Suggestion Invasions: Capital Hex Suggestion

[Malok]

For the most part, invasions on the board have become both a close and long-range affair. Factions, despite not sharing a border, can reach out and touch each other with fire and death from across the map. However, one hex is immune to this style of invading: Capitals.

I'd like to suggest an amendment to the Capital Hex immunity that would be dependant upon a faction's borders. In brief, if your capital is exposed/on the edge of your space, it can be invaded. If it is not, then it will enjoy the typical immunity.

Spoiler: Example

This would have the affect of incentivizing the "shoring up" of ones borders - and would give warmongers a chance to actually defeat an enemy faction in full via Invasions.

What do you think Chaos?

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Sounds good to me.

But I'd also note this is will make larger Factions able to destroy Minors much quicker. If this rule was put in place I'd extend the Minors immunity to dominions to up to 2 months instead. That way they can build at the very least some layers of defence from invasions.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Basic idea is neat, but requires more work. What if the Major Faction in question completes the dom/s to surround its capital hex in the period of time between invasion announcement and invasion start? Why is it still safe if another faction borders it? For site staff, What happens if the capital planet falls?

Also, do note that with the current map, this makes the following factions open to having their capital hexes invaded: TSE, TGI, TB, and if their Major is approved, EE as well.

 

[Malok]

Great questions! Scherezade deWinter

1. Then the hex can't be target for the invasion. Keep in mind Dominions can't just be completed, they do have to be approved by staff so it's a roll of the dice if a hail Mary Dominion works.

2. It isn't, it's only if your own cloud is adjacent to the capital.

3. If a capital planet falls, the major faction picks a new one - that's standard procedure actually.

4. And that's a-okay. It'll give factions a reason to be strategic on the map all the more, give them a reason to build around their capital. That, and new majors have the one month Dominion immunity so they can easily cover their capitals in their first set of Dominions.

All in all, doesn't seem like it'll hurt anything, or make more work for staff.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Thanks for the answers!

Need to add TR to the vulnerable list then.

 

[Ettiene Kharne]

Also, do note that with the current map, this makes the following factions open to having their capital hexes invaded: TSE, TGI, TB, and if their Major is approved, EE as well.

For this particular point, new Major factions already have a buffer time before they can be invaded (currently a 30 day period from approval as reference in Rules here). While this drives a major faction to tailor their early dominions toward more strategy of protecting their, capital the times a brand new Major are invaded immediately upon their 30 day buffer is very uncommon. I definitely understand your point here, but just wanted to point out that there are some things to prevent a brand new major from being immediately run off the map.

Currently, the Grayson Imperium cannot be invaded by anyone and should the Eternal Empire be approved, they, too, would not be able to be invaded for a full 30 days after approval unless they were to launch an invasion first.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Ettiene Kharne New Major Factions may start with up to 3 hexes, which means 2 out of the 6 that surround their capital hex. TO get the 4 within the 30 day grace period, they can only use two specific mandates or leave it open.

Something to be mindful of.

 

[Ettiene Kharne]

Scherezade deWinter I definitely understand that, and I'm not trying to approach this as if it's perfect. At the moment, this seems to just be an initial stab at an idea with the effect of trying to put more emphasis on the actual map game from the way I see it. There's definitely the opportunity that certain things can be tailored with this to provide more balance, and in turn, more fun and competitiveness to the game.

Tathra Khaeus 's suggestion in his response to this earlier is something that could be explored as well as it is a very valid point.

 

[Ettiene Kharne]

No suggestion is ever going to be without flaws, which is where having it in the open like this is fantastic. It allows everyone to voice an opinion and offer ideas that might make the suggestion more feasible and ideal to implement

 

[Malok]

Hypotheticals can go on forever - typically, it isn't newer factions that are targeted right out of the gate as the court of public opinion is very disapproving on the matter.

That said, the average invasion takes a full month to announce, launch, and receive judgment on. And that is if the factions involved do not agree to an extension as many do.

In the rare scenario that a new major is invaded, they would still have time between the immunity phase and the completion of a first invasion to further shore up their borders in my opinion. But again, this scenario is supremely unlikely on today's board.

So I don't think that extending the major immunity window is necessary, only because of how rare new majors being invaded off the bat is. For the most part, they won't be invaded unless they throw the first punch. And in a big way. Killing off new factions doesn't do anything for the board overall - every MFO knows this.

K Kaine Australis Tathra Khaeus Scherezade deWinter Ettiene Kharne

 

[Malok]

K Kaine Australis

If there's an underlying fear of minors going major, then that's something that we should address as a community - separate from this suggestion. Maybe make a new thread and we can dig into what's going on?

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Ettiene Kharne I honestly don't know why further 'emphasis on the map game' is required.

Malok I'm wondering who this helps though, who does this ultimately benefit? And its not everyone. We should try to find ways of waging war that isn't equally just a way for those on top to stay on top. As you said yourself, the average invasion takes a month. It would take someone OOC years to take down the CIS, TSE or SJO. I think this is a far greater issue, the way invasions are Is heavily restrictive in terms of the ambition one can have.

I don't think something that is a benefit for larger groups and a detriment to smaller ones is the way forward.

 

[Valencia Hadley]

Counter suggestion:

If a faction gets down to a single hex (currently could not be invaded) - have the rule amended to state that if that faction wishes to be involved in an invasion (launching one or having one launched against them) they must have their hex parked against the other faction's hex. Touching borders in order to have interaction.

Risk it all for the gold, n' what-not.

