IOT Developmental Thread

[Double A]

Originally Posted by Double A

You should make a rule that goes something like "You can't pull more than 50% of your forces committed to an offensive operation if you are sneak attacked."

What about that?

Originally Posted by Thorvald of Lym

Did I mention Double A is in Egypt?

Macedonia.

[Thorvald of Lym]

Depends if a) I'll allow sneaks, and b) I want to let attackers adjust at all, and I'm currently inclined not to.

But it would be something to consider.

[Mad Man]

Originally Posted by Thorvald of Lym

What, you mean slap the new rules onto it? The thought had crossed my mind, actually. Multiple times, even.

Only problem is, most of those players are veterans from IOT's early days, and I'm not sure if they'd remain on board with a more rigid interface.

I *do* want to finish that game, though.

I wish to finish this too, after all there was never any real conclusion. You don't want to pull a Sopranos do you?

[Thorvald of Lym]

AW HELL NAW!

I'd thought about an "early" Happy End by establishing the ERI and restoring the whole world to Blue. I also had (have?) some great RP reserved for an end war between TEH WOHRLD & Sombra-led Abhorrents.

[Thorvald of Lym]

Alrighty, let's lay down a skeletal framework for this:

Claims and expansion ignored, assuming a continuation of MP.

Politics
Democracy or Dictatorship.
Democracy: stronger roleplay influence on RR; dissent does not trigger rebellion; parliament can impose limits on power.
Dictatorship: weaker RP influence on RR; dissent triggers uprising; full control of government.

National powers
For now, left as-is. I might nerf them, if I don't abolish them completely.

Economy
As stated previously. Pop x Industry = GNI; tax + world trade = state income. Every 1% of GNI invested increases industry by 0.01. Annexed/assimilated territories normalize industry to the average between the two states.

Military
Army - 10 gold, 1 pop, 2 maintenance; Air wing - 25 gold, 0.2 pop, 5 maintenance; Navy - 35 gold, 0.4 pop, 10 maintenance. Military tech increases purchase price and maintenance costs by 10% for each level, rounded normally. All forces pool, but players can outline deployment during/in preparation for war. Naval blockades of strategic straits will prevent amphibious assaults as long as a fleet remains present.

Navies and air forces can provide fire support @ 20-plus-x% chance of effect, where x is the respective tech level. Navies can only support if they have routed the enemy fleet. For air, I'm still debating whether to use Tani's tiered system (fight the theatre and the winner takes the battlefield), or Sone's suggestion of simultaneous support. I'm even considering making them both options (Tani's as more of a steamroller but with the risk of higher losses, Sone's as less effective but more survivable), but I'm having trouble figuring out how to balance the numbers.

Armies and navies can intercept aircraft at 10% and 20% odds, respectively.

Battle is calculated based on Sone's system, where strength = #units * tech, and the RNG = sum of both sides' strength. Originally I was looking at an original formula for kill/rout/capture based on stand-alone tech level, but the numbers I was coming up with ramped up either too slowly or too quickly, so I think I'll stick with his unchanged.

Warfare
After order lock, battles are announced to provide the defenders and their allies time to prepare a response. I've decided on hard-capping reserves as all unallocated funds for the turn; thus it's worth keeping a surplus. You know, for emergencies.

Occupied territory provides population but no income, and will rise up each turn; if a country has been completely conquered, these rebels benefit from half the old state's military tech level. Chance of pacification is a combination of occ. pop. to victor pop., conqueror's form of government, cultural similarity (or lack thereof), and the general RP history of the conflict, ranging from 1-10% each turn.

I'm still not set on how collateral damage plays into campaigns.

WMD
Same rules as Tani's in how they operate. Ballistics investment represents missile quality; SDI investment the defence against. At a 1:1 ratio they cancel each other out, although there is a 1% chance of evasion due to Fegelein human error.

Costs, however, are different. Each missile increases in price by 50%, and base price doubles by tier. Additionally, every standing warhead carries a fixed, but steep maintenance fee. Exact numbers yet to be determined.

NPCs
People probably know my stance on NPCs. While competent enough to support themselves and their allies, I will not go out of my way to have them steal the limelight. On Tani's forum, some of them may be played by the Downfall Gang, making it easy to surmise a nation's attitude and emphasis based on who's in control.

Client rules are still in effect, but if I keep it, Tani's rather poorly-explained annexation system will only manifest if a player country's GNI is 75% greater; for expansionists, 50%.

