Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2019-11-22, 14:12 WE ARE RECRUITING
Sign in to follow this  
Zero

Declaration of War

Declaration of War  

89 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Someone posted a suggestion about forced PKs so  I came up with this idea. What if we had a way on the forums where we can declare war if two parties are in a faction? 

The requirements would have to be

1. Both parties agree to the declaration.

2. After a series of firefights one side wins the war. The losing side is forced to PK and archive their group. 
 

To add on, the amount of firefights needed to win would have to be something like 3 perhaps 5. It doesn’t matter how they are won or how they occur. Of course you still have to initiate.

If the party complies you have the option of executing them (you’re at war, so you gain rights) or you can take them prisoner where they will sort of have to be forced to stay with your group when they’re online. 
 

I think that this option would give an ultimatum to people that keep crying about faction wars and firefights being pointless and since it’s optional and both parties have to agree it doesn’t hurt by adding it. 
 

This could also create more RP because if one side wanted to they could have a trial for the “war criminals” (Whoever lost the war). Also if people get captured but then rescued that could make a lost firefight null and reset the board, though that begins to complicate things.

obviously this would be on an honesty and Good sportsmanship type scale to an extent but so are a lot of other rules. The main suggestion is just add a declaration of war with the two bullet points above. The other stuff I added is just fluff. 

Edited by Zero

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

This is very much needed because without perma deaths wars just continue and RP becomes stagnant, right now it's basically have a war until the other side archives and makes a new group so hostilities are reset. 

Having this is also good because it doesn't force PK anyone, since both sides have to agree to it. That also makes it different from the PK executions and all that comes with that. I like this suggestion 100% 

Edited by NozzyRP

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, NozzyRP said:

This is very much needed because without perma deaths wars just continue and RP becomes stagnant, right now it's basically have a war until the other side archives and makes a new group so hostilities are reset. 

Yeah and this would get rid of that excuse of “oh I would PK but I know the other people won’t” and get rid of people complaining that firefights don’t do anything. It’s also completely optional so if people just want to keep dying over and over then it’s up to them. 

Edited by Zero

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

While I see where you are coming from by wanting to implement a system to make war finally matter and firefights have actual consequences, the idea you proposed straight up brings up a lot of question like f.e.:

1. How would you know who won a firefight? Logs? Or do both parties have to talk OOC with each other and what if they then dont agree?
2. How would you rescue someone when the hostage taker has permanent execution rights? The moment the first bullet flies, the hostage will get shot.
3. Would you suggest that the losing party also has to archive because when not, there are plenty of cases where people just rejoin their old group with a new, nearly identical character and continue the war?

Just to name a few questions. I get it, this is just a rough idea and the goal behind it, is very honorable but I simply think that a system like this would turn very fast very complicated and might only create more disagreements and salt than we already have as good sportmanship is a rare attribute nowadays sadly.

Edited by Malet

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Malet said:

While I see where you are coming from by wanting to implement a system to make war finally matter and firefights have actual consequences, the idea you proposed straight up brings up a lot of question like f.e.:

1. How would you know who won a firefight? Logs? Or do both parties have to talk OOC with each other and what if they then dont agree?
2. How would you rescue someone when the hostage taker has permanent execution rights? The moment the first bullet flies, the hostage will get shot.
3. Would you suggest that the losing party also has to archive because when not, there ware plenty of cases where people just rejoin their old group with a new, nearly identical character?

Just to name a few questions. I get it, this is just a rough idea and the goal behind it, is very honorable but I simply think that a system like this would turn very fast very complicated and might only create more disagreements and salt than we already have as good sportmanship is a rare attribute nowadays sadly.

1. Logs could be pulled. 
2. Would just be an option really and was more of a suggestion of how people could RP it out if they wanted to.

3. Obviously the losing side would be forced archived If it wasn’t the war would be pointless. Also the idea is ultimately to make stories matter. If chars don’t die then they’re pointless. If party A decided to let party Bs leader not have to PK that’s up them. 
 

I say that because it would be interesting to let the leader survive and execute all his friends in front of him. That person could be broken for being responsible for all those deaths. 
 

once again that is just a suggestion of how they could go with the RP. I always see people cry about nothing ever mattering in RP. This would even the playing field for everyone and make it equal. In the end it would be an option for people to choose. If someone gets salty because of a choice they made then that’s just something wrong with that persons moral character 

Edited by Zero

Share this post


Link to post

I think the goal should also be to archive the group.

Share this post


Link to post

An additional thing would be perhaps LMs would look at the logs and enter the totals onto a page dedicated to all the wars that are occurring. Not sure if that could be coded so someone doesn’t have to manually input it but this would allow people to keep track of war progress. 

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure of this but if groups accepted the terms to go to war then once one group has fought for x amount of time people should start PKing, if captured and executed then it should be a insta PK otherwise having a war is kinda pointless.

Share this post


Link to post

Just spit-balling ideas, because stuff like this has been discussed in the past.

1. Maybe not forced PK on firefights, but forced PK on execution can stay.  Characters being forced PK on a firefight seems kinda iffy, even if both parties agree.

2. War should also not be determined by a single firefight.  War can last a certain period of time, and groups can also opt to surrender.  Regardless of a surrender or a forcible loss in the war, the result always ends in the group archiving.  It's easier to archive a group than it is to permadeath a character, in my eyes, and seems like more a fair option.

