Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
they need to build everything beforehand. if you dont want to do that, just start as the Aztec empire. and dont let the Spanish (or anyone else) in.
IOT Developmental Thread
- Thread starter Joecoolyo
- Start date
they need to build everything beforehand. if you dont want to do that, just start as the Aztec empire. and dont let the Spanish (or anyone else) in.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
in my case i will start historically accurate and make my own history as time goes on.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
I am in the process of creating one that will be more realistic. If you want it to be realistic join that one when it starts in September.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Droopy is SORT OF on the mark. I agree with him about the last paragraph, there needs to be a line somewhere. The Natives should be equal, they can have disadvantages but they need advantages to counter it.
I like 10 to start.
And about Armies, I was under the impression you could defend without one. I still like my system better but that's just IMO.
Lighthearter
President of the United States
I believe that all nations are created equal
There should not be any disadvantages to those who start in America as opposed to those in Europe - while I personally agree with Tailless' map I have a proposition: I'll provide a map of Haven, the fictional world in my books, and serve as cartographer.
I fully expect this motion to be defeated, but that's your alternative to accepting that this is Earth whenever and we just have the tech of the era.
I'm serious - if the Native Americans are put to ANY disadvantage I'm not playing. It's not fair to those of us who want to play as Native Americans. Even if I do play I'll feel cheated and unfairly(there's that word again) penalized just for starting in the wrong spot, and I'd actually do BETTER to QUIT and start up a new nation in Asia.
Now please answer my earlier question: Would you play as a Native with these restrictions in place?
- Lighthearter
There should not be any disadvantages to those who start in America as opposed to those in Europe - while I personally agree with Tailless' map I have a proposition: I'll provide a map of Haven, the fictional world in my books, and serve as cartographer.
I fully expect this motion to be defeated, but that's your alternative to accepting that this is Earth whenever and we just have the tech of the era.
I'm serious - if the Native Americans are put to ANY disadvantage I'm not playing. It's not fair to those of us who want to play as Native Americans. Even if I do play I'll feel cheated and unfairly(there's that word again) penalized just for starting in the wrong spot, and I'd actually do BETTER to QUIT and start up a new nation in Asia.
Now please answer my earlier question: Would you play as a Native with these restrictions in place?
- Lighthearter
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
I believe that all nations are created equal
There should not be any disadvantages to those who start in America as opposed to those in Europe - while I personally agree with Tailless' map I have a proposition: I'll provide a map of Haven, the fictional world in my books, and serve as cartographer.
I fully expect this motion to be defeated, but that's your alternative to accepting that this is Earth whenever and we just have the tech of the era.
I'm serious - if the Native Americans are put to ANY disadvantage I'm not playing. It's not fair to those of us who want to play as Native Americans. Even if I do play I'll feel cheated and unfairly(there's that word again) penalized just for starting in the wrong spot, and I'd actually do BETTER to QUIT and start up a new nation in Asia.
Now please answer my earlier question: Would you play as a Native with these restrictions in place?
- Lighthearter
i would. hey i might actually survive long enough in oen form or another. if i dont, well, heroic last stands are fun.
DroopyTofu
Double Bass Double Bass
Well the natives were disadvantaged, but they didn't say, "Hey, those people over the ocean are more advanced than we are and that's unfair, so we're just not going to play." (mass suicide ensues). Not all areas of the world we the same in 1453. I think its reasonable not to have Natives with printing presses, galleons, and advanced civilizations anymore than it is to have Europeans with galleons, machine guns, and ICBM's. Seriously, we need to draw a line somewhere. This is why I suggested just closing off the Americas, and making it easy for the Old Wolrd to take, but everyone wanted it opened. If you want to play in a land that was fodder for the Old World people, don't complain when your country becomes fodder for the Old World people.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Yeah, I really agree. Close them off or make 'em equal. I say close them unless my compromise is used, or if a better one is suggested later on.
I believe that all nations are created equal
There should not be any disadvantages to those who start in America as opposed to those in Europe - while I personally agree with Tailless' map I have a proposition: I'll provide a map of Haven, the fictional world in my books, and serve as cartographer.
I fully expect this motion to be defeated, but that's your alternative to accepting that this is Earth whenever and we just have the tech of the era.
I'm serious - if the Native Americans are put to ANY disadvantage I'm not playing. It's not fair to those of us who want to play as Native Americans. Even if I do play I'll feel cheated and unfairly(there's that word again) penalized just for starting in the wrong spot, and I'd actually do BETTER to QUIT and start up a new nation in Asia.
Now please answer my earlier question: Would you play as a Native with these restrictions in place?
- Lighthearter
What do you think of my solution to the problem? Don't allow natives to colonize accross the Atlantic or Pacific but give them an extra claim to make it up?
EDIT: @Lighthearter- While your map won't be used I'm curious to see it.
