Proposed War System

[Treshure 5579]

Establish Points

 

These are things that every nation can agree with when it comes to raids/war.

 

- Raids ruin roleplay of the capitals. You get drowned out by non-intelligible shouts and if they breach the city, dozens of soldiers run past you PvPing anyone in armor. It is chaotic, unrealistic, and a huge mess to deal with.

 

- Realistically, the raids would not get close to the Capital. If you are familiar with MOBA’s (like LoL or Dota), you must kill the outlying turrets of the map before getting remotely close to the main “reactor”.

 

- Without a specific system, there is no official progress of a war other than conquest/pillage warclaims.

 

Proposed

 

Between the two nations in question of warfare, there are the following:

There must be 100 blocks apart from every rank.

That means there must be 100 block distance from capital to major.

There must be 100 block distance from major to minor.

 

Major Fort: (1)

 

A major fort is a second to last the final conquest. It is a large fort containing major fortifications.Traps are allowed. It is relatively near the capital, and would expected to be manned and armed to the teeth. To take a major fort, a warclaim would be required. If a major fort is taken, the Capitol is open to warclaim and raid.

 

Minor Fort: (1-2) OPTIONAL

 

These are smaller forts somewhat far away from the Capital, the Major fort being a sort of bridge between. These are expected to be manned and are the frontier of the battle. This expects to get constantly attacked, traps are not allowed. To take a minor fort, a warclaim is NOT required. The defending force must be at least 3/4ths the size of the attacking force if to officially take it.

 

If you have a minor fort that isn’t manned whatsoever, it can be brought up and taken down. Only have minor forts that are regularly manned, not abandoned claimants of land.

 

---

 

If a minor fort is taken: It cannot be taken for another 24 hours.

If a minor fort is raided: It cannot be raided for another two hours.

 

Minor forts are optional. If you don’t want them, you do not have to have them.

 

You must take all minor forts to raid major forts.

You must take the major fort to raid the capital.

The major fort must be taken to warclaim the capital.

All Capitals to be taken require a warclaim.

Minor forts do not require a warclaim.

To be able to take an enemy fort, all of your forts must be secure under your control.

For example, you cannot warclaim the capital when the major forts are standing. You cannot warclaim a major fort when the minor forts are in enemy control.

 

 

 

^

Obviously things would be spaced out more, especially major fort distance between minor fort. But this is the breeze I’m hoping you’ll catch.

 

Basically what I am trying to establish here is a system where there is progress and unless the war is being heavily won, capital roleplay is unaffected. Military RP is heightened because drills, watches, and the likes can take place in an active environment where it does not crowd popular roleplay centers. A war shouldn’t be up and over with one warclaim, wars are meant to be impactful things and not something you do on a complete whim.

 

If a side is heavily winning, the losing side should have dread upon them. Fortifications should be built in advance for the impending siege, the streets howl with an emptiness…

I am trying to establishing an environment where progress is felt and danger is as well. Going on, I will describe the Dead Zone.

 

Dead Zone

 

Other than forts and capitals, a major place of fighting is the Dead Zone. While roleplay is still required to initiate PvP, it is made very clear this is a place of warfare. It is the place where soldiers sally out for open field battles, it is the place where stragglers are caught and fights happen. All the place for open field battles takes place in the Dead Zone, and /not outside it/.  (not mandatory)

 

Consensual Warfare

 

A point stressed was that of nations that do not want any war. Concerned rised when consensual warfare was enacted (and still is?) about how nations can pester other nations but hide under consensual warclaims. I want to keep consensual warfare for only nations that truly are peaceful.

 

Neutral Nations may only hold their capital.

They must not partake in any offensive battles, only defensive behind their walls.

Casus Belli may be garnered against them to remove the consensual warfare protection.

 

If they abide by this, raids are still on the table however warclaims have the option to be denied by the peaceful nation. If another nation has been receiving threats, insults, or aggression, they may gather these as “Casus Belli”. There must be 3-4 clear threats, insults, or aggressions that are verbal. Any physical attacks that aren’t defensive are automatic casus belli. If these are gathered (THROUGH ROLEPLAY), their consensual warfare protection is removed.

