[Your View] Raid Announcements

[Javert 5573]

Just now, kazoo said:

Imagine, A nation leader is standing in a city that you discovered has a way in to enter and you want to capture them. And in order to capture them you know have to tell them that you are going to try and capture them an hour before. If the nation leader doesnt want to be captured he will just log off and tell everyone else in his city to log off.
This will be used as a way to evade all kinds of conflict rp by weak cocky nations

Solution: If an NL is online when the raid is announced, they cannot get off until the raid is concluded

[JoLeTaco 72]

2 minutes ago, MmmBudaq said:

by making this a rule you're going to change raids to arranged skirms where the other side has unlimited amount of people to rally and on top of that call up allies and fight max 20 people with a 50 man rally 

As a small nation player, no lol

make it scalable or smth

 

[kazoo 586]

+
Some may say this hapenned in frp but the only reason it worked in frp is their community, unfortunately the lotc community has grown a fear and hate towards conflict rp and now will search ways to avoid it at all cost.

2 minutes ago, Javert said:

Solution: If an NL is online when the raid is announced, they cannot get off until the raid is concluded

but what if he has to "log off to eat"?
also this doesnt answer the main problem, the nation leader can just tell his entire nation to not log on and evade the raid

[Javert 5573]

7 minutes ago, kazoo said:

+
Some may say this hapenned in frp but the only reason it worked in frp is their community, unfortunately the lotc community has grown a fear and hate towards conflict rp and now will search ways to avoid it at all cost.

but what if he has to "log off to eat"?
also this doesnt answer the main problem, the nation leader can just tell his entire nation to not log on and evade the raid

Good point. If a NL forfeits a raid they should be subjected to something similar to wartime raid rules.

 

1. Capture the NL when they're online again

2. Capture whoever the original target was

3. Destroy a building or something

4. I'm about to fall asleep you get the point with the consequences of giving up a raid

 

basically what this does is encourage NLs to fight it out, because if they forfeit they suffer the consequences all the same. By extension this encourages the community to adapt and be like "Shit, can't sit this out anymore" and actually put up Some fight rather than just lie down and let consequences happen to them.

[MayRndz 1130]

21 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Also, If it’s announced an hour an advance it should be raiders choice. If any sooner, then defenders. (This is so that crp groups/spooks aren’t left out.)

We were considering this (numbers not set just an example)

5 or less = conflict not a raid
5-10 = similar raid rules to now with no ping
groups larger than 10 constitute a raid w/ an hour warning (That warning results in PVP being enforced)

15 minutes ago, Javert said:

Also, I don't feel like this is a way to nerf bandit groups. This simply encourages bandit groups to evolve new tactics when approaching a raid. I know for a fact the Ferrymen have a record of beating anyone while outnumbered, but as for other PVPers you could always find ways to sneak in. TNT and Ladders are still available to you, and it's not like the raided settlement will know where you are coming from. You could always be sneaky and completely bypass enemy defenses somehow some way.

 

TL:Dr; I trust that this won't nerf bandit groups, but will instead encourage them to utilize more strategy

 

Side note: I'm tired as **** and I took Melatonin so I apologize if I am nonsensical

Agreed, adds more than just clicks to the system.

[kazoo 586]

5 minutes ago, Javert said:

1. Capture the NL when they're online again

2. Destroy a building or something

3. I'm about to fall asleep you get the point with the consequences of giving up a raid

 

basically what this does is encourage NLs to fight it out, because if they forfeit they suffer the consequences all the same. By extension this encourages the community to adapt and be like "Shit, can't sit this out anymore" and actually put up Some fight rather than just lie down and let consequences happen to them.

nation leader loggs of and tells 5 people of his rally to fight it out so he technically had a rally that showed up. Nation nl doesnt get captured.

[chaotikal 2236]

In FRP, where this system worked, there was an endgoal to raids other than just raiding, namely raid crates that had different useful items or resources.

If you add this, the ability to log off prior to the raid, then you should make winning a raid actually meaningful and defending it actually worth it.

