BTS Role-Playing Challenge; Questions and Comments

[madscientist]

Ok, I think this series of games is a great idea. But in light of seeign the challenges by three different posters I would like to ask a few questions and post some idea for these games.

Most importantly I would like to hear from Slobbering Bear who brainstormed the idea.

1) Can there be numerous games form different civlizations and leaders. To be specific I was thinking of doing Washington but find Rossevelt currently going on. I would still be interested in Doing Washington but defeinitely would wait quite a while since another American game would get redundent and boring, losing the charm of the role-playing games. That said, if someone really wanted to play one of these as Brennus or Sitting Bull, would it be condiered done already.

2) Should there be a signup thread for these games?

3) I think game handicaps and conditions should be at the sole discretion of the poster running that game.

4) With point #3 said, I think most games should have some guidleines put in unique to that civilization, not because it sounds cool. Examples, The celts conditions for building cities on hill, the native americans preservation of nature, the Americans use of only Freedom civics. etc...

5) Some civs have multiple wonders associated with them while some have none. I think it usrealistic to mandate one civ like American built all associated with that civ (this is a game about alternative histories). But I think something like Celts need to control Stonehenge, Egytpians need Pyramids, Americans need SoL are acceptible. Ideas????

6) Can there be a limit on how many are running at once??? I count three right now. The ALC only shoots off one at a time although I understand only one poster runs that entire challenge.

EDIT::

7) Also I think wee need a few days to get some good dialogue about each gaem before it is started. Posting the first screenshot and 4000BC save is fine, but i think we should give each other some time for useful discussion.

End EDIT::

My bottomline is we need some sort of unofficial moderator for these challenges or they are going to get pretty stale and boring.

Please add any other comments or ideas, these are just to get started on this.

 

[Bast]

Yes this is a good idea. I would like to have a go too (first time ever) with Elizabeth or Victoria sometime down the track if possible. I actually think England has a strong claim to building Stonehenge too.

 

[LiberiGlacialis]

Hey, don't forget, Three different people are running RP Challenges (officially) right now. The god of the style (ALC) is just one person. Hmmm....

 

[Indibil]

The salient point here is how many different demo-games can this forum support at the very same time, LiberiGlacialis, not how many people can start those games.

Of course, emphasis is made on those RP challenges as they seem to have catched fire lately.

 

[LiberiGlacialis]

Hmmm....good point there. Grah, I just did it because giving myself restrictions would help me learn, which in turn would help me get past Warlord/Noble/ect. That, and showing what I'm doing will make me go "Oh, snap. I screw up, I'm in the fire."

Hmmm....well, three going is a bit much + ALC, Help Me Learn, Flying Dutchmen, LHC....#4 I heartily agree with. Shot for one, not all of them. Grah.

 

[sterben]

Just a suggestion from a lurker, but it would organize things much better if there was a sub-forum here dedicated to demo games. I love reading them and following along, but sometimes they get lost in the sea of traditional strategy posts, and now that there seems to be a plethora of demo games going on (ALC, RP, and other various challenges) there are even more to wade through.

Just a suggestion, though.

 

[madscientist]

Hmmm....good point there. Grah, I just did it because giving myself restrictions would help me learn, which in turn would help me get past Warlord/Noble/ect. That, and showing what I'm doing will make me go "Oh, snap. I screw up, I'm in the fire."

Hmmm....well, three going is a bit much + ALC, Help Me Learn, Flying Dutchmen, LHC....#4 I heartily agree with. Shot for one, not all of them. Grah.

Yes, that is one purpose. The game series is developing quickly (3 games within a week) into any can try regardless of playing ability which is really a great idea.

The point I see is a series of restictions for a given leader/civilization consistent with history (or at least how we view it, case in point Stonehemge) for flavor and enjoyment. Once some conditions are mutually agreed upon any player that haunts these forums, they can start their own game athtere own speed/map size/difficulty following those criteria. It's a different angle from the ALC which focus' on the leader traits and UB as demonstrated from an excellent player, as an educational tool.

Also everyone view on certain leaders may be different, as became evident to me how you viewed the American through the Roosevelt presidency and I viewed Washington's.

 

[r_rolo1]

Just a suggestion from a lurker, but it would organize things much better if there was a sub-forum here dedicated to demo games. I love reading them and following along, but sometimes they get lost in the sea of traditional strategy posts, and now that there seems to be a plethora of demo games going on (ALC, RP, and other various challenges) there are even more to wade through.

Just a suggestion, though.

A nice idea.... Sometimes I also get a little bit lost . And they would be easier to find for future reference

 

[slobberinbear]

Thanks for posting about this, Madscientist.