 

Point of Entry

Capitals and Major Forts are excluded from this because of siegecraft used in warclaims. This applies to minor forts.

 

To prevent impenetrable forts, if your men have scouted and scouted your fortress for any weaknesses and there are none, that is automatically not allowed. There must be some way in to the minor fort, some way at all. This is to make sure that uber buttoned palaces are not created that there is no possible way inside.

This may be controversial and can be debated upon further.

 

I hope this wraps it up, folks! If we all can agree on this, ban reports will drastically decrease, we can all get along, and the playerbase will be happy.

 

da forts be above ground

above ground

[drfate786 1639]

This could work rather well but no one will do this as they are used to the current system.

[Praetor 1548]

This could work rather well but no one will do this as they are used to the current system.

 

Things change, people adapt. Been proven before.

 

-------

 

I don't think it's a bad idea, as long as a nation doesn't build three dozen major forts.

 

Don't like the deadzone however. If they want to have battle, nations should chat OOC and organize them, or maybe patrols meet and fight. Focusing it all in the land in between doesn't sound to grand to me.

[gam 386]

I like it. I like it a lot.

 

I only see two real problems. The first being that minor forts have to be manned at all times and require no warning/warclaim before attack. Nobody wants to sit in a fort for hours straight doing nothing, and it gets very tedious; like gate duty. I propose that a warning of at least one hour needs to be given to the nation leader so that they can at least gather up some troops. 

 

The second is the whole theory of a dead zone. In a perfect world, two nations might be directly across from one another with space for a dead zone in between them, but sadly that isn't how it works. What if there was another nation in between the nations, or a large and popular traveled road used by all races? You can't make another nation a war-zone for your war, and using a popular road will just end in pissing people off. I'm afraid that a dead zone is cool in theory, but in practice it would end in complete disaster.

 

All-in-all though, sounds like a cool idea. +1

[Imperial Administration 530]

The Skirmish Zone/War Front idea, if expanded on, is the perfect model for Lord of the Craft. It provides a PVP "Zone" for the more PVP oriented players, while also allowing a sense of RP to be carried out both in and out of the skirmish zone, with camps and patrols and every other little thing coming into play. Let us expand on it and you won't be disappointed :)

[yopplwasupxxx 5664]

muh fort indagolaf : ((((;

[Lago 2569]

I like the idea of fort radii: if you warclaim a major fort and win you can then warclaim anything within X hundred blocks of it, including the capital. Prevents the wall of infinite forts.

[mmat 7461]

 

 

Neutral Nations may only hold their capital.

 

I'm a little concerned about this, would it apply to only the four primary nations of Orcs, Dwarves, Humans and Elves? Or would it include any little 'nation' that calls itself a nation? I wouldn't like immunity for capitals for little inactive nations just because they want to be left in their cliques.

 

 

 

They must not partake in any offensive battles, only defensive behind their walls.

 

What if a nation wishes to, without warning, aid one of the belligerent nations? Are they stopped due to OOC restrictions?

[Treshure 5579]

I'm a little concerned about this, would it apply to only the four primary nations of Orcs, Dwarves, Humans and Elves? Or would it include any little 'nation' that calls itself a nation? I wouldn't like immunity for capitals for little inactive nations just because they want to be left in their cliques.

 

 

What if a nation wishes to, without warning, aid one of the belligerent nations? Are they stopped due to OOC restrictions?

 

1. This would apply to all the pretty much major nations (4 races plus Alras).

 

2. If they're in an offensive battle, they're not neutral. Simple as that.

[spqrSancus 173]

*shrugs* I liked the war front system honestly, but if the staff won't use that, this would be a very nice second. +1 sir.

[monkeypoacher 6993]

I like, I support.

+1

[Narthok 9213]

+1 my only comment is what about villages and towns that are part of a nation?

[Pureimp10 5178]

+1

I feel like this is the solution to the whole Bloc-Crimson Silver war.

 

Now if only it were implemented..... :/