arya126
Squad Leader
If there was a like button for posts on here, then AA, the above post would deserve a Like.
IOT Developmental Thread
- Thread starter Joecoolyo
- Start date
Indeedly.
Who are you victimizing this time?
This.
hoplitejoe
Top fun-poster
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 5,470
The SoI system is simple!you just go in that one piece of land somewhere on the coast of Argentina, BUT DON'T YOU DARE EXPAND INTO BRAZIL OR CHILE OR PERU.
What do you guys think about random starting positions? Everyone who is interested in playing signs up, then the GM randomly assigns you a province?
This would eliminate the pre-pre-pre diplomacy, SOI and alliances that always plague these types of games.
This would eliminate the pre-pre-pre diplomacy, SOI and alliances that always plague these types of games.
christos200
Never tell me the odds
But that destroys the RP, and the players no longer decide what nation they want to play.
SouthernKing
crickety cricket
There also needs to be a restriction on the mass global alliances that never fail to form. Those really didn't exist until well into the 20th century.
I agree with DroopyTofu as well. The SoI system currently played is gamey and unrealistic.
Although, considering my previous history on this forum, my comments will probably be ignored because "IOTs are about gameplay, not realism." Not in my eyes.
EDIT: I like the random province idea, especially for a low province map like I&B. Or the mod gives you a choice of say, 3 provinces, and you pick one.
I agree with DroopyTofu as well. The SoI system currently played is gamey and unrealistic.
Although, considering my previous history on this forum, my comments will probably be ignored because "IOTs are about gameplay, not realism." Not in my eyes.
EDIT: I like the random province idea, especially for a low province map like I&B. Or the mod gives you a choice of say, 3 provinces, and you pick one.
christos200
Never tell me the odds
Well, if you have a better idea about SOI then propose it.
Uh... hmm... I'm cautious about this. The basic premise of IOT is players being able to create their own countries, after all.
I think people just need to keep in mind that whatever country you may like to play in a game, you might not get that country when you sign-up, so don't get upset and don't plan your game too elaborately.
I think people just need to keep in mind that whatever country you may like to play in a game, you might not get that country when you sign-up, so don't get upset and don't plan your game too elaborately.
In IB2, at least, SoI counts for nothing as far as game mechanics is concerned; it's purely a player's roleplay/diplomacy thing. And for IB2 I'm introducing internal factions, and each faction in the country will act like little NPCs with their own opinions on how the country should be run, so being overly aggressive over SoIs can backfire.
SouthernKing
crickety cricket
My idea is to forbid the claim wars that plague nearly every game, and institute a free for all. If that doesn't work, a Berlin Conference like thing could easily fix it later on.
Players should act with a 19th, not 21st, century mindset is the general idea.
Players should act with a 19th, not 21st, century mindset is the general idea.
Sure, it is a little bit of a departure from the past, but it could be interesting. You still would be able to develop and RP your own country, but you have to wait to the start of the game to see where, geographically anyway, that country is.
It could be fun to break us out of our normal habits and RP comfort zone and make us develop something on the fly as we get into the game.
I dont know if IB2 is the game to start this or not, as there has already been a lot of discussion and anticipation for the game, but the thought just occurred to me so I figured Id get some reaction to it.
This is golden, and everyone should take this to heart.
SOIs have always been diplomatic fabrications of the players. It is a way to state your interests in land surrounding your territory, and to put others on notice that you want them. There is no hard and fast rule that anyone should honor an SOI. But if you claim one, you could be reasonably expected to act in your interests to protect/acquire that land.
The only time that SOIs become a problem is when the other players take them at face value and dont question or confront a player about them, or when a player works against his own interests to honor an SOI of a neighbor.
The only time that SOIs become a problem is when the other players take them at face value and dont question or confront a player about them, or when a player works against his own interests to honor an SOI of a neighbor.
"Claim wars" is typical 19th century mindset, arguably. See also: Fashoda Incident, Crimean War, The Great Game.
I can't imagine how one would "institute a free for all". Technically, IOTs are already free-for-alls; little binding alliances, little consequences for aggression, little limits on warfare. Players are allowed to state where they want to expand (essentially what "sphere of influence" means in an IOT context) which is not overtly ahistorical considering everything else that goes on, and their claims aren't officially recognised by the GM until the player actually takes control of the area. A dispute-solving mechanism like the Berlin Conference went back to the very first IOTs (as the United Nations) and was present in most IOTs since then, including IB1 with the creation of Canada.
So none of this is new. If anything, IMHO we need more limits on what the player can do, not less, if realism is to be the goal. Real-life leaders can't just declare war on a whim like IOT players do. They can't claim this territory or that territory and expect to always have domestic and allies' support when confronting a rival claim.
Edit: also, what BSmith said, and the latter point about damaging own country's interest is what I'm trying to alleviate with the faction system.
hoplitejoe
Top fun-poster
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 5,470
I would be interested in one IOT with random starts, jut not I&B 2 
Really, if someone claims an SOI, the first few questions should be:
- Can he reasonably expect to defend that claim?
- Does his claim conflict with any of my claims?
- Does he have any allies that would interfere on his behalf if I took some of his claims?
The answers to these questions would then dictate your response to his claim. Just assuming that because he claims it then it is his is a recipe for disaster.
- Can he reasonably expect to defend that claim?
- Does his claim conflict with any of my claims?
- Does he have any allies that would interfere on his behalf if I took some of his claims?
The answers to these questions would then dictate your response to his claim. Just assuming that because he claims it then it is his is a recipe for disaster.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Certainly, SoIs are a problem, but I wonder... Why such a great expectation for an IOT?
Midnight-Blue766
The filidh that cam frae Skye
Here's an idea that came to me: You can SOI 1 (and only 1) territory per turn, which has to be adjacent to your land or on the coast. The SOIed territory will not give you income, but for purposes of foreign nations expanding it is counted as your territory. You can later claim your SOI for 5 IC.
