Suggestion Fixing Ally Rules & Improving Invasions

[Tathra Khaeus]

This was a suggestion floated in the Major-Faction discord channel that I put forward and was then asked to put up here for everyone to see. So here it is;

- Ally rules as they are, are not currently being enforced for a reason and are also broken. Why? Because they are easily bypassed.
Ally rules were initially put in place to stop people from joining Invasions willy-nilly because regardless of what anyone says, numbers matter.

I've had the personal experience of a more evenly numbered invasion vs a very uneven one. The more even one had more emphasis on the writing capabilities of the individual writers that Invasions are supposed to be won by.

My solution for this, was enforcing set amounts of writers that can be involved in Invasions. I know the immediate alarm is that people can drop out and that it will exclude people.

Yes, people will be excluded. But our very own victory conditions talk about who wrote things better. The more writers you have, the more chances you have to get it right or better. And our old ally rules were intended to stop a massive imbalance in invasions. Inclusion is secondary to fairness.

Likewise, with 'smaller scale' invasions you could just have multiple. Larger scale battles across a few star systems, that way nobody is excluded but also each individual Invasion is less of a headache and more of a cohesive story. Plus that's just more true to Star Wars.

Obi-wan, Yoda & Mace weren't at EVERY major battle. This gives the opportunity to give spotlight to those who normally wouldn't or just, whatever really. It provides room for diversity whilst still keeping things more fair in this supposedly competitive environment.

So, the proposition is this;

Invasion writer counts can go up in intervals of FIVE; 5v5, 10v10, 15v15, ect.
If a Faction has 12 and one has 14, then it'd fall under the 15v15 category.
Allies would be dictated by this;
5v5 gets 2 allies
10v10 gets 5 allies
15v15 gets 7 allies
20v20 gets 10 allies

What this will do will force allies to be allies, otherwise a Faction that has its allies joined as members, will have to decide between their actual members and allies filling their Faction slots rather than their Ally Slots.

I would also propose [because I know there will be people who disagree with the enforcement of this, even though it definitely should be] that this system, is an opt in. Similar to how the Bounty Toggle works, a Major Faction can 'toggle' into this ruleset. Any Faction that has opted into this must abide by the rules of the it.

The defending Faction in an invasion decides whether this ruleset is something they would like to use. It is not up to the Attacker.

 

[Jacen Voidstalker]

Invasion writer counts can go up in intervals of FIVE; 5v5, 10v10, 15v15, ect.
If a Faction has 12 and one has 14, then it'd fall under the 15v15 category.
Allies would be dictated by this;
5v5 gets 2 allies
10v10 gets 5 allies
15v15 gets 7 allies
20v20 gets 10 allies


What if one faction has 17 and the other 5?

 

[Caden Evesa]

Jacen Voidstalker has nailed my thoughts on this entirely. Purely and simply it's not going to work between a big faction and a small faction, not in the slightest.

I don't see how this fixes anything, just confuses things.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Jacen Voidstalker

Well, in hopes of fairness it'd be a 5v5 or if the smaller faction felt up to it, a 10v10.
In that case, the larger faction need not worry as because of the fact Invasions are smaller and less stressful, they would hopefully happen more often. Or the larger Faction could just invade the smaller one at the same time, thusly doubling the number of members they have involved.

Caden Evesa
How exactly are you confused?

EDIT: It would work because the factions would decide between themselves what limit they set. And frankly any Major worth its stripes shouldn't be scared of a fair fight.

 

[Luna Terrik]

This essentially handicaps a faction for being big. They would have to pick writers and tell others they're not allowed to write because of this rule, excluding them.

A no from me.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Luna Terrik
It's certainly not a handicap, exclusion leading to fairer battles is better than what we have now.

By a long shot.

I'd also disagree on that count as I'm sure all Factions have threads for different members or private threads for certain people or groups. Part of how you're seeing things is because Invasions are so rare that everyone jumps at the chance of involvement.

If you make Invasions smaller and less stressful, then the hope is they will become more common. And that chance of involvement is more common, thusly you don't need everyone in every Invasion. Do people feel excluded from private threads? I don't think so.

