Rules Update Invasion Hex Gain De-buff

[Tefka]

Link For The Lazy: https://starwarsrp.net/ams/faction-war.2911/?article_page=12

Invasions now spread influence up to a maximum of two hexes, down from three.

Reasoning: Invasions have been asking for a debuff ever since we saw their massive upgrades with the "stunlock" mechanic and their buff to 3 hexes for gains. While the argument for the buffs was to "make their impact hit harder", "provide greater consequences" - which I agreed with (and still do, mostly) - the response from the community to this was mostly negative in side-effects provided. The map game has long been one of the biggest draws of SWRP: Chaos, but it's not the only draw - and when hexes and influence begin clamoring for more attention, it dwarfs the "roleplay/immersion/story-driven" experience of the forum. My argument against the narrative crowd has always been, if narrative/story is what matters most, the number of hexes gained does'nt matter. I was asked, on more than one occasion, about cloud-choking a Major Faction with two invasions surrounding the opposing faction's Capital.

This was not intended, and this is not how I wanted Major Faction Owners to think. It's mostly just map mechanics driving this mindset, not fun writing or ideas. I hate min/maxing. When we upgraded Invasions, I wanted the excitement to be there - not what we saw instead. The extremely experimental Annihilation ruleset immediately and hilariously delivered on this, despite strong bouts of doubt, whereas Invasions left me with a bad taste in my mouth almost every step of the way.

Are you writing more to win hexes or are you writing more because you enjoy the story? I think some of us stopped asking ourselves that question when Staff Lord Of War'd ya'll last winters new weapons.

 

[Djonas Val]

Aside from community perception on invasions and interactions between factions, as far as 3 hex invasions go, they were not the cause of 'cloud-choking' or map game mechanics in order to abuse capital positions. This was the cause of factions using Contagious Assault which allowed them to invade an additional Hex after exceeding the 3 hex cloud gain rule.

The most notable and only case being NIO + GA Invasions on TSE's Helgard, Cadomai, Tiss'arhl, and Ziost hexes at the start of the year.

Contagious Assault is already removed, and the written reasoning reading as more to justify the removal of that, coupled with the majority of 3 Hex Invasions not actually threatening egregious capital cutoffs, this is either a stop-gap, or a denial of the reality that pairs of factions did not enjoy writing with their opposition to begin with.

 

[Tefka]

The most notable and only case being NIO + GA

The example used in my reasoning was BRYN + SJC, after Contagious Assault was removed, for clarification.

 

[Djonas Val]

The example used in my reasoning was BRYN + SJC, after Contagious Assault was removed, for clarification.

That's still an issue of inter-factional relations.

As an outsider viewing both these factions, you don't need to read too far into this to see that potential hex loss =/= the change you want.

Whether its to minimize salt or encourage narrative storytelling, even with this change, those factions still don't like each other. Unless Staff is going to prevent factions from interacting with each other, this is a pointless rule change that's not going to have the change you want if they continue to interact.

 

[Tefka]

those factions still don't like each other.

huh okay we just speaking for everyone now lol

this is a pointless rule change that's not going to have the change you want if they continue to interact.

So by this logic, we have entire 30+ member groups of people that log on to Chaos to specifically interact with people they don't like?

...can I ask why?

 

[Zark San Tekka]

So by this logic, we have entire 30+ member groups of people that log on to Chaos to specifically interact with people they don't like?

...can I ask why?

That's a great question Chaos is kind of a weird place like that.

With this rule change and the accompanying fair fight mandate, it would seem the map meta has shifted back from territorial gains to exhaustion tactics. Is this intentional? A lot of us in the community really appreciated how major factions actually faced some risk/consequence for being there. Now that it seems as if factions can expand faster than they lose ground again I worry this won't 'fix' drama wars so much as force them into slow motion.

