Multi Invasion Idea

[sabrina]

[member="Lily Kirsche Kuhn"] [member="Darth Venefica"]
This was the full report by [member="Tefka"]
http://starwarsrp.net/blog/1/entry-387-so-i-joined-an-invasion/

 

[Darth Ferus]

[member="Lily Kirsche Kuhn"]

Mostly cause I never knew it was brought up before.

I don't see how a dog piling would really be that much of an issue. It's preventing members from going from one of these multi invasions to another between the two factions, not between multiple factions.

I think I'm making sense. I can't tell right now.

 

[Cira]

So what I suggest is a multi invasion clause, where if two major factions agree on it, multiple invasions can be issued.

The current invasion rules we have in place already cover this by the following --

Invasion Rules:

"Before an Invasion begins, Faction Leaders must convene to discuss how the Invasion will be handled by both sides to account for fairness and balance. If a compromise cannot be reached please consult a Role-play Judge."


and it is further clarified by this ruling.


Simultaneous invasions Ruling:

"...simultaneous invasions have always been up to the faction leaders to discuss beforehand, and that it cannot be forced upon a faction to be simultaneously invaded by several other factions. It's not fair to the members of that faction, and I don't believe any faction would like the same thing happen to them."


[member="Darth Venefica"] [member="Darth Ferus"]

Any terms may be discussed and agreed to by faction admins of both sides for fairness and balance; including simultaneous invasions or the request for the invasion to be split into three different threads.

The suggestion can be made to your respective FA counterpart, but it cannot be forced. If all faction admins from all respective factions agree to it, then you have your terms.

 

[Darth Metus]

Simultaneous invasions were utilized in the past as a means of quickly overwhelming and battering down a faction that can't keep up in a variety of areas. In the grand Halcyon era of the Republic, the Fel Empire, the Mandalorians, and the GR dogpiled on the Sith Empire simultaneously. Numerous times. Needless to say, it wasn't long before the faction went poof and plotted sweet revenge.

#OSSupremacy

Anyways, IC it makes logical sense. OOC it's kinda douchey.

*goes off to clock in*

 

[sabrina]

[member="Cira"] Thank you for putting better than I could

 

[Lord Kataklysmos]

So according to the rules, 1 faction can hit multiple places at once technically.

 

[sabrina]

[member="Lord Kataklysmos"] yes as long as everyone agrees to it, but all sides must agree

 

[Jsc]

[member="Lord Kataklysmos"] [member="sabrina"] No. According to the Invasion Rules a Major Faction cannot engage in a second Invasion before the completion of the first. [member="Cira"] was not speaking to the last rule on the list directly.

To expand, the "Simultaneous Invasions" clarification was for: Multiple Invasions against 1 Faction. AKA The Dogpile. Which is technically allowed if the defender is cool with it. However, It did not speak to 1 Faction attacking many times. Which is prohibited at this time.

EX:

 

[Anija Betna]

I do not support this. At all. It promotes dogpiling... as is happening to the mandos right now with Skirmishes intended to distract us.

 

[Jsc]

[member="Darth Ferus"]

I believe this idea could technically work on paper. Especially since the rules allow for Invasions to be resolved by the FA's alone before ever consulting a RPJ.

However, that said? In practical application I believe this will create a hostile environment, well beyond the abilities of any Faction to respond to every threat or thread they may face. With a failure in activity, motivation, quality, attitude, and scheduling concerns. None of which has anything to with IC tactics. IC, a faction may easily have the man-power and the gusto to respond to such numerous threats. OOC, a faction is just a bunch of writers who ain't got no time for that.

I would suggest that if what you want are better IC tactics? You begin by creating better IC tactics.

 

[Cira]

Cira forgot to read the last rule on the list and speak to it directly.

​

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE0ORmUSqiM​

​

​

​

But yes, as linked earlier in my post, the full invasion rules are available for review there.​

​

But for ease of convenience, I'll spoiler it.​

​

If you want the requesting ally rules for invasions, here they are as well. ​

​

​

Spoiler

INVASION



Label your faction's name, the planet, and the opposing faction (if there is one) in the topic title. Acquisitions will not be awarded in the future if this is not adhered to.



Before an Invasion begins, Faction Leaders must convene to discuss how the Invasion will be handled by both sides to account for fairness and balance. If a compromise cannot be reached please consult a Role-play Judge.



