IOT Developmental Thread

[Tee Kay]

Yes to first two, abstain on last one.

 

[Double A]

-redesigned map
Cool

-"price value" for provinces
Good

-get rid of the province system
NOOOOOO

 

[Cull]

no to all

 

[Omega124]

-redesigned map
Yes
-"price value" for provinces
Yes
-get rid of the province system
I see great reward for dropping this. YES.

 

[Zack]

How can you support 2 AND 3?

 

[GenMarshall]

Voting: Round 10
-redesigned map
-"price value" for provinces
-get rid of the province system

These are the last 3 things on the original list, so get a votin'.

Yes
NO!!!
NO!!!

 

[Tee Kay]

How can you support 2 AND 3?

2. Not all provinces have the same value (compare Western Europe with Siberia with the Sahara - the first is more desirable than the second than the third). If we redraw the map and make the provinces roughly the same size, for instance, more productive provinces should costs more than less productive ones.

3. The main issues with the provinces system is combat. In previous IOTs you have the problem where countries with large provinces (eg USA, China) gets conquered more easily.

 

[ZeletDude]

Yes to the first 2 no to the 3rd

 

[Mad Man]

no to the third.

 

[Arakhor]

Yes, yes and no.

 

[MathNerd]

Ditto as Arakhor.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Sorry that I haven't updated guys, I have been really busy the last couple days (4th of July ) and haven't had a lot of access to the computer. But now the wait is over. It's tally time.

-redesigned map IIIIIIIIIIII/00
-"price value" for provinces IIIIIIIIIII/000
-get rid of the province system I/00000000000000

So I guess we're keeping the province system with overwhelming support

And, well, that's all the ideas we had. Where do we go from here? Do we continue with another round of ideas and voting? Do we take the ideas we have and iron them out (some of them do need some ironing out IMO)? Do we just set up the next game and try to implement these ideas the best we can (if so, who's going to be the GM?)?

You never answered my question - my combat idea tied and I want to know what that means.

Really? I could have sworn that got booted... but I don't really feeling like digging through all the votes again (that was the really messy vote), so how about we do a recount.

Voting: Round 11
-Lighthearter's very complex idea for combat (linky)

 

[Lighthearter]

Yay! You saw!!

I vote yes

- Lighthearter

 

[W|M]

yes...

 

[civplayah]

I have to admit it's a good idea, but I don't think it's appropriate for this game. No.

 

[Lighthearter]

And, well, that's all the ideas we had. Where do we go from here? Do we continue with another round of ideas and voting? Do we take the ideas we have and iron them out (some of them do need some ironing out IMO)? Do we just set up the next game and try to implement these ideas the best we can (if so, who's going to be the GM?)?

I think that after this vote we should iron out what we need to a bit. Like the etiquette. For the next game I can't be the GM - I have Star Wars: Galactic Empires AND Realpolitik. I think also that all that can be said has pretty much been said on this subject, so we should do what we gotta do and then get into the next game ASAP.

BTW, civplayah, my combat system is on trial ATM in SW:GE, so we'll see.

- Lighthearter

 

[landlubber]

That idea is nice, but I think it would make the game a little complicated. Simplicity is the greatness of IOT. So, I vote No.

 

[GenMarshall]

A big fat...


Link to video.

 

[Double A]

What? Complex?

If CFC didn't take so long to load pages, I wouldn't mind so much. Or even read it.

No.

 

[W|M]

Why does CFC load so slow for everyone else? It loads quickly for me - Then, I AM using extra battery power due to it constantly being plugged in.