Discussion - Game Time And Terms

[Provolution]

DISCUSSION - GAME TIME AND TERMS


A few players use rates only, as I see, viewing laws more as abstractions such as "rights", "standards", "fairness", "Principles" and so on. Rates and Totals go in hand as Constitution with Rights and Government with National Budget. Totals are needed, as the first thing a cabinet does every single term, is spending government money. To be comparable to any nation at all, we need the same way of handling this, not veering way off course for all budget conventions, which all are year-based.

A huge group of players play by time standards. If only rates prevail and totals fall out of the picture, we put severe restrictions on the players inclined to forecast and think ahead. For the rates, rights and principles people, they will still see their laws and actions impacting the gameworld, at an annual rate. This is the most fair thing to do to both styles of playing.

I honestly do not believe in following a real-time game with a new Prime Minister with either a fully fledged national budget per month (a years income to be spent in a month), or super-fast, almost alien speed in the economy and social shifts. Nothing is more certain than death and taxes.

The players are now crafting laws with long term milestones based on future years, like most of the countries do today. Some write 2010, others write 2012 and 2020. This is how politicians create objectives today, and this is how it should be done in this game. Otherwise, we will not see the game progress normally as it should, building projects would either become impossible or extremely unrealistic - having a tunnel from Cook Island to Citannia built taking only a couple of months. This would be so unrealistic that the game would make no sense. Even sci-fi would feel more "real".

I think that many would have reacted if this abstract time-line is chosen. We also need to be fair to those that think that each cabinet (each term) should have as identical and comparable working conditions as possible. Giving each term/cabinet equal time and equal funding (national budget) is the least we can do.

However, I notice that a minority subset of players do not worry too much about the realism and economics of this game. All they need to do to stay happy, would be to concentrate on their bills and the elections. However, those that want to see their long term plan have real measurable and comparable outcomes, using years as a standard measurement, will get their share. Also, I am not too keen on abstracting developments like economic growth per year, as these happen per year, not per abstraction. We need to be able to benchmark with China, USA, Japan and Russia on the same objective criteria. As this is pointless to compare them this fall, as these economies sizes remain constant compared to each other in such a short time, we need the global time to progress, to see if Civilitas is climbing the ladder, or falling down from it.

There has been no attempt to present how "abstract time" should handle national budgets, equal conditions between the cabinets and term, a fully viable feedback mechanism for handling outcomes of long-term policies with identical time and space concepts. Abstract time would only be beneficial to some governments more than others, since all passing of time and projects would be subject to an arbitrary nature, that could never be compared.

As you guys said, you haven't been reading most of the posts, but so have I and several others here, and we are of the same opinion on this. For the game to progress (with 1 game-year per month), you need to understand how we think, not write us off. Also, if both sides claim that they are backed by a majority, I think we need to have a clear vote on this.

Ball Lightnings Environmental Bill, Arne HDs Cook Island Bill, Joe Harkers football season and other actions all have gameyear per month as a set prerequisite in their thinking. The train for abstract time sort of left the game a couple of months ago, as the absence of posting from the GMs on the matter made thinking in terms of game years quite natural. We do not want to unlearn our approach, remove facts, withdraw initiatives, alter our gameplay, quit thinking in terms of game years and so on, suddenly because there was a sudden interest in being GMs again. The authority to impose "abstract time" thus eroded and vanished, and we are now here with game years.

If we need to contest this, I suggest setting it up for a vote with all facts on the table.

As it stands we got the following options:

1. 1 term = 1 month = 1 Game Year (National Budget per term)
2. 1 term = 1 month = 1 Game Quarter (National Budget every 4 term)
3. 1 term = 1 month = 1 Game Month (National Budget every 12 term)
4. 1 term = 1 month = 2 Game Years (National Budget for two years)
5. 1 term = 1 month = Abstracted time (National Budget is not doable)

 

[Perfection]

Why aren't national budgets doable in abstracted time? I just don't see the rationale! You just make a budet each term. It's easy!

 

[Provolution]

No.

A national budget should cover a year to make any sense, since that is what 100 % of all parliaments do. So should we.

 

[Perfection]

We don't need to be like 100% of all parliaments because we're an internet game not an actual parliament, we can and should let realism slide in certain cases when it helps gameplay.

Now for all you folks wonder what the heck perfy is talking about. Let me give you the rundown on abstract time (as provo calls it):

Abstract time allows us to simulate the parliament better by abandoning a realistic time frame. We strech out short events and compress long events. This allows us to deal with fast events (like war, disasters, and international crisises) in slow detail while allowing us to see the actions of long term strategies (like preventive heathcare and incentives/disincentives for having children).