 

[Ettiene Kharne]

Tathra Khaeus , Would this proposal not benefit in the ability to take down a larger faction if you could target their capital hex sooner? I definitely see your concern, but hypothetically speaking, if this proposal went through right now, to significantly alter that field of play on the map, it would take the following:

TSE: 1 invasion (Capital of Bastion currently sits on a border hex and would be able to be hit right now if this were a thing)
CIS: 2 invasions (Capital of Geonosis currently has a single hex buffer so if 2 invasions were won against the CIS, its territory could significantly alter)

Just is those two listed there, that illustrates the 2 largest factions on the map being vulnerable. And let's also remember that it's not numbers cater to a win in an Invasion. Instead there are 4 guiding criteria for judgement: Participation, Tension, Story and Drama. And there is already evidence of factions with smaller numbers being able to win Invasions against Factions with larger numbers.

Thing is, no matter what way you slice it, there are going to be pros and cons to any idea. And it's through suggestions and other threads that we can iron things out and make them even better.

 

[Malok]

Tathra Khaeus

This would certainly benefit anyone who is interested in the Invasion portion of the map game, large or small.

As stated in the OP, invasions on the current map are just as much across the map as they are adjacent. When the board was far younger, invasions were only launched when factions were adjacent - the current rule is a testament of that time.

Regardless of faction size or longevity, it is an impossibility to actually defeat an enemy faction if your clouds are not adjacent to one another. Amending this rule would make it so that major factions do have the actual possibility of defeating one another overall.

This is an amendment that would benefit any faction that decides to go to war with another - not just large ones.

And I agree with you regarding the ambition point - and that's definitely something we could explore as a community. I don't have any thoughts laid out well enough to present as an idea, but if you do please by all means!

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Regardless of faction size or longevity, it is an impossibility to actually defeat an enemy faction if your clouds are not adjacent to one another.

That would wholly depend on your definition of "defeating". You can win an invasion against another faction that does not neighbor your, as the CIS has demonstrated several times now.

However, there is no guarantee that even if a faction loses its last hex, it's "defeated". This has never happend before on Chaos and the site staff, last I asked them about it directly, don't know what they're going to do in the event that this happens.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Ettiene Kharne It would not as, per Darth Metus' own statement all that would happen is that the Faction would choose a new Capital. Standard procedure. So ultimately this does nothing but make Minors more vulnerable.

Let's also remember that numbers definitely do affect wins. Only Factions who know what it feels like to have to worry about numbers know that, such as Factions that cater to more niche ideas such as Chiss Ascendancy once did and now my own. Numbers affect everything including the four evaluation methods of Participation/Tension/Story/Drama.

Why? Because not having to worry means your muse isn't under pressure. When you don't have the numbers, you rarely have the muse and very often fatigue is what will come of it. Because, Invasions don't exist inside a bubble and neither do their events. Majors will smaller member bases have to put in double the effort to get through Dominions and Activity checks, their members are already pushing hard. Invasions are an undertaking in of themselves and can apply pressure and can be stressful for newer groups.

Thusly, numbers may not strictly matter on paper, but they affect everything that is considered part of the evaluation process.

I think ultimately any further rulings should be in the favour of less excisable ideas and groups that, because when it comes down to it everything is a numbers game and those who wish to be more creative, ultimately suffer as consequence.

 

[Tefka]

"Numbers matter" because Factions > one person. Numbers have always mattered, in the real world and beyond.

It is known.

However, there is no guarantee that even if a faction loses its last hex, it's "defeated". This has never happend before on Chaos and the site staff, last I asked them about it directly, don't know what they're going to do in the event that this happens.

They usually capitulate, but I don't remember ever being asked and responding "no idea", lol. They'd likely just be offered the chance to go Major again, to pick another 3 planets, and go for it.

However, as it's been proven several times, it's so much easier to take the morale of a Faction and cause them to capitulate then it is to actually take every last hex.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Malok , well said.

I think perhaps a way to also solve your issue would be less emphasis on numbers. Do you need 15 people on either side in an invasion thread to show scale? In current times we invade whole systems, but only represent it on one singular planet and rarely with on an appropriate scale. Current invasions don't properly represent war nor are effective in waging war against other Factions. I think to me that means invasions fail OOCly and ICly.

Perhaps something akin to a 'Sector Campaign' would be better? My suggestion being that we could simplify invasions whilst also making them larger in scope and easier to handle and less inclined towards salt.

Have maybe smaller threads as part of a Campaign where each side agrees on a set amount of people taking part. This way you can have Invasions with 2 writers on either side, or 4 or 6. As many as you'd like. You don't need any more than 2 or 3 or Chaos' excellent writers to represent a massive war, this also would give them time to do so as the pace would be much calmer. This way, you can have multiple invasions going on at once as part of a Sector Campaign.

This eliminates the stress and confusion of large groups of people all in one invasion, and allows particular members to take the stage and develop epic stories whilst maintaining a Factions intentions. It also makes Invasions more accessible for smaller groups that can more easily co-ordinate and allows smaller Majors to partake.

On the other hand, you'll have multiple slower-paced and more effective invasions that will also be easier for Judges to come to a verdict on. Then, at the end of it when you win you get a much bigger prize and a more effective showcase of warfare that is at the same time more accessible and fun for those to wish to partake.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

Perhaps something akin to a 'Sector Campaign' would be better? My suggestion being that we could simplify invasions whilst also making them larger in scope and easier to handle and less inclined towards salt.

Have maybe smaller threads as part of a Campaign where each side agrees on a set amount of people taking part. This way you can have Invasions with 2 writers on either side, or 4 or 6. As many as you'd like.

I'm all for reducing stress, but I don't think forcibly keeping your faction members out of threads is the way to go about it. If you have five members that want to participate would you really want to tell 1-2-3 of them to stay out of a non-private thread? I would definitely not.