Raid Rules Revamp

[mmat 7460]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gySlCZjikt8

 

The heavy door closed with a clack, a visible shadow cast in the torch’s light. One, two, three. The figure’s steps tapped slowly and quietly on the stone floor, stopping at the head of the table. A sudden thud rang about the room as his palm struck the table in an unnecessarily over-dramatic fashion, an unfolded scroll planted onto the hard oak wood. Standing up straight, the figure glanced around at the other seven dotted around the table and sat quietly in the chairs, craftily masked by the dimmed light.

 

“Is it ready?” a strangely foreign and exotically Irish tinted voice usually filled with sarcasm asked with a hint of unfamiliar urgency, the sound echoing through the quiet hall.

 

Peering over with a nod, the figure let out a breath before looking down at the document with a pondering expression, worry evident on his face. The man was cruel, impetuous and pathologically ambitious. But he was a tactical genius, that’s undeniable.

 

Open the spoiler to see them.

 

Revamped Raid Rules

Main points -

• The warfront system will not apply to raids, as it has next to never been used and seems to be cumbersome above all else.

• Two rulesets based upon the RP situation.

• All server rules still apply to this. Trolly, un-RP happenings won’t be tolerated such as spamming, obvious real life references, etc.

• Focusing on nations, official nation recognised and supported assaults will be given more freedom than simple erratic brash raids.

• Raids are classified only as attacks on populated settlements, marches through general enemy land are not raids and have to limit, except the usual server rules.

Varieties of Raid

There are two types of raiding; Nation-endorsed and Impromptu. The use of these two separate types will depends on the state of conflict between the would-be attackers and defenders.

Impromptu - The state of raiding that exists when a non-nation affiliated guild, group or faction decides to raid another, or when permission from a nation leader is not given. Assumed to be less organised in strength and more hodgepodge than an assault backed officially by a nation’s military. Only a small amount of raiders may partake in this type of hasty attack on a populated structure or settlement.

• A maximum of 8 raiders.

• Looting of unlocked chests in any non LWC accessible areas is permitted.

• Group must have a legitimate RP reason for raiding said defender, simple banditry would suffice for a reason in an impromptu raid.

• Cooldowns before a given group can raid again ->

  • Defeat in raid - 48 hours

  • Victory in raid - 12 hours.

  • Indecisive - 24 hours, 1 day.

 

Nation endorsed -

A more organised and coordinated force with the official support, armaments and troops, perhaps even a section of a nation’s army itself, decides to raid another immediately before or during a state of war. Permission to undertake such an action would be given by the leader of the faction in question. In such an organised raid, a much larger amount of soldiers may assault the target.

• A maximum of 20 soldiers.

• Group must have a legitimate RP reason for raiding said defender. Simple banditry will not suffice for this type of raid, it would have to be a reason of war, harrying enemy forces or harrassing defences, etc.

• Looting of unlocked chests in any non LWC accessible areas is permitted.

• For a raid to be classed as nation endorsed, a state of conflict must be declared in roleplay (On the forums, most likely) between said attacker and defender, by the nation leader. Such a declaration would most commonly be a declaration of war. It must explicitly state that such raids are permitted.

  • By declaring that these raids are permitted in his/her name, the nation leader takes indirect responsibility OOCly for any actions perpetrated by the raiding group as a whole.

  • Only the leaders of the Humans, Orcs, Dwarves, Elves, Caliphate and Salvus may endorse these larger raids.

• Cooldowns before a given group can raid again ->

  • Defeat in raid - 72 hours, 3 days.

  • Victory in raid - 12 hours.

  • Indecisive - 24 hours, 1 day.

 

Victory - Breaching the settlement in question and destroying or capturing a significant amount of the defending enemy force, before withdrawing. If the entire defending faction’s force is caught outside their settlement and killed, raid will be classed as a victory regardless of breach.

 

Indecisive - Only a couple people on each side are captured or killed by the opposing force and no pivotal breach in the raided settlement is reached. If a stalemate occurs for more than 20 minutes with the defenders held up in their settlement, then the attackers must retreat and the raid will be decided as indecisive.

