BirdNES Turn and Stat Poll

[JosefStalinator]

Ah, we aren't assuming the same start for each cradle? Still, the cradle that develops first, having sped along faster (had more big updates), gets a significant advantage, and the cradles that fell behind have significantly less time to develop and spread. Still, if you're all fine with that, then so be it.

 

[das]

I've decided that I'm firmly against desynchronisation. It will lead to way too much confusion with regards to the update schedule, break down the fruitful order-sending contest that we got going by now and will make general ranking (as done by The Strategos) more difficult to implement as well. Also, knowing NESers, the chances of things actually getting boring and staying that way after a single update are almost nonexistent, in any cradle (which is part of the reason why there won't be BTs in my next NES; hiatuses (hiati?), maybe, but with no such excuse ( )).

 

[The Strategos]

I am still undecided/uncaring on all issues, but I would like to post my thinking on the issue of synchronization so that those who feel strongly can try to argue me to their position.

As of now, one of the main reasons I am leaning towards being opposed to the idea of independent cradle times is how the resynchronization will work. As I see it, the following could happen:

1) There won’t be a big time difference between the cradles: In this case, why desynchronize to begin with? If this is true, you don’t seem to have gained much compared to the possible negative impact (see das’ post above)

2) A turn covering the time difference between cradles is done: If some people complain about 100 year turns because they feel it divorces them from control and identification with their nation, they would throw a fit if they were forced into, say a 500 year turn.

3) You say that the cradles are currently at present time so year 300 of one nation equals year 600 of another. Here, you are dooming the 300 cradle to being the North America to the 600 cradle’s Europe. Now that is fine with me, as long as the 300 cradle knows that is what they are getting into by having a series of 10 year turns. I could see, however, tensions within a cradle between those who want to hurry up so that they can be on the colonizing end while others are happy playing around with bow and arrows.

4) How will the “lost boys” time work in relation to the various cradles?


I am also curious how the people who voted “Cradles advance independently at mod discretion sync when required” see that working out. If the mod decides what to do, why bother having cradles advance independently? If the mod is taking the cradle’s players into account (as one voter for that option suggested) then how is that different from player majority rules? Lastly, if the mod has to take players into account, are we going to be forced to have a voting thread after every update so we can see what turn length we will be having? That seems to like it will either force the update back or give the players less time to write orders.

 

[Toltec]

I've voted for 100 years turns in Manipur and desynchronisation. Mix it up a bit.

 

[das]

I am also curious how the people who voted “Cradles advance independently at mod discretion sync when required” see that working out. If the mod decides what to do, why bother having cradles advance independently? If the mod is taking the cradle’s players into account (as one voter for that option suggested) then how is that different from player majority rules? Lastly, if the mod has to take players into account, are we going to be forced to have a voting thread after every update so we can see what turn length we will be having? That seems to like it will either force the update back or give the players less time to write orders.

And that option is especially redundant because ultimately everything still will be up to the mod's discretion. That's just how NESes work. At the same time, it is also more or less apparent that Birdjaguar will consult players in any case, making the player discretion option quite redundant as well. It is simply a question of whether the turns should be synchronised or not; and the former option strongly implies precisely the mechanism described above.

 

[Thlayli]

I have no opinion. My conquest is inevitable either way.

 

[das]

Yes, you will inevitably be conquered no matter what.

 

[foolish icarus]

Clarification: If retaining cradle synchronicity means that all those sensible 10-year Animas votes successfully outnumber the damnable 100-year Manipur votes, then I'm all for it.

 

[Thlayli]

Yes, you will inevitably be conquered no matter what.

True, after we have an extensive, multi-millennia period of world domination. But anyway.

 

[Birdjaguar]

22 player votes so far and here are the results:

Keep cradles synchronized in time vs let mod de-link them : 4-16

Prefer Animas to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 6-0
Prefer Manipur to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 3-5
Prefer Manonash to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 2-4

Custom stats versus all the same: 4-11
Leadership 1 stat vs 3: 7-12
Tech the same vs expanded Tech stats: 3-13

If you are in the game, please vote; even the 'lost boys'.

I have added Abaddon's votes since he is currently "unable to post" even though he can see the threads just fine. Must be some weird technical problem.

