Roleplaying a base takeover

[Binski]

http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=106358

reposting this to an idea similar to this one. I do also like the idea that instead of total destruction, 'victory' could result in an IFF and affiliation stance (temporarily) say, for a day, blocking the losers from using that base (assuming they could in the first place)

---

The Further Exploits of Captain Antares (August 2015) │ (alt) JonasHudson
*Argo | Special Operative ID (Approved Request)* | Argo Compilation Video
################ *Proposed OF Challenge System* ################
############### The Book of Piracy (Piracy Tutorial) ###############
############### Binski Alamo (Youtube Channel) ###############

[Trogdor]

Premise is flawed. What if the defending side knows it can't win? I would rather see my base destroyed than have it transferred to someone else. What's to stop them from simply dumping out the base and letting it rot, or shooting it themselves? (And then probably ragequitting the mod)

What if the attacking side has no interest in defending the base, and does the same thing after they take control?

No, there's even more potential for hurt feelings and QQ here than there is already.

If I wanted to play a game with stakes like this, I would play EvE.

---

[Scumbag]

At least two conflicting factions that agree to do this

That's one of the prerequisites. I love it when people post without reading, it just shows their character you know?

[Trogdor]

At least two conflicting factions that agree to do this

That's one of the prerequisites. I love it when people post without reading, it just shows their character you know?

That means it will firstly have to be aproved by the admin and developer teams. Preferably the story line dev.

Sorry, I guess between this part and where you said a money sink was needed, I assumed that if it was admin-approved the defenders had no choice in the matter.
I don't see why anyone would go through all that work and then voluntarily put it at risk, either. As I said, the other faction could just tank it, giving them no opportunity to recapture it.

---

[puppytaste]

I like the idea a lot, but with some past experiences with 50,000 marines on a POB working for a..... 'unofficial faction' (not to diss unofficial's, but I cant think of a forum friendly thing to say here) I doubt it would work so well. Unless the attacking faction had mucho sufficient RP (a barge full of marines, guns, military vehicles and at-least 200 nukes onboard) and the OK from server admins to do such a thing. It could work if out of the three involved parties (attacker, defender and admin) only two needed to agree to it (really only the attacker and admins with sufficient RP approved by the council of admins and a jury of your peers blah blah of course). I say that because a defending faction (esp. the one I mentioned) would never go for something like this. But in reality, if somebody wants to invade your country, city or backyard pool, they don't really go looking for consent before doing it. Hence why its an invasion. I think that this idea could work, but its going to piss off some homeowners as well. Maybe if POBs were actually possible to kill without logging so many ships it crashes the game we wouldn't need to have this conversation. Of course, I would like other options rather than blow up the base's you don't like.

---

[Sarawr!?]

As a counter to the original poster's idea, and in agreement to Troy's "We need more real RP", I would say that the recent [LN] takeover of Freeport 4 from the IMG| is a perfect example of how to begin seeing truly player-driven story elements come into play, as opposed to sitting and waiting for the next mod update.

We had:

1. Both of our factions agreed to and were interested in making this change and seeing how it would play into the story.
2. A few weeks where we (The leader of IMG|, and myself) sat and discussed what would happen, and how.
3. We had Admin/Dev approval, but they were not -guiding- the events, we (IMG|, [LN]) were.
4. We set up a means to have in-game events surrounding the takeover, as well as forum-based things to show the after effects and political situation and such.

All in all, in my opinion, there's no reason to make a whole big mechanical process in order to accomplish changes similar to the [LN]/IMG| FP4 battle and takeover.

All we need is motivated players who are willing to actually roleplay and Admins/Devs who are willing to give the players more chances to have an effect on story developments (i.e, the endorsement of a limited form of "dynamic story" that changes based on player/faction activities).

One of the main reasons why the FP4 event was able to be a success, was that both parties had a vested interest in making it happen, and the "Story" was interesting. Additionally, it was also able to happen because we didn't have to sit and wait six months for the change to be given the "Okay".

The long waits are a big big big reason why people lose interest, in my opinion.

---

[LN] Recruitment | Rachel Baker Bio

[tothebonezone]

The long waits are a big big big reason why people lose interest, in my opinion.

Don't have anything productive to add, just need to quote this for extreme truth.

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=202684
Time left: (Permanent)

[Scumbag]

Main reason for this proposition was that battleships need a reason to exist in this mod. Right now they are just a big target. Shooting stationary objects would have been a good reason for having battleships. Cause everyone says that's their main purpose.

Like i said before, do what you wish with this idea.

[Pancakes]

I agree with the ability to take-over a base in the manner that happened with LD-14 and Westfallen, but not in the proposition you've made, sorry.

---

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD

[Trogdor]

Main reason for this proposition was that battleships need a reason to exist in this mod. Right now they are just a big target. Shooting stationary objects would have been a good reason for having battleships. Cause everyone says that's their main purpose.

Like i said before, do what you wish with this idea.

IMO Bs's primary role should be killing either cruisers or other battleships (or try and be some hybrid between the two). This is the most logical role. Cruisers are the next smaller doll in the nest, the next smaller fish in intergalactic Shark Shark. If you have the biggest powercore, you should have the biggest guns, the longest range.
It's silly IMO that cruisers can both outrun and outgun a battleship. Saronsen had a good idea in his other thread to give BS long-range, high-speed, moderate-damage, slow-rotating turrets that are pretty much specifically designed to snipe cruisers at cruiser mortar range. You could also use them against other ships in long-range fleet engagements if the enemy is foolish enough to charge at you in a straight line.

I'm not necessarily opposed to base takeovers, but if you're going to do that, you'd better make bases take significantly less effort to build (and be easier to destroy), so that losing one isn't quite so soul-crushing.

---