IOT Developmental Thread
- Thread starter Joecoolyo
- Start date
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
I think its the nostalgia from other IOTs and the appealing look of the provinces
kiwitt
Road to War Modder
Can someone please describe what is meant by "power-gaming", I have seen mentioned in a few rulesets
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
I pick whatever moves me. In Enlightenment I was Sweden, in Cold War I was Aztlan, I&B Medina, Red Alert France, and WoT Ethiopia.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,928
It's where players say they have 20,000,000 soldiers in their MADAGASCAR Army or something over-the-top like that. Or say they have tanks that are invulberable to everything.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
It's also overused in some cases; somehow, Enerjak winning Imperia Mobiana, despite being 100% within the rules, was "powergaming." 
Sure, Enerjak has super powers, but never did I say he was invincible, nor did he have all the emeralds most of the game, and besides, this was in the Sonic continuity; a super power is NOTHING special.
Sure, Enerjak has super powers, but never did I say he was invincible, nor did he have all the emeralds most of the game, and besides, this was in the Sonic continuity; a super power is NOTHING special.
kiwitt
Road to War Modder
Well those really can't happen in the IOT I am running. You can say you have 20 billion men in your province, but the effective strength will still only be 1 army, if you have only built 1. As to special powers, the only one I have is espionage, and you have to buy that as well.
I've been so many places it's ridiculous. Most used place is the Middle East or Eastern Europe, I suppose.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
Middle Eastern starts rock just because you have three continents you can devour and you're in a perfect place to build a capital of the Old World.
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
Because in fantasyland, it's decided that canals should be international zones, unlike in reality where one country can rule them but will be of keen interest to superpowers. 
Though in a game where the canal actually has a role... it's understandable why people will take an interest in you.
Though in a game where the canal actually has a role... it's understandable why people will take an interest in you.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
However the panama canal is largely ignored...
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
That's IOT for you. At least a casus belli system works here!
That's easy. Everybody crams into Europe, the ME, or North Africa because of all the empires that were historically there. We have a fetish for power deep down, and more modern powers like the United States, or regional powers that were swiftly crushed like the Inca or Aztecs, lack that same appeal.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
True...
However for the canals to make sense they have to be modern games, in which the power is in the Americas...
However for the canals to make sense they have to be modern games, in which the power is in the Americas...
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
Any new developments in this? I was half-heartedly thinking of creating a IOT War of the Roses game but was delighted to see your post.
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
Been working on the ruleset; had to rebalance stuff to accomodate a change from 3 to 5 starting provinces.
Thorvald of Lym
A Little Sketchy
Well, the test was a bust, although not totally without benefit. Thanks again to those who helped.
Time for final adjustments to the rules before this thing goes to air. My first question is, are players bothered by tweaks-on-the-fly, or would you prefer I describe the rules in as brutally through detail as possible in the OP? I'm a sucker for brevity, but I also recognize I won't have to keep confronting loophole exploits if I don't leave room for them. The draft rules are a casual tone of what will go up in the introduction; let me know if there's anything you would like expanded upon.
Most of my last-minute proposals concern combat:
Something I can't believe I overlooked was the notion of using attack points for defensive operations. It's straightforward enough: delegate points to counter invasion by providing the same sort of boost to the defender's rolls. Now, I don't intend to have players specify which particular province the boost should be allotted to, but it will require explicit instruction: if you want multiple points combined in a single roll, say so. If you want preference to be given to countering a specific attacker, say so. I will not automatically organize defence unless I'm temporarily entrusted with a nation or it's turned NPC. Like attacks, it works on a pool system aiming to match highest-to-highest; say there are two defence bonuses, one 3-point and one 2-point: the 3-point is played against a 4-point attack, the 2-point against a 2-point attack, and then all other defences follow the normal modifier. Add it?
I'm curious as to whether IOT6 vets would like to adopt the XP/AP trading from that game. Personally I am disinclined: if I can be convinced to implement it, I would disallow claim-to-claim trades and instead allow XP from nations at peace to be used for defence by nations at war. The current configuration doesn't really support AP-to-AP anyway. The biggest problem, however, is this will likely lead to a lot of PMs, and I'm really not set to handle 28+ messages a day. Still, just putting it out there, if only as fodder for other GMs.
Now, I suppose I should get to work on profiling the NPCs. I was originally going to make each connected cluster its own individual state, but there are some (Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia) that I'll peg to larger bodies since they're so small they're not worth the extra hassle of predefined politics. I'll post the master list here, but it will also be part of the OP; bear in mind that the only recognized reserves are by IOT4 vets returning to their original nations; everything else is first-come-first-serve when the game goes up.
