New NESes, ideas, development, etc

Well, that and putting a huge emphasis on war, but you know, whatever floats your boat.

That might seem to go against the stated promise of not making this a wargame, but in such a setting war is going to be very important in any case, and it occurs to me that military and diplomatic developments were always more fast-paced than the assorted domestic ones (which, incidentally, will no longer be as outshined by warfare in the main update if the main course of the war is going to covered in the mini-updates). I certainly cannot allow a single turn's sneak attack, a mere accidental advantage that would have been negated after the first few months or years, to be enough to seal the fate of an empire; it should, at least, have a fighting chance (as it would have in real life); and at the same time, I do not want to have a single campaign drag out for centuries. So on the whole, this appears to be the best way out of several dillemae at once, not to mention that it should be a nice experience in and of itself.

Das, you are talking that a step further and formalizing it by posting stats and creating a new order phase for any player to get involved.

Just to clarify: I only intend to post the immediately-relevant stats.

1. How should the spending options for a player be altered from what is typical now (allocate it all up front) to reflect a need to be responsive if war comes later in the turn?

Your treasury system seems obvious. Though perhaps one might also have a specialised emergency war budget, digging into which would grant faster results while not causing as much dissent.

2. What are a players’ permitted options for responding to an unexpected war?

Obviously, he could fight back (though it's going to be rather difficult if his troops were really caught unprepared), and conduct diplomacy. Focus points are still going to be important if he wants to raise more troops or mount an effective counter-offensive, or take any other such advanced measures (one thing that occurs to me is the sad fate of the Third Dynasty of Ur, which suddenly had it's entire state economy crippled by a barbarian invasion; they did have enough focus and eco. points left to try and buy more food, but their Bureaucracy turned out to be too Corrupt for that to work, apparently. Incidentally, I find that historical examples from a more or less relevant period are perhaps the best gauge of historical realism in rules).

3. How will a player’s responses to war affect other planned spending?

I suppose there's the question of how soon he wished to make a spending. It may be assumed unless said otherwise that it is meant to be spent over the time, possibly making the player try and master fractions if he tries to extract the spending for ceased projects.

4. If a “focus point” system is used, then how will those be generated?

Based on Bureaucracy's Extensivity (a.k.a. Quantity) and Quality, though I am not sure how to get the exact numbers. Corruption won't affect it directly, but high levels of it are liable to make money mysteriously disappear and cause other similar problems (is it possible to have a high quality and corrupt bureaucracy? Yes, and it is probably the worst kind).

5. Should players have two or three budgets and spending tables for each turn? Military budget, economic & social budget, and focus or initiative point budget.

Other than as a special fund, I don't think that the military budget will have to be separated. A Treasury is a must have, though.

For the record, early turn lengths will be more like 25 or 20 years, though things will probably slow down to 10 soon enough (might speed up again if and when events get slow again).
 
I just opened my new NES, SerfNES II - Legacy of Versailles. People are welcome to join. In particular, I still need leaders for Nationalist China, the new Germany and Canada.
I fail to see how the last is anywhere near as important as the first two. :p
 
Incidentally, Dachs, you are quite welcome to join the discussion as well. ;)
 
I've been toying around with one of my favorite old NESs, and am currently remaking the map.

I may be tempted to do some kind of NES based on it (note: not a continuation), but right now I'm just brainstorming.

So can anyone tell me what NES this is based from? The MOD is still around, though only a few NESers that played in it are still here. And of course I would get permission from the MOD, for whatever I decide to do.

Oh and it is obviously not done yet.

Spoiler :

Working_Map.PNG

 
At first, I didn't recognise. Then I thought I did. Then I realised that it wasn't it. Then I looked at that green country in the Middle East and remembered for real. ;)
 
Nope!
 
Only it wasn't really Rome, but it was close enough. ;)
 
If anyone wants to mod GameNES 2 I can make you a much finer tuned ruleset. From my own experiences.
 
Some of the new stuff "sticks" and some doesn't. Trying it is the only way to tell.

I think in some cases examining the theory is enough.

