Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Invasion Poll
- Thread starter Valiens Nantaris
- Start date
-
- Tags
- invasion
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
[member="Jay Scott Clark"]
Let's not be silly....
Let's not be silly....
ADM. Reshmar
Directorate Officer Fleet Admiral SJC 3rd Fleet
I think you guys misunderstood my meaning. I never said decide on a winner beforehand. Just plan certain things out. But its not important, the way you do things here is cool. I was just offering my insight. Competitive is cool with me, I just have done it both ways and did not find it took alot out of the writing. anyhoo... IM good with banging ships around whilly nilly, sounds like fun.
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
[member="Reshmar"]
Excellent.
Also...it's a wrap!
Wait....
Excellent.
Also...it's a wrap!
Wait....
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
[member="sabrina"]
Not yet...but now people know it's a widespread view they may.
Not yet...but now people know it's a widespread view they may.
L Admin
[gifv]https://i.imgur.com/EkGrvgh.webm[/gifv]
Vexen
Wraith
Can we all at least agree, that "grounding" is never to be used as a term again?
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
[member="Vexen"]
You're grounded.
[member="Tefka"]
Thank you, Tef, your point is duly noted....
You're grounded.
[member="Tefka"]
Thank you, Tef, your point is duly noted....
L Admin
[member="Valiens Nantaris"]
I like some of your ideas, but I still think it should be a decision between Faction Admins, not something to be enforced by any subset of Invasion Rules.
There's been multi-thread invasions before and Staff's never so much as coughed about it. It's allowed already - now, I understand that you're not about "rules" and such, but that's pretty much my own perspective and perception when entering these sorts of threads. Especially when multiple admins of the forum join the fray.
So again I just want to reiterate: I think invasions should pretty much go however the faction admins of the opposing factions involved agree it should go.
I like some of your ideas, but I still think it should be a decision between Faction Admins, not something to be enforced by any subset of Invasion Rules.
There's been multi-thread invasions before and Staff's never so much as coughed about it. It's allowed already - now, I understand that you're not about "rules" and such, but that's pretty much my own perspective and perception when entering these sorts of threads. Especially when multiple admins of the forum join the fray.
So again I just want to reiterate: I think invasions should pretty much go however the faction admins of the opposing factions involved agree it should go.
Nyxie
【夢狐】
The hard part is just getting them all to agree on one method of invasion over the other. I've been an admin in a lot of the major factions here, and I've seen how it can get when it's not just A and B but A1, A2 and A3, all with slightly varying opinions on how things should be carried out.
Some people like the proposals and some people like the way things are now. Some people like grounding, some like fleeting and some like PVP. Some like them mixed and some like them separate. It's one of those ultimatum situations, where there's always going to be times where decisions conflict and always people who will agree and disagree with the policy. That's just the nature of diversity.
Now onto the REAL poll:
"Should 'grounding' become the official term stated in the rules?"
Some people like the proposals and some people like the way things are now. Some people like grounding, some like fleeting and some like PVP. Some like them mixed and some like them separate. It's one of those ultimatum situations, where there's always going to be times where decisions conflict and always people who will agree and disagree with the policy. That's just the nature of diversity.
Now onto the REAL poll:
"Should 'grounding' become the official term stated in the rules?"
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
[member="Tefka"]
As I've said, this is not a suggestion to change anything.
This is giving people ideas so that if they wish their factions can do it a new way. No enforcement involved.
As I've said, this is not a suggestion to change anything.
This is giving people ideas so that if they wish their factions can do it a new way. No enforcement involved.
L Admin
Tefka said:
Valiens Nantaris
Head Admin
Indeed, just making sure the other members understand.
Caius Flavian
Faction Admin - The Galactic Republic
Other
"Fleeting" and especially "Grounding" are very much a matter of "Player Versus Player".
Mass combat is a better term as it suits both Space and ground combat.
PVP is a poor choice of wording. Isn't everything we do on here PVP or PVE? Doesn't matter if we are just two peeps swinging lightsabers at each or two peeps playing intergalactic chess with space ships as pieces.
So because we are all writers roleplaying different characters the term or phrase in this case Character versus Character is a preferable one for myself and shall be used as such for the remainder of this post. All about the mentality. I enjoy this place for the boundless story telling and expanding the universe (despite the all powerful Emperor Mickey Mouse now ruling the franchise, guess that makes me a rebel... *BLAM* HERESY!), but man there are sure a lot of crazy things to sort through on here
TLR at the bottom!
