31
General Discussion / Re: Persean League Crisis, and Crises in general, killed my desire to play more
« on: March 04, 2024, 02:33:59 AM »
Here's a rambling incoherant thought...
Spoiler
If you do absolutely nothing about the League trying to bully you, take no action whatsoever, the blockade lasts roughly a year.
So that's the timeframe this event runs on.
Why does it need to be front-loaded?
There's some scope with this crisis to pull off some "cold war" nonsense with slowly escalating tension, rising stakes, and the odd overzealous League commander that could be a nuisance. Or an opportunity.
And this could potentially be more narratively satisfying, and have a much lower risk of accidentally pushing away some players.
The blockade starts off with the enforcer fleets being given permission to act more aggressively - and gives a -10% accessibility.
Every month after that, if the player does not capitulate or make some kind of deal, the malus reduces accessibility by a further -5% and some additional fleets (of varying size) are sent to reinforce the blockade.
Any fleets that are destroyed are replaced by roughly equivalent ones, so there will always be a League presence of some level during the crisis.
If by month 10 the player has still not given in, the grand fleet gets sent, and accessibility is set to -60% for the remainder of the crisis.
In this context the grand fleet could be the the same main/command s-mod fleet from the current crisis, with a pair of smaller support fleets since it is no longer the whole event.
If the player beats the grand fleet - they win.
If the player never gives in and lasts the whole year - they win.
If the player reduces the crisis bar to zero at any point during the event - they win. (Caveat: Every time a League fleet successfully turns away a trader it adds to the bar.)
If the player gives in and joins the League - they win (but differently).
So that's the timeframe this event runs on.
Why does it need to be front-loaded?
There's some scope with this crisis to pull off some "cold war" nonsense with slowly escalating tension, rising stakes, and the odd overzealous League commander that could be a nuisance. Or an opportunity.
And this could potentially be more narratively satisfying, and have a much lower risk of accidentally pushing away some players.
The blockade starts off with the enforcer fleets being given permission to act more aggressively - and gives a -10% accessibility.
Every month after that, if the player does not capitulate or make some kind of deal, the malus reduces accessibility by a further -5% and some additional fleets (of varying size) are sent to reinforce the blockade.
Any fleets that are destroyed are replaced by roughly equivalent ones, so there will always be a League presence of some level during the crisis.
If by month 10 the player has still not given in, the grand fleet gets sent, and accessibility is set to -60% for the remainder of the crisis.
In this context the grand fleet could be the the same main/command s-mod fleet from the current crisis, with a pair of smaller support fleets since it is no longer the whole event.
If the player beats the grand fleet - they win.
If the player never gives in and lasts the whole year - they win.
If the player reduces the crisis bar to zero at any point during the event - they win. (Caveat: Every time a League fleet successfully turns away a trader it adds to the bar.)
If the player gives in and joins the League - they win (but differently).
[close]