Topic: The "Duck" Disengagement rule . . .

[FPF-DieHard]

As far as number imblance goes, I think the best way to mitigate this on an GW-type server is to make attacking more difficult than defending.  Granted this would not have worked in a land-grab lilke AOTK, but this would prevent the an over-run like we've seen on SGO5, SG06, SGO7, and half the GW series.

Shadowlord had suggested Radius disengagement in ENEMY SPACE ONLY.   If I'm flying Fed (big shock there) and I get run out of a Klingon Hex, my penalty applies to the adjacent enemy hexes. This allows a smaller force the ablilty to defend larger area.

Any thoughts the on "Duck-Disengament rule?"

[Lepton]

Seems fine to me in theory, but consider the converse case.  Inferior numbers side is consistently met by more opposing players on average and is kicked out of more hexes.  So, this makes it a lot easier for a side with superior numbers to defend their territory.  Unfortunately, this rule cuts both ways and whoever has the bigger sword wins.

[Lepton]

Think of it this way as well.  The attacking side with superior numbers flips a hex as they are more likely to with superior numbers.  Now suddenly they are defending that hex.  It will make it much more difficult for the opposing side to contest that hex and they are likely to fall back to another hex.  It will make it a lot easier for an attacker to plow through hexes once it is flipped as the defender is more likely to fall back than risk being kicked from the entire area at the point of the attack.

[FPF-DieHard]

Very good point about counter-attack, continue with the feedback   

[The_Joker]

Too bad there is no way to make a Hex just stay neutral unless a PVP is involved.....

Now, realistically, what if you doubled engagement penalties for the attacking force?  Or, eliminate it for the defending force......that might be better. 

[FPF-DieHard]

Too bad there is no way to make a Hex just stay neutral unless a PVP is involved.....

This would be just too boring though I'm certain we could do this with Mission scripts.

[Braxton_RIP]

Why do I get the feeling this will eventually be called the "Duck and Cover" rule? 

[Hexx]

Might work if the "defend" thing was limited to original space , not conquered territory.

[FPF-DieHard]

Might work if the "defend" thing was limited to original space , not conquered territory.

We can use the Cartel maps to mark original space.

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Might work if the "defend" thing was limited to original space , not conquered territory.

We can use the Cartel maps to mark original space.

This could get really complicated in hexes that are being fought over and flipping back and forth.  Lose a combat get banned from 7 hexes, lose the save combat 30 seconds later in the same hex just be banned from 1.  Doesn't make sense.

What I would do is apply this to planet and base hexes only.  This gives the defending race an advantage protecting their home planets and defensive installations, but gives now special bonuse for open and empty space where there should be none.

If people were wanting a bit more I'd suggest that being kicked out of any hex surrounding a planet that was an origional enemy world would result in a ban for the planet hex and all other hexes surrounding that planet.  For bases I wouldn't do that since they can be placed by players.

I also like this as it would make certain planets close to others even harder to take, think Romulas and Remus, or the 3 homeworlds of the Gorn.  It is realistic to think of these as particularly tough targets with lots of concentrated defensive units and aid cloe by.

[Hexx]

Might work if the "defend" thing was limited to original space , not conquered territory.

We can use the Cartel maps to mark original space.

This could get really complicated in hexes that are being fought over and flipping back and forth.  Lose a combat get banned from 7 hexes, lose the save combat 30 seconds later in the same hex just be banned from 1.  Doesn't make sense.

Well not if you use some weird interpretation of it no.
Otherwise it's pretty simple to figure out.

What I would do is apply this to planet and base hexes only.  This gives the defending race an advantage protecting their home planets and defensive installations, but gives now special bonuse for open and empty space where there should be none.

Which kinda could achieve the same thing you were just snivelling about as too hard to comprehend.
That being said- I like both ideas, and would perhaps agree that trying it to see how it played out around bases and planets might be best to start.

If people were wanting a bit more I'd suggest that being kicked out of any hex surrounding a planet that was an origional enemy world would result in a ban for the planet hex and all other hexes surrounding that planet.  For bases I wouldn't do that since they can be placed by players.

This I like. No this I love. If you lose in any hex surrounding a plent hex you're permanently banned from all surrounding hexes.
That will make planets as hard to take as they should be.
I may have to co opt this if i ever run another server..

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

Well not if you use some weird interpretation of it no.
Otherwise it's pretty simple to figure out.

If you played more on servers you might realize that we have some newer players on.  Keep It Simple Stupid is a usful guideline, obviously written with you in mind.   

Which kinda could achieve the same thing you were just snivelling about as too hard to comprehend.

No not too hard to comprehend, just like rules aren't hard to read, but people tend not to do that anyway.  I'm suggesting a way that doesn't require any checking of the cartel map and is apparent right away, no fliping maps, no uncertainty.  Either you can see a planet or base or you can't on the map we are playing on. 

This I like. No this I love. If you lose in any hex surrounding a plent hex you're permanently banned from all surrounding hexes.

I would only apply this to the attacking force, not the side that controlled the planet.  The only difficulty is if a planet is so hot it is flipping back and forth, but I think if you eliminate the ban immediately if your side gets control of the planet this would take care of itself and while making planets tougher to take, would also make fighting for that last DV shift a potential battle royal.

[marstone]

you can have the boot rule (the radius) only in enemy space. (the one hex, plus any enemy hexes around it).  That way if you attack a hex, get repelled, you can still defend the hex of your space you back up into.