Faster Map Conquest

[NightSister]

I would love to see actual wars being roleplayed, it's something I've wanted to see on the board for as long as I've been involved in factions. Anything that makes such a thing more easily achieved is an instant yes from me, but since I like to talk, I'll expand.

On one hand, I agree that minor factions shouldn't be made less relevant so the major factions can have their wars, and I agree that not all factions could or should play the map game. On the other hand, there's a map of the galaxy, gaining and losing territory is a thing that we do, why not take advantage of it the best we can?

The more that's going on across the map, the more IC conflict and the more interesting things are, so if there are steps we can take to generate more map-related activity then I feel like we should. While focusing on the map game can leave PvE factions out a bit, I agree with [member="Soeht"] that PvP is really the main focus when it comes to the map. I don't think we should deliberately place all the focus on PvP and tell the PvE factions that they can't sit with us, but at the same time, major factions really have to be up for a bit of conflict of this sort.

On top of that, OOC-wise more map game means more members getting involved, and when it comes to factions getting people involved should absolutely be the priority, and faster/easier map game means lower stakes and thus less OOC conflict over wins and losses. I love love love IC drama, like I said, but OOC drama irks me to no end. Anything that greatens the former and lessens the latter (assuming, of course, it works out that way, which I realise it easily could not but bear with me for argument's sake) presents zero downside to me.

TL;DR; If there's a way to achieve this that isn't in itself non-inclusive to non-map-game factions, then it's a resounding yes from me.

 

[Boethiah]

My two cents:

I think 'faction dynamics' are what you make of it. The fact is that faction rules are pretty lite.

Everything else is crafting a faction that suits your roleplaying interests, and those who share them with you. I am leaning against increasing the pace of map conquest, because as much as I can see it being less of a chore, I also think it could actually make it more of one. Look at the Netherworld event for instance: Dominions were lowered to 50 posts and 3-4 factions did nothing but gobble up countless systems, and the rest--for one reason or another--did not.

For those who did the conquering (and I was with two of them), it was the entire focus of everything and watered down storytelling. Plus it created some friction with nearby factions that led to unfortunate bouts of out-of-character drama that honestly could have been avoided if people took a breather and focused on writing the story being told and not just the added benefit of quick territory (re)gains.

Of course that was an event, and to a certain degree there was a lot of fun trying to beat the clock and grab as many worlds on a refreshed map. However, if this was made long-term I think it has the potential of burning people out and disrupting the balance of what factions can potentially be with more focus on territory warfare rather than faction storytelling. Both can coexist, and with the current rules i believe that is being achieved.

 

[Teynara Jeralyr]

As for quicker Dominions? Ehh. The factions that specialize in pumping out doms will explode, while the ones who don't, will lag behind really badly.

Yup. Short, rapid-fire posts will win out over good-quality narrative. That's not going to make for a pleasant writing environment, particularly when people who write longer posts already struggle to keep up in the fast-paced invasions, dominions and board-wide events.

 

[Connor Harrison]

Mm. I don't know....I don't like the sound of this turning into a conquest game.

I didn't come here to play a game, so to speak, I came here to write in a SW universe with others. I get that Factions have their own territory and systems / planets etc and that's logical, like in the movies and books etc.

But when the scent is strong to take over as much as possible and having Factions invade/rebel/skirmish it of course brings up the "wars" in Star Wars, but it forces many hands to engage in a pressured scenarior of having to really THINK and play a game to keep going as a character or writer, without losing motivation or losing planets or whatever.

To some, they win and feel good. To others, it causes dissapointment that they aren't skilled, tactical or online enough to try and make a stand to simply write on a planet/system they love relating to the Faction.

Dominions are good and I think the best - they can have wars or battles or whatever in there with no long lasting effects to two Factions, or major losses, and the writers can do what they can relating to their own writing, creative and story-telling skill. It's a good pace, and it's enjoyable.

I know the idea is with good intent, but I just don't like increasing desire to make this a Map Game, and for those who can't or don't want to "play it", they feel they shouldn't be here at all.

IMO, obvs.

 

[Teynara Jeralyr]

Have to be honest, I'm in agreement with [member="Connor Harrison"]. War takes up a large part of the SW Universe (hence the name!), but there are also large portions of the Galaxy that never get embroiled in conflict, and the vast majority of the actual factions that constitute the Galaxy tend to find other ways to deal with each other than blowing each other to pieces. There has to be a balance in that regard: room for non-violent RP as well as for all-out war.