When I first posted the Sitting Bull roleplaying challenge, I had some reservations. Mainly, I didn't want to steal anyone's thunder. Sisiutil, Aelf, and others have been doing this sort of thing longer and better than I ever will. In particular, and in all seriousness, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Sisiutil's series and I don't want to do anything to take away from that or diminish it. He is my leader.

From a selfish standpoint, I was looking for a creative outlet and thought that posting my games would make me a better player. I was hoping others would find the game fun and a little different. I have wondered, though, whether my thread belonged in the stories and tales forum. But it's really a hybrid of a demo game and a story, with an artificial challenge imposed by the OP. So it is a strategy subject, just with some "RP fluff" thrown in for grins.

I claim ownership of nothing. The concept is derivative, a progression (though not necessarily an improvement!) from what has been done before. I say that if someone wants to post a game, go for it. I am happy that anyone is interested in doing one, frankly. It's more work than it appears to be, trust me.

I am generally against organizing the games in a "sign up" type fashion. Folks should be able to play what they want. Let the CFC members decide for themselves if and how they want to participate. It is true though, that getting involved (as a reader or poster) in a demo game is time-consuming, and there is a limited amount of attention that can be given to them if there are several going at once. But we shouldn't restict anything -- let this be a marketplace of ideas and half-baked fiction.

I would support setting up demo games in a subforum, though.

I have to wonder, too, whether there isn't heightened interest in the concept because it's semi-new. I imagine the interest will fall back to a normal level (or lower!) in a week or two.

 

[KMadCandy]

i'm reading again what i wrote and it sounds a bit harsh but i really don't know what else to say. we all have different opinions, and obviously some folks agree with you. i don't hate you for your opinion, and i do feel you have a right to it. i'm just completely befuddled by it, and explaining my own point of view is harder than i thought it would be. i'm not trying to flame you or call you an idiot and i hope i don't offend you. i'm having trouble with the wording.

"My bottomline is we need some sort of unofficial moderator for these challenges or they are going to get pretty stale and boring."

well my theory is you don't have to read them . i skip a lot of threads that don't interest me in the slightest. i won't mention which ones, i don't want to start any flame wars, but i don't go posting that they're boring, since boring is in eye of the beholder reader isn't it?

i really don't understand why it's an issue for you at all. obviously some other folks who have already responded do see it as one. please understand that i'm not saying you're stupid or even wrong, i'm just telling you i have a complete mental block there since my perspective is so totally different that i can't even relate to yours. in my eyes, if it's fun for the people doing the challenge, and fun for at least some people to follow along, then it's worth the space for a thread on the forum. each is one thread, with an easily identifiable title, and easily findable for the folks that like it and easily skippable for the folks that don't.

3) I think game handicaps and conditions should be at the sole discretion of the poster running that game.

4) With point #3 said, I think most games should have some guidleines put in unique to that civilization, not because it sounds cool. Examples, The celts conditions for building cities on hill, the native americans preservation of nature, the Americans use of only Freedom civics. etc...

5) Some civs have multiple wonders associated with them while some have none. I think it usrealistic to mandate one civ like American built all associated with that civ (this is a game about alternative histories). But I think something like Celts need to control Stonehenge, Egytpians need Pyramids, Americans need SoL are acceptible. Ideas????

i won't be doing one of these games, or any game in public, that's not my style. but if i were going to, i certainly would want it to be fun for me and i quite frankly wouldn't put details up to a vote ahead of time as to whether they're "acceptable". advice during the game is one thing, and discussion during a pre-game like in ALC is fun, but a majority rule before the game even starts strikes me as very odd. granted if folks found my game boring and didn't participate in the thread, then my decisions weren't "acceptable" in that sense, it would die off and i'd finish the game offline or not at all. but the thing is, if i'm not having fun what is the point? so if i was gonna do it at all it would have to be what's acceptable/fun for me, not necessarily what wins a vote. maybe that's just me .

if it's not fun for the poster (for whatever reason, and one reason might be "the crowd" or "the unofficial moderator" imposing rules), they won't keep doing it. if you like the threads you want them to keep doing it. if you don't like the threads you simply skip them when you check the forums, that costs you nothing. so why not let the originators do as they please? i don't see who wins anything by your proposal.

again, i'm sorry if that sounds harsh. it's really hard to explain my point of view when i can't relate to yours, but it's just because we're entirely different, not because i think you deserve a flaming post, so i hope this doesn't read like one.

edit: here's how long it took me: i started this post before slobberinbear had replied, his post is stamped 3.30. i didn't hit submit until 3.53, and i type over 90 wpm! i had a hard time, and probably still made a mess.

