What aspect of Invasions do you dislike the most?

[Dallen Thayne]

[member="Miss Blonde"]

I agree with this on the basis of the Clone Wars where battle lines were so broken up and messy because it wasn't an even half of the galaxy against another. The Republic and CIS had isolated clusters, fought mostly on neutral planets until the outer rim sieges, and yeah. CIS had Foerost and surroundings systems that were just encircled by the Republic but it was still their territory. I always had the appeal in that like if you imagined certain writers being stranded in that dwindling sea of territory that got cut off and had to become a self sufficient sector as one could imagine their enemies blocking the trade routes out of the now surrounded territory.

 

[Eralam]

It's worth noting that any inhabitable system is quite capable of carrying on, even if the most direct route to their government has been captured. I mean, Earth gets by just fine without anyone else. It's also worth noting that the map is a 2D representation of 3D space.

 

[Dallen Thayne]

[member="Eralam"]

Yeah true on the 3D aspect but there are established trade routes and lanes (regardless of whether they are straight lines up or down or to the side) because just jumping could mean hitting who knows what space debris.

 

[Eralam]

Sure, but travelling outside of the normal lanes isn't impossible, just riskier.

 

[Miss Blonde]

[member="Darth Carach"] and that's why I'm for getting rid of the map game all together. Even as someone who started two major factions I'd rather it not be a thing.

 

[Reverance]

Without some form of mechanism for interaction between factions (map game for instance), then you will truly have factions that stagnate in their respective corners.

 

[Onrai]

I dislike getting forced into invasions as a faction. There's no greater way to make people in separate factions start to hate each other than to toss out a perfectly pointless invasion at one of them when you know they'll lose it due to OOC issues. On top of that, invasions ALWAYS bring drama and arguments, enough to probably give the admins a headache.

But it's not like Tef will change invasions based on the feedback in this thread or anything.

 

[Jsc]

Without some form of mechanism for interaction between factions (map game for instance), then you will truly have factions that stagnate in their respective corners.

This.

There is nothing worse than having 3 sandbox High Queens of Hapes all doing overlapping storyline things onworld without a way to punch two of them in the face and say GTFO.

 

[Eralam]

Without some form of mechanism for interaction between factions (map game for instance), then you will truly have factions that stagnate in their respective corners.

It's true. He's seent it.

 

[Captain Jordan]

I'd agree with some of the big points made in this thread.

1. Cloudbreaking and deep-reach invasions reduce the ability to enjoy the story and add stress to the 'map game'. When the invasion focus becomes more on the territory lost because of it, and less on the story within and around it, we all lose out.

2. Time limits. They may be a necessary evil, but as others have mentioned, they place a heavy burden on players to churn out posts and causes many to ignore most all but the immediate action. If we slowed down a bit, we might have more time to weave a more cohesive story.

3. Negotiations, between factions and between players over duels/actions.

4. Invasions as an isolated event. I almost never see factions working on the buildup or aftermath of these stories, even though there is surely much to do. A fleet is approaching? Save the children! We fought off the attackers? Rebuild! We won a new planet? Struggle establishing a new administration. Etc.