Bunny Ears Asteroid

Team Colour Selection for Competitive Wargame Events

So, was playing the new PvE missions with friends and just as happened we always got assigned to the Blue team.

I was thinking, wouldn't it be great if at the start of the event, all team members get to pick / vote what they think the team colour should be (say from some prefixed choices or maybe even colour wheel). Whichever colour was most picked (of the 4 choices or grouping colours by similarity) would be the chosen Team colour (reflected on the mini-map). If there was a tie. Then, two tied colours could be blended together for the final colour. If both teams choose the same colour (or too similar a colour) for their team, then a impromptu PvP match should begin where the two competitive teams fight it out for their colour before the match starts.

Course, many  people won't care, so perhaps have a system a bit like need or greed where people can choose "don't care". People could select their desired colour whilst awaiting queuing / team matching. Maybe even make it a mini-game. Those selecting 'don't care' probably wouldn't notice the extra wait whilst the PvP goes down, if its got some kind of "Golden Gun" (one shot kills, race for weapons) mechanics.

I told my fleet'y T'Sar about this so she thought it sounded a great idea said she thought it was a unique idea and I should email a suggestion, so here I am suggesting it for you all to share (I've copied this to the forums as well)

World needs new laws and to deal with corrupt presidents (Trump)

I'm not normally politically motivated (as anyone who knows me will attest) I prefer a live and let live approach to life. However, recent dark times have drawn me out to share an idea.

We need a law, enforced for all nations and peoples, which prevents any nation or person attacking any another nation or person with more firepower or force than the 'defending' nation or person is able to command themselves. This goes for political groups as well. 

This law should be obvious to any person of consideration, but just in case you have not considered, let me give example:

Imagine Aliens came to earth today with the kind of firepower to destroy planets. They could easily, come and destroy us in a moment with their weaponry. Our only hope as a planet would be in the hands of the sense of decency of the aliens, or at the very least with sheer luck.

If they however, came to us and, with only equivalent weapons to ourselves won some battle, it would be, if not right, fair. Presumably we couldn't come to peaceful resolution first (or Trump was president, which is also an inability to come to a peaceful resolution and having a very loose relationship with facts and truth).

How can we, as a world nation, not see the crap being pulled by America as a nation (based on the decisions of its leaders, which may not be the same thing as its people) as they bomb nations and groups who are incapable of responding with any kind of equivalent force, or the only way they can is to hijack America's own technology to do it.

I can imagine the objections "sometimes a decisive move need to be made to end a conflict quickly to save lives". This is ignoring the fact, that these 'saved lives' are hypothetical where as the lives which will be lost by bombings and military campaigns to secure will be real. 

Even if we accept that the hypothetical losses might be real if the action should not be taken. If that alien had the choice of wiping out a segment of the earths population or facing a earth vs space war, wouldn't you hope the space aliens would give humanity the dignity of a chance? even if it was a very very slim one?

Decency in humanity is giving others space to be wrong, but also drawing a line and preventing them turning their mistakes into everyone's problem.

President Trump provoked this post. With his bombing of Isis (and his manor of publicising it). A group of people (e.g. Isis) without any possible equivalent military access to equal weapons. Indeed has Isis the command of equal weapons, I believe America would be TALKING to them and not BOMBING them. A nation of cowards, either for not speaking out in defense of the underdogs, or for believing that they are so morally superior they can justify the bombing of others without conscience.

Shame on you.

Bullies should not be tolerated. They must be stopped and, stopped without us becoming like them. If the only way to stop them is work on their terms, we become the bullies ourselves.

I keep thinking how, no matter who the enemy, when they are not themselves able to muster huge bombs and are cowering in mountain caves to press the assault with them is cowardly and sickening.

I realise Isis are a group which has done much to cause issues and need to be 'dealt with' but I also see how if they where commanding equal bombing power, America would be negotiating and not bombing them causing the destruction of an are of natural majesty.

These aren't weapons factories or nuclear bunkers of nations of great power that are being bombed. They are a group of disaffected people, cowering away from pressed attack. Whilst surely not innocent, they will have children who are. Who will grow up only remembering how they where bombed when they where cowering in caves and barely survived. America balks at the online radicalisation of its people, but its their political choices that enable it to happen (combined with ignoring that and pretending its manipulation by external media, manipulation of media being their primary mode of operation).