The One and Only
Judah Lesan
Makes a good point.
The established precedent with the Fortress World mandate is that you should not be able to have complete immunity. A one-hex faction is basically that fortress world mandate but on a smaller scale.
There are a couple of things I would like to touch on, but one thing I've seen that doesn't make sense to me is people saying 'it's a viable strategy, so leave it be.' Yes, anything that has broken the meta in a game is a viable strategy. For example, in this new season of Destiny, the season pass grenade launcher -- Witherhoard -- is one of the most annoying and broken things I've seen on the game and is probably going to get nerfed. But still, it's 'meta' because it's overpowered. My point is, having something be a viable strategy doesn't justify it.
Another thing is, the map game and invasions are all about being able to hit back if you're invaded -- that's literally the only actual deterrent in the map game, the fact that if you hit someone they're going to hit back. A one-hex faction invading and placing their capitol hex in a place where it can't be easily reached is deliberately toxic; they could hit a faction again and again without having to worry about losing their own territory. Meanwhile, the defending faction could deal with a potentially unlimited amount of invasions, where they either can lose hexes or save their hex, only to just be invaded again.
Also, I've seen accusations, or implications, (not towards me, towards others, but given I'm in the same position it's all the same) that since I'm in the Confederacy faction which is being attacked by a single-hex faction, that my reason for arguing this is purely being driven out of salt, so I want to lay those accusations to rest. I don't have any vendetta against the Agents of Chaos as a faction -- they are a great group of wonderful writers that I enjoy working with, writing with, and I have zero animosity towards them. Same thing on Destiny; I don't hate anyone who uses WItherhoard, but I still think it's a weapon that breaks the meta.
Case and point, if any faction is trying to deliberately exploit the rules to give themselves immunity, that should be dealt with. The Fortress World mandate already establishes a precedent that no faction should be completely immune to being hit back. The solution? I think the most common sense one would be the implementation of a rule saying if you're invading another major faction as a single-hex faction, that major faction is allowed to hit back with an invasion of their own. It's not a mandate, because a major faction shouldn't have to change their mandate just to deal with immunity exploitation. If you're concerned about wanting to be a single-hex major faction and not be invaded, then it's quite simple; don't invade others. If you want to be able to invade others and not be invaded yourself, then that just means you don't want to play by the rules like everyone else, not that you've found this 'viable strategy.'
The established precedent with the Fortress World mandate is that you should not be able to have complete immunity. A one-hex faction is basically that fortress world mandate but on a smaller scale.
There are a couple of things I would like to touch on, but one thing I've seen that doesn't make sense to me is people saying 'it's a viable strategy, so leave it be.' Yes, anything that has broken the meta in a game is a viable strategy. For example, in this new season of Destiny, the season pass grenade launcher -- Witherhoard -- is one of the most annoying and broken things I've seen on the game and is probably going to get nerfed. But still, it's 'meta' because it's overpowered. My point is, having something be a viable strategy doesn't justify it.
Another thing is, the map game and invasions are all about being able to hit back if you're invaded -- that's literally the only actual deterrent in the map game, the fact that if you hit someone they're going to hit back. A one-hex faction invading and placing their capitol hex in a place where it can't be easily reached is deliberately toxic; they could hit a faction again and again without having to worry about losing their own territory. Meanwhile, the defending faction could deal with a potentially unlimited amount of invasions, where they either can lose hexes or save their hex, only to just be invaded again.
Also, I've seen accusations, or implications, (not towards me, towards others, but given I'm in the same position it's all the same) that since I'm in the Confederacy faction which is being attacked by a single-hex faction, that my reason for arguing this is purely being driven out of salt, so I want to lay those accusations to rest. I don't have any vendetta against the Agents of Chaos as a faction -- they are a great group of wonderful writers that I enjoy working with, writing with, and I have zero animosity towards them. Same thing on Destiny; I don't hate anyone who uses WItherhoard, but I still think it's a weapon that breaks the meta.
Case and point, if any faction is trying to deliberately exploit the rules to give themselves immunity, that should be dealt with. The Fortress World mandate already establishes a precedent that no faction should be completely immune to being hit back. The solution? I think the most common sense one would be the implementation of a rule saying if you're invading another major faction as a single-hex faction, that major faction is allowed to hit back with an invasion of their own. It's not a mandate, because a major faction shouldn't have to change their mandate just to deal with immunity exploitation. If you're concerned about wanting to be a single-hex major faction and not be invaded, then it's quite simple; don't invade others. If you want to be able to invade others and not be invaded yourself, then that just means you don't want to play by the rules like everyone else, not that you've found this 'viable strategy.'