That might seem to go against the stated promise of not making this a wargame, but in such a setting war is going to be very important in any case, and it occurs to me that military and diplomatic developments were always more fast-paced than the assorted domestic ones (which, incidentally, will no longer be as outshined by warfare in the main update if the main course of the war is going to covered in the mini-updates). I certainly cannot allow a single turn's sneak attack, a mere accidental advantage that would have been negated after the first few months or years, to be enough to seal the fate of an empire; it should, at least, have a fighting chance (as it would have in real life); and at the same time, I do not want to have a single campaign drag out for centuries. So on the whole, this appears to be the best way out of several dillemae at once, not to mention that it should be a nice experience in and of itself.

Your point about the main update focusing more on domestic events is quite valid, and one that had not occurred to me.

I suppose what concerns me is the proposed structure: inevitably, you'll end up getting straightjacketed into a very silly time scheme. Yes, a war over centuries is a bad idea. So is a battle over years.

Maybe you could get around this. If you basically worked up to a certain point in the war, and came to a decision that you feel a player needed to input stuff into, you PM them a brief report from one of their subordinates. They react in whatever way, you work up to the next point, and so on.

I think that would be quicker, anyway.

Your treasury system seems obvious. Though perhaps one might also have a specialised emergency war budget, digging into which would grant faster results while not causing as much dissent.

Well, for the era you're planning on working with, these are the main ones. However, in later times, credit should become important as well.

I've been toying around with one of my favorite old NESs, and am currently remaking the map.

:)
 
Nope!
 
I suppose what concerns me is the proposed structure: inevitably, you'll end up getting straightjacketed into a very silly time scheme. Yes, a war over centuries is a bad idea. So is a battle over years.

Maybe you could get around this. If you basically worked up to a certain point in the war, and came to a decision that you feel a player needed to input stuff into, you PM them a brief report from one of their subordinates. They react in whatever way, you work up to the next point, and so on.

I think that would be quicker, anyway.

I'm not sure, I suspect that it might get very cumbersome as well, and will limit the player options considerably - perhaps unduly so. I think that having mini-updates in the thread is preferable to PMs, anyway; if only for the sake of keeping such things in one place.

Also, it wouldn't be a battle over the years; breaking things down to the level of individual battles would obviously be a little too much. Ideally, this should be closer to a war over the years, which is to be desired, more or less. The solution certainly isn't perfect, though, and I've since found some more problems, which mainly rotate around time length and internal cohesion. Simply put, it is probably preferable to do these mini-updates at the turning points, but these might not necessarily coincide for different major conflicts. Still, breaking it down further again appears undesirable.

I think that in this particular case Birdjaguar is right and this will simply need some testing.

Aye, it was North King's stNNESVII. A very good oldie.

I do have fond memories of it, though my memories of stNNESIII (silly though it was at times, in retrospect) are fonder still.
 
I might give a try at modding GameNES 2, so I'd be interested in what you can come up with.

I can improve on my last ruleset to take out some of the holes it had. I would so love to play in GameNES though. That was my only regret from modding the last one.
 
I can improve on my last ruleset to take out some of the holes it had. I would so love to play in GameNES though. That was my only regret from modding the last one.
I know the feeling. I've wanted to play a nation in several of my NESes.
 
Retroactive deletion.
 
Here's one stray thought that occurred to me - will/should quality of orders affect the amount of focus points in any way, or are the natural advantages it grants enough in their own right?
 
I guess it could? But I don't really see why or how to do it in a consistent fashion.

I personally like the idea of "Leadership" (/whatever) placing limits through FP and a character limit. You can take that to the next level and give an FP a specific character limit allocation (which is really just the two concepts merged into one). Players then have to literally buy their orders when building them and make decisions instead of just spewing text to solve problems.

Also: answer my question.
 
The character limits seem tempting at some times, but no. Exact allocation is difficult to determine and ultimately it seems simply out of place (a ruler can order most anything no matter the quality of his cadres; the "only" thing that depends on that is actual execution).

Also: answer my question.

What's your take on the reallocation solution? The same, similar, or wholly different?

I haven't quite figured out how many focus points your ordinary medium-sized polity is supposed to have; still, the suggested reallocation makes sense to me.
 
Retroactive deletion.
 
Back
Top Bottom