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!

Discussion Let's talk about fleeting objectives

Caarlyle Rausgeber Caarlyle Rausgeber
Kaeshana and Borosk are perfect examples of where fleet engagements intersected with other stuff in invasions. This is exactly the kind of direction invasions should move towards if they want more people to participate in those invasion theaters.

Right now they just appear to happen in a vacuum, separate from pretty much the entirety of the rest of the invasion, to the extent that they might as well be a skirmish separate from the main thread with how detached they are from the invasion's "main" event.
 
As someone who writes pilots in basically every invasion I do, I can attest to what Zark San Tekka Zark San Tekka said. I'd love to see more emphasis on starfighters over capital ships in some way, and I think that could be accomplished with his presented ideas, including starfighter-centric objectives, limiting fleet sizes (one PC per ship), setting the focus on smaller ships (Which are more realistic for starfighters to engage), and other objectives where capital ships play more of a support role. In the movies and shows the big bad Sith and the heroic Jedi MCs always jump in starfighters if they need to create a big break during a naval battle. We don't really see that level of engagement on Chaos, mainly for the reasons Zark listed and given that, in my opinion, sometimes the advantages that Force Users have in piloting fighters don't translate as well to the medium of text-based RP, as dogfighting can get somewhat technical (Albeit not to the degree of fleeting). That said, I will admit that anything that allows my characters more moments to shine beyond dogfights that well, sometimes feel meaningless given the presence of so many big ships and legions of NPCs, gets a +1 from me. ;)
 
Last edited:
As most of you know I was quite a fleeting fan in the past. Too much, probably, lol.

Stereotypically fleeting was a cycle of:
  1. Fleet A's 'genius' admiral boasts how good they are for a few paragraphs.
  2. Executes a complicated manoeuvre which only the author really understands and which probably needs a 3D map. (No one gets a 3D map!)
  3. Fires 100,000 cannons and confidently expects the enemy to be destroyed.
  4. Takes 10% shield damage and minor damage on one of the 27 corvettes they have in their 40km fleet from enemy fire.
  5. Attaches radically off base musical selection and tags everyone in the invasion.
  6. Fleet B does the same.
  7. The cycle continues.

Now, that's a bit unfair, the fleeting of the last couple of years has been much better, mainly because people want to win story and tension and so actually losing ships happens now more often.

What's the solution? What are better objectives?

I'm firmly convinced as Acaadi Acaadi says that smaller fleets are key. If you've only got a single capital ship it's more impactful than if you have 14 star destroyers.

Integration of other objectives such as pilots or boarding is also important...but most of all talking with your opponents so it doesn't feel like a game of Battlefleet Gothic but a collaborative writing experience.
 
I don't think having 1 ship per writer/character is practical from a storytelling perspective, at least from the attempt to write an overarching narrative in a fleeting engagement, but I do think there is a point where most people try to take on too many ships to actually.. write the people in those ships. That probably depends on the writer and the effort they're going to put into a given post, but I don't think a unilateral each character can only use one ship sort of deal is going to solve the overarching issue so much as shift it to something else.
 

Dasmi Lindervale

Guest
I do enjoy this thread so far.

A lot of good feedback and suggestions.

Limiting isn't ideal but at the same time, given the sometimes ludicrous amount of fleeters on one side of an engagement. Sometimes brimming to a 1v5 where a dedicated fleeter is working with a gereneralized fleet as background while they deal with posturing posts.

And saying that it only did minimal damage when 5 sd's are staring you down from one of those five fleeters is a bit hard to fudge. Especially when you want to have your own outgoing fire to be respected and the damage to be more than just a scratch on the paint.

Fleeting can be fun.

But everyone is a high admiral in command of 10-15k worth of ships and if you aren't one you can't even hope to compete against that if you are brand new to fleeting.

I do like the disadvantage idea also. An electrical fire has broken out and knocked out a system or yadda yadda. Really love the idea.

Communication is absolutely key. If this is supposed to be cooperative writing, then cooperate and come up with ideas and storylines you want to get going. I certainly haven't been around near long enough to be up there on the fleeting roster as some others I have heard of.

But it's getting old, stale, and just boring to write

"I come into the system and address my crew while charging weapons. "

"Yeah, well we were waiting in ambush for you."

"Actually my picket line has advanced long range sensors so they would have picked you up when we dropped."

