A new dreadnought sector map and sector ownership system

So I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how to solve the pressing issues with dreadnoughts, and this is the idea I have come up with. Before I start, no this idea isn’t perfect, but I am open to constructive feedback and suggestions for how to make this idea even better.


The current sector map would be kept, but it would implement the old seccon system, where sectors are only held for a certain number of cycles.

As soon as the ownership cycle for a sector ends, the sector will revert back to neutral, and corps can compete for control of this sector. To prevent fake corporations from filling the tournament slots and ensuring that other corps do not get to participate, I think it wise that one of two things could happen.


Option 1) Corps will be heavily penalized for not showing up for an attack. If a corp were to launch an attack and not show, the corp should be blocked out of participating in dreadnought battles for X number of cycles, where X would increase as the number of fake attacks launched increases (have a counter per week, and the higher the count, the longer the corp is banned from dreadnoughts).


Option 2) No limit to the number of attacks per sector. So no matter how many corps launch fake attacks, corps that actually plan on showing up and participating will still get to play. This will discourage corps from launching fake attacks, as there would no longer be any point to it. However, this would also increase the length of time that the tournament would take to determine a winner. I have thought of a potential solution to this though. Set up a tournament system similar to the weekend tournaments. Where all the corps play X number of games. Based on how many games are won and by how large of a margin the games are won, sector ownership will be determined. The number of games would depend on how many corps show up for a tournament for sector control. So the more corps that show, the more battles should be played. Maybe set a maximum of 3-4 battles per corp, so that it doesn’t take too long.


Now, if the idea of combining the new dreadnought tournaments with the old seccon map were to be implemented, the sectors should be set on different cycles within a space. So have 4 cycles per faction, and have the sectors split up evenly between these 4 cycles. This way all of the sectors won’t be neutral at the same time, only a handful.


A flaw I have noticed with this idea is that this would eliminate defense, but this is a problem I feel could be compensated for. Give corporations the option to defend in the tournament for sector control at the end of the cycle. Defense wings would be randomly paired with an attacking wing, and if the defending corp could beat a certain percentage of the attacking corps, the corp would remain in control of its sector for another cycle. This percentage would have to be fairly high though (above 50-60% in my opinion), so that the corp would have to launch quite a few defense wings and have all of them win.


Any other thoughts on this idea?


Edit: I thought of another idea for adding defense: Give corps the option of launching an attack on a sector mid-cycle. (Only 1 corp per day). The attack would cost double (or triple if the corp launching the attack already has a sector) the amount it normally would. If this attack is successful at beating a defense wing, the attacking corp will take control of the sector for the remainder of the cycle. This would add another way for sectors to change hands more frequently, as well as a way to have more games.


Also I just remembered the thread that KT started regarding redesigning sector conquest, so please respond to that thread, not this one.

Link: [http://forum.star-conflict.com/index.php?/topic/27867-redesign-the-sector-conquest-system-important-read-this/](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/27867-redesign-the-sector-conquest-system-important-read-this/)

Hey there! Thank you for this suggestion, it is more than on time cz we are reworking the Dreadnought battles mode at the moment.

  1. Penalties is an option that we are discussing. It is effective yes but it has its own drawbacks, what we want is to adjust the whole system in a way that it would work without  them.

  2. Making no limits is not planned to be implemented cz there are a lot of technical restrictions not allowing us to do that.