This puts the focus more on RP, forces groups to decide between the group as a whole and it's goals/survival or the lives of the characters they've been sharing their story with.  It also makes the PK more about the hostile experience of capture and execution rather than just dropping a bunch of people in a firefight and calling it an easy clap and archive of a group/characters.

Regardless of the outcome, some sort of war system should be and always should have been apart of this server to bring a means to an end for conflict within RP.  So +1 to the overall idea.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe the groups haves to agree one each of their own terms. Like if they have agreed upon battles (better for everyone's schedule) or base sieges, or not at all. They make their own conditions for victory and the consequences for the losers. The contract will be made public and you can see a list of allies and enemies and this can lead to recruitment and people signing up to join in the fight. More RP. 

My concern is, if characters are PK'ed during the war from being captured or killed in a gun fight, depends on the two group's war agreement, players will just make another random character and have them rejoin their old group because they are OOC friends. That's the issue I see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Lets be realistic about this as well and state some of the obvious things regarding this situation. This is a perfect outcome for most groups to go to war with each other and I love the idea of it (especially the PKs and Archive bit) but this will also turn into rights to gloat. One group puts out a declaration of war and another turns it down and suddenly the other group will use it as bragging rights, insults, and belittlement. Groups will start feeling forced into accepting declarations of war to stop the same situation that occurs with the global radio thread after people lose a battle which is people quoting numbers and taunting.

This also turns into a situation where maybe not everyone in a group wants to PK their character just because they are in a group that accepted a war declaration, so there would have to be rules in place that during a declaration of war members can opt out of the PK, but this of course would then mean they couldn't help in the war against that particular enemy group that declared against them. 

The other very real elephant in the room...who is honestly going to declare against Anarchy? Do we allow multiple groups to ally to declare, or is this a 1 vs 1 declaration? There has and always will be only a small handful of groups out there that are and have ever been willing to fight against their group in the past due to their skills in PvP. It brings up needing rules regarding the numbers in a group, logging in during hostile situations to bolster numbers, what happens if a person not affiliated with the group gets a kill (does it become invalid and not counted as a kill count for the final winning count?), there's a lot of unknown that needs to be fleshed out, but if there could be some sort of system put in place to govern it all I think it would be a very neat idea and push for some great RP.

Edited by Malthis

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Malthis said:

Lets be realistic about this as well and state some of the obvious things regarding this situation. This is a perfect outcome for most groups to go to war with each other and I love the idea of it (especially the PKs and Archive bit) but this will also turn into rights to gloat. One group puts out a declaration of war and another turns it down and suddenly the other group will use it as bragging rights, insults, and belittlement. Groups will start feeling forced into accepting declarations of war to stop the same situation that occurs with the global radio thread after people lose a battle which is people quoting numbers and taunting.

This also turns into a situation where maybe not everyone in a group wants to PK their character just because they are in a group that accepted a war declaration, so there would have to be rules in place that during a declaration of war members can opt out of the PK, but this of course would then mean they couldn't help in the war against that particular enemy group that declared against them. 

The other very real elephant in the room...who is honestly going to declare against Anarchy? Do we allow multiple groups to ally to declare, or is this a 1 vs 1 declaration? There has and always will be only a small handful of groups out there that are and have ever been willing to fight against their group in the past due to their skills in PvP. It brings up needing rules regarding the numbers in a group, logging in during hostile situations to bolster numbers, what happens if a person not affiliated with the group gets a kill (does it become invalid and not counted as a kill count for the final winning count?), there's a lot of unknown that needs to be fleshed out, but if there could be some sort of system put in place to govern it all I think it would be a very neat idea and push for some great RP.

I agree with you. 

I also believe that groups should set the conditions. Groups can go to war and no choose to archive in order to build a Faction Story. Players can choose to be prisoner and not be PK'ed. As for the bragging that will likely occur, I only see a few groups doing so. In truth, they can ignore them. 

Share this post


Link to post

Why not make any deaths in an agreed war scenario be PK? Would make stuff allot more interesting, war is no small thing.

Share this post


Link to post

honestly perma death should be introduced into faction wars otherwise people can just keep running back to their group, Which means the war never ends and the body count gets ridiculous, After a certain amount of deaths (firefights) or a well role played execution people should accept their charcters death and move on, Not create an identical character or relation, This way factions can be destroyed and storys can progress, Nothing worse then having a war drag on for months on end with no real victor. Even worse when you come across the same guy you seen die 7 times in executions 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I think hardly any groups are ever going to willingly agree to a war with a group like Anarchy, hence the system is flawed.

 

Edited by APositivePara

Share this post


Link to post

Yes. Kill them. 

Share this post


Link to post

I voted no. 

If it's going to be an honor-system thing anyway, there's no reason two groups (or more) can't agree to terms ICly and OOCly and declare war as things stand now.

As for PKing and Archiving - that would be up the agreement between warring factions. 

Personally, I think it's ridiculous to ask another group to archive whether they've lost a war with yours or not. Even if original characters died in a war, the group can continue. It's just not your place to ask someone to do that. The point in this server is to encourage role play, not to rack up the deaths of characters and forced archivals like notches in your belt.

If folks get tired of killing people who won't stay dead, perhaps other goals are in order.

Share this post


Link to post

Would be pretty cool if people would actually use it. Which they probably won't because ya know, people. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Not as if there's actually a chance of an actual war occurring anytime soon, without a new group to challenge Anarchy. Nobody on the current group roster is really capable of it and unless other people come back to put up a fight things will probably remain the same.

Either way, the whitenames who would typically standup to larger groups are allergic to losing and defeat anyways 😂

Edited by Major

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...