IOT Developmental Thread

[Joecoolyo]

The casus belli/stability and the new map proposed by tailless and an RNG for combat. I could handle combat if we use an RNG, that's easy enough. Include the code of conduct as well.

So, you just want to gut the rest of it?

I'm sorry I included all the things you guys voted for earlier in the thread.

Well, I meant on the rules specifically (I could swear you added a couple things that weren't there originally), I mean you yourself wanted some discussion too.

Though if I offended, I didn't mean too.

For the sake of realism, could we use RNG for different sectors of the army? For example, use RNG for Navy, then do it for Air, then do it for Land, etc. Each player can say how he wants to split his total army strength between the sectors.

Didn't we already discuss how RNG fails?

 

[Mathalamus]

I had this in mind when writing the rules. It will not take hours to do a single battle. It'd be more like two minutes, if that. Just get base strength of the two sides, add all the modifiers from tech, terrain and such (in percentage, clearly displayed in the summary section), roll a dice for that extra randomness factor, then compare to see who wins, and you're done. That's it.

It's only a step up from the rule already in use for Europe's Burning. With multiple GMs we can get it done very quickly. If you want, I can increase the cost for each armies so that one player does not control 20+ armies in the game.

hmm. good point. but the cost of the army shouldnt be too high.

for example if i control modern turkey and cyprus, with..oh... 30 million people ( a tad high even for 1453), id want a 500,000 strong army and navy. one army should be 10,000 men, not 1,000.

any nation can have a higher amount of soldiers, but at a risk to economy.

 

[Tee Kay]

I could swear you added a couple things that weren't there originally

I did, though it was almost all based on the ideas posted on this thread and whatever I added is there so that they'd actually work in game. Take casus belli and stability for instance - the idea floated around but we didn't discuss the details, so I added them in so that they'd actually be important to the game.

hmm. good point. but the cost of the army shouldnt be too high.

for example if i control modern turkey and cyprus, with..oh... 30 million people ( a tad high even for 1453), id want a 500,000 strong army and navy. one army should be 10,000 men, not 1,000.

any nation can have a higher amount of soldiers, but at a risk to economy.

Indeed, that's what I'm proposing.

The beauty of this though, is that it's not actually defined exactly how large an army is. So a certain Byzantine Emperor can't come up with population statistics and claim he can support an army with x number of soldiers. He can't claim that x number of soldiers have or don't have such and such effects on the economy, because it's all displayed for everyone to see in the amount getting subtracted from your treasury each turn to fund the army.

 

[Zack]

All I'm saying is what we have now, we might as well just call it an NES.

 

[Tee Kay]

All I'm saying is what we have now, we might as well just call it an NES.

Well, lazyNES, maybe, since we're not writing a story. It'll probably won't be called IOT anyway, seeing as Taniciusfox seemed to have reserved the brand.

So, what, you'd be fine with it if it was called Rise from Medieval Kingdoms VI or something?

 

[Zack]

Never mind, just do whatever you want with it.

 

[Tee Kay]

But that kinda defeats the purpose of the thread...

 

[Tee Kay]

I'm sorry, I'll shut up now.

 

[Zack]

If we go forward with your rules, I'll still play, it looks like a lot of fun.

I just think that all the game really needed was a code of conduct and a casus belli system.

 

[Tee Kay]

Well, now you made me rethink the whole concept.

We could've refined the rules a bit more if people post...

 

[Zack]

I'm sorry, I kind of stopped following the thread, what with all the spam.

 

[Tee Kay]

I'm sorry, I kind of stopped following the thread, what with all the spam.

That's the problem.

Anyway, I'll see if I can simplify the rules a bit (so don't jump to the launch yet Joe ). I maybe busy tomorrow so perhaps Wednesday afternoon Melbourne time I'll post it up. Of course you're welcome to do this yourself if you feel like it.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Well, simplifying shouldn't take that much work. IMO these measures should do it.

-I never really liked the idea of gold, it seems like to much of a hassle to keep track of, and with some of the "costs", it would take forever for the game to take off. So either we should scrap it entirely or really simplify it.

-Diplomatic actions shouldn't cost money, to keep it simple lets keep it free, though of course to prevent world wars and constant shifting of alliances, people should be limited to I'd say 2 or 3 actions every update (though of course that wouldn't include talking, just the concrete stuff like alliances, trade agreements, wars, etc.)

-Tech should also either be really simple or taken out completely, it just adds unnecessary complexity and would slow down the game (this of course wouldn't restrict the player from coming up with their own "discoveries" here and there, for flavor and humor value )

-Stability also seems unnecessarily complex, I say keep it to 3 levels. Very Stable, Stable, and Unstable. That way it isn't a hassle to keep track of and we can still apply penalties and such

EDIT: Tailles, see my post after this one, if we simplify gold, we can probably keep the complexity of the ideas I simplified above

 

[Zack]

I agree to all of your points, Joe.

 

[Arakhor]

Likewise, Joe.

 

[Mathalamus]

i agree.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Actually, I've been thinking about gold and a way to simplify it.

How about, instead of accumulative gold, as you suggested originally (which would require looking after and would slow down the game as more and more nations joined), we just make it so each province is worth a certain amount of gold. And this amount of gold would stay static, not accumulate, and after each update it's replenished. So for example, if each province is worth 5 gold, that means someone who got two provinces has got 10 gold. He can take that gold and spend it on his army (depending on how expensive we make an army), tech, diplomacy, or whatever. And after each update, it goes back to 10 gold, and does not accumulate. The only way to get more money would be to expand.

So that would make it so that the more provinces a person has, the more gold he has to spend on things (so maybe we should keep some complexity in say tech and diplomacy so gold has a value).

It would be really simple (since there's no need to add up everything, just look at the number of provinces a person has), and rather easy to keep track of. It also gives a reason to expand (rather than just have the biggest empire possible) and to fight wars.

We could also assign certain amounts of gold to places on the map, so one Siberian province doesn't have the same gold value as a province in Europe.

 

[Zack]

Well, apparently we could've saved ourselves 60 pages!

 

[Cull]

I agree with all the points.

 

[Double A]

Actually, I've been thinking about gold and a way to simplify it.

How about, instead of accumulative gold, as you suggested originally (which would require looking after and would slow down the game as more and more nations joined), we just make it so each province is worth a certain amount of gold. And this amount of gold would stay static, not accumulate, and after each update it's replenished. So for example, if each province is worth 5 gold, that means someone who got two provinces has got 10 gold. He can take that gold and spend it on his army (depending on how expensive we make an army), tech, diplomacy, or whatever. And after each update, it goes back to 10 gold, and does not accumulate. The only way to get more money would be to expand.

So that would make it so that the more provinces a person has, the more gold he has to spend on things (so maybe we should keep some complexity in say tech and diplomacy so gold has a value).

It would be really simple (since there's no need to add up everything, just look at the number of provinces a person has), and rather easy to keep track of. It also gives a reason to expand (rather than just have the biggest empire possible) and to fight wars.

We could also assign certain amounts of gold to places on the map, so one Siberian province doesn't have the same gold value as a province in Europe.

So... if you have any left over, it just goes away? Let's just say you spend it on nice things for your palace.