IOT Developmental Thread

[Double A]

That was actually a "yes; here are some ideas to steal."

 

[jackelgull]

I have an idea for a game that I'm still trying to hash out.


Here's the basic premise. In some fantasy world, there was an empire that is kind of like some combination of the Holy Roman Empire and the Roman Empire. It split in many warring kingdoms. Now it will be threatened in some amount of time by a barbarian wave. No one individual state can withstand it, but the empire united might. So you are one of half a dozen kings of these kingdoms trying to ensure survival, and you want to unite the empire. However, none of you can do it by force. Instead, you must look to the Pope to be the king maker. If he crowns you Divine Emperor, you're good to go, with a caveat - the empire at large must be assured that your the man for the job. Without that, your title is empty. So to be the man who unites the empire, you've got to have two things - enough papal favor to be crowned Holy Emperor, and enough reputation that people are willing to follow your lead. Papal favor is earned through bribes donations to the Church, and reputation is earned through defeating advanced parties of the barbarians that are trickling through before the main invasion.

Now I just have to think of an economic system and army system to go along with this premise.

 

[dragonprobably]

Question: has there ever been a Wild West IOT?

 

[JohannaK]

I don't recall any.

 

[NinjaCow64]

I've got a question for you all that will help with my upcoming project(s). What was you favourite combat system in an IOT/NES and why?

 

[Robert Can't]

The only combat system I ever felt I could engage with on a decision making level were the ones in the Risk games run by Sonereal. In my experience other games have never really applied a system that I really felt I could really do anyhting with other than more guys, better equiptment, more winning.

And I don't really mind that. I don't really look to IOTs for tactical simulation, that should be my generals' job, not mine.

 

[JohannaK]

The I&B system, because of its relative simplicity.

 

[Ailedhoo]

On combat systems its structure will depends on whether we are playing tactical or strategic game, as well as how deep you want while at the same time ensuring a simple to understand rules or at the least not a complex mess.

So to answer the question: many games have aspects I like; for instance I enjoyed the RP and bonus features of Fallen Star and I did enjoy the strategic scheming I could do in IdIOT. To confess I should try more military operations in NESIOTs...

 

[Angst]

I've got a question for you all that will help with my upcoming project(s). What was you favourite combat system in an IOT/NES and why?

Ramblings inbound.

If you aim for realism, anything but strategic movement of armies (which requires some creative direction and peoplet end to get) is superfluous. Because the average NESing or IOT guy knows exceedingly little of how warfare was actually performed. There are some nuances to this, I'll get there.

Most of the mod energy is often spent in the wrong places. You should use a combat system that more deeply concerns itself with resupplying and cost effeciency, because that's what wins wars. It doesn't matter if you can produce the best sword if the overall sword supplying cost is massively higher but equal in impact than just throwing pointy stick peasants onto the field. Also while good pitched battle tactics are important people seriously overrate how important pitched battles are. They are evocative and colorful and sometimes actually crucial but the majority of historical warfare and the majority of progress was done in sieges. Which requires lots and lots of resources to maintain. It's not just secluded to our understanding of medieval European warfare. It is the vast majority of Europe's history, that way of fighting ending in the 1800s or something from the top of my head. Maybe less true outside Europe but still true.

Also, simulating it with say Excel is practically pointless. Because crafting a program that properly simulates battles is a) impossible even by today's experts and b) requires you to know more about historical warfare than you currently do and c) changes rules slightly for each technological development, and d), and d) is the most important, it's a *HUGE* opportunity cost. You could just have spent that time actually hosting the IOT for a swathe of fun updates.

Here's the best combat system for cost-effective realism. You have say two army stats, numbers and quality, the better army wins. This is balanced by imminent neihgbours that will work against problematic conquests. Also use your moderator fiat: You must emphasize the army economy in a much larger degree than most people do. Each sword has to be manually forged by someone and then sent out in numbers to each soldier. Each meal has to be prepared. The army equipment must be both effecient but also light so they can travel long distances. Some modern military historians speculate that depictions of soldiers may not be accurate because modern soldiers use massive backpacks. Why wouldn't historical armies do that? This is very important for battles, because exhaustion is a serious factor when you're actually standing in front of a prepared opponent with a raised sword.

But again, minimalist stats and moderator fiat should actually compute most of this if you're just thinking critically. For easy, cost-effective overview, have a qualitative/descriptive stat for each quantitative stat so players know what is overall going on.

Also massive conquests of swathes of land is not the norm. Several partition of Poland events every update doesn't make any sense.

Lastly, you may not aim for realism and may be aiming for something that's just fun. If you want to do that, still stick with minimalist stats and roll with it. That is, if you ask me. Because that's simply my personal preference. Other people will disagree with me.

 

[JohannaK]

I think the I&B system did pretty much just that. It had the relative strengths of both forces, added a bunch of modifiers for supplies, terrain and others, a roll for that spice of uncertainty, and voilà.

 

[Tee Kay]

Keep it short and simple (to explain, but not without depth), that's my aim.

Doesn't always accomplish it but.

(also omg tk posting in iot what is this)

 

[Angst]

I think the I&B system did pretty much just that. It had the relative strengths of both forces, added a bunch of modifiers for supplies, terrain and others, a roll for that spice of uncertainty, and voilà.

Admittedly I'm not familiar with the system, so it might be the solution to all my problems.

 

[JohannaK]

Keep it short and simple (to explain, but not without depth), that's my aim.

Doesn't always accomplish it but.

(also omg tk posting in iot what is this)

A GHOST

Admittedly I'm not familiar with the system, so it might be the solution to all my problems.

Probably not. It's a very primitive system done on excel, but it does the job if you want to have a simple combat engine that can incorporate some degree of complexity.

 

[Double A]

Keep it short and simple (to explain, but not without depth), that's my aim.

Doesn't always accomplish it but.

(also omg tk posting in iot what is this)

wait didn't tany eat your flesh

 

[Tee Kay]

tis but a scratch

 

[Mathalamus]

Hey guys. i got lured back in. Civilization 6. is there anything new?

 

[Robert Can't]

TK and Math returning to post on the same page!

Truly we live in interesting times.

 

[Tyo]

hi math and tk

 

[NinjaCow64]

I'm curious, how do/did you GMs think of effects and costings of special projects? I feel like its an important skill to have yet I never really got the hang of it in IdIOT. How do you do it?

 

[JohannaK]

I would like to announce that my first game may be coming soon. Its working title is

Go! Go! Across the World Space Adventure!

And it will be a purely narrative-driven effort.​

Disclaimer: The thread title may not be in rainbow colours.​