Content Suggestion Remove the "Strike Mission" from the Chaos Insurgency!

Content Suggestions will be reviewed by Content Team weekly, please allow time as not everything can be reviewed at once.

YandereMuffin

Senior Administrator
Senior Administrator
SCP-RP Staff
Event Team
Group Moderator
Dec 25, 2023
596
153
111
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Quite simple, CI would no longer get the "Strike Mission" CMission anymore and anytime it would trigger would get some other mission.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I am unaware :)

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- F/GOC have more time to do things within their own faction.
- Strike Missions add unnecessarily onto the reduction of non-combative fun that F/GOC currently get, which for Foundation at least is already quite reduced by CIs regular raids.
- The system in which CI raids a group and then instantly re-raid using a CMission (or vice versa) can no longer happen.
- We have quite literally all seen this happen, sometimes during the active CI raid and not after it, it actively and unnecessarily strengthens CI raids (either through directly affecting it or by just limiting who can respond to them).

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- CI will find less enjoyment
- I don't think this is a large issue, CI can be given other CMissions and are (at least on UK)
- CI will have less warfunds
- Please note, this is not a negative to me and the ease of CI getting warfunds currently is quite high compared to Foundation at least.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
The Chaos Insurgency is given the power to raid the most already and hold raids the longest (as is shown in their 15 minute lower raid cooldowns and general equipment/warfunds). The extra CMission is entirely unneeded and only causes further power to be given to CI which allows overall more raids and a reduction in non-combative gameplay that people may enjoy.

It's affects on raids is also important to note, although it happens far less. When a CMission does overlap (or come right before or after) a regular raid, creates a far more intense and undesirable combative situation in which CIs main negative - the fact that they are unable to respawn during raids - is removed, this ends up in situations in which CI either shoot Foundation combatives making them unable to react to CI raid or (depending on where the waypoints are) can directly affect Foundations defence of the raid.

Final Yapper:
CI have enough raids and raiding power as it is, and getting extra through a CMission psudeo-raid is not only unneeded but is actively harmful to the wider server both for combatives (by disrupting pre-existing combative actions without negatives, e.g breach protection, raid protection, other combat) and for non-combatives (more raids are always bad).

Comment I wrote
 
Last edited:
-SUPPORT

In the part where you say "Please note, this is not a negative to me and the ease of CI getting war funds currently is quite high compared to Foundation at least.." This has nothing to do with Strike missions in my eyes and as a CI BCOM on UK i can in all confidence say that Strike missions do not make even 5% of our total war funds intake. The reason we have so many compared to other GOI's is because we regular win all Cmissions on surf, We raid SA and steal up to 3 million war funds each time and do this up to 2 times a day if pop allows it. as well as the frequency of getting a strike mission is insanely low normally only happening once a day and rarely up to 3.

In summery of all this the main factor of this suggestion is that UK CI are just good at the game and regularly make new strategies for all types of situations regardless of the force they are against.

So after me explaining this i hope it adds to the decision that happens if approved / denied.




Holding:Held:
CI Brigade commanderMTF NU7 LT
Ethics committee assistant
Sr. Moderator
 
-Support
There is no point really to remove them they usually only happen like once a day and even sometimes never happen even tho sometimes we are lucky to get a strike mission twice in a row but otherwise we won't either way get them more than once or twice as well as strike mission on foundation is one of our favorite things and removing it would just damage CI a good amount.
 
-support
And let me tell you why.
While the points you bring up make somewhat sense, there is one big issue.

THE POINTS YOU BRING UP ARE NOT CI SPECIFIC AT ALL
When GOC gets a strike mission on Foundation while CI raids, does it not pull away combatives?
When Foundation gets a strike mission on GOC, does it not stop the non-combative fun GOC has?
The fact that you could re-raid after a strike mission like this is, again, not CI specific at all! If Foundation gets an infil right after a raid, do they give up? NO, they go do it!

For the non-combative part that you mention, idk how US or GOC does it, but we have this unwritten rule that unless a non-combative decides to be in the way, you'll be most likely ok! On top of this, I dont see how a waypoint in HCZ could affect areas like SA, RSD etc. for non-combative RP.

