Section 1 Updates to Alliance and Agreements
Alliances are limited to a maximum of 5 factions. (Mega alliances may not team up together, defeats the point of the limit) (This limit includes districts, a district is regarded as an ally, a vassal you own, but an ally nonetheless) This will increase amount of diplomacy Roleplay and prevent the server from splitting into two massive alliances (Boring!) [Added benefit of reducing number of puppet factions]
This rule is not followed either enforce the rule more thoroughly or change it back. All this rule created was proxy factions agree or disagree that's how it is currently.
Reasons for Conflict:
Extortion
Extortion or attempted extortion could be a reason to cause conflict. The two factions would have to meet and reach a suitable business agreement to maintain the peace. For example if one group wants to control a certain aspect of storefronts within their territory they may put pressure on another faction for 50% of their profits, and after some escalation and sit down negotiations a deal of 20% in exchange for security is made.
I've firsthand seen a faction attempt to extort another faction for impeding on their racket which UA denied. Either remove this reason for escalation, rename it to impeding on said faction's business, or allow factions to extort other factions for stepping on their racket without the need for a mutually agreed contract beforehand. In the mafia the bigger group is going to try to tax the smaller mafia for cutting out a piece of their income IE illegal gambling, selling drugs at a certain location, etc. Another thing is the term "within their territory" there is no definition of territory found anywhere in the rules or conflicts. Assuming it refers to the faction's business fronts you could just get around this by doing it right outside their property. Either define territory or change it to business fronts.
Section 2: Sit-downs and meetings
Not every sit down needs to be logged to UA, while UA is going to hate this change its ridiculous having to record and make a ticket for every sit down that occurs between factions especially internally within alliances. Most sit downs get resolved by the first meeting and making a ticket for every single one is aids and no one does it. To better balance this, sit-downs that require a UA ticket should only occur after the first sit down fails and further negotiation is needed.
UA should not mediate sit downs, this is just fail rp. Why would some random guy act as the mediator between two dons of criminal families. I understand the practicality of the rule and how it makes UA's job a lot easier managing conflicts but end of the day there needs to be a separation of staff and rp and when you mix the two it ruins the roleplay. Complete immersion break tldr, if both factions can't agree on a mediator, then there shouldn't be one.
I propose that there should be three distinct different types of sit downs that can occur. 1. Internal (factions inside the alliance) 2. External (factions outside of the alliance) and 3. Full Scale (Between whole alliances.)
Section 3: New Escalation Tiers
Level 1: The first sit-down
Provided the transgression is minor and both faction leaders are good at what they do then most conflicts will not escalate past this point. Both factions will have met and discussed the issue and outlined an agreement to resolve the problem. Should they fail to do so they should make a UA ticket and find a mediator. The first sit down must be recorded in order to move to Level 2.
Level 2: The simmer (2nd sit-down)
The second sit down will occur with an agreed upon mediator to help hash out the facts of the case and both factions will have support tickets open with UA so they may submit any relevant evidence and keep management up to date on the status of the conflict. During the time between the first meeting to the second the two factions may put their business with the opposing faction on pause, halting trades and other events or niceties until the situation is resolved. 95% of conflicts should be resolved by the second sit down unless the issue is so atrocious that proper settlement terms cannot be reached.
Level 3: Boiling point (3rd sit-down)
A failure of the second meeting is the boiling point and by now bad blood has likely formed, small breakouts of violence are likely to occur, bar fights, obscenities maybe even some road rage or the occasional out of territory mugging. After the third sit-down and no resolution is found the escalation is moved up to Level 4.
Level 4: Brothers Spat (4th sit-down)
At this level target mugging (on your main characters…) the opposing faction is fair game and barring rivals from your establishments is expected. Loitering or graffiti may also become commonplace but tolerating loitering is also less practiced. Both sides will seek to annoy and harass the other to the dismay of both the police and your suppliers. While this stage of escalation allows you to openly harass the opposing faction it also strains your business, as your suppliers don’t want the extra heat your shipment arrival times and shipment costs increase 25%. Business is impacted.
Level 5: Wave of Violence (5th sit-down)
At this level the violence is palpable. Shootings of properties and businesses may become commonplace and will not be considered a raid. Shipment arrival times and shipment costs increase by 50% of the original amounts. More attention from police means your suppliers may request cash or certain amounts of drugs / weapons as payment in order to keep operating, failure to meet these payments could see additional vendor penalties apply and possibly have your faction lose access to selling certain drugs. Individuals responsible for the initial cause of the conflict can have hits (PKs) placed against them. (For instance if the conflict stemmed from a certain member target mugging and the offending faction had refused to hand him over. Seek UA approval for these hits.)
Level 6: Defcon 2
This level can be reached if more than 5 sit-downs have occurred and failed. At this level you are basically a few days if not less from hitting the mattresses, your suppliers disappear seeking to wait the impending conflict out. At this level you may firebomb the rival properties to put them out of commission and cause significant financial harm as well as openly target one member of their high command for a PK hit.
Level 7: War
Level 7 is war. You know how war goes. Your factions are fully blocked from selling drugs to any NPC as the sellers aim to not choose sides. War lasts until one side falters or until an agreed win condition must be met. UA has final say if war is approved or not and can end it at any time.
The things I changed
- Every escalation level represents a sit down up until 5. Both factions have 5 chances to resolve the conflict before it escalates to violence.
- Removed the Level 0, needing approval from UA for every instance of conflict resolution is a waste of time, 99% of conflicts are resolved are resolved by the first sit down and you should not need UA involvement until it moves up a level where an initial resolution could not be found.
Section 4: Taxation/Compensation Changes
Remove the max escalation level for all of the offenses. Any and all offenses can move towards conflict if neither side eventually comes to a resolution. Bad blood simply doesn't stop because the conflict has a max escalation tier. This just makes the escalation system put an absolute stop on the possibility of real conflict, if both sides can't agree on a resolution, then conflict is inevitable not based on what max escalation level the offense was. The tax amounts should stay and are a good reference for how much you should tax someone for an offense.