 

Defeat - The defending faction manages to sally forth and rout the attackers, forcing them back to where they came from. If an attacking force is defeated in such a manner, the defending force may counter-raid once, with an unlimited number of soldiers if they so wish, a raid not subject to the standard cooldowns.

 

A faction may only break the properly of their enemy without permission if it is NOT in their region. All destruction RP of enemy property outside their own region MUST be done properly with a GMs RP help, etc.

 

On Saturday I said that raid rules were being worked in. Here we are. This is less of a static system of raiding in terms of cooldown and numbers, however if you do choose to risk raiding and lose, there will be more penalties for your lack of skill in battle…

 

Obviously I can’t promise 100% that this will work in practice because we’ve never seen them in practice, but we’ll see how it goes. If it is a catastrophic failure I'll have it removed reasonably quickly. All I ask is that you give them a try.

[mitto 2312]

imattyz for community manager when?

[CheekyNolan 5420]

War...war never changes. But apparently raids do.

[Birdwhisperer 1174]

I like that the cooldown times are different depending on the outcome of the raid, but 12 hours is way too short for a cooldown.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

Welp I guess we're keeping the gates closed permanently.

[Aetosion 2062]

Aetosion rubs his sleep-filled eyes with a grown, the light from his window piercing their heavy lids. Had it really been eight hours since he went to sleep? Flopping over, he found that his clock said 4:16 pm.

 

"Woops," the overslept college-student-on-summer-break says. Then someone clunks a scroll down outside his room, and after a few stretches Aetosion grabs his laptop and opens it to find the updated raid rules.

 

"Wow," he thinks, while creating internal dialogue for the reader to better appreciate, "I woke up right when this was posted, for the Creator wished for me to see the new dawn."

 

I support these changes, as the previous system was worked up so that 4 person Nexus plots wouldn't be disadvantaged by raiding parties larger than 4, etc.. In this system we're of course looking at massive nation regions getting raided, and 8 men is something a full sized nation should be capable of defending against. The nation-endorsed raiding party, while large, is only five men larger than the previous "warfront raid", which operated on the same principles except confined to a warfront no one ever actually bothered using in their warclaims. This system removes that redundancy and accounts for the change from Nexus to Nation, and I think it does a solid job.

[Harri 4815]

I love iMattyz, what a good man.

[lawnmowerman 3040]

[mmat 7460]

My rep isn't going up fast enough...

[zaezae 1098]

I honestly think a failed raid should prevent a group from raiding for at least a short time. Like, how are you going to lose most/all your troops and be like 'Man I'm good'.

[Smithers 388]

I honestly think a failed raid should prevent a group from raiding for at least a short time. Like, how are you going to lose most/all your troops and be like 'Man I'm good'.

3 days for nation-endorsed defeat, 2 days for not. A day is a very long time in roleplay.

[Aelu / Rel (Combustionary) 1540]

I like them for the most part, but I think that the cooldown for a raid after a failed defense should be a bit longer. Maybe bump everything up a bit to 1/2/3days for lose/draw/win?

[Luciloo 2680]

I like them for the most part, but I think that the cooldown for a raid after a failed defense should be a bit longer. Maybe bump everything up a bit to 1/2/3days for lose/draw/win?

 

Yeah, a settlement gets its head caved in by bandits and come dinner time it can get it's head caved in again?

Seems like a good way to frustrate the playerbase.

[tea with Gwyn 218]

The intricate thought process behind this:

 

"Let's make raids more frustrating."

 

I don't like it one bit. The old rules no longer apply. The gates of Oblivion have been opened.

[Harri 4815]

I like them for the most part, but I think that the cooldown for a raid after a failed defense should be a bit longer. Maybe bump everything up a bit to 1/2/3days for lose/draw/win?

No. Winning would mean that, role-play wise, you're at a huge advantage as your enemy is scrambling to recover, whilst you're able to keep launching raids over and over, pressuring them into either surrendering or partaking in a war-claim - most likely a conquest. 

 

If a nation /did/ absolutely decimate on a raid, they wouldn't just wait for them to recover now would they? They'd re-mobilise and launch as soon as they could.