Salt over feeling singled out for signing up to fight in the map game was inevitable when the rules were changed to make faction death more feasible. Now it seems like the most effective tactic once again is to invade your enemy forever until they give up or you do. We can try it out I guess if there's a strong feeling that the risk of three hexes per invasion is too much too quick but I wouldn't be surprised if all this leads to is the bad old days of either no invasions or openly resentful ones.

 

[Tefka]

it would seem the map meta has shifted back from territorial gains to exhaustion tactics.

Now it seems like the most effective tactic once again is to invade your enemy forever until they give up or you do.

Well, I have said that nobody's ever going to win the map game.

It blows my mind people perceive the map like this. Literally nothing you just said is roleplay or healthy for it.

 

[Zark San Tekka]

Tefka

I don't think anyone is seriously trying to win the map game whatever that means. But some factions exist to attack others. I wouldn't expect a Galactic Empire faction to want to share power, or a Jedi crusader faction to suffer Sith groups to live. That's not a matter of wanting to "beat" the other guy OOC. Doesn't matter to me if I'm the one getting my ass kicked as long as it makes a good story.

There are some of us who feel the shared narrative-friendly competition that is the map is better served when conflicts have resolutions. If it is intentional to limit the scope of those conflicts so they can't be too damaging to an influence cloud too quickly that's fine its of course your prerogative. I understand there are parts of Chaos where we won't see eye to eye, thank you for taking the time to explain your reasoning.

 

[Tefka]

Doesn't matter to me if I'm the one getting my ass kicked as long as it makes a good story.

I like most of everything else you said, but this sentence sticks out as the one that doesn't stand the test of time for a lot of people.

What matters more, story or hexes?

If it's story, then Major Factions will voluntarily write their own demise if it fits the RP.

If it's hexes, we talk about "exhaustion tactics."

 

[Zark San Tekka]

Tefka

Sorry caught up at work. Of course story is most important. Hexes are meaningless sandcastles, but it's my opinion and maybe I'm wrong that stagnant influence clouds lead to a stagnant map narrative. It's more interesting when things are happening, whether that be a big war or some kind of site event or whatever. Granted much of my experience with the map was pre-junctions when invasions were the only game in town for big time faction on faction interaction. Maybe my perspective on this is dated.

Using pro gamer words like 'meta' when you're trying to combat the war gamer mentality was probably a poor choice, and I may be doomsaying about it being a foregone conclusion that factions will behave this way. I'm only basing that on past behaviors during the one hex per invasion era and certainly not advocating for it.

There is something to be said for this 'competition' bringing out some of the worst angels of people's nature, I don't mean to seem oblivious to that. If staff feels this is necessary to keep the peace and provide a better environment for the community fair enough.

And for the record, I DID voluntarily write my faction's own demise.

 

[Tefka]

And for the record, I DID voluntarily write my faction's own demise.

I'm with ya, but again I'm talking about the community as a whole. If everyone was chill, the world would be perfect and we'd all see Chaos the same way as the guy who built it.

What faction are you talking about btw

 

[Zark San Tekka]

Tefka

The old Galactic Alliance. And yeah that's a fair point, I'm just uncertain if this will have the desired effect at quelling toxicity and don't think we should be favoring sore losers with the rules just because the sore winners are insufferable about it.

Not that I have any kind of say but let's try it out and see what happens I guess.

 

[Tefka]

don't think we should be favoring sore losers with the rules just because the sore winners are insufferable about it.

The community, which includes all of those people, had like 7 months of 3 hex invasions to show me they could treat it responsibly, and be chill, and prove that it's all about story and the hexes were only motivating it.

And now it's gone.

The community will take this new chill atmosphere we've been experiencing the last few months and keep it going through the Invasion season, or I'll hit it again with another regression, and we'll be back in this thread complaining again about all our views of Chaos and how we think it's the right one.

 

[Konrad Harrsk]

“the response from the community to this was mostly negative in side-effects provided.”

Tefka - can i ask what these side-effects are?

