Invasions: The Next Step

[Tefka]

1. With this simple wording change, Invasions would gain three hexes for the attacking Major Faction, and could often result in a Cloudbreak.

2. We plan to make Invasions and Rebellions more impactful as we also plan to make gaining Influence easier and less dependent on the Dominion grind.

Thoughts?

 

[Dhalinar Greystar]

Thought/Question: How is it determined from which hex the influence will be gained? Is it always a straight line or could this example have gone from say..Tanaab and come from a different route?

 

[WolfMortum]

[member="Tefka"]

That could result in a huge amount of territory lost due to the results of a single invasion.

I realize you suggested influence growth being made easier, but for such a potential loss on the side of the defending faction, I'm wondering what their reward would be for winning the invasion outside of keeping their territory.

As of right now, it's a single hex we're talking about which is fine, but a cloud break can cause quite the change to the map. I feel like there needs to be as large an incentive for the defending faction as there would obviously be for the attacking faction who could potentially wipe half of a factions progress from the map.

Otherwise, would there be a means to rebel said invasion in order to regain the territory lost?

 

[Atlas Drake]

I support this idea.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

​Also, is gaining influence gonna be easier yet still dependent on how many people you have?

​This isn't to say, Major Factions shouldn't be sprawling & active. But, if it becomes easier in practice to gain influence; there should also be a harder level of quality control.

​This should be to help more niche ideas blossom, more interesting narratives get bigger spotlights through having more avenues available than the eventual burn out given by endless dominions, not to help massive groups quickly gain a chokehold on the Galaxy.

​Also, how is this ease of influence gain reflected in-world? It makes sense for a conquering army to spread quickly, not for a democracy or confederacy.

​Just be careful to make it easier, not lazier.

 

[Luca Donskoi]

As much as I enjoy invasions, especially with the stories they drive and getting writers that wouldn't normally write with one another a chance to interact, I'm going to have to agree with [member="Veiere Arenais"] on this. This proposal gives way too much incentive to the invading faction. Now if something is added where, if the attacking faction loses, they lose up to three hexes and the defending faction gains them, then maybe i can fully get behind this idea. But as it is worded in this proposal, I think there is a lot of work to do in balancing it out.

 

[Scherezade deWinter]

I love it.

How would it work for Major Factions who have the Contagious Assault mandate? Could they create two 'trails' or is this limited to one?

 

[Dhalinar Greystar]

Because Chaos' map game isn't inherently competitive the scales don't need to be balanced. War is not a game of checkers where everyone gets the same amount of pieces nor do they move one after another. Sometimes you get tripple jumped with no way to tripple jump yourself. Sometimes they just flip the whole board over and say screw your niceties.

I'm all for it


[Also I wanna see a contagious assault six-hex cloud break]

 

[Elpsis Kerrigan]

I like the invasion proposal. These territory clouds need some sort of counter, aside from several factions hitting one faction with multiple invasions (which can be avoided via mandate now). Right now you lose territory and you can get it back very easy, unless you get ganged up on. The fact that potentially a lot of territory could be lost in an invasion is a good thing in my book.

 

[Coci Heavenshield]

Quite an exciting idea. Like Elpsis has suggested, small major factions can counter this with mandates, continue to expand, so they would be protected against complete destruction.

Maybe, as a suggestion to the call for more balance or fairness, if the invading faction looses the invasion they forfeit the (one) hex from where they launch the invasion? that hex is not given to the defending faction, but allows for it to be Domed by either faction.

 

[Darth Athora]

Approved.

 

[Malok]

The invader in me likes this beyond words. Like, I'd kiss you if you didn't have ramen breath right now @Tefka.

However comma, with this invasions become low risk, high reward. You can nab up to three with zero risk? We've gotta balance that a little imo.

Suggestion:

If a major faction successfully defends against a multi-hex invasion, the number of hexes becomes the number of months the aggressor is locked out from targeting the defender.

Or something like that. Thoughts?

 

[Ugohr Poof]

However, with large potential losses of territory, the risk for toxicity will increase (at least past a certain point). As much as changes could be needed, any fix shouldn't make the game unplayable.

The invader in me likes this beyond words. Like, I'd kiss you if you didn't have ramen breath right now @Tefka.

However comma, with this invasions become low risk, high reward. You can nab up to three with zero risk? We've gotta balance that a little imo.

Suggestion:

If a major faction successfully defends against a multi-hex invasion, the number of hexes becomes the number of months the aggressor is locked out from targeting the defender.

Or something like that. Thoughts?

A mechanism that would make both IC and OOC sense, such as this one, would be preferred of course, but balancing is undoubtedly necessary. Let's not forget that multi-system attacks are IC much more intensive logistically on the attacker than attacking a single system, and any attempt at balancing should reflect that.

That said, higher risks could also mean that there may not necessarily be more invasions than before. Now, would that defeat the purpose of that change, or not, I would say that it depends on a lot of factors that may or may not be out of the scope of the change.

 

[Ryan]

Get rid of cloud breaking

 

[Ryan]

Suggestion:

If a major faction successfully defends against a multi-hex invasion, the number of hexes becomes the number of months the aggressor is locked out from targeting the defender.

Something along those lines would work awesome.

 

[Tefka]

with this invasions become low risk, high reward.

The setup, the time allotted to the preparations, the Factory subs, the negotiation with the opposing Faction Admins, the approving allies, the time spent organizing the thread's location and objectives and not to mention the updating of current player movements and IC interactions that may affect the entire field.

Invasions are low risk...? Sounds more like they require a metric ton of time and effort to conduct, all on the chance you'll succeed.

Besides, it's basically just a video game

 

[Tefka]

Get rid of cloud breaking

We can't, or invasions will mean literally nothing.

 

[Tefka]

the risk for toxicity will increase

I'm personally okay with this. I've never negotiated with toxicity, and I'm personally a fan of how loss and tragedy can create good stories if people would just lean into it rather than clutch their valuables.

 

[Malok]

[member="Tefka"]

"Sounds like" is a far cry from what it is. It's not that hard to launch and manage an invasion. (#GitGud) The only "risk" is when the suggestion forum gets invaded as a result of a thread. But anyway.

I've deposited my two yen, do with it what you will.

 

[LT-137]

​

-​

​

With that aside, I like this. The potential for great war-time stories and the invaders being fatigued from a lengthy crusade through their opponents territory?

*Grabby Hands.*​