This also prevents a problem of predicting the future that Provo's system has. In such a system we have now where we go into the future, if a major international event occurs that changes our nation's past then we're stuck having to ignore it or reconcile it with our history, both of which are undesirable. Whereas, if we have an abstract system we can easily incorperate it into our nation's history and react and interact with it!

 

[Splime]

We don't need to be like 100% of all parliaments because we're an internet game not an actual parliament, we can and should let realism slide in certain cases when it helps gameplay.

Now for all you folks wonder what the heck perfy is talking about. Let me give you the rundown on abstract time (as provo calls it):

Abstract time allows us to simulate the parliament better by abandoning a realistic time frame. We strech out short events and compress long events. This allows us to deal with fast events (like war, disasters, and international crisises) in slow detail while allowing us to see the actions of long term strategies (like preventive heathcare and incentives/disincentives for having children).

This also prevents a problem of predicting the future that Provo's system has. In such a system we have now where we go into the future, if a major international event occurs that changes our nation's past then we're stuck having to ignore it or reconcile it with our history, both of which are undesirable. Whereas, if we have an abstract system we can easily incorperate it into our nation's history and react and interact with it!

QFT.

While we needed more stuff to get the Parliament moving, Provolution is a realism addict. Just like alcohol, realism can be good, but an overdose will just give you a headache in the morning.

 

[Provolution]

If we stretch and compress events within a month as a gameyear, I am ok with it, as long as each cabinet get about the same money to spend (an annual national budget), and a gameyear to spend it. Except for those two criteria, an annual national budget and a gameyear to spend it, we may compress and extend as much as we want, as we got to the critical part, to give about equal conditions to the various cabinets.

I am perhaps a "realism addict", but we can certainly allow for abstract time within a game year (one year in one month), and this was by default "abstract time". However, where this is semi-abstract, I assume you let it all take place in the fall of 2007, which is where we differ.

Don't worry, the game-year thing will work out just fine.

 

[Perfection]

Well how do we address my second concerns? (future prediction issues)

And the budget thing is easy enough to manage. We just do things using rates and percentages instead of hard cash.

 

[Provolution]

The future prediction is easy. We are in the Northern Pacific, where borders have not changed for a long time between these giant nations. The only thing we need to make up (this is a game after all), is the change of governments around the North Pacific Rim. Our limited number of events would handle the rest. In other words, all we need each term, prior to each election, is a brief update on domestic events taking place that year(couple of pages) and a brief update on international events taking place that year (couple of pages).
This is also quite easy to do, in particular for 4 GMs. We are also free to forecast "world events", which we sort of shade out. The limited number of events per term makes sure that this happens. Realistically, being isolated in the North Pacific, the outside world is more likely to interact with us, than the other way around. All we need to do is to emulate that interaction. "Foreign Bases" was such an event, which I think people liked, simple enough to understand and enough options to worry about. These events pointed out benefits per year, not per month or per abstraction.

Technology will not be an issue, as we are about 20 % in GDP per capita behind Australia and about 30 % behind the USA. There will only be a need for railroads, roads, airports, powerplants and so on. The national budgets go by the year, and a term per year is geared to this.
I think the players prefer a fair objective standard to be measured on, not our impulses. The neutrality must be defined, not only perceived.

We already got GDP to deal with, which is an annual figure. We voted on these figures as they were not invented. What you should have done, was to use the energy to set up the ground rules, like for example Splime did in his NES "Terraxilla". There should have been a FAQ stating how this should be handled and so on. If this game had some basic groundrules in place, prior to the constitution, you should have spent a few hours doing this, people would have gotten used to the use of "Abstract Time". It is too late now, as a great number of assumptions are put in place, and we are moving on.

The game year per term is quite easy enough as well. We are not rigorously following contemporary international events to the letter, as we rather concentrate on Civilitas, and abstract international development based on our notion how it works now. Don't worry about the history of Civilitas, we made it quite consistent with all the inputs we got. The history is not to collide with international events happening this fall. We choose to ignore what is happening in world politics starting October 1., which is the real event horizon we leave "real history".

Take it easy, there will be no nuclear holocaust or anything wild taking place in the North Pacific, it will be quite stable, even though we progress a year per term, and I think most players would like to see that.

 

[Perfection]

We didn't choose to, You chose to!

I don't we should choose to ignore current world politics!

We can still have figures like GDP and crap without a regimented timeframe.