DOUBLE EDIT: For roleplaying purposes the Natives should have disadvantages. For game purposes, they shouldn't, except the one for one compromise I suggested.
Really, I can buy a bunch of guys with spears beating guys with Muskets with luck and skill. I know its a stretch, but the sacrifice is worth it for the game. Its not likely but it is POSSIBLE, therefore making the chance equal is a stretch but not a bizzarre one.
However, Canoes going to Europe is a HUGE stretch, as its IMPOSSIBLE. Its ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for war, but not for peace, hence why it shouldn't be allowed IMO.
This is the last time I'm going to say this.
The time period is there FOR FLAVOR ONLY. The only changes are FLAVOR related. Nothing else.
We've already decided that all nations will be equal, and it's not going to change. If you want to set up in the Americas and be disadvantaged, by all means go ahead, but don't force other players who want to play there to be disadvantaged too.
Anymore talk about this rule and I will be forced to bring out the banhammer, it's useless clogging up the thread with something's that already been decided, we need to focus more on the stuff that isn't official yet. Such as the rules Tailless wrote up.
I'm still iffy about using other games for war, mainly because it takes longer to do so. Which means it will take longer to get results and slow up the game... but I digress.
Before I put out a vote, are there any other possible candidates for games to do this in? (If we were doing a modern version, I could just easily do all the battles in WiC, but since it's Renaissance I can't use it, do to the lack of tanks
).
GhostWriter16
Deity
I vote yes for all of them except Lighthearter's. No offense, but there's no way I could handle that one.
Also, was Taillesskangaru's army system already voted on? I personally have a different system I'd prefer (Which still keeps numbers important.)
Also, was Taillesskangaru's army system already voted on? I personally have a different system I'd prefer (Which still keeps numbers important.)
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
i would prefer you use EU3 for battles. you can probably make a world map with these nations in. and, run the battles.
GhostWriter16
Deity
I meant the field army system.
I'd rather it be more like Risk, you gain money for economy like Tailless said, and you pay, say, 1 Gold in his system for three troops, which can be placed anywhere, and It'd be handled like Risk. If you have no troops you are insta-conquered if attacked. You'd then pay one gold per turn for each 10 troops you have active. Limit troops to 99 per territory to prevent massive numbers messing the whole thing up.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
@LH: I have asked you twice in realpolitik to pm those stories. I want to read something thats not civ related
GhostWriter16
Deity
Your post is off topic, but while I'm there I'd like you to PM them to me as well.
On Topic: What do you all think of my system?
DroopyTofu
Double Bass Double Bass
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that my posting was such an issue that I'd get a banhammer. I'd seen that there was still some debate and trying to keep my ideas in the debate. I'll drop it now.
As to Tailless's rules, I posted comments on them and only Dommy gave any feedback on my thoughts and I haven't had any of the question I had answered.
It was decided a couple pages ago, though my post might have gotten buried under all this, so it's okay.
Though note, the banhammer wasn't at you specifically, I was just using the most recent post discussing the topic at the time. Sorry if I offended at all.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Am I allowed to request my system get put up for vote.
I am updating my proposal:
When handling combat, A GM rolls two dice for each player. The winner takes away troops from the loser equal to the difference:
If there are 20 or more troops on each side double the number
If there are Over 50 on each side Quadruple the number.
Terrain would factor in somehow, but I'll wait until it (Hypothetically) is agreed on before I do more.
I am updating my proposal:
When handling combat, A GM rolls two dice for each player. The winner takes away troops from the loser equal to the difference:
If there are 20 or more troops on each side double the number
If there are Over 50 on each side Quadruple the number.
Terrain would factor in somehow, but I'll wait until it (Hypothetically) is agreed on before I do more.
Do people actually read other people's posts here anymore, or are people just saying any damn thing?
My rules is made so that that is impossible.
1. This game and IOT2 is different.
2. The start date will not change. I don't know how much Joecoolyo have already stressed this, but I guess some people needs extra reminders.
3. Historical. Accuracy. Be. Damned.
If you actually read the rules, you'll see that no nation in Eurasia can colonize the Americas at the start, or vice versa.
I put a limit on native American expansion because
1. that's what most people here seem to want, and
2. to ensure none will likely be powerful enough to research military tech faster than the Europeans, ensuring that the Europeans will discover America first.
I've thought these things through.
And if you actually look at the map, you'll see that they can.
That and the rest of your posts is completely wrong, but there's the OT forum for that.
By the way, folks, this is the sort of post which should earn you an instant ban once the game gets going.
Oh please don't hesitate.
I put the rule in (originally Zelet's idea) because the majority of people seem to want it in. Deep down though, I agree with you.
Acknowledged.
You're wrong. Again, though, there's an OT forum (or World History) for this kind of discussion.
