Huge idea. But I doubt that it can be implemented since it requires immense paperwork and tracking that takes up time which staff doesn't have as it is.
(03-04-2021, 12:49 PM)Connor Wrote: Honestly something like this could be made into a decent idea and potentially be worked into the contested territories system but certainly not in this state. I also think this could involve A LOT of work with very little gain and it'd most likely cause more issues then good.
Exactly as Mr. Connor said and I would like to add that I love the idea
(03-04-2021, 12:49 PM)Connor Wrote: Honestly something like this could be made into a decent idea and potentially be worked into the contested territories system but certainly not in this state. I also think this could involve A LOT of work with very little gain and it'd most likely cause more issues then good.
Exactly as Mr. Connor said and I would like to add that I love the idea
Oh but if we work it out right I think it would be worth it just to jump start the economy alone.
There are definitely people who'd be willing to do the forum side of things. As to activating a siege, now that we have custom POB models, is it possible to yank a station temporarily to replace it with a POB of the same base model? and be like a POB in having a shield, and the ability to repair by using the repair materials already used for POB's. That way each siege would literally be the exact same mechanics of a POB siege, and automatically each time it happens, it creates a high priority supply run for repair materials and shield fuel. If that could be done then each siege would always give the defending side a chance to enlist anyone to help contribute to defense even just by supplying the base using a transport, as well as those looking to fight.
And really the point will not be to destroy these places, but be able to fight over [some] places that are permanent fixtures. For planets just use a model of the mooring fixture. Or set up a duplicate, set up as a POB next to the normal one. But as far as keeping it to only certain zones, I feel that will only keep the horse in the gate. Instead lets just designate some bases as off limits (almost back to guard systems or bases) and keep small safe zones, leaving most the in game world included. This means at worst, if a faction takes losses it can only go so far. They'll always have a place to build back up if players see them as an underdog in need of investment (like forming a new OF to go try retaking its old territory).
That would be perfect really since a siege would have 7 days to bring the HP down to 0, and in that time people could supply it to repair and keep its shield fueled. That seems pretty fair and balanced, giving defenders the ability to repair intead of just slowing down an inevitable loss in some cases. That is why at worst if one side succeeds, the other can counter challenge right away if they have the data to spend and keep a base in contest for a while. And the HP would be reset each time.
I know people will love to hear me say this but I play this RTS Rise of Nations, and in that the cities are like town centers from AOE2, but if you reduce them to destroy them, they don't go away, they change control to the player who has the most military units within the city's zone. If its 0 then it can change back and forth. To actually remove a city you must control it for some time and choose to delete it yourself. You can do that if you fear losing a city to another player and want to prevent its capture. (that game is the real AOE3 by the way). The lesson is the system lets you fight over these places instead of just destroying them. It keeps the game going though, and makes it much more interesting.
In our case this will put the economy on steroids and combined with other changes that should being up every form of activity.
nothing stops you to jointly make a PoB with the opposing faction using FL ID etc. in a contested system, make RP, build history, get custom model.
And then ask Admins to have an event for who takes control and then keep fighting for it. Eventually possibly even making it a canon.
Heck you don't even need Admins - make a PoB with joint effort between e.g. BAF and Coallition using neutral IDs to haul, split costs, agree that at X damage in X time it swaps sides, if damage is not done, defending faction keeps it. Build enough back and forths and story that devs would have no choice but to consider it canon eventually since both Faction OFs agreed on it, made it jointly happen, set the terms and fought for it
This is very simple, you can start right now to work on it - all you need is a joint effort between opposing factions to create something new together, very straightforward and easy to implement, needs no staff approval and just some admin effort if you decide to go the way of plugin events for initial holder of the base decision - good luck!
(03-11-2021, 03:30 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: You know
nothing stops you to jointly make a PoB with the opposing faction using FL ID etc. in a contested system, make RP, build history, get custom model.
And then ask Admins to have an event for who takes control and then keep fighting for it. Eventually possibly even making it a canon.
Heck you don't even need Admins - make a PoB with joint effort between e.g. BAF and Coallition using neutral IDs to haul, split costs, agree that at X damage in X time it swaps sides, if damage is not done, defending faction keeps it. Build enough back and forths and story that devs would have no choice but to consider it canon eventually since both Faction OFs agreed on it, made it jointly happen, set the terms and fought for it
This is very simple, you can start right now to work on it - all you need is a joint effort between opposing factions to create something new together, very straightforward and easy to implement, needs no staff approval and just some admin effort if you decide to go the way of plugin events for initial holder of the base decision - good luck!
