Posts by StephanoV

I personally think that encouraging interractions between players is to be favoured to no roleplay.

Sharing responsabilities and actions (as opposing to be a one-man army) could be very productive, for example:

If I were a pirate I would ask a smuggler buddy of mine to check his contacts and find me the best trade route of the day. Then I would ask him to accompany me in his train and I would ask for a big tax so that eventually somebody doesn't pay (or just waste him) then tipp of the smuggler. The smuggler would tractor the whole cargo and pay me 10-20% of the "brute profit" (which could be alot).

The same day or the day after, the smuggler would check the trade routes and find the best one for the cargo of his char, go to that system and just wait in a cloud or nebulae clost to the base. He then could try to sell it to other people at half of the price (and who would not buy merchandise even for 1500-2000/unit profit if the base was right there, within 10k.

what does the smuggler win? - doesn't have to dock 100000 times, unloads his cargo and make some profit
what does the pirate win? - enhances rp and makes some money regardless of taxing
what does the merchant win?- adrenaline rush, makes trading more interesting (can hire mercenaries to defend while he docks and undocks)
what does everybody win?- alot of fun, RP and interraction between people...which is why we are here in the 1st place.

I think that we could overcome all of the setbacks with a little immagination.

@ Myric

The "political" dimension of CF exists today too but in a latent form. The problem is that right now politics is practically set by each clan's ego. In my model, politics will be set by the need of resources and plans for development. So if today some clans are fighting over little matters, in the future clans will not be able to afford such things without losing resources...so that people will not enter RP conflict as easy as they entered RP AND RL conflict in the past (and you all know how many conflicts like that existed). \

There is no concept of "clan wars"...anyway, not as you guys perceive it. The main idea here is that :

1. Clans could benefit from territory in gathering resources and "power".
2. Clans could extend their territory.
3. Clans could lose their territory if out of resources or if they expand too much.

There are tons of other implications...politics is jut the top of the eisberg here...the rest is pure RP.

P.S I agree with Bond, "Handle with care" But also "With great power comes great responsability."

Well, not really re-inventing the wheel...

Not only allies could come to the aid of one clan but also "paid help" => so resources start to play a key role in a clan's existance...

As for the resemblance to the ASF/CSF event...this is only because the ASF and CSF are forced alliances). The "Conquest Model" encourages the free forming and developing of inter-clan relations in a complex socio-political environment). For instance cops could enter a "truce" with a pirate clan (especially if we would need more pirates on the server and so we could let them gather resources and grow), or a "Pact of non-aggression" according to which Pirates do not tax on their territory and Cops do not engage unless otherwize engaged by the pirates.

@ Bond

I understand what you are saying...but unfortunately this is not the place to post it...In this post we are looking for solutions to problems not just to criticise...

@ everyone
P.S Please pm me with the any problem that you find in the concept AND at least one solution that you can think of, solution that would fit the 24/7 RP agenda.

@ Huor

It means that if I catch somebody docking or tresspassing without clearance or smuggling something without my approval as the owner of the monopoly I can chose to follow and terminate the target into one neutral system away from mine. IF I do this on another clan's territory and the "offender" is protected by that clan, I am taking the risk of deteriorating relations with that clan and entering an open conflict.

That's what it means...maybe I should of been more clear on the fact that pursuing and punishing into one neutral system was the point and not actually enforcing the monopoly...either way..."Smugglers" will originate in my system so => this is meant to let me pursue even out of my system, but I'd have to stop there...no need to pursue all over the galaxy.

Clan rented systems are untouchable. this related to neutral territory or Territory of Influence.

Michael

First of all, there are certain advantages that some people have and others don't. To name a few: numbers, coordination, equipment, etc.

This system is thought in such a way that the majority of the players can enjoy CF and Roleplay as well as the minority but within certain boundries.

