BOTWAWKI Revised Thread

[Abaddon]

EQ.. no temptation for the game to play out from your BT? I would really love to play this as a "normal modern NES" now we have created such a background for it!

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

At the moment I have not even the slightest intention to play on from the BT. If I do any Fallout after Capto Iugulum, it'll be a new one from scratch. If anyone else chooses to take it, they're welcome to. I'd add in some smaller powers first though.

 

[Abaddon]

Hmm.. anyone else interested? Perhaps I might create a spin-off NES from this...

 

[thomas.berubeg]

Please do, abaddon... maybe there'll finally be a NES of yours that I play in (that lasts long.)

 

[SKILORD]

I'd be interested. But probably in a week after my first update if I feel like I have the appropriate rhythm and focus to moderate. In any event, The Pieces is hardly a spinoff of this game, but it does use a lot of the core concepts of the post-apocalyptic sci fi fresh start that BOTWAWKI has made so fashionable.

Which is fair, I suppose, I've always stolen my best moderating ideas from EQ. Most of the games I ran in the past were pretty devoted to trying to be RTOR2.

But, yes, once I felt secure in my scheduling I'd be very interested.

 

[Abaddon]

Well it will have to be September.. harvest will be kicking in soon so I don't know how much free time I will have.

EQ do you mind if I throw ideas around here, or should I start a new thread?

 

[thomas.berubeg]

I'll, of course, reprise my role as the NIR

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Feel free to throw ideas around. It's a related topic I'd say.

 

[bestshot9]

I'd join in if you'd start up a spinoff where this left off, probably make a new nation somewhere in the Southwest or another place equally uninhabited by players.

 

[Terrance888]

Red Mesa Remnant Anyone?

 

[ChiefDesigner]

Canada, naturally.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

First of all, I’d like to thank all of you for participating in this NES, and would like to ask each of you to commit a few moments of time to answer the following questions. Unlike other NESes, I’ve determined to take a retrospective look through ya’ll at what I did right, what I did wrong, and what worked, and what didn’t work so well. So, I’ve got a few questions here which I’d seriously appreciate all of you who played in this NES (no matter how briefly) and in other NESes of mine providing with some input. Lurkers are also free to respond to questions. This will help both me with my current Capto Iugulum NES, but also with the possibility of a new round of BOTWAWKI.

1. Was the section of the first page “Lessons of the Wasteland” useful to you? Was it a source of valuable information or a complete waste of space?

2. Similarly, did the Monsters of the Wasteland section serve any valuable purpose to you?

3. As I have frequently stated here and elsewhere, the setup for this NES, and the updating process was focused on using RNG far more than any prior NES I’ve moderated. This was part of a system of random results based on limited influence of other modifiers, and then the actual writing in the updates being the actual “in character” justification of the results the RNG provided. Do you believe this is a worthwhile system and superior to a moderator such as myself simply deciding the most likely/interesting outcome of a player’s actions by fiat?

4. Though we only caught a glimpse of what I had planned before I moved on, what is your thoughts on a multi-turn spanning plot such as the Master’s Army?

5. What motivated you to make the decisions which led to the creation of your faction? Were you more driven by the effects of the various traits, or by the potential for story?

6. Is there any other room for improvement beyond what you may have already discussed above?

 

[ChiefDesigner]

1. As someone familiar with the Fallout canon, I found the "Lessons of the Wasteland" section to be useful as a guide to how my orders would get interpreted. As the game changed over time, however, some of the older lessons became less useful. What I would find most useful would be:

* rough guidelines as to what phase of the game we're in, and what problems we as faction heads should be trying to solve--are we shooting for self-sufficiency in food and water, with a margin for several years' population growth? or are we trying to find significant pieces of salvage?

* estimates of what our orders would yield, to make planning easier. I'm not saying make it all deterministic; just that knowing a baseline would make planning a lot easier.

2. Again, as someone familiar with the Fallout canon I am pretty familiar with the appearance and combat ability of most of the monsters in the Wasteland, so I didn't find that section very useful. Someone without knowledge of the canon would probably find it a great resource, though.