Just a suggestion from a lurker, but it would organize things much better if there was a sub-forum here dedicated to demo games. I love reading them and following along, but sometimes they get lost in the sea of traditional strategy posts, and now that there seems to be a plethora of demo games going on (ALC, RP, and other various challenges) there are even more to wade through.

that sounds cool if a moderator wants to go to the trouble. would make it even easier for those who want to skip some to skip them, and find only the ones they want to follow.

 

[madscientist]

i'm reading again what i wrote and it sounds a bit harsh but i really don't know what else to say. we all have different opinions, and obviously some folks agree with you. i don't hate you for your opinion, and i do feel you have a right to it. i'm just completely befuddled by it, and explaining my own point of view is harder than i thought it would be. i'm not trying to flame you or call you an idiot and i hope i don't offend you. i'm having trouble with the wording.

"My bottomline is we need some sort of unofficial moderator for these challenges or they are going to get pretty stale and boring."

well my theory is you don't have to read them . i skip a lot of threads that don't interest me in the slightest. i won't mention which ones, i don't want to start any flame wars, but i don't go posting that they're boring, since boring is in eye of the beholder reader isn't it?

i really don't understand why it's an issue for you at all. obviously some other folks who have already responded do see it as one. please understand that i'm not saying you're stupid or even wrong, i'm just telling you i have a complete mental block there since my perspective is so totally different that i can't even relate to yours. in my eyes, if it's fun for the people doing the challenge, and fun for at least some people to follow along, then it's worth the space for a thread on the forum. each is one thread, with an easily identifiable title, and easily findable for the folks that like it and easily skippable for the folks that don't.



i won't be doing one of these games, or any game in public, that's not my style. but if i were going to, i certainly would want it to be fun for me and i quite frankly wouldn't put details up to a vote ahead of time as to whether they're "acceptable". advice during the game is one thing, and discussion during a pre-game like in ALC is fun, but a majority rule before the game even starts strikes me as very odd. granted if folks found my game boring and didn't participate in the thread, then my decisions weren't "acceptable" in that sense, it would die off and i'd finish the game offline or not at all. but the thing is, if i'm not having fun what is the point? so if i was gonna do it at all it would have to be what's acceptable/fun for me, not necessarily what wins a vote. maybe that's just me .

if it's not fun for the poster (for whatever reason, and one reason might be "the crowd" or "the unofficial moderator" imposing rules), they won't keep doing it. if you like the threads you want them to keep doing it. if you don't like the threads you simply skip them when you check the forums, that costs you nothing. so why not let the originators do as they please? i don't see who wins anything by your proposal.

again, i'm sorry if that sounds harsh. it's really hard to explain my point of view when i can't relate to yours, but it's just because we're entirely different, not because i think you deserve a flaming post, so i hope this doesn't read like one.

edit: here's how long it took me: i started this post before slobberinbear had replied, his post is stamped 3.30. i didn't hit submit until 3.53, and i type over 90 wpm! i had a hard time, and probably still made a mess.



that sounds cool if a moderator wants to go to the trouble. would make it even easier for those who want to skip some to skip them, and find only the ones they want to follow.

No offense taken at all!

To explain my view:
These type of games by nature ask for input which can be given or not given. Obviously people have shown an interest in it, by the number of games started and comments in posts. Alot of people here like to play there games in public as educational as well as enjoyment, nothing wrong with that (I have tried this somewhat myself but less efficienctly). There have been alot of other games started with ALCisk names, at least in the past 6 monthes that I have been regularly posting.

It also is a type of challenge game (Role-Playing Challenge) which basically handicaps the games, and bascially calls for suggestions and ideas. From the first it was defined as a concept to be adopted by others, which is great.

So I was wondering (and I mean wondering) if there should be a little more organization to it. Maybe it's just me, but if I find 5 RP chalenges nest week all using Elizabeth with different handicaps and different levels, I'ld call that a little stale and boring. Not a bad term, some of my games stale and boring and just ended.

I am also a fairly structured guy, and play the games in a rather organized fashion. I typically will not repeat a leader once I have won with them until all leaders have been played.

I really meant no offense to anyone regarding this, just shooting some ideas out for discussion.

I do agree that perhaps these games should go into a sub-forum.