[Javert 5573]

3 minutes ago, kazoo said:

nation leader loggs of and tells 5 people of his rally to fight it out so he technically had a rally that showed up. Nation nl doesnt get captured.

Not my point. I'm saying a NL should still suffer the consequences of a loss, whether he logs off or not. I apologize if that wasn't coherent enough in the last message.

 

If a NL loses, they suffer the consequences of losing. If a NL forfeits, they still suffer the consequences of losing. That's why it's best they throw everything they've got so they dont suffer the consequences by potentially winning. AKA, it'll encourage them to fight hard so they can try to prevent something bad from happening to them. I'm not saying "If they resist they should be exempt from consequences no matter what", I'm saying "Make losses hurt so people try not to lose".

[MayRndz 1130]

Just now, Javert said:

Not my point. I'm saying a NL should still suffer the consequences of a loss, whether he logs off or not. I apologize if that wasn't coherent enough in the last message.

 

hot take though, yall raid at 3am and noone logs on because its 3am should the defenders have consiquences?

[Javert 5573]

3 minutes ago, MayRndz said:

hot take though, yall raid at 3am and noone logs on because its 3am should the defenders have consiquences?

tbh we should just have a time period where raids are acceptable then. Hot take of my own but I don't think raids should be allowed when there's only like 50 people online

 

edit: imma join the mod disc so I can debate this there instead of the forums

[kazoo 586]

5 minutes ago, Javert said:

Not my point. I'm saying a NL should still suffer the consequences of a loss, whether he logs off or not. I apologize if that wasn't coherent enough in the last message.

 

If a NL loses, they suffer the consequences of losing. If a NL forfeits, they still suffer the consequences of losing. That's why it's best they throw everything they've got so they dont suffer the consequences by potentially winning. AKA, it'll encourage them to fight hard so they can try to prevent something bad from happening to them. I'm not saying "If they resist they should be exempt from consequences no matter what", I'm saying "Make losses hurt so people try not to lose".

the NL hides in a very unreachable area of the city during the one hour notice what then?

[Javert 5573]

2 minutes ago, kazoo said:

the NL hides in a very unreachable area of the city during the one hour notice what then?

Bomb them with TNT. (In all seriousness there are numerous tools to get Anywhere in a city. TNT damage self-repairs if I remember right, so just bomb your way through. It's a questionable strategy, but a strategy nonetheless. This is far from a perfect fix and I'll have a more coherent answer tmrw)

[kazoo 586]

1 minute ago, Javert said:

Bomb them with TNT. (In all seriousness there are numerous tools to get Anywhere in a city. TNT damage self-repairs if I remember right, so just bomb your way through. It's a questionable strategy, but a strategy nonetheless)

tnt's are very expensive and he dug 400 blocks underground behind 60 iron doors. 

[Javert 5573]

6 minutes ago, kazoo said:

tnt's are very expensive and he dug 400 blocks underground behind 60 iron doors. 

Well I'll be honest I don't know what to tell you. But I also think escape routes should fit some sort of standard so they're not just 1x2 block tunnels. I clearly don't have the answers for everything and I am certain the Mods can do better than me. Also I think using an excessive amount of iron doors/trapdoors should be considered build scarring.

 

Edit: I sleep

[kazoo 586]

this could only work if a casus belli system was set up:
There are set amount of casus belli's that you can choose from:
Raiding the city to pillage it
battle the city's army
Capture someone in the city (only available when the person is online and in the city)
Heist the city
each of the should have their own set of rules that the nation being raided cant breach 
 

2 minutes ago, Javert said:

Well I'll be honest I don't know what to tell you. But I also think escape routes should fit some sort of standard so they're not just 1x2 block tunnels. I clearly don't have the answers for everything and I am certain the Mods can do better than me

the answer is there is no other way to prevent that without the system I said above

 

17 minutes ago, MayRndz said:

hot take though, yall raid at 3am and noone logs on because its 3am should the defenders have consiquences?

Make it so that you can only raid at peak hours. But the consequences to the defeated or not rallied nation should be considerably large like loosing a set portion of their treasury