 

[Connor Harrison]

[member="Tirdarius"] Yep. Most planets in the films/books that focus on war are capital planets or ones that house major fleets/shipyards etc as in there's a real reason TO launch an invasion or something. The other planets are left untouched for the Faction to do as they please.

And like if you take out the capital, the rest will fall naturally.

But as you say lots of planets out there don't see conflict and can still remain in a Faction for writers to feel they are playing a part and doing their own thing.

Maybe the all-out-war should focus on the capital planet only, rather than ones that may have little point to put people under so much pressure or strain to defend with their ability or resoure? After all, this ISN'T real and ISN'T giving us real rewards; we have to make it fair and enjoyable for all. That is crucial.

 

[Jsc]

The galactic map is limited - so if Dominions can fill up the map super quickly, then Invasions and Rebellions would start happening because that's the only other way to expand.

Sounds like Risk. I hate Risk.

And a lot of the toxicity also comes from gray areas that Jay Scott Clark has pointed out. But that's outside the scope of the Map game and more about how does one write combat against another Writer's character in a fair manner.

What is love? Baby don't hurt me.

 

[Eddak Manod]

This has many good points, but it opens two doors that I do not like.

Less Dominions
Of course, many of you like to compete and fight, but many also like to make a story and not have issues with others. Sure, if it's a meaningful rebellion or invasion, it can work out, but Dominions are for those that don't want to invade, for those who don't want to map rush, for those who don't want to mess up the site in potential OOC drama.


More OOC Drama
It's inevitable. Faster conquest means there will be angst at every corner. Maybe part of a group wasn't ready or around this week because of work and their mess of planets were bombarded and by the time they return every thread is over a hundred posts. Monkey feces will be flung, and then, eventually, trucks will be thrown, and problems will arise.

I can't in good conscious agree to this.

 

[Cyrus Tregessar]

Look how cute and small the OS are!

Though I do think it worth noting that several of those factions collapsed soon after, and there was a lot of debate at the time (as best I can recall, maybe it was later on) on how the map was too full. Anyway on to the topic at hand.

Overall I like the idea. Maybe something like a large-scale 'Campaign' thread to fill up large swaths of territory could be a thing. Hell, you could even work it so two factions can get it on the same super-thread and territory is added at certain benchmarks while the 'Campaign' continues on. A super-Dominion or something, long-running and involving a long-term storyline created by the people involved. It could be a war, exploration stuff, or something else entirely.

Possibly too ambitious, I can't say. Valens was sort of similar I guess, but with a more concrete goal that sees direct results on the map you might get longer term support. Maybe.

The Rebellions bit is problematic though, as [member="Isamu Baelor"] mentioned it might disincentive things for smaller majors. Maybe a restriction related to size of the Major Faction being rebelled on? I mean the Republic at its height could probably have shrugged off several at a time but for many of the newer Majors now they'd be in for a tough fight.

I would love to see actual wars being roleplayed, it's something I've wanted to see on the board for as long as I've been involved in factions. Anything that makes such a thing more easily achieved is an instant yes from me, but since I like to talk,

yiss

 

[Soeht]

Yup. Short, rapid-fire posts will win out over good-quality narrative. That's not going to make for a pleasant writing environment, particularly when people who write longer posts already struggle to keep up in the fast-paced invasions, dominions and board-wide events.

Why do you perceive a correlation between word count and quality? Relevant thread on this discussion.

Mm. I don't know....I don't like the sound of this turning into a conquest game.

The Map game is already a conquest game. I just believe that it's a very slow conquest game and it takes a lot of time to build empires that one would see in Star Wars Lore. Basically, equate a single hex as a month of work.

I didn't come here to play a game, so to speak, I came here to write in a SW universe with others.

This site is actually a play-by-post role playing game. Not exactly collaborative fiction. Not exactly Dungeons and Dragons. But a mix of the two. Think of it like Fate but without a DM most of the time. There are rules that automatically regulate how we interact with each other in the roleplaying environment. These rules just happen to inhibit the galactic war setting common in Star Wars from becoming a site norm.

To some, they win and feel good. To others, it causes dissapointment that they aren't skilled, tactical or online enough to try and make a stand to simply write on a planet/system they love relating to the Faction.

More OOC Drama It's inevitable. Faster conquest means there will be angst at every corner. Maybe part of a group wasn't ready or around this week because of work and their mess of planets were bombarded and by the time they return every thread is over a hundred posts. Monkey feces will be flung, and then, eventually, trucks will be thrown, and problems will arise.

Do you feel super disappointed when losing a board game or a quick online match of [insert favorite online video game]? I'd imagine not, most people don't unless the game takes FOREVER. However, these games are designed to take as little time as possible from beginning to end.