 

[KMadCandy]

yay i didn't offend you! thanks for reading it like i meant it . and you didn't offend me, i just didn't get it! but yeah if you don't repeat leaders, we play awfully different! i'm an oddball and do weird variants and swap difficulty levels and do all kinds of things that you should not try at home . i sit here and ponder "what kind of mood am i in, what sort of game will be fun" ... structured isn't exactly the word for that *giggle*.

there's the Stories & Tales forum, and the SG sub-forum under that. if they do split these sort of game threads off, i can sort of see a mod putting them there. even the non-RP ones, because SGs are there, so that's the precedent. my preference would be a sub-forum just for them, i'd not like to see them thrown in with all the SGs. part of why they're easy to find here is that the names aren't like the rest of the thread titles in this forum. there, they would be, oops!

ps given my username i totally claim dibs if they add Willy Wonka as a leader .

 

[Firewind]

The way I see it, tihs is all shiny and new. Interest will eventually die down, but there will still be people who are particularly into these types of threads. Thus, a seperate subforum may be ideal.

As for my reason for starting one, quite simple really. It looked like fun. Sure, I can't manage the fun flavour text that Slobberin does (being in the middle of a three-month and running writer's block will do that to you), but I find justifying everything as a Celt fun and an interesting spin on things. So far it's been easy, with just a couple of speed bumps, but I'm actively looking forward to when things get difficult for me, as that's when I'll be having most fun.

I think that if a subforum was set up, there should be a thread for people to discuss what restrictions they think suit each civilisation and leader. This wouldn't be to enforce rules on the games that take those combinations - they would be so people who struggle can pick up ideas. For example, some people might not agree that Celts only building on hills is a good restriction - they might discard it in favour of another rule for the Celts. That should be fine. The person playing should ultimately decide what rules are fair for them, and preferably should be able to back their decisions up with reasons why, even if it's only 'I don't think it'll be fun with xyz rule'.

I suppose what I'm trying to say in a long-winded way is that I'm in support of a subforum, would even help a little if I could.

Oh, by the way, thanks for sparking the idea off Slobberin. Just because you don't claim any ownership doesn't mean I don't think you created the concept.

 

[mice]

I agree with Kmad. They should be free and easy. No need for as sign up thread.

And the parameters of the RP should just be settled by the OP after a healthy amount of input from forumers.

A separate sub forum for demo games is a really good idea. With the RP approach they are similar to succesion games, but they are not succession games.

See how much creativity there is on the SG forum. It's endless. The same could occur in RP demo games (or whatever you call them)

 

[Guardian_PL]

@madscientist
I understand Your will to organize, however I don't think it's possible Despite that we are dealing with information and communication it's all chaos anyway, and You have pick up pearls from garbage untill Your back will hurt (I'm talking about gaining knowledge process here )

I have no problem at all with even eight RP challenges with Elisabeth, I'll just pick one-two that I have interest in and skip the others (like warlord difficulty and such). I like Elisabeth, almost as much as I like Huayna or Hannibal
Subforum should do the trick if enough insane users with looooooaads of time for playing&posting will gather, other than that it's fine for me.

 

[madscientist]

Well that settles it, let the madness begin!!!

 

[Bast]

So I was wondering (and I mean wondering) if there should be a little more organization to it. Maybe it's just me, but if I find 5 RP chalenges nest week all using Elizabeth with different handicaps and different levels, I'ld call that a little stale and boring. Not a bad term, some of my games stale and boring and just ended.

It depends on what you're trying to achieve. But I'm not a good player. I can consistently win on Noble and just graduating to Prince. There's no way I'll be able to play effectively on Prince with handicaps. I'll find this challenging on even Noble.

But I want my games to be about role-playing and story telling rather than about game strategy. I'm nowhere near the player like Sisiutil or most people here.

For example, my idea with Elizabeth would be to handicap myself through civics and wonder. I can only adopt Hereditary Rule and jump to Free Religion or Pacifism asap (see that in itself is contentious but I'll save for that later). I might even put in historically accurate rivals like Netherlands, Spain and France etc... But the idea would be to follow her reign from her accession to the throne to her death and retell it with what's happening in the game. I'm sure this isn't really similar to what others are planning to do. But I'm not sure if there's enough interest.

 

[KMadCandy]

Well that settles it, let the madness begin!!!

the madness begins whenever i hit reply silly! one of several reasons i've gone by KMad online for, well, longer than some CFC posters have been alive *giggle*

 

[madscientist]

the madness begins whenever i hit reply silly! one of several reasons i've gone by KMad online for, well, longer than some CFC posters have been alive *giggle*

heh heh!

And I have been playing the role of a Mad Scientist since, well since childhood in the late sixties!

 

[LiberiGlacialis]

Why is it, KMad, that I get the image of a hyperactive, gleeful Hello Kitty bouncing around when you post? Not that that's a bad thing.

On Topic: The adding of "flavor" handicaps make it feel...better, for me. I can't do this, because America doesn't. Wooo....now I have to think just that much harder...