 

[Jacen Voidstalker]

Tathra Khaeus

You're basically saying:

MAJOR FACTIONS CAN ONLY BRING AS MANY MEMBERS TO AN INVASION AS THE SMALLER FACTION HAS AVAILABLE

That's a much, much bigger deal than any suggestion about ally sizes. Almost hidden under the topic of allies. Like, ten times more important a suggestion and game changer.

People join the map game knowing the risks. I can get behind limitations on ally sizes, as difficult as they are to enforce, but not handicapping large and successful factions for being large and successful.

 

[Njal The Black]

I can agree with this. Having a reasonably good balance of writers would help alot with story cohesive, as I have written for small factions being invaded by large factions (which on top of a writer quantity difference, was alt padded like crazy) and ended up having Wyatt Morga write again over 16 Sith writers.

Suffice to say, it wasnt fun.

Additionally, having a set number of writers for an invasion could certainly help rpjs workload in regard to invasions.

The only downside I see is it would limit "lesser" or newer writers to the sidelines in most wars, never really seeing a chance to write in those wars. Arguably, many are sidelined in alot of capacity already, so I dont think it would be too different a system since you can make non judged invasion threads concurrent with the main judged one.

I think its a great idea tbh.

 

[Caden Evesa]

Tathra Khaeus

It's less confusion and more like, I don't see the point of this.

Look, I agree that the ally rules are broken, we both agree with that. This isn't the way of fixing it though mate, cause at the end of the day you're going to cause a problem with factions and infighting over who takes part and who doesn't.

Luna again has summed it up. You're handicapping big factions just for being really big. You're forcing people to pick what writers take part in invasions and I very much don't agree with that. Invasions should be open for everyone and it should be up to the factions taking part to set ally limits, we don't need official rulings if major factions work together.

We both know mate that major factions are gonna choose the clique writers. We know that, it's how Chaos has always worked. 99% of faction members would never get to write in these invasions cause it would always be the cliques that get involved.

At the end of the day small factions know the risks and getting into the map game is an acknowledgement of this.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Jacen Voidstalker

Why do ally rules exist? To avoid the inflation of numbers on one side.
To keep things fair.

Why am I suggesting limiting writer counts for invasions universally?
To keep things fair.

Also lets be clear large and successful aren't synonymous. I agree that if you join the map game you know the risks, I do indeed agree.

But, regardless we should endeavour to make these competitively won Invasions fair for factions of all sizes. That, is more important than.

I would also echo what Njal The Black has said, it would lighten the workload for RPJs. Why is this relevant? Invasions get judged faster, you get to have more invasions. It will be at that point up to the Major Factions to decide internally who takes part.

Caden Evesa

I want to put forward that what you're suggesting would happen; infighting is exactly why you're wrong. This rule change would instead of allowing Major Factions to choose to be fair to each other and work together, they would now have to be fair to themselves, internally.

If you think putting the focus internal will cause infighting, then why do you have faith MF's would be able to work together? That doesn't make sense.

You're placing faith on the writers on the most integral part, which is fairness. I'm saying instead, make fairness enforced and make the inclusiveness up to the Factions.

 

[Jacen Voidstalker]

I would split these into two separate proposals:

1) Bring back ally limits based on the size of the factions involved
2) Limit the number of faction members who can join an invasion based on the size of the smaller faction


These are two distinct proposals that could be implemented separately from one another. You are proposing both together and 2 is slightly hidden inside the ally proposal. The fact that they are both under your view of "fairness" does not make the rules changes intrinsically linked.

You'll get much more support on #1 I think. Tying it to requiring #2 is likely to a much stronger pushback in my opinion.

Invasions have got much, much smaller over the years.

 

[Caden Evesa]

Jacen Voidstalker can we please never let idea two be real.

I really don't want idea two.

 

[Jacen Voidstalker]

If you asked the question:

Would you like to be excluded from your own faction's invasions because the other side is smaller?
OR:
Would you like your invasions to be less overwhelmed by allies?

I suspect the answers would be very different

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Caden Evesa
I've participated in many invasions.

Having a larger writer count for an invasion is straight up an advantage in what should be a fair environment. That doesn't stop the larger Faction from launching a counter-invasion because it has the man-power to run two 10v10's simultaneously with different writers in each.

This is all about making Invasions genuinely better.

Jacen Voidstalker
Also your 2) is not what I proposed. What I proposed was that any Faction regardless of size can decide upon a set amount.