Spoiler :

Cradles should advance independelntly of one another at player/mod discretion and synchronized when required.
The Manonash should stick with 10 year turns for now
No custom stats
I want three leadership stats
I want expanded technology stats

This discussion has been most interesting. More ideas are welcome. I will post my thoughts later tonight.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Who is Yui?

He's in BombNES.

I thought the goal would be to eventually make contact with other cradles, which again will be a pain in the ass if we're all on different timelines. Unless you want to skip some cradles for an update or so to sync back up.

I'd be okay with that.

I'm not in any hurry--at all--to get through large chunks of history. The more time and turns we spend in ancient eras, the better (in my estimation). That's likely an opinion not shared by many others, but there it is.

I like all eras.

For example, Manonash might have a lot of hundred year turns while Animas sticks to mostly ten year turns. Manonash discovers the Animas in what is by their calendar 2240, while Animas is still at 1620--that just means the first Manonash update turns out to have occurred earlier in history than the first Animas update.
Admittedly, any globally observable events (climate, disaster, astronomical) would have to be left out or left ambiguous until all the cradles met and synchronized, but that seems to be a very minor drawback.

I never thought of that, but you're right!

I have no opinion. My conquest is inevitable either way.

Yes, you will inevitably be conquered no matter what.

True, after we have an extensive, multi-millennia period of world domination. But anyway.

That would be fun.

My thoughts: Many old civilizations never became very technologically advanced, so we don't have to worry too much about things being unbalanced due to some cradles having shorter turns. For my part, I've never put any money into developing technology other than architecture. I think it would be fun to have meetings of cradles with very different technological levels. It would be fun to see my culture struggle in opposition to the vile inhabitants of other cradles trying to Colonize Manipur... or perhaps vice-versa.

I've only grown in my support for desynchronization.

 

[Frozen In Ice]

I haven't fully made up my mind on the desynchronization issue, so I will wait to vote till then.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Turn Length for Update 6:
Prefer Animas to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 6-0
Prefer Manipur to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 3-5
Prefer Manonash to stay with 10 year turns vs 100 year for now: 2-4
Someone might check my math on this one. It appears that most of Manonash has not voted. In spite of that, 11 are for no change and 9 for moving back to long turns. If de-synchronizing is an option, then it is not problem, if it is not, then it is pretty even.

Stat Changes
Custom stats versus all the same: 4-11
Leadership 1 stat vs 3: 7-12
Tech the same vs expanded Tech stats: 3-13

Most of you seem to want the expanded leadership and tech stats and do not want any additional customization. My inclination is to grant each of your wishes: I would give those who want more the expanded versions, the extra lines, and those who do not, may keep things as they are. From an IC perspective I see it as some leaders want and need more information to be effective and other s don’t. For those who need that additional information, more also becomes available for others to know. But if you are a leader whose need to know is less demanding, there will be less for your neighbors to know too. The choice is, perhaps, a strategic one.

bombshoo, das, emu, North King, you all voted for custom stats. What would you like to see that is not visible now or what would you like to be hidden that is visible now?

Keeping Cradles synced in time:
Keep cradles synchronized in time vs let mod de-link them.
There seems to be a heavy push to allow this in spite of the obstacles it might create. It is the toughest for me decide on. My thinking is that this would not be an uncontrolled process and that I would ‘force’ re-syncing as cradles got closer to contact so that when they met they would be at the same year. If I had to force a cradle to catch up a few hundred years, we would do it in 50 year increments as shown in the new order structure.

By allowing cradles to separate I saw an opportunity when one cradle needed to stay with short turns and another needed to move along faster, they could do so. I did not anticipate not bringing them into sync and letting those time differences be a stand in for different tech paces. As Iggy said so well, that would certainly create an interesting game. Imagine that if you didn’t know what was going on in other cradles. From a selfish standpoint, I also saw the de-linking as a way to have more variety in the updates that I have to write. This is a very strategic question about the games as a whole and is closely tied to what you, as players, expect this game to become. It really should be answered in that context.

I think that before this question can be answered, we need to come to some kind of understanding about where this NES is going and what we all want it to become. I think that for this discussion we can assume that we have until the end of the year before I go bonkers and need break of some sort and that we will move along at about 2 updates a month. Since Jan 4th I’ve managed six updates (zero-5) in three months. That gives us 18 more at the most before a break.