"Well my carriers launch 30,000 starfighters."

It is daunting to the new blood yes. Because they see this kind of interaction during invasions where everybody is ready on red alert and getting their pickaxe for the salt mine venture.

It paints it in a bad light pretty quickly. As for pilots, I know I have done a poor job of supporting my pilots in the past. Its something in the back of my head that goes -They are self sufficient, and surely the enemy doesn't realize in the midst of this huge group of starfighters that a character is actually piloting.

Very much wrong. And I apologize to any pilots I have left frustrated for that. 'Big boom on horizon syndrome' got me seeing targets instead of potential.

Thats my bit. Im out to go whip myself with fleeting some more.
 

ADM. Reshmar

Directorate Officer Fleet Admiral SJC 3rd Fleet
Hello and good day.

Warning this will be a long post so skip it if you do not feel like reading the mad musings of an old admiral. This is just my opinion based on a very long fleet RP life.

So for those who do not know me, All I do Is Fleeting, generally speaking. Been doing it for 27 years now in one form or another. D6, D20, D100 PC, tabletop, writing. I have seen this conversation play out on a dozen different forums two dozen different times. I fleet because I love it. Yes i have written Jedi and Sith and ground pounders. I killed a barber with fire. and I have written Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlefleet Gothic, Starmada, full thrust, home brews, almost any kind of fleet role play a person can do. For the better part of three decades, I have been doing starships in one form or another. Through it all one thing is constant. It is always put behind everything else in competitive forum roleplay. I as a Fleeting Grognard have accepted this. Long ago and far away accepted it. It is the way of it. Fleeting is not for everyone, not even for most. It takes far more time in planning, preparing, and even writing than most other realms of roleplay. AS a few have stated the biggest issue in fleeting on Chaos now is the size of fleets. Honestly guys and gals WHat is going on?

SO.... Watch the clone was. they had ALOT of dreadnaughts. but they are not used in battle. how many Mandators, Preators, or Procurators do you ever see in a fight in the show? The took 3 Venators to assault a planet with escorts sometimes. The empire usually tasked one star destroyer and its escorts with patrolling a sector. That's usually one destroyer, two or three heavy cruisers, six light cruisers or frigates, and eight to twelve smaller corvettes and pickets. For a whole sector. Most planets had very little fleet support other than pickets and monitors. If they did have a ship in orbit it was usually a light cruiser or frigate and maybe a couple of corvettes. This varies in wartime when intel says "hey we think we are going to get attacked at this place" so you fortify that place with a heavy cruiser or whatever can get there fast. An Imperial star destroyer coming to your planet meant something was wrong. it was a terror ship, a sight that sent everyone away or into hiding till it left. It was meant not to be messed with. Sadly the current fleeting atmosphere has a mile-long terror ship of death as nothing more than a disposable escort for something bigger. In most cases..... I know there are exceptions.

Think of Ships over 2km as nuclear bombs of the 50s and 60s. even today, they are deterrents, not weapons. that is how Dreadghts are used. Yes, there are a few exceptions to this but battles with them in it are very rare and often end in the dreadnaught being destroyed. Big ship are not practical, they are big, crew, fuel, and supplies for these are expensive. A dreadnaught is usually a defense ship placed at important worlds such as capitals and worlds with shipyards. Kuat had 3 Mandators stationed there for defense. They are deterrents that keep people from attacking important places. Of the dozen or so Super Star Destroyers, only Executor really ever did anything other than repel attacks. Yes again exceptions.... but very rare. and most are EU and stupid instances and again most of the SSD's were destroyed or disabled.

Fleets are never gathered in scale like we do on Chaos. The movies have shown massive fleets of ships for instance the battle of Coruscant. It is for cinematic flair and very unrealistic. The Republic had thousands of Venators, over a thousand at the battle of Coruscant in fact. but they also had a million worlds to defend. The Empire had 25,000 star destroyers but again one million-plus worlds. with over a thousand sectors out there to deal with these were spread thin. Yes I know I have pounded on this a bit and it does little for the conversation. I have a point.