The Roster Thus Far
Confirmed returns:
Kashmir (taillesskangaru)
NCSA (DroopyTofu)
Arabia (civplayah)
Patagonia (ZeletDude)
Marian Federation (? Taniciusfox)
Germany (CivGeneral)
Macedonia (? Double A)
Paradise Islands (west india man)
Kosovo (landlubber)
Scotland (Kan' Sharuminar)
Canada (Captain2)
Vermont (Mad Man)
China (? Link)
New Hetmanate (Thorvald of Lym)
Returning players under new nations:
Omega124
Domination3000
Terrance888
Interested-but-speculative vets:
Virote_Considon (Petrograd)
Cull (Eastern Federation)
Perfection (New Zealand)
Joecoolyo (Japan)
Interested new players:
NedimNapoleon
Red_Spy
Sonereal
Aiolos
MaxaTheGreat
Prospo
CELTICEMPIRE
General Olaf
Time for final adjustments to the rules before this thing goes to air. My first question is, are players bothered by tweaks-on-the-fly, or would you prefer I describe the rules in as brutally through detail as possible in the OP? I'm a sucker for brevity, but I also recognize I won't have to keep confronting loophole exploits if I don't leave room for them. The draft rules are a casual tone of what will go up in the introduction; let me know if there's anything you would like expanded upon.
Most of my last-minute proposals concern combat:
Something I can't believe I overlooked was the notion of using attack points for defensive operations. It's straightforward enough: delegate points to counter invasion by providing the same sort of boost to the defender's rolls. Now, I don't intend to have players specify which particular province the boost should be allotted to, but it will require explicit instruction: if you want multiple points combined in a single roll, say so. If you want preference to be given to countering a specific attacker, say so. I will not automatically organize defence unless I'm temporarily entrusted with a nation or it's turned NPC. Like attacks, it works on a pool system aiming to match highest-to-highest; say there are two defence bonuses, one 3-point and one 2-point: the 3-point is played against a 4-point attack, the 2-point against a 2-point attack, and then all other defences follow the normal modifier. Add it?
I'm curious as to whether IOT6 vets would like to adopt the XP/AP trading from that game. Personally I am disinclined: if I can be convinced to implement it, I would disallow claim-to-claim trades and instead allow XP from nations at peace to be used for defence by nations at war. The current configuration doesn't really support AP-to-AP anyway. The biggest problem, however, is this will likely lead to a lot of PMs, and I'm really not set to handle 28+ messages a day. Still, just putting it out there, if only as fodder for other GMs.
Now, I suppose I should get to work on profiling the NPCs. I was originally going to make each connected cluster its own individual state, but there are some (Africa, Central America, Southeast Asia) that I'll peg to larger bodies since they're so small they're not worth the extra hassle of predefined politics. I'll post the master list here, but it will also be part of the OP; bear in mind that the only recognized reserves are by IOT4 vets returning to their original nations; everything else is first-come-first-serve when the game goes up.
The Roster Thus Far
Confirmed returns:
Kashmir (taillesskangaru)
NCSA (DroopyTofu)
Arabia (civplayah)
Patagonia (ZeletDude)
Marian Federation (? Taniciusfox)
Germany (CivGeneral)
Macedonia (? Double A)
Paradise Islands (west india man)
Kosovo (landlubber)
Scotland (Kan' Sharuminar)
Canada (Captain2)
Vermont (Mad Man)
China (? Link)
New Hetmanate (Thorvald of Lym)
Returning players under new nations:
Omega124
Domination3000
Terrance888
Interested-but-speculative vets:
Virote_Considon (Petrograd)
Cull (Eastern Federation)
Perfection (New Zealand)
Joecoolyo (Japan)
Interested new players:
NedimNapoleon
Red_Spy
Sonereal
Aiolos
MaxaTheGreat
Prospo
CELTICEMPIRE
General Olaf
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
Excellent. I look forward to wreaking havoc as a non-Enerjak! 
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
I absolutely encourage rule-changes on the fly if you think it will help the game. If a loophole comes up that players or yourself dislike, change it. Keep everything open for discussion.
I think I posted to Kiwitt in the Iron and Blood thread that I prefer moderators who are open to discussion and modifications of rules, but aren't afraid to simply put their foot down and accept their final decision.
And, er, definitely in as Scotland. I might be a bit more role-playing the nation than gaming for victory, though. We'll see how long that lasts.