Current rules on Chaos aren't designed to take as little time while being fair. They've been designed for the past few years to require more time - either intentionally or inadvertently. The Free Parking House Rule in Monopoly is an example of where a rule that is perceived to be fair actually increases the length of the game, thus increasing the perceived sunk cost as someone loses a 4-5 hour game that should have taken only 1 hour.


If it's faster to change and conquer map territory, disappointment will decrease as a result.

Less Dominions Of course, many of you like to compete and fight, but many also like to make a story and not have issues with others. Sure, if it's a meaningful rebellion or invasion, it can work out, but Dominions are for those that don't want to invade, for those who don't want to map rush, for those who don't want to mess up the site in potential OOC drama.

Dominions aren't the only source of PVE threads for Factions, though.

 

[Eddak Manod]

[member=Soeht]

Oh, right, sorry. No, I personally hate quick games. 15 minute games is run and gun and boom, over. Took no talent or skill, just whoever got the lucky shot. I play RTS and strategy games; Supreme Commander, Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, etc.. I like planning a strategy and going the long haul. Preparing (if I can) for any obstacles or possibly being outsmarted. I get upset a bit over the very short games, because all you need is luck on your side, and when everyone dies, game over you win/lose.


And, under the current rules, what is another PvE way for Factions to claim territory?

 

[NightSister]

I was going to add something again, but...

What [member="Soeht"] said.

 

[Soeht]

Oh, right, sorry. No, I personally hate quick games. 15 minute games is run and gun and boom, over. Took no talent or skill, just whoever got the lucky shot. I play RTS and strategy games; Supreme Commander, Command and Conquer, Age of Empires, etc.. I like planning a strategy and going the long haul. Preparing (if I can) for any obstacles or possibly being outsmarted. I get upset a bit over the very short games, because all you need is luck on your side, and when everyone dies, game over you win/lose.

You'll probably like board games like Catan and Ticket to Ride, if you haven't already tried them.

Yes, there's still an element of luck for these, but in 9/10 playthroughs the person with the best strategy and understanding of the game wins. And these games only take 1 hour if playing with vanilla rules. Even Monopoly becomes a test of your charismatic skill lasting 1 hour when you throw out all the house rules.

These games are why you could think of games as needing to last only as little as they need to. Yet even for video games, most RTS matches don't last long at all unless the rules are changed heavily from default (at which point, you're pretty much asking for a long 2+ hour game). Turn-based and Grand Strategy games could be quick with the right settings, and if they aren't then it's super easy to pause the game and resume at a later date even on multiplayer).

And, under the current rules, what is another PvE way for Factions to claim territory?

Besides Dominions? None. But as I've said before, the Map game is inherently a PVP game. Dominions are PVP on a strategic level - setting up for future Invasions, blocking off other Factions from expansion, etc. That's if they're used efficiently (some Factions just don't).

To want to get involved in the Map game, either through Dominions or just by creating a Major Faction, is to invite Invasions, Rebellions, and Skirmishes in the future. There's no way to avoid this. In fact, Dominions even have rules that allow for Rebellions to start. They're not safe havens from PVP.

But again, Dominions aren't the only avenue for PVE adventures with Factions.

 

[Eddak Manod]

[member="Soeht"]

I just played a match of SUpreme Commander, which has insanely massive games, maps probably as large as Rhode Island, and it only lasted an hour. Supreme Commander could be made fast with the right settings. Everything has unrealistically low health and upgrades are made within miliseconds. Yes. In any case, I'm heavily against this idea, but I'm pretty sure most of you are voting for faster matches. In light of that, my choice for anything Major Faction/Map wise, nothing will change. I was never fond of the Major Faction/Map idea, and this will turn me off even more. While I do understand your points, it just doesn't seem like a good idea at the end of the day, aside from my personal opinions. Have fun!

 

[Soeht]

So, since I haven't seen anything like this, here's my suggestion for a several quick rule changes that would increase the speed of Map painting/conquer:

