Port Blockades (Large)

[DezNutz]

Using the dynamic blockade model I suggest, I do see some room for 'sneak' blockades : even using a small number of fleets, it would be possible to snare a goodly amount of tax income plunder before the counterforce gets its act together, gathers its fleets and breaks back.

It would also encourage using big ship fleets, as the plunder gains will mount up, plus the continuing loss of income may well encourage the counter force to use more powerful fleets itself. I like Dez's idea of a minimum number of warships in any blockade fleet. Again, it adds to the unknown risks of engagement.

I think the 'fog of war' element is also exciting : no-one knows just what they face, in numbers or power, and it will only be as the event progresses that either side will start to get a feel for that.

I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe the blockading fleets should not be put into too much DP as a result of the action. I see the counter fleets as gaining the usual danger for their attempts to break the line and suffering the usual consequences of being lit.

Perhaps we should look at an escalating DP gain : calculated per day of blockade : the longer the blockade feeds on plunder, the more danger it will gain.

I definitely like the dynamic setup as I think about it more.

Are you going with an immediate end of the blockade once broken? I'm leaning more for a blockade must last at least one game update, or once broken the effects on the port aren't lifted until game update.

To avoid the abuse of 1 fleet blockades that ransom the port, a blockade could require a minimum of x fleets for the blockaders to gain the perks (payouts).

I like a lot of this. I agree with "the fog of war" aspect. Still considering danger aspects. It need to be more than normal game mechanics for attackers simply because there is the possibility of and attacking fleet exiting a blockade with 0 danger if normal mechanics were in play. I am not sure as to what is a fair number per fleet.

IMO, the blockaders should receive a set amount of danger after the blockade ends. I wouldn't want blockaders to lose danger while in the blockade, because the blockade doesn't allow for sink chance. A player could go into the blockade with a fleet that already has danger and use it to remove danger without sink chance.

[Most Lee Harmless]

As I recall the original proposal, blockade fleets must be danger-free to enter the blockade :

I do favor the immediate end : the blockade, once it cannot be defended, has been broken : for ease of play, it should be fine to transition tax incomes at the next hour turn : as that hourly slot is a convenient way to calculate tax incomes due, it should stand for both the start and end of the blockade.

[DezNutz]

As I recall the original proposal, blockade fleets must be danger-free to enter the blockade :

I do favor the immediate end : the blockade, once it cannot be defended, has been broken : for ease of play, it should be fine to transition tax incomes at the next hour turn : as that hourly slot is a convenient way to calculate tax incomes due, it should stand for both the start and end of the blockade.

I must not be seeing it in the OP. I didn't find anything that prevents a fleet that has danger from being part of the blockade.

[Most Lee Harmless]

My bad, I mis-remembered : twas the bit about blockade fleets not losing danger whilst in blockade, so any fleet with danger on couldnt just be parked safely in blockade fleets until it bled away.

Lol, its getting hard to recall the exact sequences of proposals, counter-proposals, etc, etc...

[Haron]

If it wasn't there, it should be, in my opinion. Only fleets with no danger should be allowed to enter a blockade, in my opinion.

[DezNutz]

If it wasn't there, it should be, in my opinion. Only fleets with no danger should be allowed to enter a blockade, in my opinion.

Why not? If a fleet can't lose danger while in the blockade, they will come out with what they entered in with plus what they gain from being part of the blockade.

[Haron]

I still think it should be required. One thing is that a high danger fleet should not be able to "hide" in a blockade, another thing is that it gives some nice strategy options. Also, too me, it just "feels right", I guess. A personal preference, if you like.

I think this should apply whatever of the suggested methods are implemented.

[Most Lee Harmless]

I think you both make a good point : so, its a coin toss as to which works best for me

[sXs]

I still think it should be required. One thing is that a high danger fleet should not be able to "hide" in a blockade, another thing is that it gives some nice strategy options. Also, too me, it just "feels right", I guess. A personal preference, if you like.

I think this should apply whatever of the suggested methods are implemented.

I am ok with this either way as long as it is the same for both sides.

[sXs]

If defending fleets are locked until blockade is broken then since they can be added anytime the same would apply. 18 danger once entered into defensive action and 18 additional for each day they are locked.

So example. Blockade initiated and successful. Attackers get 18 danger per day while blockade is in place.

Defender tries to break blockade on day 2 unsuccessfully. Acquires 18 danger
Day three another defender attempts to break blockade and is successful.

Initiator in this scenario gets the initial 36 danger plus 54 for 3 days of blockade. 90 danger total
Defender 1 gets 36 danger.
Defender 2 gets 18 danger.