I've posted this on several occasions in the main forum, but never here in the Suggestions forum. So here goes.
Can we please put an end to green-on-green wars? By which I mean, Federation Democracy vs Federation Corporate, or Imperial Patronage vs Imperial Corporate, or Alliance Dictatorship vs Alliance Democracy?
It seems to me to be silly, wasteful and irrational that two factions who are ultimately on the same side cannot resolve their differences peacefully, for the greater good of the superpower, so that the superpower's military resources are put to use against the superpower's actual enemies. I mean, we can now have Conflict Zones where two capital ships, both from the same superpower, spawn in and duke it out. That's just pathetic. I for one refuse to ever participate in such wars, and I'm sure I'm not alone - which of course means that such wars are more likely to remain unresolved. I'd think that having someone able to force your enemies and rivals to come to the table and negotiate your problems would be one of the beneficial things about belonging to a superpower in the first place.
I propose a new BGS state: "Arbitration". When two factions that would ordinarily go to war due to opposing ideologies both belong to the same superpower, they would go to Arbitration instead, which is resolved peacefully rather than by warfare and conflict zones.
The mechanism for CMDRs interacting with and helping resolve an Arbitration could either be exactly the same as we currently have for Election - non-violent activities contribute to "victory", such as trading, exploration data and mission-running - or, perhaps to make it a bit different, have special mission types spawn during Arbitration, which would require CMDRs to transport passengers, cargo or data to the Superpower's capital planet (Mars, Capitol or Turner's World).
Perhaps if Arbitration fails, then War could be an outcome, but Arbitration failing should be a rare occurrence and, preferably, not something that a dedicated group of "enemy" CMDRs could force to happen more often.
Can we please put an end to green-on-green wars? By which I mean, Federation Democracy vs Federation Corporate, or Imperial Patronage vs Imperial Corporate, or Alliance Dictatorship vs Alliance Democracy?
It seems to me to be silly, wasteful and irrational that two factions who are ultimately on the same side cannot resolve their differences peacefully, for the greater good of the superpower, so that the superpower's military resources are put to use against the superpower's actual enemies. I mean, we can now have Conflict Zones where two capital ships, both from the same superpower, spawn in and duke it out. That's just pathetic. I for one refuse to ever participate in such wars, and I'm sure I'm not alone - which of course means that such wars are more likely to remain unresolved. I'd think that having someone able to force your enemies and rivals to come to the table and negotiate your problems would be one of the beneficial things about belonging to a superpower in the first place.
I propose a new BGS state: "Arbitration". When two factions that would ordinarily go to war due to opposing ideologies both belong to the same superpower, they would go to Arbitration instead, which is resolved peacefully rather than by warfare and conflict zones.
The mechanism for CMDRs interacting with and helping resolve an Arbitration could either be exactly the same as we currently have for Election - non-violent activities contribute to "victory", such as trading, exploration data and mission-running - or, perhaps to make it a bit different, have special mission types spawn during Arbitration, which would require CMDRs to transport passengers, cargo or data to the Superpower's capital planet (Mars, Capitol or Turner's World).
Perhaps if Arbitration fails, then War could be an outcome, but Arbitration failing should be a rare occurrence and, preferably, not something that a dedicated group of "enemy" CMDRs could force to happen more often.