Over that time we could have no goals and just mosey along at whatever pace suited us at the time and reach whatever point we were at when we paused; or we could make sure that all three cradles with some time to spare so a ‘mixing’ can occur; or we could make sure that all three cradles meet and if there were, by happenstance, vast unknown lands of strange and savage peoples, some of our intrepid players could meet and fraternize with them a while. I have no idea how long any of these will take, even though, to some extent I can control the pace of progress. More long turns speed things up for sure; too many 10 year turns and we will never get there. Too fast a pace and much of the fun is lost. I guess I am asking about how to balance the pace to make sure that we all have the expected fun and still get where we want to go.

So what does this all mean? Well, how about if everyone tells me what you expect out of this game in terms of progress and pace and the place you want the world to be in when the fall rolls around.


Non players are welcome to chime in on this last question, because I think it is an important one to NESing in general. Sym?

 

[North King]

bombshoo, das, emu, North King, you all voted for custom stats. What would you like to see that is not visible now or what would you like to be hidden that is visible now?

I voted that way because I think it should be an option. I don't particularly want it for my own nation.

I'll offer an opinion on the other stuff once I have more time.

 

[Symphony D.]

So what does this all mean? Well, how about if everyone tells me what you expect out of this game in terms of progress and pace and the place you want the world to be in when the fall rolls around.


Non players are welcome to chime in on this last question, because I think it is an important one to NESing in general. Sym?

I don't really know why you want my opinion, but it's that where the game goes should ultimately be dictated by the moderator, unless the ambition is such that the players want to jump ship. On the other hand, I tend to be very goal-oriented, so if you don't have a particular place in mind, I guess you could consult the players.

 

[jalapeno_dude]

I'm inclined to stay with 10-year turns because 1)I tend to want to control my nation more and 2)I don't have much of a desire to rush to gunpowder and all of that stuff.

 

[das]

I sort of thought the custom stats meant something else. Regardless, I think that what you said may still be useful in some peculiar situations.

So what does this all mean? Well, how about if everyone tells me what you expect out of this game in terms of progress and pace and the place you want the world to be in when the fall rolls around.

Personally I just want a nice, reasonably-paced ancient NES. No need to drag it out too much, but I'd really prefer slow and gradual progress, and am certainly in no particular hurry.

 

[foolish icarus]

My thinking is that this would not be an uncontrolled process and that I would ‘force’ re-syncing as cradles got closer to contact so that when they met they would be at the same year. If I had to force a cradle to catch up a few hundred years, we would do it in 50 year increments as shown in the new order structure.

Since this is likely to ultimately make the entire game move at the pace of the fastest cradle, hint at or give away when contact is about to occur, and take away the choice of turn length at a potentially crucial time, I renounce my heretical desynchronizing fallacies and proclaim my newfound dedication to the one true faith of cradle synchronicity.

we need to come to some kind of understanding about where this NES is going and what we all want it to become. ..

Over that time we could have no goals and just mosey along at whatever pace suited us at the time and reach whatever point we were at when we paused; or we could make sure that all three cradles with some time to spare so a ‘mixing’ can occur; or we could make sure that all three cradles meet and if there were, by happenstance, vast unknown lands of strange and savage peoples, some of our intrepid players could meet and fraternize with them a while.

I'm more comfortable with a one-50-year update than the two-at-the-same-time.
Let's say we do go full speed, 100 years a turn, 1800 years further by the end of this year. That could get us to a roughly early-CE analogue, or it might only be as far as the the beginning of the truly large empire building age. Probably the former if normal NES patterns are allowed to take hold, perhaps more appropriately the latter if sufficiently interesting (read: cruel) historical-inspired obstacles are thrown at us.
That's one way.

I think we should be about 500-800 years further after about 15-18 more updates. If there are any currently existing societies that haven't decayed or imploded or been wiped away by that point, that would be a good time to do so. The bronze/early iron age kingdoms come to an end, perfect timing for their successors to come into play in the next stage of BirdNES.

Either way, it seems to me cradles will be interacting only minimally or not at all (especially likely in the latter case). If there's a reasonably secure route of travel between cradles they may very well have a vague understanding of each others' existences, but not much beyond that. Manipur is certainly big enough for me, and I'm not keen on any other cradles disturbing my blissful backwardness with more complicated/advanced notions of society or technology or philosophy.

That's about what I expect and it would make me quite content, but I'm not set on it--leisurely moseying suits me fine.

too many 10 year turns and we will never get there

Reiteration: I've no particular place to get--I'm 'there'.