RANT time... wheeee!
Everything is character driven! But there is tons of Mass combat involved in the setting!
Lets look at the movies!
So to start addressing how we can best approach this topic. Is that I think we all really need to remain open minded in how to approach these "invasions" and "dominions" does territory changes necessarily always have to be an "INVASION" we throw our Super Saiyan Force Users against each other and our meta-genius strategist space Sun Tzu Patton von Clausewitz Warlords duke it out in text chess?
Yes I know it is the system we currently have. But dear gods real world politics can make territorial changes occur without having to necessarily fight over every single acre.
Also this idea that territory some how not touching automatically means that part of it just is not part of that country makes no sense what so ever! Look at the very map of the clone wars! Two "MAJOR" factions one of whom controlled vast but disjointed parts of territory.
A system can be "WON" by words, diplomacy can shift a systems political territory with out a single shot being fired (or maybe a single shot is fired... assassins anyone?)
Military campaigns are what truly change territory over time in the course of a war. Maybe an "invasion" this week is a cluster of a thousand hard to sort through posts and next week is a series of threads all tied together resulting in the same damn thing.
I think a few things that can be improved on is making an overall drive or theme of explaining the "WHY?". Keeping certain aspects of developing a structure to the evolving story. We are all writers. Puppet masters of our own characters. Role playing with with other puppet masters. Time needs to taken carefully and deliberately best explain why character X is fighting character Y. Otherwise our little strings get tangled up and somebody gets all flustered and heated and throws the show.
Lastly Character Versus Character will not always determine "who won the territory" just because ALPHA dude has been fighting BETA dude for like a hundred posts and one of them dies from boredom/beheading or something crazy, does not mean they "won" the invasion. Sure they had a great one on one duel, but hell unless the entire "invasion" came down to being decided by a duel between two people. And each side then HONORED said result when one lost and left with the entirety of their military might. In which case, hellz yeah on whoever wrote that "invasion" premise and I would love to read to how the hell it came to such a climatic moment.
Setting objectives is great before hand. One method of keeping things structured that I've found seems to keep a little bit of order in all of this nonsense
Man... I have had a lot of caffeine.
TL;DR: This is collaboratively driven. Nothing needs to be too complex and involves a ready and willing discussion. There is no single method to approach it. "invasions" require constant cooperation in making the story work. To make a truly great and memorable story then the collaboration must be very strong between all the writers. It is all about the story and telling it is the fun we want in the end.
"Fleeting" and especially "Grounding" are very much a matter of "Player Versus Player".
Mass combat is a better term as it suits both Space and ground combat.
PVP is a poor choice of wording. Isn't everything we do on here PVP or PVE? Doesn't matter if we are just two peeps swinging lightsabers at each or two peeps playing intergalactic chess with space ships as pieces.
So because we are all writers roleplaying different characters the term or phrase in this case Character versus Character is a preferable one for myself and shall be used as such for the remainder of this post. All about the mentality. I enjoy this place for the boundless story telling and expanding the universe (despite the all powerful Emperor Mickey Mouse now ruling the franchise, guess that makes me a rebel... *BLAM* HERESY!), but man there are sure a lot of crazy things to sort through on here
TL
R at the bottom!RANT time... wheeee!
Everything is character driven! But there is tons of Mass combat involved in the setting!
Lets look at the movies!
- Phantom Menace - Mass Combat? Yes, like several times over yes. Character versus Character? Yup every step of the way. In this movie we can say we had like a "dominion of Naboo" and an "Invasion of Naboo". Hell we can further translate it into a "Major Faction" the Trade Federation "Dominioned" Naboo. Then the Naboo a minor faction, decided nu uh and started an "Invasion" to take Naboo.
- Attack of the Clones - Mass combat? Yes but only like after nothing but Character Versus Character Driven events. Also because Yoda really knows how to DEUS EX MACHINA.
- Revenge of the Sith - Mass combat? Hells yeah! Did it have an impact on the overall story. Somewhat. Really this entire movie was more character driven and was what ultimately decided the story's results. In terms of actually territorial changes, the CIS was defeated when its leadership was killed. Deactivation of the droid armies left the CIS without a means of defending/fighting for itself. SO in this case one could argue that the entire map was change purely because of Character Versus Character events.