At any point, a Major Faction may “invade” another Major Faction's occupied planet. This involves one Major Faction's members fighting for control of the planet against another Major Faction's members.


1. Stampeding* is not allowed.
*Stampeding is when a Major Faction colludes to post all of its members repetitively without waiting for a proper response from the opposition.

The winning faction must meet all minimum requirements in order to declare victory.



1. The thread must have a minimum total of 100 posts between both factions.

2. Both factions must have a minimum of 5 members per side. If either faction cannot meet this requirement within 72 hours of the beginning of the invasion, that faction forfeits.



Once an Invasion nears it's completion, the Major Faction Leaders involved in the Invasion must convene with each other and decide on the victor. If a decision cannot be made, a Roleplay Judge must be privately contacted and he/she will make the final decision.



A Major Faction may only begin one invasion at a time and may not start another until the original invasion is completed and judged.

​

​

 

[Jsc]

[member="Cira"] Nah, sorry about that. I just meant in the format of Sabrina and Lord KataKs conversation, they were using your last post out of context. You were speaking directly about something, very to the point, and Sabrina assumed that you were speaking overtly and in an all-encompassing manner. So her answer to Lord KataK was misleading in that it assumed your last post to be a definitive statement, with sources, that could overrided the Top Rules as currently posted.

Trust me. I don't mean to say that an RPJ doesn't know what she's talking about. Because Cira most certainly does. Always.

Cheers!

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

This has come up many times before. Whilst it is certainly more logical to have multiple invasions (I proposed a system for it once) the reality is that it’s impractical.

• It would dilute factions so that 1 fast and successful invasion would become 2 or 3 slower and less decisive ones.
• It would encourage factions to ‘dogpile’ a single enemy.

The only way it could work is if you reduced the size and limits on invasions so that winning an invasion would be easier. Of course, the issue there is that a larger faction could simply start several invasions of this kind and outlast their opponent.

Another alternative would be to have each invasion have 1 objective. Thus, instead of the three objectives in the upcoming OS/GR invasion, you would have 3 invasions, one dedicated to PVP, another fleeting, another ground combat.
That would work, but it would place great importance on the niche areas of fleeting and ground combat whilst leaving 80% of the writers to compete over a single objective.

 

[Tefka]

You can do simultaneous invasions if both factions' leaders agree to it.

That report [member="sabrina"] referenced... that was a simultaneous invasion being forced upon us.

 

[Sanya Val Lerium]

I swear ive seen this pop up like 20 times now about multi invasion

 

[Darth Kentarch]

[member="Darth Ferus"], as much as I want to change the rules and way we do invasions, as well as capture and remove territory. It simply won't happy. Interpretation of the rules aside, I understand that you are attempting to create or suggest a military 'Theater' where multiple campaigns of varying operations unfold. And thus the scope would be larger and events would unfold on a more proper and realistic scale. This will never happen. I say this without being, as some people would say, scathing. But the current system is in place because 'it works'.

 

[Cecily Demici]

Perhaps I am a noob, but I think if this were the case that NPCs would need to play a much larger role in the outcome of the invasions. Some factions that would outnumber another faction in NPC members (that is to say all the oblivious citizens of the various member planets and all of those whats-their-faces in the army) may be outnumbered in PC members and thus lose a multi-front invasion that they otherwise would have won if all the NPCs were counted among the combatants.

 

[Jak Skirata]

Dog piling is a real thing. Deal with the consequences of showing up unprepared. Move on.

In a perfect world.

 

[Tefka]

In a perfect world.

Sadly we ain't got perfect. We got imaginary, but I don't think we'll ever have perfect.

 

[Cyrus Tregessar]

Sadly we ain't got perfect. We got imaginary, but I don't think we'll ever have perfect.

Man, even our imaginary worlds aint perfect. What does that tell you about human nature?

On the topic of invasions, I don't know about multi-invasions, but I would love to see a little more complexity to the process. The now widespread inclusion of objectives is great, but you still don't have, uh, tiered progression? If x succeeds then y happens, if x dosen't work then z is the backup, and so on. Sort of like Rush from Battlefield, or something.

But I think that's a different discussion (not to mention potentially being a lot of work for staff which is probably on interest to a minority of people).