Multipolarity II - Game Thread

[Jehoshua]

GaPII (civ 5 stories and tales) could perhaps contain some inspiration for an IoT (with principles translated to a multi-nation IOT format). It has a fairly interesting espionage system and war is a rarity since everyones too busy playing politics to gain power, running the host nations internal affairs, and spying on each other.

 

[Osmowstroyer]

I would like to get Black operations and espionage mechanics improved, to simulate the real world, where countries don't declare war but send lotsa spies.

 

[topsecret]

You said yourself that MP isn't supposed to be a war game, but so far that's all the development makes it out to be. MP3 is a step in the right direction; with resources people will actually have something to manage in peacetime. We need to make more steps like that. So, I propose working on Espionage, which is more or less peacetime war. Make espionage more interesting, don't restrict it as much, and generally make it better. With actual economic management and an interesting espionage system, a Cold War is a lot more likely to happen and would be more fun to actually partake in. Of also consider looking at NPC diplomacies to make proxy wars possible, and try to add spice to those as well.

I would like to get Black operations and espionage mechanics improved, to simulate the real world, where countries don't declare war but send lotsa spies.

 

[Tani Coyote]

See, this is why I wanted to run this by everyone; thanks for the input folks.

Spies are your "military" units that -aren't- dependent on resources to use. However, I've still tied their numbers to your overall technology. So it'll take a few turns before an espionage Cold War takes off in full swing. But it'll be easier to maintain a large spy force than a large military.

I've liked Thor's idea of putting characters in charge of the NPCs. It'll make managing them more interesting; this is their fleshing out after I've created their core mechanical values. We'll have 80-100 or so as usual, so I've lots of work to do.

I'm going to see if I can finish the ruleset so I can publish signups.

 

[Ailedhoo]

The Imperium of Man will rise in the next MP!

 

[Patriotic_Fool]

Claiming musco-siberian area probably.

Will we have navies?

 

[Double A]

The mass defections on the last turn don't count?

There certainly would have been insane table flipping if I hadn't decided to prevent a massive buyout.

There was no table flipping because you occupied the great power slot for the bulk of the game; that's contrary to the spirit of MP1, where holding onto the predominant power slot for just two turns was near impossible.

As such, I find it odd you are critiquing a lack of table flipping.

Though that tech cartel you formed is the basis of a new rule I've introduced...

I still say the reason he lasted for as long as he did was because no one actually cared.

If we plan on running a game off of economy and espionage then the espionage system needs to be more interesting than it already is.

Yep. It's just words and numbers right now.

Juuuuust like military.

War is an integral part of politics. I think excessive restrictions on a states ability to wage war will lead to stagnation in the game. MPII was successful I think precisely because of the omnipresent security situations players had to play into for example.

That said, I would say that WMD's should be severely circumscribed, if not outright removed, and there should definitely be some sort of economic and diplomatic cost to waging war for some sort of occupation period to avoid excacerbating the effect of the cumulativity of conquest principle, it just shouldn't be too excessive.

Oh, and I agree the weakening of a UN is a good thing. Combined with the well balanced security/war paradigm it should make the game much more interesting and engaging, and it would more accurately reflect the anarchical state of the international order as compared to MPII's artificial imposition of a leviathanical UN.

-

I concur with the idea of a different timeline, although it needn't be Mobius.

The economic costs to war is "being at war" and the diplomatic is "rape." Occupation's is "also rape." Don't make war less rewarding, make the alternative more rewarding.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Words and numbers. Like everything else in a mechanic-based game?

I did make peace more rewarding. By making war a bad idea unless it's a quick affair.

 

[BSmith1068]

Forgive me, because I have only half been paying attention to the conversation, but wouldn’t severely (and permanently) reducing industry in provinces that are affected by war go a long way to reducing the benefit of war itself?

Destroy 75%* of industry in a province every time it changes hands by violence and your problem will be fixed. The aggressor nation may get a lot of territory, but it won’t go very far to adding to the coffers, and will require quite a bit of investment to restore it to productive levels.

You could further balance things by making peaceful expansion more worth it by increasing industry in new (unclaimed) provinces taken without war.

EDIT: *Or maybe even 90%

 

[Tani Coyote]

That definitely is an idea I would consider, and would account for war relocation of industry (a la what Stalin did to his factories after Germany's invasion). The issue here is I replaced the Industry mechanic with a factory mechanic that controls production. I -could-, however, have invasions destroy and damage factories that are captured, if any.

 

[BSmith1068]

Yeah, I think destroying/damaging factories in affected provinces would be a good way to go. Not only does it slow the growth of aggressor nations (at least in the short term) but it is also somewhat realistic to boot.

 

[Sonereal]

I would like to get Black operations and espionage mechanics improved, to simulate the real world, where countries don't declare war but send lotsa spies.

I think that might be a bit of an underestimation of how espionage works. It is a combination of technology, field agents, and the infrastructure behind them.

That definitely is an idea I would consider, and would account for war relocation of industry (a la what Stalin did to his factories after Germany's invasion). The issue here is I replaced the Industry mechanic with a factory mechanic that controls production. I -could-, however, have invasions destroy and damage factories that are captured, if any.

That would work. I'm not sure how likely capturing an intact factories would be unless you caught defenders with their pants down.

 

[Tani Coyote]

That sounds good to me. Originally I was simply going to reduce output from the region, but with Industry's removal a new method is needed. I can assume resources from the conquered areas will still be disrupted by passive resistance, but the minimal economic gain in a war of occupation will harm the desire to conquer.

So the game is shifting primarily to an NPC / economic focus. While some have shown chagrin at this, there will still be plenty of tension.

If one wishes to build an army and go beat folks over the head with it, well...

This is not the game for them. There's plenty other IOTs.

 

[Double A]

That would work. I'm not sure how likely capturing an intact factories would be unless you caught defenders with their pants down.

Yay sneak attack discussion!

The more troops you have, the most stuff you kill and more factories you conquer intact, but past a certain threshold, more troops means greater chance of detection. Once again. I must mention that sneak attack orders would have to be sent in two or three days in advance of orders lock (depending on how many days there are between updates) for this to work. Sneak attack orders after the sneak attack lock would always be invalid unless the regular lock itself is suspended.

 

[Tani Coyote]

I suppose that could be doable.

 

[Patriotic_Fool]

I demand that my armies be able to turn invisible and teleport deep inside enemy territory.

Either that or you give me a few hundred thousand paratroopers.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Do not make me eat you.

 

[Double A]

I DEMAND WIZARDS.

You can thank me when you wake up, Tyo.

 

[NinjaCow64]

The economic costs to war is "being at war" and the diplomatic is "rape." Occupation's is "also rape." Don't make war less rewarding, make the alternative more rewarding.

Although I am not much of a warmonger, this seems like a good idea.

And if we're doing reservations right now then I claim Malta and Jerusalem. If we're not then I'm sorry.

 

[Double A]

Hell, the reason I do the stuff I do is because I like prodding the rules.

With a claymore.