And how was the community’s response gauged to have been mostly negative?

 

[Tefka]

And how was the community’s response gauged to have been mostly negative?

3 MFO's were relieved of their positions, 2 of your NIO Faction Staff members posted crazy person announcements saying "defiance against Staff", we had almost daily exhausting reports to the SWRP Staff Team, I've been asked for Administrators to be present in MFO deliberations, one leader asked "whose dick do I have to suck to get a fair shot" after losing his first invasion ever, I personally sat in on pretty much every deliberation myself and saw a leader accuse another of lying with zero credibility or evidence to his claim, there was this guy in NIO who said ya'll were being gaslighted after I blatantly called out your leadership for bringing private OOC consequences on an RPJ the day of an Invasion result. For which the individual has still hidden behind the cloak of anonymity, instead of owning his mistake and taking the heat off his faction's leadership.

This is the last time I'm repeating down these lessons learned, lol. I know we ain't forgot 'em, but they're specifically why the toys are getting taken away reduced. Almost all of them happened situationally close to or in direct causation of an Invasion. The poor sportsmanship, the constant lack of leadership and accountability, the Pandora's box of crayola. All of it revolving around Invasions.

In a year that started with Invasions getting the biggest buff they've ever seen, I can't ignore the obvious causation. A clapback was always coming.

 

[Konrad Harrsk]

3 MFO's were relieved of their positions, 2 of your NIO Faction Staff members posted crazy person announcements saying "defiance against Staff", we had almost daily exhausting reports to the SWRP Staff Team, I've been asked for Administrators to be present in MFO deliberations, one leader asked "whose dick do I have to suck to get a fair shot" after losing his first invasion ever, I personally sat in on pretty much every deliberation myself and saw a leader accuse another of lying with zero credibility or evidence to his claim, there was this guy in NIO who said ya'll were being gaslighted after I blatantly called out your leadership for bringing private OOC consequences on an RPJ the day of an Invasion result. For which the individual has still hidden behind the cloak of anonymity, instead of owning his mistake and taking the heat off his faction's leadership.

This is the last time I'm repeating down these lessons learned, lol. I know we ain't forgot 'em, but they're specifically why the toys are getting taken away reduced. Almost all of them happened situationally close to or in direct causation of an Invasion. The poor sportsmanship, the constant lack of leadership and accountability, the Pandora's box of crayola. All of it revolving around Invasions.

In a year that started with Invasions getting the biggest buff they've ever seen, I can't ignore the obvious causation. A clapback was always coming.

Nothing of this is caused by invasions being 3 hexes instead of 2 though.

 

[Tefka]

Nothing of this is caused by invasions being 3 hexes instead of 2 though.

It's definitely ok to disagree, nothing wrong with it.

But as I told the poster above, the community was given ample time to demonstrate maturity with the new buffs. Can't win them all.

 

[Kara Moonlighter]

If you cannot handle writing online on a forum with people you hardly actually know without a freak-out about invasions and other things, you are probably not mature enough to handle this hobby.

 

[Okkeus Dainlei]

Wanted to ask a clarifying question real quick.

With the amount of hexes able to be gained moved down from 3 to 2, does this mean that the max amount of hexes gained with the "Contagious Assault" mandate is 3 hexes? As the mandate states, an additional neighboring hex can be added to the invasion. But with this nerf to invasions, I was unsure if that mandate had changed at all, or still have the same rules applied to them, just with a reduced amount.

 

[Tefka]

Contagious Assault is current remaining unchanged, which means with it, you can hit 3. Before, you could hit 4.

It's not currently on my radar, as we're going to roll with these two attacks of mine on the PVP game and see how it rolls. Community chills out and doesn't repeat last cycle, it stays unchanged.

Systemic toxicity perseveres because people care way too much about hexes and W's, more people will leave, Contagious Assault and other PVP aspects get rolled back.

Contagious Assault has been removed.