There are some problems that would exist regardless of the concepts we use, to name a few:

A. Time difference, as you noted.
B. Lack of will to RP.
C. Small numbers.
D. Looking for quirks to take advantage of within the concept (finding exploits so to speak).

This model has been developed with all these in mind. I ask you this Michael: What happens when Clan A conquers 10 systems (including one that you want to conquer) and when you claim it and coordinate with your mates in an attack, then Clan A simply avoids you or you don't see any of their members online...or the clan has been inactive for some time, etc. => that system together with the rest becomes inconquerable which means in this case that these 10 systems are "out of the game", DEAD systems RP wize. So when chosing between CF RP that will surely attract new players and Clan ownership for a clan that does not use it or avoids RP...what do you chose (we're not talking about the rented system here, only about "conquered systems)?

Even in the situation that the attackers/defenders are in opposite time zones, it is impossible to not be able to meet online (even if it's a few players here and there) in a week's time.

art. 3
Yes, first and foremost it has to be known IF the clan wants to defend the territory...maybe it doesn't.

art. 6 and 7

6.a Yes, anywhere in Colorado. (seems only fair)

Option 2: Yes, you are right on the NY thing. There has to be some space between the oposing parties.
If the defending clan owns all of the basses within that system, then yes the attackers have to dock somewhere outside it.

Problem: One situation would be something like conquering NB, Essen. What happenes when you conquer Dortmund? This is a real problem, as you can't break the rules and attack from 2 meters away. One option would be to claim both and then those are your choices for the week.

@ All

I think that the best course of action would be for you to copy-paste the text, mark your questions on it (prefferably with some space between or in a different colour) and send it to me and I will post an answer to each and every one the problems indicated AND possibile solutions if more than one (like a quiz...with 1,2,3 or more variants from which clan leaders will vote). Just so that we save effort and coordinate, let's do it withing a time frame.

So, I expect your questions by pm to my adress here at SWAT until the 1st of October (this Friday). Then, I will read all and re-post the document tackling each and every problem in order, for every article.

sorry, my bad choice of words...it should be like "The area of influence for this monopoly is that particular system and/or all of the clan's Systems of Influence, extending as far as one system away into neutral territory. If they chose to enforce their rules on another clan's territory though, they do it at their own expense."

P.S I edited it.

I already posted in the Leaders' Board but I will double-post here too.

The important decisions and voting though would be best to be made in the Leader Board.

This is the Conquest Model that I propose for debating:

Quoted
Territories->

1. Rented systems have the same definition as stated in the CF Rules.

2. Sysems of Influence -> Systems which are conquered but do not share the same particularities as the clan rented systems. The conquering clan's authority within those systems is limited to:

a. Enforcing a monopoly over any BMG that can be bought at the stations within that territory. The area of influence for this monopoly is that particular system and/or all of the clan's Systems of Influence, extending as far as one system away into neutral territory. If they chose to enforce their rules on another clan's territory though, they do it at their own expense.

b. Controling the access with the benefit of granting access rights or not to any other areas within the Systems of Influence BESIDES areas where there are Trade Lanes and Jump Gates, those being PUBLIC AREAS. (docking at basses can be restricted or not by the owning clan with the exceptions that are present in the CF rules -ie noobies-)

c. Setting any RP rules that the clan sees fit for all of their Systems of Influence (can be the same as their Rented System or different) AS LONG AS THEY RESPECT THE CF RULES and are stimulating RP. (I.E->granting authorisation for a certain BMG that represents a password and when a trader is scanned and asked for tax he would say the password and leave without paying anything)

Publicity->

3. Any conquering process should be properly advertised at SWAT 1 full week before it takes place (so that people could make time or know when it will be) and if nobody opposes it (with a post in that topic) until the attack can begin (ie. the intent to attck is posted on the 20th at 10:00am => if on the 27th at 10:00am there is no post containing the intent to defend, then the system is considered as conquered).