Yeah except we can all make better use of our time by opening things up for the whole server. But yes if there were places that were going to wind up under regular siege attempts, I would build a POB or help contribute to any who are helping to secure a place. To me thats even more epic. I would already know the grinding is for something. The other purpose is to add a bright shiney new feature to the mod that adds a new appeal. No one's really doing it the way you described because its not really practical.
Now I'm not demanding it happen overnight but if we could get devs to try it and say we'll try to get it on the go within a month or 6 weeks that would still be fine. The whole rest of the year could be much more exciting.
(03-11-2021, 03:30 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: You know
nothing stops you to jointly make a PoB with the opposing faction using FL ID etc. in a contested system, make RP, build history, get custom model.
And then ask Admins to have an event for who takes control and then keep fighting for it. Eventually possibly even making it a canon.
Heck you don't even need Admins - make a PoB with joint effort between e.g. BAF and Coallition using neutral IDs to haul, split costs, agree that at X damage in X time it swaps sides, if damage is not done, defending faction keeps it. Build enough back and forths and story that devs would have no choice but to consider it canon eventually since both Faction OFs agreed on it, made it jointly happen, set the terms and fought for it
This is very simple, you can start right now to work on it - all you need is a joint effort between opposing factions to create something new together, very straightforward and easy to implement, needs no staff approval and just some admin effort if you decide to go the way of plugin events for initial holder of the base decision - good luck!
Yeah except we can all make better use of our time by opening things up for the whole server. But yes if there were places that were going to wind up under regular siege attempts, I would build a POB or help contribute to any who are helping to secure a place. To me thats even more epic. I would already know the grinding is for something. The other purpose is to add a bright shiney new feature to the mod that adds a new appeal. No one's really doing it the way you described because its not really practical.
Now I'm not demanding it happen overnight but if we could get devs to try it and say we'll try to get it on the go within a month or 6 weeks that would still be fine. The whole rest of the year could be much more exciting.
What do you mean not practical? Just talk to the opposite faction, make a joint new PoB splitting the costs in a reasonable place and then fight for it, agree that at X damage siege stops and it gets swapped ownership.
Anyone on the server can do this, you can start now with existing mechanics. It works well, other factions will follow.
(03-11-2021, 04:16 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: What do you mean not practical? Just talk to the opposite faction, make a joint new PoB splitting the costs in a reasonable place and then fight for it, agree that at X damage siege stops and it gets swapped ownership.
Anyone on the server can do this, you can start now with existing mechanics. It works well, other factions will follow.
Thats so artificial though. And its a lot of work to turn a POB into a purposeful piniotta. If this is the case, dont let me stop you from proving it I guess, but no, otherwise that's not practical for immersion on an RP server. The point is not just to provoke PVP, but all forms of activity, and bring fair order to some player driven story to rp around. To me, thats just not real. We either play an RP game to play along, and care, or not care at all. If this place must stay set up to never care about anything only to avoid oorp fighting, this place is sad indeed. I believe that playing to care about what you're doing is what really made this place special. We avoid it now to avoid fights, and now have a dead server, relatively speaking. Not dead enough to not be saved though.
People were talking about the events team in the other thread and I was going to just say, just make the events team the group that processess such a system? This just gives a format to a player faction driven system to keep moves fair and limited within reason. Then we just need devs to divide up putting the changes in game.
Frankly, without the insurance of a freely unfolding situation (within the rules), people won't have what they need to act with more purpose. That is one of the biggest points to setting it up like that.
(03-11-2021, 04:16 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: What do you mean not practical? Just talk to the opposite faction, make a joint new PoB splitting the costs in a reasonable place and then fight for it, agree that at X damage siege stops and it gets swapped ownership.
Anyone on the server can do this, you can start now with existing mechanics. It works well, other factions will follow.
Thats so artificial though. And its a lot of work to turn a POB into a purposeful piniotta. If this is the case, dont let me stop you from proving it I guess, but no, otherwise that's not practical for immersion on an RP server. The point is not just to provoke PVP, but all forms of activity, and bring fair order to some player driven story to rp around. To me, thats just not real. We either play an RP game to play along, and care, or not care at all. If this place must stay set up to never care about anything only to avoid oorp fighting, this place is sad indeed. I believe that playing to care about what you're doing is what really made this place special. We avoid it now to avoid fights, and now have a dead server, relatively speaking. Not dead enough to not be saved though.
People were talking about the events team in the other thread and I was going to just say, just make the events team the group that processess such a system? This just gives a format to a player faction driven system to keep moves fair and limited within reason. Then we just need devs to divide up putting the changes in game.
Frankly, without the insurance of a freely unfolding situation (within the rules), people won't have what they need to act with more purpose. That is one of the biggest points to setting it up like that.
You wanted contested terrotories and bases. You can do it right now. Only the organizers would take a hit in immersion as they'd need to cooperate. Lower levels in faction and indies would be none the wiser. YOU'd make the story, and staff could turn it into canon eventually. Instead of factions losing existing assets, you jointly create something new and contribute to the region.