We need smaller fleet engagements!

the few times I have used more than 10km of fleet was begrudgingly and only because I was forced to by the fleet limits. If I had my choice 5km would be the largest fleet I would ever use. Fleeting is not easy and the more ships you have the harder it gets. This forces you to be less focused on the battle and your ships because if you lose one oh well I have 12 more. Losing a ship should be a catastrophe. Losing a Destroyer should be the end game for a fleet. it would diminish your battle strength to a point where you have to choose between running and staying to fight extremely crippled in power.

Three Destroyers with escorts should always be the largest fleet you need. speaking of... they need escorts! There is a lack of understanding when it comes to how deadly fighters and bombers are. Your ship is BIG. It is easy to hit. forget electronic warfare or cloaking or countermeasures. A dreadnaught is something you do not need anything to target. Even Cloaked! if one ship in the fleet is cloaked and unless it is sitting way far away from the battle acting as a command and control ship it will be easy to find and target. just look for a place where nothing is at..... Cloaking 3 destroyers has been done but only to move in close. once a battle is on cloaking goes out the window for a ship that size. Frigates and corvettes .... yeah they work with cloaking if used right. But putting a cloaking device on a destroyer only is useful if you want to hide the ship. Fighters will find it, and will unload death on it and there is not much a big ship can do but take the hits. frigates and above can not dodge missiles and torps no matter how good they are at moving. Fighters are kryptonite to cruisers and above. Even with point defense, they are hard to hit. also another thing.... why so many fighters? why do the ships on chaos have so dang many fighters? WHY?!? a 19 km ship had 144. yes, a few had a ton but they are very unrealistic numbers seeing as that many 10 to 20-meter craft would never fit inside them. I make 3d models for a lot of my ships I put in the factory. I have tried to see how many Y-wings I can fit in a ship. it's not many.... a ship the size of a Victory Star Destroyer looking at its hanger can hold maybe 18 to 24 and that is with about a quarter of the ship being open. Yes they have 24 canons and they are ties on racks. that helps but still..... there is no way 72 fighters will ever fit in the amount of space an Imperial Star Destroyer has dedicated to them. I have tried to fit them in the dang thing. Not happening.

That all being said Fighters need to be taken more seriously and feared. Most of the ships in a fleet battle are taken out by attack craft, not capital ships.

Also, Corvettes are sadly underused and not taken seriously. A group of corvettes can take down a destroyer if done right. I took out a Vic II with 3 DP-20s once. was amazing! small battles are always more fun. Corvette battles are amazing and allow you to use real tactics. they are fast enough and maneuverable enough to avoid turbolaser fire if used correctly. They can put a lot of firepower on a target in a fight. Most corvettes have weapons that can fire in every arch. larger ships do not and even though they have much more firepower often a corvette can maneuver into a position where they can bring limited weapons to bear I.E. under or behind them. It seems people just swat them away on chaos and just ignore them. That is sad....

As for what can make Fleeting better or more fun... As stated previously in this thread. Communication! talk to your opponent. make plans, talk about what you want to do, and give each other an idea of where and how you would like the battle to go. You do not have to give away your plan or lose any advantage. This is a story, it is competitive to a point. But Fleeting is far more detail-driven than dualing or ground battles. And it takes an understanding of how ships and weapons and even people work in space battles.

In a battle not so long ago an opponent came to me and asked me if they could ram my ship. They also wanted me to not see them coming even though my initial plan was to see the ships with tech I had onboard some ships capable of doing so I agreed. Just because you have some tech or something that can do a thing does not mean that in the heat of battle it does.

He ramed my ship and I took that and ran with it destroying my entire fleet in a cascading explosion which should have damaged his ships more but hey. YEs you know who you are..... and i still love ya

in closing Guys and gas, this is supposed to be fun. Talk to each other and work out guidelines and ideas for the battle then play off each other. Use their actions against them if possible and take your licks when you can not. In the end, you are responsible for the damage done. by the enemy. we do not have counters or sheets or dice to do it it is about co-operation and good gamesmanship. you do not need to win a fight to win a battle. Also, we need smaller Battles! I will and have preached this for years now. there is a sourcebook that lays out how imperial fleets and alliance fleets are built. MSG me and I will be happy to explain and give you resources.

Again sorry for the long post. things needed to be said. This is just my opinion based on 27 years of playing starships.
 
Last edited:
Without jumping onto a soapbox to reiterate everything that's basically been said - I agree with many points brought up here in this thread. I legit barked THANK YOU at the screen when I saw mention of smaller space battles taking place in Invasion threads. Not every bloody thread has to be Endor or Exogol.