4. The conquering process could take place under the ASF/CSF ROE, with the noted exception that everything transformes from "one system" to "one base" or "empty system" AND that if the attacking clan does not "own" any base within that system the attack would have to "spawn" from one system away and/or within a system from an attacker "owned" base situated at least 2 sectors away (between the conquering and attacking basses there should be at least 2 sectors NOT counting the sector that the basses are located in)

5. After a week has passed since the SWAT post relating to the conquering of a base AND the defenders have posted their intention to defend, the attackers should warn any ONE member of the opposing side via in game chat, taking a screenie with a time stamp. If nobody comes to defend the base within 15 minutes, then the attackers have a bonus equal to their numbers. This bonus can be earned in the same way (message with a timestamp while within the claimed system) once every 24 hours (more or less) since their first screenie with a time stamp, until the week ends. NOTE: There has to be at least one defender online in order for this to happen.
a. If the defender exits the base or system after he/she has died a number of times inferior to the number of attackers, then the present rule applies, ADDING the number of attackers to the registered kills. (no shortcuts to victory)

Battle->

6. Following the ASF/CSF ROE for one full week from the moment the attack begins. Attackers should mount (open for debate) ASF licenses and defenders CSF (or the other way around...or if the clans are of different RP faction maybe we could track them down in that system and get a score -> people employed by att/or def should wear the same licenses as their allies do).
a. The DEFENDERS should be DOCKED in the sytem/base that they are defending, in a location within the base's vicinity (2 to 4 sectors in every direction) OR in the nearest possible location when defending an empty system.

7. Once a base or system (with no basses) is officially "conquered" then all the defenders must exit that system or vicinity of that base (2 sectors in each direction) as soon as possible and MUST not engage the members of the victorious clan until they are out of the system or vicinity of the base AND UNLESS 72 hours have passed since the system was officially "conquered".
a. A system is "OFFICIALLY conquered" the moment a post is made on SWAT in the same thread as the post for attack. The official conquering post must contain: a link to a screensaver containing the autoreferee score which indicates the winner OR
b. In case the system or base is not defended, a screensaver with a timestamp took at the moment the system can be attacked AND an identical screen with time stamp 15 minutes later IF a member of the defending clan is online. (the objective is to determine the lack of intent to defend, if the member of the defending clan expresses the lack of intention to defend in writing then one screen with this and a time stamp is of BUT it must be explicit)
c. A clan LEADER can CONTEST the conquering of one system within the Leader's board PROVIDING that he/she can prove their accusations with screenies OR if the ATTACKING CLAN did not produce any screens needed to validate the conquest (autoreferee screens, lack of intent to defend screens, etc).

8. A person will be chosen on behalf of each side involved in the conflict that will be in command of the whole operation (att or def) and will be accountable for any abuse (unless they prove that the person that committed the abuse did it on pourpuse and of bad intent). Of course, that person can delegate its responsability to other members, case in which they must provide proof by posting a screensaver with a pm or in-game chat from which should result the transfer of power BUT this will be required JUST IN CASE THAT THERE ARE PROBLEMS.

Limits->

9. The "rented" clan system cannot be conquered. (open for debate, like everything else)

10. A clan can claim a system that is situated at a maximum 1 systems away from territory it already owns (1 system should exist between the attacking clan's territory AND the targeted system) be it rented system or conquered territory.

11. A clan can only attack 2 basses or empty systems at one time or one of each. On the other hand, if a clan is attacked by more clans it would have to defend each territory attacked by all clans.

This is what I came up with. Please READ ALL OF IT, ask me where it is not clear AND state the section number or article as you comment on it and please let us proceed IN ORDER, from ARTICLE 1 to 11. Once we clear one we DO NOT DISCUSS it any further UNLESS it's absolutely neccessary.

Thank you.

...you didn't catch my drift...but whatever, it's not important anyway. Let's stick to the subject at hand. please tell me if I should post a "conquest model" in the LB.