I'll volunteer, as long as another GM(s) takes care of combat, land claims, diplomacy, etc.
No. Each province, when attacked, counts as its own army (didn't I put this in the draft? I'm 98% sure I did). So, to demonstrate:
west india man's Portuguese (green) is battling for control over Brazil against ZeletDude's Spain (blue). Spain attacks a Portuguese province while the Portuguese uses their one army on land to attack a Spanish province. Now, the one attacking Spanish army cannot defend the territory it attacks from because it's engaged in an offensive, but the territory won't just fall because we assume there's a fort in that province. That imaginary fort has the same base strength as a Spanish army unit would, plus any defensive modifiers and mod from dice rolls. The total strength (ie base + offensive modifiers + dice rolls) of the attacking Portuguese must be greater than the total strength of the fort to capture that province.
That army in the province next to the province being attacked would have been able to contribute to the defense (that is, the base strength of the defender will double) if it isn't being attacked itself, which in this scenario it is. So the fort will be standing alone against the invaders. On the other hand, that other army will be able to help defend its province against the amphibious invasion.
The map is big. Really big. I actually think 10 provinces to start may be too little.
I vote neither.
I prefer a map of Earth.
Thank you.
Yep. This is the main reason I'm against using other games for battles.
Thank you for your endorsement.
No, I just compiled it from the ideas floated on this thread. It's not official yet.
Too complicated. And, who's willing to mod and then watch the game? Even I don't have that kind of time. Also, I'd rather be playing EU3
Your system isn't that different from mine except for having smaller units and larger numbers of them, which I think adds an unnecessary level of complexity. Besides, each province on the map is so small a dot representing an army is much easier to deal with than numbers corresponding to the amount of troops.
Though I may be biased, I like my system better. Voting no.
My rules is made so that that is impossible.
1. This game and IOT2 is different.
2. The start date will not change. I don't know how much Joecoolyo have already stressed this, but I guess some people needs extra reminders.
3. Historical. Accuracy. Be. Damned.
If you actually read the rules, you'll see that no nation in Eurasia can colonize the Americas at the start, or vice versa.
I put a limit on native American expansion because
1. that's what most people here seem to want, and
2. to ensure none will likely be powerful enough to research military tech faster than the Europeans, ensuring that the Europeans will discover America first.
I've thought these things through.
And if you actually look at the map, you'll see that they can.
That and the rest of your posts is completely wrong, but there's the OT forum for that.
By the way, folks, this is the sort of post which should earn you an instant ban once the game gets going.
Alright people, get back on topic, or I won't hesitate to bring out the banhammer again
Oh please don't hesitate.
Though I still have one gripe, and that's making the American civilization penalized for being, well, in America. I still want to make it so every country it on equal footing unless the player chooses not to be (for challenge, I guess). That way, countries would be evenly spaced around the globe (and will allow for some more, shall I say, "creative" countries to be created
I put the rule in (originally Zelet's idea) because the majority of people seem to want it in. Deep down though, I agree with you.
Acknowledged.
You're wrong. Again, though, there's an OT forum (or World History) for this kind of discussion.
I'll volunteer, as long as another GM(s) takes care of combat, land claims, diplomacy, etc.
No. Each province, when attacked, counts as its own army (didn't I put this in the draft? I'm 98% sure I did). So, to demonstrate:
west india man's Portuguese (green) is battling for control over Brazil against ZeletDude's Spain (blue). Spain attacks a Portuguese province while the Portuguese uses their one army on land to attack a Spanish province. Now, the one attacking Spanish army cannot defend the territory it attacks from because it's engaged in an offensive, but the territory won't just fall because we assume there's a fort in that province. That imaginary fort has the same base strength as a Spanish army unit would, plus any defensive modifiers and mod from dice rolls. The total strength (ie base + offensive modifiers + dice rolls) of the attacking Portuguese must be greater than the total strength of the fort to capture that province.
That army in the province next to the province being attacked would have been able to contribute to the defense (that is, the base strength of the defender will double) if it isn't being attacked itself, which in this scenario it is. So the fort will be standing alone against the invaders. On the other hand, that other army will be able to help defend its province against the amphibious invasion.
The map is big. Really big. I actually think 10 provinces to start may be too little.
I vote neither.
I prefer a map of Earth.
Thank you.
Yep. This is the main reason I'm against using other games for battles.
Thank you for your endorsement.
No, I just compiled it from the ideas floated on this thread. It's not official yet.
Too complicated. And, who's willing to mod and then watch the game? Even I don't have that kind of time. Also, I'd rather be playing EU3
Your system isn't that different from mine except for having smaller units and larger numbers of them, which I think adds an unnecessary level of complexity. Besides, each province on the map is so small a dot representing an army is much easier to deal with than numbers corresponding to the amount of troops.
Though I may be biased, I like my system better. Voting no.