Give me Yavin or Scarif pls.

Grand battles like Endor or Exogol - or even Coruscant for kicks and giggles - should be EPIC events that happen once in a blue moon. There should be plenty of build-up to give them their due, so they're impactful and leave a lasting impression. We won't talk about Exogol, but Endor? That's what I envision pivtol Invasions should be like. That interconnectivity between every aspect of a faction, working against another in the hopes of claiming victory and telling amazing stories. Hrrng!

I believe the onus is on faction leadership and their members from here on out. If the Leadership is making a hamfisted fleeting objective to keep their space writers engaged during Invasions, then that's one of the few issues that need to be addressed. To that end, the Leadership is nothing without their member base. If Space writers are getting the Objective scraps, they should take the initiative and organize something with their fellow faction members - including the opposition - so they can set up something epic and interconnection without having to fall into what space battle sidepieces we've gotten in the past.

But, getting people to talk about things openly is like pulling teeth, and I'm far too idealistic in hoping for such changes. lol

Anyways, be the change that you want to see and all that.
 
I think if more major factors were open to causing damage and havoc, it'd be cool to have fleets in low orbit and really influencing things. Like corvette packs barrelling through and raining hell on some walker spearhead,

And faction Admins have a perfectly valid fear that one person on the other side will control an entire fleet and spend the time countering everything that happens.

They'll constantly apologise to eight members on the other side for slow posting, but say they're busy trying to counter everyone's post at once.

People like smaller, more personal character focused engagements in invasions.

They are right to want this.

Fleet battles can be more story/character driven too, but not if people treat them as some kind of board game. Not if people expect new writers to try and manage 100 ships and track their status making the barrier to entry very high. High barrier of entry, low rewards.
 
And I'm certain, Acaadi Acaadi that should your hypothesised scenario occur, that would show in the invasion judgement against that writers faction as both awful and powergamey. You couldn't feasibly write countering EVERYTHING, because your post would end up being a mountain of boring 'X fired at Y, and then Captain Z bombed checkpoint A'. It'd be just cascading amounts of actions that detract from quality writing.

But that being said, I'm not entirely unsympathetic. It's just I feel as a fleeter, and one of the guy who does it on the reg, is that as a subset niche, we're isolated from the rest of invasions. Insulated from influencing things. No one ever really acknowledges the fleet battles at all. They happen entirely independently and that super sucks. I think if you can have a sort of medium, where fleeters can influence the ground, it can be gucci as and can be healthy for story development.

To bring up the Kaeshana example. That Star Destroyer was deployed to wipe out artillery. And in turn, was dragged down by a weird cult of force users. There's counters on both sides, within reason.
 
The more that fleet battles become "gamified" large scale battles the larger the barrier of entry. The less people writing character driven stories want to have to try and break that barrier to understand fleet battle posts affecting them. The more that fleet battles in invasions, for the benefit of 99% of the community, will be forced into its own Sandbox.

Make joining and engaging in these fleet battles more approachable and then you might bring down some barriers that make your personal wish possible.

Too many people who write in these fleet battles make it a sense of accomplishment and don't want to break down barriers to entry as they see it as some kind of achievement and badge.

The attitude of "I know all 45 of my factory submissions inside out and will rinse this newbie trying to face me in the invasion" has been prevelant since 2014.

Some of the invasions right now are the best chaos has ever seen and this niche is being left behind.
 
Acaadi Acaadi
Except it isn't because the most popular major factions still press for fleeting inclusion in invasions, they just refuse to have creative objectives that go beyond two fleets arrive in system and are fighting in space while the invasion plays out.

If one side doesn't have members who participate in that field it's an auto-win for the entire invasion for the side that committed members there because there is a perception that they were unopposed.
 
Acaadi Acaadi
Except it isn't because the most popular major factions still press for fleeting inclusion in invasions, they just refuse to have creative objectives that go beyond two fleets arrive in system and are fighting in space while the invasion plays out.

If one side doesn't have members who participate in that field it's an auto-win for the entire invasion for the side that committed members there because there is a perception that they were unopposed.

If you have a 40km fleet that looks like the below, what creative objective can you give it other than "take the planet"?