And we never explicitly stated it becauswe that how it was assumed before in previous model parlaiments. When people hasked how it was done, I told them over and over. I'm sorry if you didn't care to listen, that's your problem not mine.

 

[Equuleus]

1. 1 term = 1 month = 1 Game Year (National Budget per term)

 

[Provolution]

Well, it is to be done differently now, and if you contest it, we may need to vote over it.

 

[LightFang]

I'll support Perfection. Provolution has failed to address his terms satisfactorily because he inadequately read his arguments.

 

[Provolution]

Plain and easy, what I suggest to do is the following:

We have 1 term = 1 game year

1.
Within each term there is a national budget, and like most national budget, they cover government spending per year.

2.
Within each term there is a Prime Minister election

3.
Justices last 1-3+ years, as they are only replaced 1 at a time per month

4.
The Prime minister propopes the cabinet (in one batch) and national budget (in one batch like Downtown suggested).

5.
We have 2 Supreme Court cases per month

6.
We have 2 events per week on the average, one main event and one lesser event, where the latter color event mainly seeks to inspire new bills. For provinces, we will add a couple of events per province too, but casual players are not expected to be party to these, as the nationals would do it for them.

7.
We depart from contemporary international events and develop a parallel history starting now, so September 2007 is the event horizon where history takes another course for Civilitas. This means that the players are free to influence the world, without being required to follow international news, read up background articles for ongoing events and so on. All events will be made up, and fit into the context of Civilitas, not the other way around.

This means we basically generate the ongoing history through the events and two two pager updates prior to each election (where the parties can draw out all their issues, be it CSP, socialists, ION, LRP, Conservatives, PLP and even fascists, Techno-party and others). This also means we are not bound to address ongoing international events, which I think more belongs in the Off Topic threads. The game would not be realist regarding following international events, but be realist that the game universe is consistent, realistic with regards to budgets and projects and that all cabinets get the same chance to leave their mark on Civilitas without being subject to arbitrary time measurement and impact measurement.

8.
The Game Progress will date per year, which means that long term plans that are time sensitive and about allocating budgets, designing laws with milestones and other policy instruments, would be given the due respect, attention and follow-up. This also means the players will be able to see how the game shapes the country.

9.
Physical change of the game-world. The players will be able to start a project, like a tunnel from Cook Island to Citannia, and they know the project will last 3-5 terms, which would also be 3-5 years. Terms would be considered as gameworld time units, not just political term units. Railroads, roads, power dams would get similar time frames, 1-3 terms for example. Setting up a brigade would take 1-2 terms, for example.

10.
Abstract time, in the limited and organized sense, not the anarchic and arbitrary one, will be handled through the events and through the elections, which is quite an event in itself. There is enough chaos already, and most players may need a sort of predictability to what they do. The term elections are by no means something to predict from, anything can happen.

At least the players deserve to know that after a month, a year has passed. They want to know how much money they have to spend, what time frame these should be spent in and finally that certain laws of nature apply to how fast physical projects could be done.

However, we will compress longer events (within a year) and stretch short term events (within the setting of the same game year), as long as we begin a new annual budget the next term, and if an event transcends over the election into a new term, that event will for gameworld purposes go into the new term.

Not 281 days of a legal trial, not 30 game days with the production of either 1.5 years for roads, 5 months of crime prevention, 8 weeks of war and 12 days of a tsunami. Not a chaotic timeline that would mess up our history (of which most of it is fictive anyways), simply because we decide to play in our parallel world. I am not interested in what happens in the next weeks or months on this earth with regards to Civilitas.

We can surely make up more interesting events than new Al Quaida videos on You Tube, the next media stunt of Paris Hilton, Civil War in Chechnya and another media goof from a known American politician. Just taking a quick look on Off-Topic and compare that to the History thread, give a quick glimpse into what kind of game vision there is at stake. An Off topic game on acid and steroids, or a semi-cohesive, semi-realist game where your decisions, laws and budgets do have a bearing on the gameworld, not the other way around.

This will be gameplay friendly, in particular for the players that prefer time units, annual national budgets and the interest in crafting their own future history.

 

[Joe Harker]

That sounds like a good plan pro!

It means interest won't disappear because there will be plenty to do over the month and long term things don't take so long that people lose interest and making short term things longer, mean they get proper care and attention.

 

[Perfection]

Look, a lot of that stuff above is what I've been saying for a long time. What I'm saying we do that differs is abandon the 1 term = 1 year diverge from reality thing. This will inevitably lead into lame sci-fi predict the future fantasy world crap (unless the game falls apart before then). Just work from a term, have a new national budget each term and interact with real world events. It worked out awesome last model parliament. We had a really cool event where we decided weather or not to engage in the Haitian poltical crisis.