1. Remove per month limits on Tier 2 & 3 Dominions and Hex Invasions.
   • ​​These limits are obviously similar to MMO gear drop limits. Chaos doesn't have a subscription-based revenue model (or any source of revenue beyond what's in Tefka's pocket), so there's no need for something like this.
2. Remove the requirement to negotiate pre-Invasion if extra rules aren't to be added, but add a requirement for notifying Defending Faction Admins about the Invasion/Rebellion pre-Invasion.
   • ​​Anti-stall suggestion. Staff have already expressed what they see as a fair way of determining Victory. Anything beyond that is extra and should require mutual agreement. Factions in the past have used the pre-Invasion negotiation rule to stall the beginning of an Invasion.
3. Add a Max Duration Limit to Invasions & Rebellions
   • ​​Anti-stall suggestion. If an end date for the Invasion isn't agreed upon pre-Invasion, then Factions can delay calling the end of the Invasion and extend it to ungodly lengths (increasing perceived sunk cost for BOTH Factions). This has happened in the past.
4. Add negative consequences if a mutual agreement on Invasion/Rebellion victor cannot be made, if and only if the RPJ's ruling finds that there should have been no question on which Faction won.
   • ​​Anti-stall suggestion. Factions have used RPJ's as a last ditched effort to possibly obtain victory even when a retreat was called by said Faction or the conclusion of the Invasion doesn't support this. If there are negative consequences for such action, then this behavior would end.
5. Make Rebellions possible almost anywhere on the map, yet with a few restrictions compared to Rebellions born from Tier 3 Dominions and Recalled Major Factions.
   • ​​This allows for new Major Factions to appear on the map via a trial of fire. There should be restrictions so that existing Major Factions choose Invasions over making alts to start a Rebellion with on already claimed territory.
6. Allow for territory exchanging and merging between Factions, but make the territory fall under Recalled Major Faction rules for a time period.
   • ​​It should come with restrictions so that an existing Major Faction would use Dominions to expand instead of making alts to start a new Minor Faction that goes Major. A lack of easy territory swapping makes Invasions the only means of doing so - which is a time sink in itself since territory gained via Invasions is minimal now.

 

[Isamu Baelor]

[member="Soeht"]

Remove per month limits on Tier 2 & 3 Dominions and Hex Invasions.

• ​​These limits are obviously similar to MMO gear drop limits. Chaos doesn't have a subscription-based revenue model (or any source of revenue beyond what's in Tefka's pocket), so there's no need for something like this.

A bizarre comparison. One which I believe is not particularly applicable. In the context of its ecosystem, MMO Drop Limits are there to lengthen the time taken for a player to receive all available rewards for a particular Raid, Heroic, etc. In conjunction with RNG, it keeps players within a manipulative cycle of grinding.

With the limit on Tier 2 & Tier 3 dominions, I would argue that the opposite is achieved. It breaks the cycle of grinding dominions, and forces Major Factions to focus their efforts into alternative avenues.

Make Rebellions possible almost anywhere on the map, yet with a few restrictions compared to Rebellions born from Tier 3 Dominions and Recalled Major Factions.

• ​​This allows for new Major Factions to appear on the map via a trial of fire. There should be restrictions so that existing Major Factions choose Invasions over making alts to start a Rebellion with on already claimed territory.

To me, this is the most egregious of proposed rules. Here's why:

• Added Stress To The Map Game: I say it a lot, but this is ultimately a game that people play in their spare time for fun. Constantly being under threat is a stressful prospect. Far more so than under the current rule set. To me, this would sap much of the fun out of being a Major Faction. I'm sure there are plenty who would agree.
• Eliminates the Risk vs. Reward Aspect of T3 Doms: As it stands, T3 Dominions are a risky affair. You have the potential to gain large amounts of territory, but at risk of being forced into a Rebellion. It is a controlled risk, one that you consciously undertake in order reap the rewards. However, were this change applied in conjunction with your first proposed change, it would make T1 & T2 dominions entirely obsolete. If you're under the constant threat of Rebellions, why wouldn't you exclusively do T3 Dominions?
• Balance of Power: Currently, Minor Factions hold an inordinate degree of power to affect the Map. Regardless of position, they can initiate a Rebellion in any T3 Dominion, or push any T2 Dominion into T3. That's power, and not something to thumb your nose at. This proposed change would further empower Minor Factions, at the expense of Major Factions. An examples includes:
  One-sided Wars: Were a Minor Faction to target a Major Faction, they could harass them with impunity. With nothing to strike back against, the Major Faction would be forced into a defensive-war. One where their only means of victory is the Minor Faction getting bored. That would not be fun.

Here's my gripe with these proposed rule changes: they're tailored entirely for factions that specialize in Dominions, or PVP. They feel like they were conceived in an echo-chamber, with little concern for players who don't enjoy PVP, or pushing out numerous Dominions a month.

In the interest of being inclusive, there has to be a balance. There are many different ways to play "Chaos". All of which are equally valid. The rules need to reflect that, and not focus entirely on one-singular playstyle.

