There's a totally different way to go about it all though.
The script kills freedom of action here. Its also why no work has gone into making things more interactive in game. The way the story is driven is terrible with no commensurate events, closed outcomes etc. All because we want a world here where things happen freely but they still have to go someone's way.
Boo hoo for factions who'd actually have to get online to get the empire they want. Here's the new reality under a fair system:
Leeds would have been retaken well before the massive push into NL, the battle would have been going back and forth over the system. Odds are, if players had been able to defend targets and destroy Gallic ones, Leeds would have been fine. Gallia filled a role as a bad guy, so why did the devs insist on the tragedy? again, threw away tons of activity over the years to ensure as many gallic trade lanes and gates got placed as possible.
So Aland would never have happened, since SouthHampton would never have been lost to dev magic. Say they had a battle event over it (which I'm sure they didnt do to avoid players getting used to them having fair events over changes like that), and Aland had happened, if again it had come down to battle, would Bretonia have captured the station? Destroyed Falster? Imagine the fun in finding out! Everyone thought it was a real situation, but it was killed to make Bretonia win, after they were made to lose elsewhere. It makes no sense anymore.
And then of course if it had been realistic they could have tried annexing O49 by again needing to place ships in the system and defend them against attacks, and supply many untis of Marines planetside to establish their presence, all of which would have allowed those opposing the move inrp and oorp to take it out in game.
See we want these wars as backdrops (at least we did) but no one wants to risk losing, ever! Especially the devs and staff that also mainly RP for OF's.
So at the very least, when it comes to wars and military expeditions/incursions, we dont need scripted dictation, we need developers to find ways to set the things up well for players to have fair battles, and actually accept the outcome. No one would have minded if the lines in the war had gone back and forth several times over Leeds, if it was the result of player groups coming and going in strength and activity. Then, of someone had broken through, it would have been as epic and real as it was supposed to seem all last year. In any war, a loss is not always permanent. If Bretonia had gone into 49, been driven back, they could have gone in for another try already. I'd rather see constant back and forth battles than these insta victories for a minory's pre script.
So we could have much better player driven situations here, especially if it came down to war, if the work went into setting up a situation in game. We'd still see balanced and realistic outcomes. But work has to go into that part first.
![[Image: G38aJ6J.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/G38aJ6J.jpg)