- Staff
- #1
Suggestion Title: Cancelling org rivalries being a mutual decision
Suggestion Description: Only allow players to unrival organisations with mutual agreement from that other organisations leader(s).
This prevents a plethora of issues elaborated upon below and remains realistic. This also forces players to make plea deals with rivals, and even more so, for more bitter rivalries, force organisations to disband or members to break away in order to abstain from the threat of a rival. Currently on perp you can kill a whole organisation and they will still retain their strength because they respawn, unlike in real life where gang wars can end in the deaths or casualties of their members making them lose strength.
This feature was implemented to encourage more RP through interactions with other players but nowadays players just do everything remotely with minimal interaction.
Why should this be added?:
- prevents org relations rule being loopholed and bypassed by cancelling and reinstating org relations when convenient to do so.
- Prevents organisations from cancelling rivalries in wars they are losing without making an agreement with the rivalling org and forming some sort of mutually beneficial agreement, or one sided agreement in the event of a total loss of an org in a gang war, thus increasing roleplay and adding an element of essentially forced interaction with another organisation.
- Overall increases roleplay atmosphere, and helps define a true victor within an org rivalry rather than coming online one morning only to find out that your org rival cancelled during a 4am powergrow session.
What negatives could this have?:
- To be honest with you I don’t actually see a con that doesn’t defeat the purpose of the rival feature to begin with. The only issue I see is it gives players less control over their organisation?
Suggestion Description: Only allow players to unrival organisations with mutual agreement from that other organisations leader(s).
This prevents a plethora of issues elaborated upon below and remains realistic. This also forces players to make plea deals with rivals, and even more so, for more bitter rivalries, force organisations to disband or members to break away in order to abstain from the threat of a rival. Currently on perp you can kill a whole organisation and they will still retain their strength because they respawn, unlike in real life where gang wars can end in the deaths or casualties of their members making them lose strength.
This feature was implemented to encourage more RP through interactions with other players but nowadays players just do everything remotely with minimal interaction.
Why should this be added?:
- prevents org relations rule being loopholed and bypassed by cancelling and reinstating org relations when convenient to do so.
- Prevents organisations from cancelling rivalries in wars they are losing without making an agreement with the rivalling org and forming some sort of mutually beneficial agreement, or one sided agreement in the event of a total loss of an org in a gang war, thus increasing roleplay and adding an element of essentially forced interaction with another organisation.
- Overall increases roleplay atmosphere, and helps define a true victor within an org rivalry rather than coming online one morning only to find out that your org rival cancelled during a 4am powergrow session.
What negatives could this have?:
- To be honest with you I don’t actually see a con that doesn’t defeat the purpose of the rival feature to begin with. The only issue I see is it gives players less control over their organisation?