Another thing you bring up, Im sorry but CI is designed to raid people, and this is still being upheld, otherwise our raid CD would be brought up to Foundation levels. But it isnt. Do with that as you will.


But you know, there is one point I think that is CI specific.
- CI will have less warfunds
- Please note, this is not a negative to me and the ease of CI getting warfunds currently is quite high compared to Foundation at least.
And Im sorry but how the hell is this true.
CI can get WF from surface missions and hacking other factions.
Foundation gets WF from surface missions, hakcing other factions, recontaining/terminating SCPs and missions inside Foundation. We literally give you WF by doing HCZ/LLCZ raids.
For all they have an easier time getting WF. And while here at UK CI we might have a really good track record with surface missions and hacking Foundation WF (3mil daily pretty much over the last week), I dont see why we should be punished for Foundation/SOP not being able to stop our raids effectivelly.
 
THE POINTS YOU BRING UP ARE NOT CI SPECIFIC AT ALL
When GOC gets a strike mission on Foundation while CI raids, does it not pull away combatives?
When Foundation gets a strike mission on GOC, does it not stop the non-combative fun GOC has?
It pulls away combatives in the same way, yeah, but for GOC (and kinda for F) that strike mission is a rarer occasion of a special raid compared to CI who normally raid 5-6 times a day.

And Im sorry but how the hell is this true.
CI can get WF from surface missions and hacking other factions.
On UK currently this is certainly true, discounting the larger ease of which CI have raiding and holding SA (although the hack is still difficult depending on skill) - CI almost always have more warfunds than Foundation and I don't think I've seen them dip below them in a good while, and if they get close they can do the SA raids.

did you ask CI before making this??
forum
/ˈfɔːrəm/
A forum is a meeting, website, or environment where people exchange ideas, discuss public interests, or share information.

🤔

The problem isn't the strike mission existing, It's when it right after, Basically killing the cooldown in some situations.
Certainly this, strike missions when there is a long period of inactivity between raids isn't as much of an issue (if an issue at all, they are normally fun and enjoyable if no RP is stopped) - but the situations where right before, during, or after a regular raid it occurs it just makes it even more messy and that is so often the case with current regular raid cooldowns and CMission cooldowns.


i understand this and agree strike missions can be disruptive but uhhmmm i like my silly little strike missons... they make me happy!!!!!!!
Valid ngl (y) strike misiion are fun
 
  • Cool
Reactions: Emilia Foddg
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

- CI will have less warfunds
- Please note, this is not a negative to me and the ease of CI getting warfunds currently is quite high compared to Foundation at least.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:

It's affects on raids is also important to note, although it happens far less. When a CMission does overlap (or come right before or after) a regular raid, creates a far more intense and undesirable combative situation in which CIs main negative - the fact that they are unable to respawn during raids - is removed, this ends up in situations in which CI either shoot Foundation combatives making them unable to react to CI raid or (depending on where the waypoints are) can directly affect Foundations defence of the raid.

Final Yapper:
CI have enough raids and raiding power as it is, and getting extra through a CMission psudeo-raid is not only unneeded but is actively harmful to the wider server both for combatives (by disrupting pre-existing combative actions without negatives, e.g breach protection, raid protection, other combat) and for non-combatives (more raids are always bad)
-Support
This is a major cope suggestion ngl. Alot of the points you made such as UK CI having a higher amount of warfunds then UK Foundation and Strike Missions putting SOP defenders in a sub-optimal position if CI MR after are genuinely just Skill issues. It is harder for US CI to do successful raids/gain warfunds due to the average skill level on US being generally the same across all factions so it doesn’t make sense why CI should lose a fun part of their gameplay loop because UK Foundation can’t defend raids effectively.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Emilia Foddg
+Support
I'm already a strong believer in the fact CI should be completely removed or locked to event roles, as they provide no actual benefit to server health, other than stop all roleplay every 45 minutes or so

CI is already only about raiding, having no actual roleplay aspects (be this due to CI leadership not pushing for RP, or simply the way they're set up, not allowing for it), so them having a mission consisting of raiding without cool down for 900 seconds is just... More roleplay ending content imo, which shouldn't really be a thing for a server that prides itself with prioritizing server health above all