The usual rules would apply on defeated players having to leave the system etc, though maybe reduce it to an hour r even less to keep the action going.
My reasons for the suggestion:
1) A conflict zone is meant to have conflict. It should feel like a warzone. There should be skirmishes, raids etc going on instead of a dead and sterile empty system.
2) /Conn is ok for pvp, but allowing players to fight freely in a warzone brings it within the bounds of RP.
3) It would create some squad level RP as factions organize strikes and raids amongst themselves.
4) It would bring new life into some areas.
5) Any player could create a character for either warring faction and get some combat practice in without the oorp /conn system.
Ok, now on the subject of RP and specifically the server rules about engaging without first interacting; this should be ignored in a warzone. There is no reason whatsoever to engage a known enemy vessel in chit chat before you attack. The RP comes from coordinating with your own allies and/or high command etc. So there's no reason to enforce that rule in open pvp. It's unrealistic. In over a decade of military service and with several combat actions under my belt, not ONCE did I attempt to engage known hostiles in conversation. I was too busy coordinating the actions of my platoon. That is how it should be.
Now, I know some of you are going to say that technically a system like Leeds is already an open PvP zone, as is just about any other system. I am merely suggesting slight changes and relaxation of certain rules to encourage combat where combat really should be taking place. Players who frequent Connecticut could bring their fights to the warzone. They still get the combat they want and at the same time breathe some life into an area that should have more than it does.
And before I am accused of being a PvP whore who just wants to over-ride RP with PvP, I would point out that I avoid PvP like the plague as I suck at it. I have never used /conn and I prefer to RP most encounters I can't avoid. All I am making here is a suggestion that I feel would flesh out a certain part of the mod.
[BAF patrol enters Leeds system, locates some GRN players]
BAf: Mission control, we located an enemy patrol, moving in to engage.
BAF: We count 4 vessels, we can take them on.
GRN:Quoi?
BAF: Weapons hot, targeting leading vessel.
[Engagement occurs, minimum rp given]
It's not insta engagement, but it's not that hard no?
You just have to do some written rp, doesn't mean it has to be "extending courtesies to your enemies" rp.
It doesn't matter if you allow people to stay silent pre-pvp, or be required to write novels before they engage; without real inscentives to attract players there you won't see an increase in activity.
Basically your suggestion probably wouldn't change things. In fact it might drive people away from the area.
True Lyth, it might. Though it's a tough call to drive people away from a system where nobody really goes to, as there seems no reason to. I have been in and out of Leeds (for example) all week and am invariably the only guy there. It's possible that my suggestion just might actually attract people too. Hard to say either way without trying it or more input. Also I believe the incentive I pointed to was the chance to fight within the bounds of game lore and RP and being part of an ongoing conflict. Some people want to pvp, we know this. Why not use that to enrich other areas of the game?
It could be that certain times are set aside in an area for pvp. Like a server event. That way the players you think would be put off from the area can still access it freely the majority of the time without fear of destruction.
The issue isnt about pre engagement RP as peregrine seems to think.. I knew people would pounce on that. Sure we could take his example text there as a 'minimal' RP approach. I would query the wisdom of telling your enemy which vessel you are going to target of course. I find that OORP myself. Military units of opposing forces don't generally tend to broadcast to allies and enemies alike on the same frequencies do they? That RP could just as easily be carried out between pilots of the same faction as I said. It's obvious you would be going to engage the enemy, you dont need to tell them. That's what you do with enemies. In fact the majority of the time, you would have no idea if your enemy was planning to engage or withdraw until they actually make the move. Like I said in my op, the RP can come from coordinating with allies just as well as enemies. That's a small personal point based on my opinion. I am just proposing an idea to make a conflict feel like a conflict. As I said, it's just a suggestion that popped in my head and I thought I'd share it.
People will only fight for:
1) activity hub - place that is guaranteed to have people in. Ex: 4.85 Omicron Minor, NY.
2) mining spot - place you go either pirate or to defend the miners.
3) Chokepoint - There just isn't any way but for players to converge on one another eventually.
Now, a battlefield system like let's say Omega 5...
It's not some faction homeworld to warrant constant presence of the locals
It has no mining fields
It can be easily bypassed and connects to literally everything
This is why LN-RM fought over Hamburg and Texas, rather than skirmish over useless Hudson. Solve the above problem and you will get activity in places like these.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
SIGNATURE![[Image: 5tZIDB3.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/5tZIDB3.jpg)
![[Image: Zb5JDj3.png]](https://i.imgur.com/Zb5JDj3.png)
![[Image: E9d8RnV.jpg?1]](http://i.imgur.com/E9d8RnV.jpg?1)