What if you changed the color scheme to B/W?
IOT Developmental Thread
- Thread starter Joecoolyo
- Start date
What if you changed the color scheme to B/W?
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
there would be a bunch of shades of grey, which would be difficult to remove.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
The only way to really get rid of the jpeg quality would be to a) find the original png file or b) trace over it on a new layer, which would take forever.
Robert Can't
Éponine
What is dead may never die!
Behold he map of Cyprus PNGed by myself for you.
Behold he map of Cyprus PNGed by myself for you.
Spoiler :
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
What is dead may never die!
Behold he map of Cyprus PNGed by myself for you.
Spoiler :
Wow... thank you
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Robert is totally awesome. Although he should be working on the update... 
Robert Can't
Éponine
Spoiler :
And a less spotty version.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
I guess the time has come for a CyprIOT-centric game. 
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
I guess the time has come for a CyprIOT-centric game.
yeah, but there are hundreds of provinces, and i dont know how much interest i can stir up. i made the combat work, though. (basically submit the best battle plan possible)
Mosher
Mushroom dad
This is a terrible idea
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
why is it a terrible idea?
Robert Can't
Éponine
CyprIOT
I actually am finding it hard to contain the giggles.
I actually am finding it hard to contain the giggles.
Mosher
Mushroom dad
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
Ailedhoo
wonderer
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,811
If played right battle plans can be benefiting
Of course if needed a word limit could be imposed...
Remember that it is about tactics. Do we organise a trap? Target specific areas? Hold the line or retreat till the enemy warns out? Basic things that I am sure the stats have to consider in how the play is conducted.
Of course if needed a word limit could be imposed...
Remember that it is about tactics. Do we organise a trap? Target specific areas? Hold the line or retreat till the enemy warns out? Basic things that I am sure the stats have to consider in how the play is conducted.
Thorvald of Lym
A Little Sketchy
The aversion to war plans as articulated by hoplitejoe seems to stem from the conflation of "point-scoring" narrative roleplay with an actual battle plan. I wholeheartedly agree, simply talking you way to victory shouldn't count diddly-squat, but when war plans are framed around comparing actual field tactics, I think there is some validity to the system. The second reason war plans aren't popular to the stats crowd, as Sonereal mentioned, is that they don't account for the entire web of cause and consequence (supply chains, unit strength, &c.): they're isolated episodes disconnected from the broader strategic picture. For sure, this was the case in the early IOTs, and one of the main precipitants of that era's powergaming: "There's nothing that proves I lost fifty thousand troops, so nya!"
But that's only because nobody's keeping a mental map of it all: players are either too lazy to do it, or have a vested interest in scrubbing unfavourable documentation, and efficiency-minded GMs look for ways to delegate such responsibility; that's precisely why so many of us adopted stats in the first place. But it is entirely possible for a GM to take the duty on himself. From what I understand, that's how Robert's running XIV: he keeps track of where forces are concentrated, perhaps to a better degree than the players, and then matches this against player orders. So even if I'm not minding my logistics, he is, and if I'm feeling arrogant and make some grand, sweeping blitzkriegs with no thought to the actual tactical requirements of such an operation, he'll hand me my ass. Moreover, he can do it in such a way that pulls from any of the myriad external variables that I so often complain hard stats battle formulae can't handle. Didn't guard the docks? Supply shortage. Blew up the airport? No reinforcements. Raped and pillaged everything in my path? Can't cry when the local warlords side with my mortal foe.
Because in real life, combat is not linear, and field tactics do matter. I won't get into pedantic examples, but suffice to say that a purely numbers game leads to gross obfuscation, indeed trivialization of scale. I'm not saying stats-war is bad and must be replaced as a matter of course; a lot of players want a system that at least looks empirically predictable. But to write off roleplay war completely is a mistake, and I'm immensely frustrated by people who present it as an either-or dichotomy.
Especially since I already reconciled the two.
But that's only because nobody's keeping a mental map of it all: players are either too lazy to do it, or have a vested interest in scrubbing unfavourable documentation, and efficiency-minded GMs look for ways to delegate such responsibility; that's precisely why so many of us adopted stats in the first place. But it is entirely possible for a GM to take the duty on himself. From what I understand, that's how Robert's running XIV: he keeps track of where forces are concentrated, perhaps to a better degree than the players, and then matches this against player orders. So even if I'm not minding my logistics, he is, and if I'm feeling arrogant and make some grand, sweeping blitzkriegs with no thought to the actual tactical requirements of such an operation, he'll hand me my ass. Moreover, he can do it in such a way that pulls from any of the myriad external variables that I so often complain hard stats battle formulae can't handle. Didn't guard the docks? Supply shortage. Blew up the airport? No reinforcements. Raped and pillaged everything in my path? Can't cry when the local warlords side with my mortal foe.
Because in real life, combat is not linear, and field tactics do matter. I won't get into pedantic examples, but suffice to say that a purely numbers game leads to gross obfuscation, indeed trivialization of scale. I'm not saying stats-war is bad and must be replaced as a matter of course; a lot of players want a system that at least looks empirically predictable. But to write off roleplay war completely is a mistake, and I'm immensely frustrated by people who present it as an either-or dichotomy.
Especially since I already reconciled the two.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
I always tend to be as broad and comprehensive as possible in my war plans.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
I'm still inclined to just get rid of war entirely to force people to be more inventive about how they handle disputes. Rock throwing is straight forward but it's so crude. 