Diablo

My case is a special one, not all of the players of CF go offline for a year and then come back when they can...I didn't want to come online at least once because if I do not have time to play then I prefer not playing to spending only 15 or 30 minutes online/day. You strike me as an intelligent person...yet you ask these kind of questions...

@all
I read op's post and I wanted to bring something constructive to it so I did. I put together my experience with CF, SW and other mods in order to help improve things on CF. I appreciate that you have read my proposals and taken them into account but up until now I have only heard complaints and very little constructive suggestions.

Let's start with this: will it be ok if I would post a "Conquest Model" based on what I said in the clan leaders' section and the clan leaders could point out the problems in it so that we can figure them out one by one and come up with something practical that we can implement in the long run?

@ diablo

Yes, that is precisely why the "battle" should take place within a week's time. Don't tell me that in one week (especially if you have one MORE week to plan it) you cannot synchronize all of the members in your clan so that you can kill members of the attacking clan in the contested system. (according to the ASF/CSF ROE the winner is chosen according to the number of kills...if the attacking clan has some advantages in coordination, numbers etc...then that's the reality. the same goes for the defending clan.) We must build on this and develop, think this out for a future in which CF will have more players...if we do not do that and anchor ourselves in the current situation there wil be no chance for improvement.

Believe me when I say that I have very little time to play...I've been offline for almost one full year because of that...

Please don't tell me that a proper coordination cannot be done in 2 weeks' time...

Arrow

It's not like that, mate...you don't have to set your goal to conquer the world in order to expand your territoty...

If you ever played "Risk" then you know that in the beginning they role the dice and share the territories...just like the European Superpowers did with colonies all over the world.

Normally, clans would pick an area that is close to their home system and start building around it until they eventually neighbour another clan (according to some Geopolitical Theories) but the CF situation is somewhat special...because of the great number of systems liked the the CF system that are dead ends.

What I wanted to say...was that in the beginning clans will take up territory unchallanged, until most of the valuable territory is claimed. After this, the fun will begin.

What if some new clan comes along and wants a system? somebody would object.
Nothing more simple...They will have to a. Get friendly with a clan that owns territory and affords to help the minor clan develop as in "giving" them a system (which the minor clan will pay for at SWAT) and this means that there will be an alliance between the minor clan and the major one that helped it...and from this alone can spawn tons and tons of diplomatic, strategic and tactical RP.

If this will be adopted, I would strongly reccomend that you pick an area in space and start building on it.

@ everybody
The goal here is to make "areas of influence", not a rainbow or a political map. This is why I think that it would be best if in the "Conquest Model" we put a rule that states that Clans can only conquer systems that are a maximum 2 or 3 systems away from a controled system of their own (we could make an expection only at the begining givn the special CF situation). (again...the CF system is the honeypot here...system which would have to remain neutral for the sake of ballance for now (like a Crossfire UN)...in the future it could be conquerable).

@ Huor

To what you've said well...no. This was thought for all of the Server, Clans and Freelancers...
This is as much interesting for freelancers as for the clans.

In the new model, freelancers would have to take in account the zones that the clans are enforcing monopolies on...for instance...IF nowdays Jack Smith is doing his usual "runs", smuggling BMG and buying back some comodity and so on and so forth, in the new system Jack Smith would have to chose between

a. Remain neutral to the clan that is currently holding that monopoly in that system and pay his dues to that clan
b. Remain neutral to the clan and invest in an escort or try to avoid them.
c. Risk getting friendly to that clan and if the system switches owners, then point b.
d. Get friendly with an opposing clan in hope that they will someday dispute that system/base and they would have some benefits off that.

These are just 4 new possibilities for freelancers that I thought of in about 5 seconds since I've seen your post...the possibilities would be almost endless..within the limits of the human imagination, the engine of the game and the CF General Server Rules.

