[Theoretical] Official Faction Challenge System

[Gardarik]

You don't get it Binsky - this would only work and contribute to the game if both factions agreed on a base being contested. Othewrise it would kill houses and bring even more cancer and hate to the game as was proven many many times in the past with sieges.

And for that like I said - a mechanic already exists - go out and use it.

Well I'm pretty sure I've put a great deal of thought into this one. If you need consent on both sides then nothing will ever happen.

And here is why it's a bad idea - you will be forcing a faction into doing something they don't want and is not fun for them. There will be siege groups that will roll everyone over, and the other side will burn out and lose. People will hate each other. There is zero roleplay going on during a siege, this is a RP server where PVPers are second class citizens anyways, and this would mean pure PvP in game, with just forum RP.

Unless you can find a system where people would willingly want to open their NPC bases up for a siege, this is just pointless.


One way that could work I suppose. Is if the defenders will receive the entirety of Sci-Data if the siege fails. Where both sides will be gamgling on something, not defenders being able to only lose or keep what they had. But either way - this needs to be agreed by both sides

I dont think you get the notion bud. Anyone can fill the side of the defenders, making an indie to any faction is easy. We already promote a system where we encourage any action that comes to a faction to provoke people to join. The point will be that small unpopulated factions can be used as something to fight over. And yes at some point there will be a winner one one side. The point is no one will ever want to just get up and get moving, but a siege here and there will provoke people, and especially give freelancers/BHG more work. No faction will be forced to do anything, but have the option to defend their turf.

Its not about agreement between two sides, its about one side making a move, and that will be countered by a variety of factions no doubt. Yet again you're only seeing monsters and worst case scenarios of people hating each other. We can't continue to keep the place only set up to avoid oorp fights. You cant do this stuff without a bit of forced risk, its the same premise that we base the game on, being able to destroy the other player. What you suggest is equal to only being able to pvp other ships if they consent to a fight. What you want defeats the purpose right away.

Have you heard of deduction? Look at the current POB sieging and put pieces of the puzzle together - defenders' side won't magically be filled by Indies. Firstly, there is nothing in for them. Secondly, it is cumbersome and not interesting for the defenders as the attackers have more ways to cheese their way to victory. Thirdly, the population is small and spread around the time zones. Me personally, if some LR would declare a siege on, say, Norfolk - I won't show up for either of the sides for a very trivial reason - I simply don't play in liberty and it will not be interesting to me. And I know a bunch of people with similar preferences.

Also, RtS you provided as examples before are quite simplistic in terms of economy and devoid of diplomacy, mostly focused on tactical control rather than strategic planning. If this kind of system is implemented without political, diplomatic, financial, administrative , technological, etc etc reasoning and gameplay, then it defeats the To purpose of this system you are praising.