But maybe you're right, smaller factions numbers should perhaps dictate how many people are in invasions. Whatever make the outcomes a result of writing quality not quantity.

EDIT:
Invasions, are won essentially by who writes better. More writers = more chances at it. The map game is indeed a game in this element that there are set factors that decide victory.
Nobody complains when they can't have a 5v4 in any other competitive arena. I don't see why Invasions should be any different just because some people don't get to be involved.

And again, less people involved = less stressful and complicated Invasions. Probably means more invasions.

 

[Luna Terrik]

If quotes could work....

But here's the problem with allowing the smaller faction to decide the number of writers.

Smaller faction is A, bigger faction is B.

A decides to invade B, only having 8 unique writers. In a general sense, 7 of the writers are good, descriptive writers, and theres one less than good outlier.

This creates a 7 to 1 good to bad writer ratio. Just an example.

Faction B has 32 unique writers, but since faction A is deciding how many people can play, can only field 7. Going by the same ratio of good - to- bad writers, they'll have to decide between 28 writers to field only 7. That's wrong.

This has turned into Anti-Big faction, as most invasion suggestions are these days. i don't hate the idea of new ally rules, but as others have pointed out, that is no longer what this suggestion is primarily about.

 

[Jacen Voidstalker]

I said:
What if one faction has 17 and the other 5?
You replied:
Well, in hopes of fairness it'd be a 5v5 or if the smaller faction felt up to it, a 10v10.

Using the terms "if the smaller faction" made me assume it was the decision of the smaller faction and therefore:

Limiting the number of faction members who can join an invasion based on the size of the smaller faction

Are you proposing it is only IF BOTH SIDES AGREE TO A SIZE LIMITATION? If so I apologise for getting the wrong end of the stick.

 

[Caden Evesa]

I would never agree with limiting the number of faction members in an invasion.

I can maybe get behind limiting allies, I can kind of understand. The ally rules are a mess and I've already said that.

But limiting the number of faction members in an invasion is a no. If faction A has 15 members and all 15 of those want to be involved against faction B (with 5 members) why should be limit 10 members of faction A from being able to write in the invasion?

We both know that the 5 members of faction A would be the "clique" of said faction. You're leaving ten members aside and it's not fair on those ten.

 

[Darth Metus]

MAJOR FACTIONS CAN ONLY BRING AS MANY MEMBERS TO AN INVASION AS THE SMALLER FACTION HAS AVAILABLE

No matter how you slice it, this is basically the end result of this suggestion - it's a no from me.

 

[Mig Gred]

Tathra Khaeus My biggest issue here is that it could push new writers out of invasions all together. If you limit large factions invasion writers, new members to thoses factions that want to join might not be able cause you'll end up with the same writers who, in general, are known to be great invasion writers while not only handicapping larger factions for being larger, but also basically kicking newer writers out of invasions unless they join the smaller faction. Invasion rule may need fixing, but this isn't the way.

 

[Rynn Vizsla]

Ever since the ruleset for Invasions changed from PvP Duel wins to the Quality of a Story, the Ally rules have always felt... antiquated and grandfathered to me. So, in my opinion, I'm glad to see that they're disabled - and I hope they stay that way for the foreseeable future. But, aside from that - I'm not a fan of limiting or excluding anyone, regardless of a faction's size. Not everyone in a larger faction always gets duels, or the chance to write with someone from the opposing side. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

I can see why there's a level of unfairness in being a smaller faction getting dunked on by a larger faction, but therein lies the risks of being a major faction. Some are more popular than others, and there's not really anything anyone can do about that - other than advertising and try and showcase how awesome and unique your faction is. That level of unfairness isn't a one-way street either, as the more and more allies a faction tacks on - the more likely they invite a wild card into their midst that ruins their chances at victory.

However, in the spirit of constructive criticism, I saw mention of a similar system to the bounty toggle being used to denote what faction's game for these "Champion fights." Perhaps, instead, it should be a new Faction Mandate. Where every invasion they fight is determined by a brawl between a faction's best fighters, or their entire member base. Now, bear in mind, this is a wholly spitballed idea that needs a boatload of polish, but I think it could offer the best of both worlds - as it would only affect those who've taken the mandate, without changing the present Invasion landscape too much.

It might also trigger that nostalgia factor that a select, vocal portion of Chaos has been hammering on about for a while. #MakePvPMatterAgain. lol