3. I feel like randomness is certainly the *fairest* way to approach it, and far superior to mod fiat; I liked it a great deal. I enjoyed the RNG system a great deal, as it added an extra element of challenge to planning orders. However, having some way for factions that are behind to catch up would be useful. I felt that the Appalachian and Liberty Commonwealths were by far the *luckiest* factions, and the results of several good rolls early resulted in a bit of a snowball effect.

4. Multi-turn plots are excellent, and add direction and threat to a game that would otherwise lose focus. I was expecting a few multi-turn plots earlier, to be honest

5. The Diefenbunker was story-driven; even if I trashed half my stories because they sucked, I felt there was a lot of possibility in a Canadian faction, especially in a part of the canon that's not well-explored.

6. I'd think hard about the feel of a game before writing a ruleset. For awhile, I wasn't sure what BOTWAWKI was trying to be--whether the ruleset was meaning to reflect a harsh and unforgiving wasteland, or whether the mechanics were designed to allow for rapid rebuilding and proto-state establishment. I feel the ruleset as given reflected the brutal nature of the Wasteland well; harsh environments and unforgiving RNGs go well together.

7. Also--thanks a lot for running this. I had *fun*, which is the most important thing.

8. Do you play roguelikes at all?

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

@ChiefDesigner: My current favorite character I call "Hobo with a shotgun." That should answer #8.

 

[SKILORD]

Fair enough.

1. Was the section of the first page “Lessons of the Wasteland” useful to you? Was it a source of valuable information or a complete waste of space?

I found it very useful and innovative, it often helped me decide what courses of action would be the most/least profitable in my situation.

2. Similarly, did the Monsters of the Wasteland section serve any valuable purpose to you?

I thought it was cool, as a person who never played Fallout and knew nothing of these creatures....

But personally? No, no help. The Community had some problems with external threats early on but rarely ever by the midpoint. Even if these monsters had tried to mess with me, I am doubtful that this particular section would have been much use.

3. As I have frequently stated here and elsewhere, the setup for this NES, and the updating process was focused on using RNG far more than any prior NES I’ve moderated. This was part of a system of random results based on limited influence of other modifiers, and then the actual writing in the updates being the actual “in character” justification of the results the RNG provided. Do you believe this is a worthwhile system and superior to a moderator such as myself simply deciding the most likely/interesting outcome of a player’s actions by fiat?

I am a fan of the RNG idea. Yes, I use it personally.

4. Though we only caught a glimpse of what I had planned before I moved on, what is your thoughts on a multi-turn spanning plot such as the Master’s Army?

It is my sincerest hope that multi-turn plots where factions are forced to take sides and their interests are put at odds are legitimate and workable. I wish I could say I was sure, but I'm not going to promise anything because I won't know for.... let's say like 3 and a half weeks.

5. What motivated you to make the decisions which led to the creation of your faction? Were you more driven by the effects of the various traits, or by the potential for story?

Little of both. Cool traits first, then build them into a good story.

6. Is there any other room for improvement beyond what you may have already discussed above?

The extremely low rate of expansion made it difficult for some of us to interact with other player factions.

I also didn't like being told what I couldn't do , I understand that not all problems are nails (none of my problems were nails), but if I wanted a hammer I feel like I should have been permitted to have a hammer, even if it led to negative consequences for my faction.

-

Thank you for running this game though, it was great and I derived a great deal of joy from it.

 

[Northen Wolf]

1. Was the section of the first page “Lessons of the Wasteland” useful to you? Was it a source of valuable information or a complete waste of space?

It was useful... Quite useful.

2. Similarly, did the Monsters of the Wasteland section serve any valuable purpose to you?

Not much of a use, because I knew what were the main enemies from updates already. However, If it'd have expanded for few more turns, this knowing of "main enemies" might have been rather useful (right now we had limited, separated, areas)

3. As I have frequently stated here and elsewhere, the setup for this NES, and the updating process was focused on using RNG far more than any prior NES I’ve moderated. This was part of a system of random results based on limited influence of other modifiers, and then the actual writing in the updates being the actual “in character” justification of the results the RNG provided. Do you believe this is a worthwhile system and superior to a moderator such as myself simply deciding the most likely/interesting outcome of a player’s actions by fiat?

This is worthwhile, I used this system myself in NWolfNES and it worked quite well. I used a dice but did not let players to roll more than two bad rolls per turn (otherwise it's just unfair).