You want staff to do the work, but when there's a mechanic to make what you want happen within DAYS - it's now too much work?
BTW I hate sieges, I think they are bad for the game in the long run - but this one, where OFs work together and agree on terms, pool in resources to move story forward could actually make disco better.
(03-11-2021, 05:20 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: You wanted contested terrotories and bases. You can do it right now. Only the organizers would take a hit in immersion as they'd need to cooperate. Lower levels in faction and indies would be none the wiser. YOU'd make the story, and staff could turn it into canon eventually. Instead of factions losing existing assets, you jointly create something new and contribute to the region.
You want staff to do the work, but when there's a mechanic to make what you want happen within DAYS - it's now too much work?
BTW I hate sieges, I think they are bad for the game in the long run - but this one, where OFs work together and agree on terms, pool in resources to move story forward could actually make disco better.
Right but that's not really interesting and it doesn't allow for much regular consistent faction moves, or story flow. I think the POB system simply allows for factions to augment their situation in similar ways we already have. There's nothing wrong with the odd place ending up in the middle of a battle between factions. Its what they'd be doing here if they could. So, yes, I want the staff to spend most of their work regarding the game on operating the game for us to help keep it active and alive for us all. It shouldn't be regarded as a burden, that's the way it should be run.
To me the only thing that's been wrong with sieges is that they are only ever over player owned bases and not the places we all know and use. That is the allure. Let the POB's be on the side. If someone wants to reinforce an NPC base with a POB and a faction has to deal with that too, fine by me. So if a faction did capture a station even despite there being a POB nearby that's still hostile, they could try to deal with that with a normal declaration and siege as well. Or maybe the defenders submit a challenge request of their own and hope the base helps them retake it quickly in the next 7 day period.
But say for your example, if I build a POB to have this match, where do I put it? Anywhere I put it, I'll need to worry about more than just one other faction, what if other factions won't cooperate and attack the project before the base can be built up? Where do I put it so that it will matter? If its just a prop to have a pretend fight over, what reason is there to bother? When, if we put the OF challenge system in place, it will let factions be the outlets for organized changes, and players will know that to get involved they either must form or join a faction.
See, I always loved sieges here, I can fight and have fun without throwing a fit if I lose I guess. The ability to emulate a real situation where a station is at risk is amazing. Players actually help or hinder in real ways. But lately most POB's are of independent IFF's and have no one to help them if they get attacked. Its not a siege, its more of a turkey shoot. Every NPC base sieged will undoubtedly be able to be defended by a faction with caps and people willing to try. We need sieges that aren't so one sided. This system is the only way to get that regularly, and use it to drive activity.
(03-11-2021, 05:20 PM)Relation-Ship Wrote: You wanted contested terrotories and bases. You can do it right now. Only the organizers would take a hit in immersion as they'd need to cooperate. Lower levels in faction and indies would be none the wiser. YOU'd make the story, and staff could turn it into canon eventually. Instead of factions losing existing assets, you jointly create something new and contribute to the region.
You want staff to do the work, but when there's a mechanic to make what you want happen within DAYS - it's now too much work?
BTW I hate sieges, I think they are bad for the game in the long run - but this one, where OFs work together and agree on terms, pool in resources to move story forward could actually make disco better.
But say for your example, if I build a POB to have this match, where do I put it? Anywhere I put it, I'll need to worry about more than just one other faction, what if other factions won't cooperate and attack the project before the base can be built up? Where do I put it so that it will matter?
1) Same as with NPC Bases - you think of a story, reasonable location of a base that would be contested, and set it up as any NPC base.
It's you who suggests that bases should be contested and swap owners - you must have an idea what type of base or planet would make sense for that - make one, simple as.
2) You won't need to worry about the faction - it will be your joint project oorp. You can involve all factions that could siege of course.
Remember - involved OFs are agreeing on this and how to duke it out together - this will be smoother and lead to a much smoother path for the the base becoming canon down the line.
This just needs one thing - Opposing Factions leadership closely communicating and oorp cooperating, coming together for the greater good of their respective factions, house and mutual gain. Simples!
![[Image: rTrJole.png]](https://i.imgur.com/rTrJole.png)
![[Image: LJ88XSk.png]](https://i.imgur.com/LJ88XSk.png)
![[Image: ka0AQa5.png]](https://i.imgur.com/ka0AQa5.png)
![[Image: QwWqCS8.png]](https://i.imgur.com/QwWqCS8.png)
![[Image: JXrTGg2.png]](https://iili.io/JXrTGg2.png)
![[Image: G38aJ6J.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/G38aJ6J.jpg)