[Draft #2] War Guidelines

[Elz]

this is about war rules what a derail : (
i like it Rygan.

 

[Rygan]

 

[Cymic_]

 

[French Roast]

..... I mean I think these look good.

 

[MRPolo13]

I'll take the proper time to respond to the guidelines in a bit. Since that's the point of the thread, and not how annoying someone can be..

 

[MRPolo13]

Let's have a proper look at this then.

II. Active fighters may not revive until the war has concluded (or at the end of a single month in which there are no battles or sieges), at which point any in the queue will revive all at once. If choosing to drop out of the war entirely, normal revival times apply.

A month feels like a stretch. I think we need to have a think about at what point a war concludes. In my view two weeks where nothing happens is already quite a while. I think that what should be done is keep the month, but after two weeks ask if you want to just resolve the war and revive everyone.

I. To reach a destination to begin a battle or a siege, an army must march. A march includes the actual movement of the army and the setting up of a war camp. While encamped, an army may raid any opposing faction’s war camps if located within 1000 blocks or engage in a field battle. Marching is not limited to one side, making it possible to cut off an enemy army and face them in the field. If two opposing sides set up war camps within 1000 blocks of each other, neither may advance until one side has been routed or has chosen to retreat back. If an army chooses to let the other pass without retaliation, this is of course at the the two party's discretion. Travel functions by the opposing sides acting in turns of where they wish to go. The turn with the closer destination finishes first, the other then completing. The same applies for moving ships and the men on them. In the case of both sides agreeing one may travel to their destination immediately - such as to make an event date that works best for all involved - then they are free to do so.

1000 blocks is massive. When you consider that this (very large) map is less than 30,000 blocks in height, being able to travel 1/30th of the map per turn, then being able to engage at a 1000 blocks, it really makes things awkward. It'd take about two turns to get from Queensport to Stoltfar, to use a current example, despite the real distance being significantly further and there being mountains and frozen land in between. Only one turn to attack. I'd be fine with a lot more turns happening with half or even quarter of the distance (at its base). 500 blocks is quite a solid number for now though in my opinion.
One area where I think the distance should be higher (maybe 750 blocks) is sailing. This is the fastest mode of transport we have and that should be reflected. However, it should be counterbalanced by longer prep time. So for instance, before an army can set off they need to wait a turn for preparation. In order to sail an army needs to wait two turns. That way they set off late, but catch up in a few turns. Warcamp ranges should be more like 250 blocks, too.

Other than that I'd love to see multipliers that I mentioned in another thread. That'd be swell, but I understand you're after the most basic level.

V. Sieges require a war camp within 500 blocks of the location, an event with the staff team and opposing faction, and at least six days between the establishment of the camp and the siege if constructing war machines beyond simple ladders and rams. If storming the gates without any of these things, such as in a naval landing, then consider these prerequisites null at DM discretion..

In real terms 6 days is an awfully long wait. Even in turns it should be maybe three or so.

 

[French Roast]

Let's have a proper look at this then.



A month feels like a stretch. I think we need to have a think about at what point a war concludes. In my view two weeks where nothing happens is already quite a while. I think that what should be done is keep the month, but after two weeks ask if you want to just resolve the war and revive everyone.



1000 blocks is massive. When you consider that this (very large) map is less than 30,000 blocks in height, being able to travel 1/30th of the map per turn, then being able to engage at a 1000 blocks, it really makes things awkward. It'd take about two turns to get from Queensport to Stoltfar, to use a current example, despite the real distance being significantly further and there being mountains and frozen land in between. Only one turn to attack. I'd be fine with a lot more turns happening with half or even quarter of the distance (at its base). 500 blocks is quite a solid number for now though in my opinion.
One area where I think the distance should be higher (maybe 750 blocks) is sailing. This is the fastest mode of transport we have and that should be reflected. However, it should be counterbalanced by longer prep time. So for instance, before an army can set off they need to wait a turn for preparation. In order to sail an army needs to wait two turns. That way they set off late, but catch up in a few turns. Warcamp ranges should be more like 250 blocks, too.

Other than that I'd love to see multipliers that I mentioned in another thread. That'd be swell, but I understand you're after the most basic level.



In real terms 6 days is an awfully long wait. Even in turns it should be maybe three or so.

Polo isn't lazy like me and actually looked at the map and stuff. I can agree with these suggestions

 

[Naelwyn]

Warcamp ranges should be more like 250 blocks, too.

Minor chiming in with constructive comment - if 2xWarcamp range ~< Max Movement Distance then it's possible to avoid all engagements by maneuvering around Warcamp range. Warcamp range ideally prevents movement around the warcamp without being attacked on the move.

If Movement distance is 500 the lowest warcamp distance can go is.. 300ish. I'd recommend keeping them the same for ease of gridding it out.

 

[MRPolo13]

Minor chiming in with constructive comment - if 2xWarcamp range ~< Max Movement Distance then it's possible to avoid all engagements by maneuvering around Warcamp range. Warcamp range ideally prevents movement around the warcamp without being attacked on the move.

If Movement distance is 500 the lowest warcamp distance can go is.. 300ish. I'd recommend keeping them the same for ease of gridding it out.

That's a fair point. But escaping and evading the enemy should also be a part of the war. It should be possible, but not extremely easy.

(that's why multipliers would be great )

 

[Naelwyn]

One area where I think the distance should be higher (maybe 750 blocks) is sailing. This is the fastest mode of transport we have and that should be reflected. However, it should be counterbalanced by longer prep time. So for instance, before an army can set off they need to wait a turn for preparation. In order to sail an army needs to wait two turns. That way they set off late, but catch up in a few turns. Warcamp ranges should be more like 250 blocks, too.

I would go so far as to say that Naval Movement should be 2x land movement.

Ideally in a system that tracked supplies the real 'price' of moving aquatically, outside of the risk of storms and the restrictions of water, is the fact that an army you are shipping somewhere cannot resupply on the move/forage whatsoever and will be strictly eating what rations they could pack for the trip.

 

[MRPolo13]

I would go so far as to say that Naval Movement should be 2x land movement.

Ideally in a system that tracked supplies the real 'price' of moving aquatically, outside of the risk of storms and the restrictions of water, is the fact that an army you are shipping somewhere cannot resupply on the move/forage whatsoever and will be strictly eating what rations they could pack for the trip.

I don't agree because I think there should be some sort of a drawback to navy (aside from not being able to go on land, of course). This could be fine if they had to wait a while to prepare the ships, like three turns. The navy would then catch up in four/five turns.

 

[Naelwyn]

While also offering suggestions, I think of typical war scenarios and come to a conclusion-

I think a proper system of warfare is a compelling thing, but should go onto it's own map, wherein all settlements and entities are considered Moderate at minimum.

I don't know how to account for warfare rules that include terrain which neither army can approach 'Because'. As an actual commander I would abuse the heck out of it and camp and situate my army right on the edge of whatever peaceful bubble range they get and use them as I would mountains or other impassable terrain at the bare minimum.

Warfare rules but a map not geared for war would be somewhat counterproductive, yet splitting the maps would allow for the community to cater to different types of people.

 

[Scardrac]

How does freeform naval and artillery roleplay work?