Hutt War- New Initiative
- Thread starter Santoro
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #22
For the Republic? I'm confused.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
Er, for the Hutts.
http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18315
Darksaber Squadron is listed there. It's a hybrid Hutt/Bogan force.
http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18315
Darksaber Squadron is listed there. It's a hybrid Hutt/Bogan force.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #24
Oh OK.
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 18,425
- Reaction score
- 32
You can't realistically merge threads together unless they take place in the same general area. It just gets confusing.
Focus on one battleground at a time, I say. First the Bothan, than the Denon battle. OOCly one happens after the other, but ICly they happen at the same time. This should be fine as the two would be separate entities entirely.
The Bothan Space battle and Shipyards can happen at the same time. The attack fleet jumps in, starts firing on the defenses, and when it secures the Shipyards in that thread it unloads the marines to attack the Shipyards.
Then, if, and only if, the Hutt fleet can overpower the Bothan one and move in to orbital possitions, the ground force can be deployed and start that thread.
Same basic deal with Denon. The space thread first, then the ground and capital can happen at the same time.
That way you've only got two, possibly three, threads happening at a time.
It'd lengthen the process, yes, but it puts less strain on the admins and will create fewer problems.
Focus on one battleground at a time, I say. First the Bothan, than the Denon battle. OOCly one happens after the other, but ICly they happen at the same time. This should be fine as the two would be separate entities entirely.
The Bothan Space battle and Shipyards can happen at the same time. The attack fleet jumps in, starts firing on the defenses, and when it secures the Shipyards in that thread it unloads the marines to attack the Shipyards.
Then, if, and only if, the Hutt fleet can overpower the Bothan one and move in to orbital possitions, the ground force can be deployed and start that thread.
Same basic deal with Denon. The space thread first, then the ground and capital can happen at the same time.
That way you've only got two, possibly three, threads happening at a time.
It'd lengthen the process, yes, but it puts less strain on the admins and will create fewer problems.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
I think stopping threads now would be a bad idea, and instead we give this method a shot. Although there are a lot of threads and all of them are happening at once, the point I was trying to make by having two battles at the same time is to make it feel like a war for each side- the strain of troops, chaos, and clear objectives in each thread. While we can cut down on the thread number, we'd also have to cut down on the PC number we can use, and many of these players want to roleplay.
Sorry if this wasn't the impression I gave when I initially opposed it, and if there's a way we can keep this going while still maintaining the essence of the wartime scenario, then I'm all for it, but the big thing I was trying to emphasize was chaos and a big battle feeling.
Maybe to keep the clutter out of the story board, we could make a subsection for the Main Battles?
Sorry if this wasn't the impression I gave when I initially opposed it, and if there's a way we can keep this going while still maintaining the essence of the wartime scenario, then I'm all for it, but the big thing I was trying to emphasize was chaos and a big battle feeling.
Maybe to keep the clutter out of the story board, we could make a subsection for the Main Battles?
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 18,425
- Reaction score
- 32
That would do nothing to alleviate the issue. The issue is too many threads at once. It'd be impossible to keep track of. They'll degenerate to OOC bickering that I know I will have no time to deal with.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
For a fight of this size, won't there be that much OOC bickering no matter how the threads are made?
I'm sorry I jumped the gun and made the threads, I was under the impression we were all clear with thread numbers. My idea was to try something new considering we'd been in a pretty serious standstill- if this doesn't work then we can try something else.
I'm sorry I jumped the gun and made the threads, I was under the impression we were all clear with thread numbers. My idea was to try something new considering we'd been in a pretty serious standstill- if this doesn't work then we can try something else.
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 18,425
- Reaction score
- 32
Yes, but it won't be all at once. Starting six threads up is an arbitrating nightmare.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #30
Please re-emphasize the fact that it's only the Hutt squad of Dark Jedi who are supposed to be in this battle. I'm getting PMs from people thinking I'm in it. The Dark Jedi of the Bogan as a faction are not in this thread.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
I guess the way I look at it is trying something new is better than sticking with the same, stale formula. If there's any way I can help admin or find temporary admins then I'll be glad to do so.
Done.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #32
Trying something new is all well and good, but multiple threads with iffy planning isn't new - that's the Battle of Nar Shaddaa.
Whereas the Battle of Nar Shaddaa didn't have many threads but had too MUCH pre-planning to the point where there was no flexibility from Kaeb, this seems to be the opposite: too many threads where you seem to not want to show any flexibility in changing the amount, though I could just be getting the wrong impression, and not enough pre-planning.
To clarify, I don't mean pre-planning from the standpoint of "A happens, then B follows, then C will occur, then X takes place," or anything like that. I mean that an RP Admin should be talked to before a battle, they should have input on how the battle will be structured, and the enemy faction leaders should be given a heads up that they should start organizing their members.