 

[Provolution]

This will not be a science fiction product, as new techs barely will receive a mention. It will be a near future contemporary Model Parliament where we address the issues that actually involve Civilitas, not some random news event which never would be of interest to Civilitas.

For the Haitian political crisis, that is not within Civilitas range or interest, for example. The event "Foreign Bases" is more relevant to our nation. Modernization of Cook Island is. We need mostly domestic events, which needs a gameworld to function, not a majority of international events.

I think those of you that want Game years, do not necessarily see yourself as sci fi focussed, trekkies, "unrealistic" and "future fantasy world crap". I would rather say a Off Topic variety og game would be more of a crap-game as I see it, as people will be arrested on their real opinions, not in-game opinions, like Gaius here pointed out.

So, it is basically this choice:

1. Make a game year a term (month), get a national budget that covers a year (100-150 billion USD per year), we will go 1 year forwards per month, effectively leaving contemporary history 2007, 1 October. The danger Perf pointed out would be marginal at most, I will not introduce aliens, weird technologies or apocalyptic developments at any point (too old for that), but rather set a context for a contemporary style development of the nation, where roads, hospitals and armies are build in the time it would normally take to build them. Maybe the game would see slightly better cars (less accidents), slightly better healthcare (1-2 years more life expectancy), slightly stronger economy, slightly faster broadband (yes, the carriers overprovide the networks, just to earn your hard earned money, even though they could have increased the speed tenfolds already) and other plausible developments that add on year by year.

2. Make a game with a national budget per month, covering only operational costs for the country that month (10-15 billion USD per month), effectively using parallel news events as inspiration for spending government money, but accelerate builds and socio-demographic shifts in an abstracted time. This means an open immigration policy would add 1-2 million people in a month and so on.

Otherwise, there will be "abstract time" within each month in both options, the main difference here is that Perf want us to reside in 2007 only, where my option is to make us go forward year by year, term for term. In the Game-year version, we can still compress and stretch events, but most events will be handled by the same government, not several.

If you look away from the words "crap", "sci fi", "game fells apart", "awesome", "really cool" and generically putting down the other solution, it is basically a choice of how the terms progress in time for a game, a quite big decision that would influence gameplay. I think this would be fair to have a vote on, to be honest, so people can decide what they really want, in particular the committed players (not to mention active GMs...) that will keep this together.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Since I'm trying to rejoin the game, I thought I should at least figure out what I am going to be rejoining. I've tried to read this thread, but am a little confused. From what I understand there are essentially two positions, summarized thus. (Excuse the Civ comparisons, but I think it's appropriate here!)

1. Scaled Time, as suggested by Provolution. This is basically how a game of Civ works--one term equals X length of time, be it months, years, weeks, whatever. Its pros include a more realistic way of looking at the game, making it easier to see development, especially long-term development. It also eliminates a lot of confusion by placing us in a very definite timeframe, so we always know where we are exactly in relation to everything in the world. The con is that if the game continues for long, we may very well end up in 2050 or beyond, leading to what Perfection called "lame sci-fi crap."

2. Abstract Time, as suggested by Perfection, which strikes me as more of an RTS way of doing things. You don't concern yourself with the game year as much as you do your internal development, sort of play-as-you-go kind of thing. Obviously, this lets us devote our attention to things which matter most to us, so very rapid events get expanded and longer, more boring, events are compressed. The downside is that it will probably lead to confusion surrounding who does what and when, and how the rest of the world is humming along.

Is that basically it?

Anyway, it sounds like Provolution's post (#13) would be a good compromise. The only problem I see is that it doesn't address the futurist issue Perfection raised, unless I misunderstood.

EDIT: I guess you posted while I was writing this. Now I've got to think about it all over again!

 

[Provolution]

If we end up in 2050 from 2007, that would take us a good 43 months. We do not intend to play that long. A more likely scenario is 1-2 years, which would be 2007-2019-2031. There is nothing wild about present technologies taking place, and the world will remain more or less what it is today.

Good comparison: Perfs way is reminiscent of "Rise of Nations", whereas the gameyear way is reminiscent of "Civilization" in how we approach time.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Well, of course it would necessarily depend on the scaling factor, but anyways...

1-2 years is a long time to play, so it may not even go into 2019. How long did the last parliament last? I think someone told me it ended in civil war.

 

[Provolution]

So, sci fi is not really the issue here, and a false flag alert that shouldn't be considered an argument at all.