Deprecated: Function bp_core_get_user_domain is deprecated since version 12.0.0! Use bp_members_get_user_url() instead. in /home/lotj/www/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6170
Deprecated: Function seems_utf8 is deprecated since version 6.9.0! Use wp_is_valid_utf8() instead. in /home/lotj/www/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6170
Deprecated: Function seems_utf8 is deprecated since version 6.9.0! Use wp_is_valid_utf8() instead. in /home/lotj/www/wordpress/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6170
-
-
September 12, 2010 at 4:22 am #1546
I came back to the mud right when the war between the empire and rebels began. I noticed something missing that could add another level of fun to the mud.
In real world wars, its not just gaining grown that wins the war but strategic locations that give you an advantage and disadvantage the enemy when you take it/destroy it. I just noticed that there is very little to ‘war’ in the mud aside from trying to cap planets back and forth, over and over and over and over and over again. Most of the time while members of the enemy clan aren’t even there. Thats my personal experience anyway.
What if another gas giant planet besides bespin was added to the mud and it would have a tibanna gas mining facility along with several refining facilities attached to it( Bespin also). The number of facilities is debatable. But the warring clans could fight over them for the advantage of more ammo available at a cheaper price on the planets that clan owns and blockading a planet would cut off the supply. If one clan didn’t have any facilities under its control prices would go up by quite a lot and they would have to be very careful with how they use the ammo that they have. Tibanna gas is also used as hyper drive coolant. That could be added as well.
The facilities could have new features added to it if the clan buys them. Shield generators, turrets, traps, self destruct, etc. I’m sure other things can be thought of.
Clans would have to stockpile ammo in case they lost control of their defended facilities. And if they lost it all they would have to resort to a black market. Smuggling ammo to an enemy planet would become a nice way of earning credits. It would be expensive for the clan that had very little left.
This wouldn’t replace the planet capping at all. It would just add another angle to how war is fought on LOTJ.
It would create highly strategic areas in the mud that would have a high chance of war and pking. Because tibanna gas is like the oil of star wars.
Control the gas, control the galaxy.
I have another idea that would add a small high pking area to the mud I’ll put in a different topic after this.
-
September 15, 2010 at 11:18 pm #15189
This sounds cool.
Perhaps fighting for resources like special ship hull (this would probably have to be coded in), or crystals, or something. The government holding the planet would get credits for selling those.
-
September 16, 2010 at 1:49 am #15190
Yeah, Those are good ideas for normal planets. I’m sure a lot of different things could be added.
It would give more a lot of incentive to fight for planets rather than just for popular support. Fighting for military/strategic/resource advantages is how war is really fought. Maybe occupying the planet gives the clan access to the advantages but gaining full support of the hearts and minds of the people living on it adds a few more advantages.
I also think hyperspace lanes should be put in somehow. It would add the element of blockading the lanes with a fleet, not just blockading a planet. Giving the clan power to blockade a whole section of the galaxy and the trade routes, But ships capable of hyperspace interdiction would be needed for this.
-
September 16, 2010 at 3:52 am #15193
There already is, sort of, the fight for the strategic importance.
For example, Imperial Remnant (Korriban) vs New Republic.(Coruscant), and there’s 3 other planets, BUT there’s one planet that’s both near Coruscant and Korriban, but Coruscant and Korriban are farther away. So the planet that is close to either of those planet is of strategic importance, imo, since your fleet can refuel and stuff over there.
You also get taxes from planets, not sure if taxes matter on popular support.
I think planets also matter with the fleet size, but you’d have to check that.
But other than that, there’s not much difference. <!– s:P –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_razz.gif" alt="
" title="Razz" /><!– s:P –>
-
September 16, 2010 at 5:39 am #15194
With taxes.. Maybe they could put the two together, the number of popular support would related to the % of taxes you get from the citizens. If you have 60% of the people loyal to the government, they will all willing pay taxes to it, but the 40% that hates it won’t pay. Maybe its already fixed that way, I don’t know. But if not I’d think it could work.
-
September 16, 2010 at 10:46 am #15195
The pop support is currently just a meter of how controlled the planet is.
The strategic drive in holding/attacking planets CURRENTLY is because of clanlimits affecting how many ships they can have. And also for things like quests and eq and such (more in the past than currently). Also, things like engineering companies, think about how hotly contest Corellia’s been this era.
Rather than adding in enforced, coded benefits for holding planets, why not just let the clans prosecute their wars in the way they want? Or at least add resources to planets that may or may not be valuable, depending on a clan’s goals and strategies, rather than making it mandatory to hold all the planets and a severe disadvantage for every planet you don’t have.
The goal is to strike a balance between the risks of expansion versus the benefits of it. To make a coded system where success is strongly reinforced every time and failure strongly punished every time means there would be more timelines like last timeline, where the rebs/NR were losing so hard that they couldn’t manage to stop getting raped long enough to try to win.
And in general freedom and thoughtful strategy are just BETTER than enforced coded reasons.
That’s not to say the planetary system doesn’t need work: it certainly does. But this is not the work it needs.
Diplomacy needs to be fixed to be useful, planetary leaders need to have something to DO other than minmax cargo prices, preferably not something silly and grindy.
-
September 16, 2010 at 5:02 pm #15196
This already is a factor – clans fight over planets for revenue stream, fleet expansions, and control over the resources there (engi clan facilities, eq, quest areas, etc.)
-
September 25, 2010 at 10:16 pm #12086
Fun fact: Popular support heavily affects revenue from a planet. It’s not "just a meter"
-
September 27, 2010 at 1:13 am #12119
Well obviously it won’t go below 0… at least, I don’t think it will… maybe…
-