Additionally, I entirely disagree with the assertion that the Map is inherently a PVP game. It is a playground. One which some writers use for PVP, and some use to tell stories. Inherently, it is whatever each individual writer deems it to be.

 

[Garza]

I'd say go with it.

Implement the idea. Run with it for a bit. Test it out for 1-3 months to see how much of the map it fills, as well as the interactions between each faction. Make sure it stays civil and what not. If it works and people like it, then go for it. If not, then stop and go back to square one.

 

[Soeht]

In the context of its ecosystem, MMO Drop Limits are there to lengthen the time taken for a player to receive all available rewards for a particular Raid, Heroic, etc. In conjunction with RNG, it keeps players within a manipulative cycle of grinding.

With the limit on Tier 2 & Tier 3 dominions, I would argue that the opposite is achieved. It breaks the cycle of grinding dominions, and forces Major Factions to focus their efforts into alternative avenues.

What are these alternative avenues and what do these alternative avenues achieve for the Map game?

Would a Faction uninterested in Dominions be hindered from pursuing these alternative avenues if the limits to Tier 2 and Tier 3 Dominions were removed?

Should a Faction be forced to pursue these alternative avenues even if they wish to grind Dominions and paint the map?

---

A little explanation for the whole Rebellion part:

The most convincing argument I see against Faster Map Conquest is this: that new Major Factions would have less and less space to appear in until the point that the map is entirely conquered.

Therefore, there needs to be a way for a new Major Faction to appear even in the hypothetical situation that the map is completely conquered. I think it's required even now. While unlikely to happen within a year or two, the Map could one day be completely covered and new Major Factions would thus be unable to appear until a Major Faction gets recalled.

Added Stress To The Map Game

Why would someone that takes their Faction Major or volunteers to be a Major Faction Admin be stressed by a Major Faction's existential threats?

Assuming that they're seeking to be entertained on this site, it seems irrational to get involved in a Major Faction yet fear its demise to the point that it causes stress.

Eliminates the Risk vs. Reward Aspect of T3 Doms

I did mention restrictions to Rebellions that would make Tier 3 Dominions and Recalled Major Faction Rebellions easier/safer/whatever to start.

An idea on how to do this: Outside of Recalled Factions and Tier 3 Dominions, a Major Faction needs to cover X amount of Hexes before its non-capital Hexes are subject to Rebellions.

What other restrictions do you think would work to encourage Minor Factions looking to go Major to seek Rebellion opportunities via Tier 3 Dominions?

Balance of Power:

I feel like this really highlights more the inherent issues in the current Rebellion rules. Even under the current rules, a Minor Faction with a very active member base could be extremely disruptive.

A random bit

Spoiler

Further rules for Rebellions for balance could include a cool-down period if a Minor Faction loses the Rebellion (which the original Rebellion rules had), requiring the Minor Faction to go Major if they win (they're currently given the choice to not go Major if they win), limit the amount of Rebellions a Minor Faction can start in one moment (currently, one Minor Faction could theoretically Rebell ALL the Tier 3 Dominions), requiring a Minor Faction to exist a longer amount of time before starting a Rebellion (A Minor Faction of alts created the day the T3 Dominion is made could start a Rebellion 9/10 times), a rule that addresses the fact that someone could plant an alt in a Major Faction in order to force a Dominion to Tier 3 status, and more.

This'll need its own discussion thread.

they're tailored entirely for factions that specialize in Dominions, or PVP.

If a Major Faction doesn't specialize or want to do Dominions/Invasions/Rebellions, what would prevent them from making their own story and fun?

I entirely disagree with the assertion that the Map is inherently a PVP game.

If a Writer has one of their characters join an Invasion/Rebellion/Skirmish, aren't they exposing themselves to the PVP aspects of this site?

If a Major Faction gets on the map, aren't they exposing themselves to Invasions?

 

[Taran Ge'Mav]

I'm new here so my opinion is sort of moot, but I can see why people might be wary of conquest becoming the sole driving force in the board's Role-Play. I like a mixture of both PvE and PVP so I'm still a little on the fence. What does not sound fun is the rigorous monotony of slowly expanding territory. If what I've read here is any indication of truth in that regard it definitely doesn't inspire me to join a Major Faction. Yeah, Role-Play should be fun and enjoyable to all but the real risk of war and losing territory would only make it more so for me.

Maybe instead of limiting things the way they are you could do sort of a Casus Belli type deal. Make people have a valid reason for taking over a territory other than just filling in the map. Perhaps make them doing a thread requiring 100 posts about them scouting, or whatever, the planet they want to obtain viable cause to attack it. I've RP'd on a site that did something similar and it worked out alright.