Revolt Risk
Probability per turn of domestic uprising (dictatorship) or curtailment of executive power (democracy). The size and scope of the backlash is proportional to the % risk; excessively high risk (approaching 100%) can lead to mutiny in the former, losing one's own country in the latter.

Aggravates:
- High taxes
- Military-to-civilian pop. ratio above 35% or below 10%
- War-time casualties, but especially from rebellions in occupied provinces
- Malicious roleplay
- Generally aggressive behaviour

Mitigates:
- Low taxes
- Altruistic roleplay
- Generally peaceful behaviour

Thus players should be able to reach an amicable equilibrium through a mix of mechanical manoeuvres and superior storytelling.

Espionage
Spies cost 25 gold each and 0.1 pop; 4 gold maintenance. Spy strength = # agents * tech.

I'm still trying to figure out the best way to reformulate mission odds. I said I wanted to escape sheer numbers, but thus far everything I've come up with favours the larger player to a substantial degree.

Terrorists/NGOs
The number of these is starting to get out of hand, and I know Tani's looking to impose hard limits in MP2. All current organizations will be grandfathered in, of course, but I will not welcome any new ones. They are extremely versatile, and I don't think Tani's disclosed all the functions they gained during the game:

- Spies double as soldiers, and so are boosted both by military and espionage research (but not cumulatively). Since this skirts the new upkeep costs, they are valuable as "free" muscle.
- When an NGO coups an NPC, it gains control of everything but taxes, including foreign policy. It can also specify political alignment and currency the same turn as the coup.
- NGOs can accept troop gifts provided by player nations, but not NPCs. This is tallied separately from their agent pool, and can include air forces and navies. I haven't decided what to do about upkeep rules that won't call for excessive micromanagement.
- NGOs can be invited to "take charge" of PC-sponsored coups, as if the NGO sponsored the coup itself. Likewise, when a player establishes an independent state, it can install an NGO as the government (this was the case with Good Xinjiang).
- Established bases can be relocated if they are not revealed during a search that turn.

- New feature: Suitcase nukes can be deployed exclusively against military targets, rather than bombing provinces, at reduced success odds.

Tani never elaborated the search mechanism, but I thought of something that goes like this: Chance of discovery = agents / ((provinces * bases) * 100)
For example, if there were 3 bases scattered in 27 provinces, and 27 agents committed to the search, each base would have a 1-in-3 chance of being exposed. I'm still trying to figure out how NGO agents work as defence, since I figure they should be deterrents against the search, not the subsequent bloody attack.

[NinjaCow64]

@The the above post: Is that for IOT:A or MP? Hope it isn't for IOT:A, I liked the simple rules.

[Thorvald of Lym]

Originally Posted by Thorvald of Lym

assuming a continuation of MP.

*cough*

[Double A]

People probably know my stance on NPCs. While competent enough to support themselves and their allies, I will not go out of my way to have them steal the limelight. On Tani's forum, some of them may be played by the Downfall Gang, making it easy to surmise a nation's attitude and emphasis based on who's in control.

I offer an alliance to Fegelein's country.

[Kinich-Ahau]

Thorvald, would the new occupation rules apply retroactively to the 501st's Alaskan territories?

[Thorvald of Lym]

Principle says yes, sympathy says no, either way I'm not sure how many turns back I want to start this.

[Mosher]

Before the three day's war.

[Red_Spy]

That could lead to a massive WP-CI Land war, or an actual era of peace like promised. I vote the latter.

[Mosher]

I vote for the latter as well.

[Tyo]

If I had kept being the Crusaders...

[Nonevah]

Originally Posted by Thorvald of Lym

Entirely possible; such a game would probably be closer to the I&B school. Do you have an idea for the sort of rules it'll follow?

I would think classic Diplomacy rules, with a 121 center winning condition. Perhaps let players pick out their three starting centers, have builds in non-home centers (starting two winters after the SC was taken.)

[Double A]

When was the 3 days war?

___

Dibs on not Austria.

[Red_Spy]

Originally Posted by Double A

When was the 3 days war?

___

Dibs on not Austria.

When I nuked the Comitern.

[Double A]

I think we should start after that since it was such a defining event.

[Kinich-Ahau]

I agree, AA. It was too important to simply ignore.

[Mosher]

We should start before it... because I don't think anyone in the Comintern really wants to play what is essentially a whole new game with an enormous handicap that they can never, ever recover from.