That's to say that...Freelancers will have the same status and possibilities as now...+ an indefinite number of more things to do^^

+ There is one big benefit I didn't think about just now...The Smuggler RP, one which now is under-rated to say at best...will become something quite usefull...as they could get places, systems and basses that other players will not...(in the situation that clan X is at war with mine -or I don't want to risk a diplomatic incident- I can't buy stuff from one base it owns when any are online...but if I log on at the time that some of them do I may prefer to pay a smuggler for that equipment...and as long as I did not dock at that base to purchase the equipment -thing which can be veryfied- then nobody can accuse me of anything)

Either way, untouchable clan rented system or not, it would be a huge step forward, RP wize and community wize...not to mention that every noob that would come in and get sucked in this RP would want a clan of his/her own=rented system (we could make a special offer for the noobs...there are lots of systems out there) (I think that we could even make an Level-up system for the clans ie. Minor clans - one base in a system (maybe in a system with more basses)- I don't want to sound mercantile...but 5euro/month (1 euro x 5 people) Clans - 10 euro/ 2 basses or small system with 2 basses and Established Clans - one big system (min. 4 basses) or two small systems, etc...the possibilities are endless...but we have to have "the dream"

I can see Michael's point and to be honest from a personal point of view I think that if this is the only problem, then no need to worry about the cherry on the cake^^ if there is a cake in the first place.

Anyway, all of this is not important in the end...we will figure it out after we agree to a 24/7 RP Conquest Model...

well, given the fact that

1. freelancers go on about their business oblivious to inter-clan disputes AND that, as you can read in the model I have presented, they would have automatic transit rights (of course, if they are not kos...case in which they would be killed anywhere anyway)

2. clans cannot lose their system (or base) irrelevant of what happenes.

I do not see any problems there...

Moreover, if a clan decides that they want to "conquer the world"...well, bad news...because as they conquer more and more territory they have less and less resources to defend it properly...so that they will lose it...and if some clans continue to conquer they will collapse on their own castle of cards...

so why not make it 24/7 -> you conquer a system or base within a week time (according to the Conquest Model), you bust your ass to conquer it, then you can reap the benefits of its monopolies and patrol it (but you'd have to let freelancers pass the "conquered" system without any permission, free passage! unless they are kos or something similar). Why return it the next day?What's the point of working for something if you know that it will all be in vain in the morning.

It is very important to note one BIG difference: rented system IS NOT THE SAME as a "conquered" system or base

Michael

1. Alaska has 2 basses.
2. If the CF system would be conquered then one could conquer Alaska. The same rules that apply for basses can apply for territory also, so if you conquer middpoint rift, then you're on your way to Alaska
3. please don't try to find enemies when there are not and let's set the differences aside. The only place that we should be on opposite sides SHOULD BE ROLEPLAY.

@Cryssis

As I understand CF is also a RP server. Wouldn't it be better if instead of "Events", which are schedualed, organized, planned ...and are by definition bound to pesky rules and limits in creativity and tactical & strategical approach, wouldn't it be better if we had a living, breathing self-adjustable universe in which territories shift, clans gain or lose influence and everything helps to induce the player in heavy RP? (Situation in which, everything being ROLEPLAY, there would be less abuse, fighting and bickering outside roleplay -> and no clan wars and tension outside of RP)

@ Op

There could be 2 situations:

1. Paying for a system acknowledges you as a server clan and grants you the possibility to "conquer" systems (with no basses) or basses, BUT you can lose one base if there are 2 in your system or a certain territory (defined by coordinates or landmarks -clouds, debree fields, etc as a DMZ or something)

2. Paying for a system does all of the above BUT once you've paid for one then it's off-limits to attackers.

As I understand, there is currently a trend for RP and rumour goes around that CF needs RP. Why not make it a 24/7 RP server? This way the mnute that people log on they are/should be in character so there should be, at least hipoteticaly, less problems...This, of course means that if for instance members from clan X do not want to RP AND clan Y is to attack one of their systems, by being inactive clan X will lose it or part of it...This in turn is why democracy favors the bigger segment of the population. If most people want to RP, then let it be so. IF not, no or less RP.