4. Though we only caught a glimpse of what I had planned before I moved on, what is your thoughts on a multi-turn spanning plot such as the Master’s Army?

Waging a huge war over several turns is better than many small wars, which influence almost no one. However, super mutants might have been a *bit* too much. Then again if the faction that fights Mutants (brotherhood?) is about same strenght as mutants, this would have been quite good idea. If AI can destroy player in 1-2 turns, whatever player does, its no fun. But having players to support a weaker army against stronger one, would have been quite fun.

5. What motivated you to make the decisions which led to the creation of your faction? Were you more driven by the effects of the various traits, or by the potential for story?

I picked what faction I want to be (nomads) then picked traits according to benefits. So First I picked faction for RP purpose and then traits for best RP/Gameplay purposes.

6. Is there any other room for improvement beyond what you may have already discussed above?

Well, trade and interaction between player faction was low. I Myself wanted to ally Wild Wolves with Fort Morgan Refuge(Anonymoose) but we never reached close enough to eachother to actually form this alliance.

There were also only few small NPC factions, so most of the game was simple expand expand expand, just because small native tribes offered a little resistance.

I also felt that population growth was somewhat slow, I would have expected more families coming to join (or be forced to join) with settlements that do great.

I also had trouble understanding food and water income modifiers, because I expected that every new member of tribe would automatically try to feed himself, instead of relying on single farm and single water pipe for food/water. Like, if I join a tribe, I'll work there and set up my own small field to feed me or do something to gain in-tribe currency to feed myself, not relay upon large tribe-maintained field to feed me.

I loved this NES, thanks for running it.

 

[SKILORD]

This is worthwhile, I used this system myself in NWolfNES and it worked quite well. I used a dice but did not let players to roll more than two bad rolls per turn (otherwise it's just unfair).

Retreat?

My philosophy about bad rolls (although I use random.org instead of dice so the use of "rolls" as the terminology is not technically accurate) is to allow fast or "militia" units to retreat if they roll a 1.

Obviously this still leaves a lot of room for bad rolls screwing people over.

c'est le vie.

-

EDIT: For noncombat applications I wouldn't let anything that bad happen consistently to somebody no matter what the numbers said.

 

[ChiefDesigner]

@ChiefDesigner: My current favorite character I call "Hobo with a shotgun." That should answer #8.

Hahahahaha! Right.

So, lessons about how RNGs work in roguelikes might be applicable--one faction getting three critical loot rolls in a row is a balance problem, if you're trying to keep player factions balanced; however, it *is* realistic, and I kind of like that.

The important lesson to take away here is that you just have to keep sending out huge numbers of scouting parties; eventually, you'll get lucky.

-----

A couple more things: one thing I would really have liked is to have some control over the critical loot successes. There are specific locations that I was hoping to salvage, and managing to grab even one of them would have been awesome.

The second thing is that having some idea of percentages of success would be useful. I wasn't sure whether reactivating the reactor in the American garrison in North Bay was the right call--I went ahead because I was expecting a 50% chance of success, and the expected value would have worked out in my favor, but I actually had no idea what I was doing there.

 

[Northen Wolf]

Retreat?

My philosophy about bad rolls (although I use random.org instead of dice so the use of "rolls" as the terminology is not technically accurate) is to allow fast or "militia" units to retreat if they roll a 1.

Obviously this still leaves a lot of room for bad rolls screwing people over.

c'est le vie.

I also use random.org, but if player gets 2 rolls of "1" and 1 roll of "2" in a single turn, then I usually made sure that player would roll at least one "3", just because, otherwise, they would have been rendered useless for next turn and semi-useless turn after that.

 

[das]

1. It was very useful and interesting, and helped me while I was catching up.

2. This, on the other hand, simply wasn't that much of a factor for me. Not sure how I could say in this case.

3. Don't get me wrong - fiat is great, but RNG is useful when you can't decide between a number of equally appropriate/interesting outcomes.

4. I very much approve, but the Master's Army suffered from being, well, predictable.

5. Bit of both, but I admit that the leader trait influenced a lot of the specifics. i.e. I wanted a clannish rural post-apocalyptic empire even before I looked at the traits, but the traits and such showed me a promising way to get there.