- New Hope - Mass Combat? yes in the form of starfighter dog fights PEW PEW; Character versus Force user? yes in the form of Obi-wan versus Darth Vader; Luke versus Darth Vader (space ace of doom!). Ground Combat? Not so much in terms of Mass Combat but more tactical such as running around the Corridors of the death going "aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh" chasing storm trooper and then running away from them going "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh" and pew pewing. Along with of course the escape from Mos Eisely.
- Empire Strikes back - Fleet Combat? Yes! In the form of a general retreat though by the rebels since the Empire had Void Superiority. Ground combat? YES omgs who did not enjoy the Rebels defending against the Empire's ground forces. Storm troopers FTW! Pew pew! Force User versus Force User? Sure, though not necessarily at the battle of hoth per se where yes a force user did play a significant role of flying around going pew pew and slicing Imp Walker bellies. Again though the plot of the movie later involves Luke and Vader squaring off at Cloud City.
- If we look at just that movie alone we can think of it in terms of different threads. The Battle of Hoth had all the elements we explore here on SWRPC. From Mass combat, to our "heroes/villains" playing a part in everything. Vader in this case was perhaps the overall commander of this battle with Admiral Piett.
- Lastly Return of the Jedi. By the gods this has every single element that every single one of us wants to recreate. From flying around pew pewing at each other to murdering teddy bears/fighting alongside teddy bears. Mass combat in space! Mass combat on the ground! Character versus Character! In this particular case we can consider all those elements taken in separate threads. Luke confronting Vader and the Emperor. Admiral Ackbar fighting Admiral Piett in mass combat, fighter pilots of both sides dog fighting it out, a blend of character versus character while a mix of all the elements of Heroes on both sides fighting. On the ground we have mass combat as the Imperial commanders though nameless are fighting against the hordes of goody to shoe teddy bears and the rebels. The heroes fighting tactical combat as they try blow up the shield generator.
So to start addressing how we can best approach this topic. Is that I think we all really need to remain open minded in how to approach these "invasions" and "dominions" does territory changes necessarily always have to be an "INVASION" we throw our Super Saiyan Force Users against each other and our meta-genius strategist space Sun Tzu Patton von Clausewitz Warlords duke it out in text chess?
Yes I know it is the system we currently have. But dear gods real world politics can make territorial changes occur without having to necessarily fight over every single acre.
Also this idea that territory some how not touching automatically means that part of it just is not part of that country makes no sense what so ever! Look at the very map of the clone wars! Two "MAJOR" factions one of whom controlled vast but disjointed parts of territory.
A system can be "WON" by words, diplomacy can shift a systems political territory with out a single shot being fired (or maybe a single shot is fired... assassins anyone?)
Military campaigns are what truly change territory over time in the course of a war. Maybe an "invasion" this week is a cluster of a thousand hard to sort through posts and next week is a series of threads all tied together resulting in the same damn thing.
I think a few things that can be improved on is making an overall drive or theme of explaining the "WHY?". Keeping certain aspects of developing a structure to the evolving story. We are all writers. Puppet masters of our own characters. Role playing with with other puppet masters. Time needs to taken carefully and deliberately best explain why character X is fighting character Y. Otherwise our little strings get tangled up and somebody gets all flustered and heated and throws the show.
Lastly Character Versus Character will not always determine "who won the territory" just because ALPHA dude has been fighting BETA dude for like a hundred posts and one of them dies from boredom/beheading or something crazy, does not mean they "won" the invasion. Sure they had a great one on one duel, but hell unless the entire "invasion" came down to being decided by a duel between two people. And each side then HONORED said result when one lost and left with the entirety of their military might. In which case, hellz yeah on whoever wrote that "invasion" premise and I would love to read to how the hell it came to such a climatic moment.
Setting objectives is great before hand. One method of keeping things structured that I've found seems to keep a little bit of order in all of this nonsense
Man... I have had a lot of caffeine.
TL;DR: This is collaboratively driven. Nothing needs to be too complex and involves a ready and willing discussion. There is no single method to approach it. "invasions" require constant cooperation in making the story work. To make a truly great and memorable story then the collaboration must be very strong between all the writers. It is all about the story and telling it is the fun we want in the end.