You don't need to tell enemy faction leaders a lot, because that defeats the purpose of battles if everyone knows everything, but I think in the future we should consider whoever posts/starts the battle (both OOC and IC) should tell the other faction leaders how many forces they're bringing. That way, in the beginning to speed things up, the enemy forces can say that even if they were surprised, they got reconnaissance once the forces arrived and knew to scrounge together something comparable.
Don't take any of this to mean we should shut down this battle, though. I think that would look bad after Nar Shaddaa. What I do think we should do is take our time now that it's up, make sure everything's squared away and decide on how the threads will be and what not.
Whereas the Battle of Nar Shaddaa didn't have many threads but had too MUCH pre-planning to the point where there was no flexibility from Kaeb, this seems to be the opposite: too many threads where you seem to not want to show any flexibility in changing the amount, though I could just be getting the wrong impression, and not enough pre-planning.
To clarify, I don't mean pre-planning from the standpoint of "A happens, then B follows, then C will occur, then X takes place," or anything like that. I mean that an RP Admin should be talked to before a battle, they should have input on how the battle will be structured, and the enemy faction leaders should be given a heads up that they should start organizing their members.
You don't need to tell enemy faction leaders a lot, because that defeats the purpose of battles if everyone knows everything, but I think in the future we should consider whoever posts/starts the battle (both OOC and IC) should tell the other faction leaders how many forces they're bringing. That way, in the beginning to speed things up, the enemy forces can say that even if they were surprised, they got reconnaissance once the forces arrived and knew to scrounge together something comparable.
Don't take any of this to mean we should shut down this battle, though. I think that would look bad after Nar Shaddaa. What I do think we should do is take our time now that it's up, make sure everything's squared away and decide on how the threads will be and what not.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
Is there anything we can do to spur people to start posting? I can send the ones on my side reminders, but I think big ADMINISTRATOR posts that urge people to join would be great. The Hutt side isnt accepting new pcs at the moment(may change as we figure out who's going to join), and the Republic is really anyone who just so happened to be on Bothuwai and Denon- non-faction PCs can join.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #34
It's hard to go into a battle without pre-organization on the sides that are participating, and by pre-organization I mean getting people to agree to join beforehand. When you just post a massive battle, no one knows if they can join, nor do they know WHERE (space, land, places on land, etc.) they can join.
It's up to you, Hakim, and whatever other leadership is involved to get your people to the right places. We can post an announcement, but that'll only go so far. We'll still be asked where they can go, what they can do, and - from some people - if they can even join at all.
If you guys are doing that, it'd make putting up an announcement much easier, because that way we could direct them somewhere to find out where they can go, what they can do, etc.
It's up to you, Hakim, and whatever other leadership is involved to get your people to the right places. We can post an announcement, but that'll only go so far. We'll still be asked where they can go, what they can do, and - from some people - if they can even join at all.
If you guys are doing that, it'd make putting up an announcement much easier, because that way we could direct them somewhere to find out where they can go, what they can do, etc.
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
- Messages
- 67,946
- Reaction score
- 3,859
- Staff
- #36
Any mass PMing would have to be to go along with some sort of sign up process. Without that sign up process, a mass PM would just be redundant. Anyone who looks at the Story board knows by now that there are like 10 battle threads up, so it's not a matter of people not knowing that the battle is there. It's a matter of people not knowing if they can join, how they can join, or what they can do if/when they join.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
Just a mid-battle review is in order, I believe.
Most of the fights have stacked up pretty well- there's a few the Hutts flopped on due to lack of participation by the Taung/other individuals. As far as I know they're ticking along, but there's always room for improvement.
Any ideas on how to keep this going strong, spice it up, or improve for next time?
Most of the fights have stacked up pretty well- there's a few the Hutts flopped on due to lack of participation by the Taung/other individuals. As far as I know they're ticking along, but there's always room for improvement.
Any ideas on how to keep this going strong, spice it up, or improve for next time?
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Messages
- 16,063
- Reaction score
- 133
Probably a thread or two to get a better sense of who is interested before putting up a load of battles threads.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2007
- Messages
- 5,048
- Reaction score
- 1
I'd like to have an admin poke around both Space battles, as... Well, I've got an issue.
In Bothawui, the Republic had ~20-30 ships, as I recall. Suddenly, they have 130.
In Denon, the Republic had ~100 ships, now they have 300.
Both of these happened in one post, with no previous note of coming reinforcements.
Hutts went in with somewhat realistic numbers until we were forced early on in Denon to stack up another 100. At Bothawui I'll have to call in another six battlegroups (when two is enough for a realistic campaign) just to stay alive. We need to figure out a reasonable number or happy medium.
In Bothawui, the Republic had ~20-30 ships, as I recall. Suddenly, they have 130.
In Denon, the Republic had ~100 ships, now they have 300.
Both of these happened in one post, with no previous note of coming reinforcements.
Hutts went in with somewhat realistic numbers until we were forced early on in Denon to stack up another 100. At Bothawui I'll have to call in another six battlegroups (when two is enough for a realistic campaign) just to stay alive. We need to figure out a reasonable number or happy medium.