Me for one, the moment I log in Crossfire (and It's been some time...) I want to forget all about the crap from RL, the dirtbag at the Ministry of Finance that taxed me 2 times for dues on April, the sh*t-head that sold me a couch without delivering it when I needed it and the list can go on and on...I am really not in the mood for anything else but Roleplay...

Addendum -> we could use the Autoreferee to score kills within the disputed system (but a victory should only win the base claimed) by using ASF/CSF like Attacker/Defender. We could use it like this now but in the future maybe it could be changed to Attacker/Defender. ASF/CSF roleplay would take place every day anyway...:)

I have had some experience with this on the SW:WT server. They have a "conquering model" but it is kind of complicated (waves of attackers, alot of pre-determined planning,. no room for tactical approach)...Moreover, the conquering of a planet/zone could happen in one day, this meaning of course that not everyone could attend the battles.

There are a couple of problems that we should keep in mind when figuring out a "conquering model", among which are:

1. People have to be able to attend it.
2. It has to be properly advertised so that everybody knows what's coming.
3. There have to be Rules of Engagement (our ASF/CSF would be perfect, with a few minor changes)
4. It has to be transparent, so that nobody takes advantage or contests it without an actual motive
5. It has to be "lucrative", people have to gain something by seizing a system and lose that advantage by losing the system

...and some more that I cannot think about right now.

We could set up a "brainstorm" team and kick off a project like this, Crossfire Conquering Model. I am sure that in about 1 week we could come up with something easy to use, fun generating, tactical and RP-inducing conquering model.

I would suggest that we do not tackle systems right now...maybe it would be better if we could conquer basses instead (planets, stations,everything dockable)

Benefits ->
1. being able to enforce a monopoly on whatever bmg that base sells, in that system and those in the immediate vicinity (jg/jh away)
2. being able to control the areas around the base (20 or so km) -> if the base is near a tl, then the owner of the base should allow free passage to everyone but the people/clans hostile to it, no need for permission though because some areas would be heavily transited

Publicity->
3. Any conquering process should be properly advertised at SWAT 1 full week before it takes place (so that people could make time or know when it will be) and if nobody opposes it (with a post in that topic) until the attack begins, then the system is conquered.
4. The conquering process could take place under the ASF/CSF ROE, with the noted exception that everything transformes from "one system" to "one base" AND that if the attacking clan does not "own" any base within that system the attack would have to "spawn" from one system away, if not from the base that they "own" (beach-head)
5. After a week has passed since the SWAT post relatingto the conquering of a base, the attackers should warn any one member of the opposing side via in game chat, takeing a screenie with a time stamp. If nobody comes to defend the base within 10 minutes, the attacking party can proceed with the attack and points are scored according to ASF/CSF ROE.

Battle->
6. Following the ASF/CSF ROE for one full week from the moment the attack begins.

Limits->
7. The "rented" clan system cannot be conquered but if it contains more than one base then that base may be conquered, PROVIDING the fact that the attacking clan owns all of the basses within an immediatly neighbouring system. (the aim here is put a strategycal dimmension to CF, because a clan in this situation would immediately either expand in the other direction or chose a diplomatic path to a truce)

Also, please note that according to this model, clans will not be able to spread as they will...they will still have to defend those territories. This means that if one clan extends its territory too much so that it exceeds its resources that clan may not be able to defend it. Also, it would stimulate a strategycal RP in diplomacy and forming Alliances and Treaties (i.e The Universal Police Treaty, etc.)

These are a few ideas that I could throw but we can develop the concept and make it our own Crossifre Conquering Model.

and Romanian
and English

So all in all I take it as a no, the Community does not need new rules. That was all I wanted to hear. Having drawn this conclusion, I can rest easy that I did my best.

I'm not going to contribute to flaming this thread...so I'd have to respectfully ask that you keep it simple.