BattleOfCoruscant-EGTW.png


Make it smaller, break the barriers to entry (like having to spend 5 hours studying factory subs) make it more approachable and creative.





Side note: it was worse with the intransigent factory of 2014 with super complicated ship templates.

My first experience was of sneering attitude of superiority from Jend-Ro Quill Jend-Ro Quill and Ayden Cater in a CIS, Omega invasion. Not only were they factory judges with the insider knowledge at the time who had gamed the objectives to give themselves a massive advantage but they enjoyed the insider knowledge too. I'm glad that at least the factory is more approachable for starships now. I persisted, but very nearly didn't.
 
Acaadi Acaadi
Nobody is throwing around 40,000 meters of ships.

And, actually, there are plenty of ways to create objectives that involve even the largest bulk of ships just like there are for all the ground NPC people (which involves infinitely more units than fifteen ships). Factions have no incentive to do so because either a) their own faction have no members that care about fleeting or b) their opponent's faction has no members that care about fleeting and to make something more interesting is to present themselves with opposition in an objective that would otherwise more or less guarantee them an invasion win without contest.
 
Acaadi Acaadi
Except it isn't because the most popular major factions still press for fleeting inclusion in invasions, they just refuse to have creative objectives that go beyond two fleets arrive in system and are fighting in space while the invasion plays out.

And do you think this is a lack of creative vision, or similar to what I've experienced in the past where Faction staff want to push what they perceive as an advantage in factory load out and members willing to go all out on fleeting?
 
Acaadi Acaadi
It is a solid combination of the two.
Because it historically hasn't been interesting, approachable or character driven.

You can argue it isn't the case, but I think that's the perception.
Invasions of Borosk, Muunilist, and PL-40112 are perfect historic examples of recent invasions where the fleeting scene was interesting, character driven, and approachable. Why? Because they were invasions where those narratives were directly intertwined with the ground and had objectives that were parallel to the ones made for the ground so that there was a purpose in controlling a ship beyond Risk in Space.

Sure, a faction deciding the objectives might try not to make a very interesting fleeting objective because they feel there is no reason to when the basic shoot at each other objective works for them already, but I think I've already said my rant on why this isn't resolved during the negotiation phase between the two factions on the page prior. Writers that do fleeting, like Cyrus or Carlyle, don't actually have the voice to make objectives in fleeting. They don't get a say. There is no conspiracy of fleeters trying to keep things absolutely basic to dissuade new people from getting involved for some sense of self-satisfaction, it's a lack of effort and creativity on the part of factions because they don't care about fleeting and think that a token objective for people who do is fine.

And I want to emphasize that it is the job of the major factions to create interesting and engaging objectives and figure out what works, not the job of the people participating in the objective. Those writers' job are to work with what is given to make it interesting to themselves, if no writers participate then it is a failure of the system, not the writer.
 
Stereotypically fleeting was a cycle of:
  1. Fleet A's 'genius' admiral boasts how good they are for a few paragraphs.
  2. Executes a complicated manoeuvre which only the author really understands and which probably needs a 3D map. (No one gets a 3D map!)
  3. Fires 100,000 cannons and confidently expects the enemy to be destroyed.
  4. Takes 10% shield damage and minor damage on one of the 27 corvettes they have in their 40km fleet from enemy fire.
  5. Attaches radically off base musical selection and tags everyone in the invasion.
  6. Fleet B does the same.
  7. The cycle continues.

Now, that's a bit unfair..

I'd have said stunningly accurate to be honest.
 
Acaadi Acaadi
There is no conspiracy of fleeters trying to keep things absolutely basic to dissuade new people from getting involved for some sense of self-satisfaction, it's a lack of effort and creativity on the part of factions because they don't care about fleeting and think that a token objective for people who do is fine.

There is absolutely a conscious motivation in taking advantage of a complete factory setup, keeping things complicated and large for the advantage of those who have dedicated the time. This is used by those writers to gain the upper hand in their fleet battles.

Faction Admins give fleet battles the attention they deserve, because so few people write them. Faction Admins only stand to lose the 1-2 writers showing interest in fleeting. Balance that against the chance of haemorrhaging members to a string of losses and they'll go for victory over interesting stories.

If large groups of members make a noise that they would participate if x or y were changed then there would be change. I'm not convinced that even if it were more approachable a significant fraction would choose it though...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom