IOT vs. NES

Status
Not open for further replies.
They're two different games and genres.

The end.

Thread over.
 
Just my thoughts on the last few posts in the other thread: small nations should be difficult to play. For almost all the times in history, being big almost always means being more powerful. There are only a few exceptions: city-states like Venice (compensated for their small size with a huge merchant network), countries which happened to be located in a very strategic position or on top of some very valuable resource (the Sultanate of Aceh and the modern Gulf States fit both criteria) and certain European states that became powerful relative to larger non-European states because of the Industrial Revolution.

Being too big does bring with it various administrative and other problems, particularly before the advent of the telegraph. Even so, it's rare that a large empire is entirely destroyed from within - you'll always find external pressure play the larger part in the downfall of most empires.

My $0.02
 
I suppose you could say that IOT's have different "levels" in the sense that some are more complex then others. However, there are four distinct styles of NESing.

Every IOT is essentially the same core game, but maybe with more bells and whistles attached. I have never seen an IOT that broke away from the games core.

At it's core, you could say that an IOT is in essence a game, where as a NES is a story.
 
They're two different games and genres.

The end.

Thread over.

Not even a competition

It's not a competition. :) And yes, they are two different styles of games. That doesn't mean it's not worth (civilly) comparing them, however, since they are similar enough that comparison is possible and, dare I say, worthwhile; NES being a far older community with a more established tradition, and we as insolent upstarts can learn from the NES experience.
 
That reminds me. I feel that NESers look down on IOT precisely because the NES community is so old and established. I also get the impression that many NESers are very conservative in their NESing.
 
That reminds me. I feel that NESers look down on IOT precisely because the NES community is so old and established. I also get the impression that many NESers are very conservative in their NESing.

Some are, it may be because NES counts for post count and yada yada, that is what most people think.
 
NES sucks.

IOT - strategy.
NES - RP
 
NESing is objectively superior to IOT. You can't compare RC Cola to Coke.


NES sucks.

IOT - strategy.
NES - RP

I'd like to know what is so strategic about a province claiming game with literally no strategy? NESers are well educated in the arts of history, military, science and beyond, and it is those that make our strategy actual. To claim a board game is anything close to the masterpieces we produce is comparing a dead cat to a spaceship.
 
IOT is far better than NES. NES sucks.
 
NES= RP
IOT= Strategy

NES sucks. Admit it. You have no strategy.
 
At the very core there is nothing similar between the two communities. On one hand you have a large group of people who can barely spell, which is apparent by scanning the IOT forum, and on the other you have people pushing out 100,000+ word researched and historically plausible alternative timelines and a community that is in the majority heading into graduate school. Such flaming threads are a disgrace to the very art of the different games we create. If you can't survive in the NESing forums don't cry about it here.
 
Okay. I have no strategy. That's why I got so far in Iron and Blood. And the only reason I got so far is because I applied a few basic things I had learned from NESing.
 
Other thing is to RP but mainly focus on strategy, and other thing to focus on RP instead of strategy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom