New NESes, ideas, development, etc

[flyingchicken]

I suggest a complete monopoly of important NPCs by the mod. If players want important NPCs for their stories, they come to the mod.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

That's way too big a responsibility for most moderators, and far too significant a limitation on player creativity.

 

[Thlayli]

That really isn't enough. What about more distant relatives? Dynastic marriages and their implications? The succession law, and changes in it? Look at the so-called Feudal War in 15th century Moscow; how would you simulate it or a similar event (because those tended to happen in countries with Rurikid-style succession, which were reasonably numerous - Turkic and Mongol successor states come to mind, especially in the western half of the Genghisid empire, but technically almost all barbarian kingdoms went through that stage of succession within the clan instead of the immediate family) in a NES?

How to handle succession if acting from the paradigm of player=ruler, anyway?

In general, that sort of thing (internal dynastic conflict) is rarely if ever INTENDED by the player, and at least from a non-Immersionist perspective. So, with player as ruler, a lower leadership and/or stability stat could induce a greater chance of interrupting the smooth dynastic succession. Perhaps, in monarchial systems, a template from the player regarding succession rules can be used to help interpret whether or not a crisis will occur. (Also, re-implementation of court factions a la the BirdNES model?)

That seems the best way to simulate things without introducing overly complicated family trees.

 

[Daftpanzer]

Personally I've had trouble with the player-as-ruler concept. It was never sorted out exactly in DaftNES. For a revival of that NES I'm thinking of specifically forcing the players to become the 'eternal mystical power behind the throne' sort of thing, as opposed to role-playing leaders directly...

As mentioned, player control over leaders and heirs usually leads to very smooth transitions of power and eternal stability etc. Perhaps players should have 'influence' over leaders and heirs but not direct control? I'm thinking of some kind of points system where 'power' is a type of point you can spend on any leadership related stuff, so you'd have to choose between smooth successions and heroic leaders and stable governments as opposed to automatically having all three.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Dynasticflow seems like a huge subset of information to manage especially across 20 or more players through hundreds of years of time. But there might be a way....

I'll use spreadsheet terminalogy but a spreadsheet should not be required. Each row in the sheet represents 1 turn and as you move down the sheet you move turn by turn throught he game. Across the columns you list the actual ruler, heirs and other potential rulers like so:

Henry VIII Mary Elizabeth Uncle Bob Cousin Steve etc.

Next to each you list the likelihood of them being the next ruler should the current one die.

Henry VIII (100) Mary (75) Elizabeth (35) Uncle Bob (10) Cousin Steve (5)

Then each turn as the action unfolds you add a new row, change the probabilities and add or subtract names depending upon events and intrigues. At any given time you have a list of potential heirs and the chances of their success in taking over. As the game progresses you build a family tree of the dynasty. If a marriage adds a new potential heir, then he/she is added to the right row and probabilities recalculated. Ages could be tracked with a second number.

If marriages link kingdoms, then a more complex table could include the potential land holdings of each potential heir. This is all very doable in Excel, but would be additional work to maintain. It could even be linked to nation stats so the heirs and potential heirs for any/all players were displayed.

A mod could then select the new ruler via die rolls if desired or some other method.

Anyway, this is a quick answer for you das.

How about a game where one mod maintained the stats, one maintained the family trees and holdings and the third wrote the update?

 

[bombshoo]

Dynasticflow seems like a huge subset of information to manage especially across 20 or more players through hundreds of years of time. But there might be a way....

I'll use spreadsheet terminalogy but a spreadsheet should not be required. Each row in the sheet represents 1 turn and as you move down the sheet you move turn by turn throught he game. Across the columns you list the actual ruler, heirs and other potential rulers like so:

Henry VIII Mary Elizabeth Uncle Bob Cousin Steve etc.

Next to each you list the likelihood of them being the next ruler should the current one die.

Henry VIII (100) Mary (75) Elizabeth (35) Uncle Bob (10) Cousin Steve (5)

Then each turn as the action unfolds you add a new row, change the probabilities and add or subtract names depending upon events and intrigues. At any given time you have a list of potential heirs and the chances of their success in taking over. As the game progresses you build a family tree of the dynasty. If a marriage adds a new potential heir, then he/she is added to the right row and probabilities recalculated. Ages could be tracked with a second number.

If marriages link kingdoms, then a more complex table could include the potential land holdings of each potential heir. This is all very doable in Excel, but would be additional work to maintain. It could even be linked to nation stats so the heirs and potential heirs for any/all players were displayed.

A mod could then select the new ruler via die rolls if desired or some other method.

Anyway, this is a quick answer for you das.

How about a game where one mod maintained the stats, one maintained the family trees and holdings and the third wrote the update?

I think finding a mod who wants to do nothing but maintain stats might be difficult.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think finding a mod who wants to do nothing but maintain stats might be difficult.

It might not be too difficult.

 

[das]

That's way too big a responsibility for most moderators, and far too significant a limitation on player creativity.

Honestly the latter is my main concern, as I am going to limit/marginalise it enough as it is (it's not as bad as I make it sound, ofcourse, but by comparison with most other NESes); it seems kind of bad to wrest control over the PC's private life as well after having more or less seized culture; although, it would also be nice not to have to maintain family trees and government rosters for every single state, especially as it would make any pretenses of historicity even more difficult to pull off in the Iron Age - the stats ought to maybe feature the ruler, the heir apparent, the second-in-line, and the prime minister/vizier (obviously there will be local differences, like in Sparta), and not much more (maybe an alternate successor for when there is confusion in succession laws like in mid 15th century Muscovy, and any really major pretenders).

In general, that sort of thing (internal dynastic conflict) is rarely if ever INTENDED by the player, and at least from a non-Immersionist perspective.

It's been done often enough, the problem is that it is usually spontaneous and poorly-organised, as opposed to a simmering crisis that can go on simmering for decades before the ruler dies and then all hell breaks loose. Rulers are often made up on the spot in such long-term NESes; what could you expect from their families?

So, with player as ruler, a lower leadership and/or stability stat could induce a greater chance of interrupting the smooth dynastic succession.

But that's not how it works at all.

(Also, re-implementation of court factions a la the BirdNES model?)

The problem with those is that they are neither quite court factions nor quite social groups, but rather stuck somewhere in between. I think I already complained about this before. Furthermore, I think the Daniilovichi should be nerfed.

For a revival of that NES I'm thinking of specifically forcing the players to become the 'eternal mystical power behind the throne' sort of thing, as opposed to role-playing leaders directly...

That's fair enough, but (as I will expound upon to greater extent at a later date) the design philosophy for this one specifically calls for players to be rulers; it is to be something of an interactive alternate history where you provide the lab rats mine canaries human element, and a mystical omnipotent force is rarely a good human element.

Next to each you list the likelihood of them being the next ruler should the current one die.

...why not just put in their places in the official and (if applies) alternate lines of succession instead? I mean, the only way they could seize power other than being the first in the former or in desperate cases the latter is by rebellion, and that's a different matter entirely (though ofcourse it still is important and a man who is seven places away from succession and is a successful, popular general would often be somewhat more likely to rebel).

If marriages link kingdoms, then a more complex table could include the potential land holdings of each potential heir. This is all very doable in Excel, but would be additional work to maintain. It could even be linked to nation stats so the heirs and potential heirs for any/all players were displayed.

And then we have the conflicting succession laws everywhere. Awesome.

How about a game where one mod maintained the stats, one maintained the family trees and holdings and the third wrote the update?

Honestly the first and the third are pretty strongly interconnected.

 

[flyingchicken]

Honestly the first and the third are pretty strongly interconnected.

Well, if an updating mod is very transparent and explicit, and the "automatic" processes are clear in the rules, then assigning the menial task of updating stats to someone else doesn't look like a bad idea.

 

[das]

Depending on the rules, it can be not all that menial.

 

[Thlayli]

I'm definitely leaning in the direction of non-numeric stats. They involve less calculation to update, and it's easier to divide one's forces when one has a 'large army' as opposed to '56.5 divisions'. As long as you know that 'large army' involves between 200,000 and 300,000 troops under arms, or something like that, so relative numbers are in play.

This has the overall affect of letting the mod focus on the player's strategy and its' outcomes, as opposed to updating a massive list of casualties down to the last broken fingernail.

I'm thinking that it's not really fair to spread an arbitrary qualifier like "division" across all states with different military organizations. A "division" could be 2,000 soldiers with tank support for one nation, and 10,000 soldiers with rifles and bayonets for another.

It's better, imo, to have a general idea of how many troops you have, and a very specific idea of their doctrines, quality, composition, leadership, and equipment. That's more important than the numerics, excepting states that rely on massive waves of conscripts or a small elite core of professionals, but that would be covered in doctrine and the general size stat to begin with.

 

[Terrance888]

I remember in this talk of Heirs of the King Jol'yujar, who had 200 Children, and within two generations, 2300 Possible heirs in Amon's MRTOR.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

How about a game where one mod maintained the stats, one maintained the family trees and holdings and the third wrote the update?

Sort of like how I maintained the evolutionary trees for NESLife?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Sort of like how I maintained the evolutionary trees for NESLife?

I am unfamiliar with NESlife.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

It's a biological evolution NES, where the players are essentially mutagens- we alter some of the genes of animals, and Daftpanzer updates the next era of the NES. In addition to participating, I maintained an evolutionary tree showing the interrelations between all species, springing from the last common ancestors.

 

[das]

Thlayli - I agree on the numeric stats in general, but at the moment it's the abstractions of Economic and Initiative points that bug me the most. Numeric actually works quite fine for armies as long as it is understood that there is some measure of abstraction involved; my old system was perhaps not so bad in this regard, though there are some major adjustments needed.

I remember in this talk of Heirs of the King Jol'yujar, who had 200 Children, and within two generations, 2300 Possible heirs in Amon's MRTOR.

Most serious Central Asian and Middle Eastern dynasties ended up being like this but worse with some time. The Timurids come to mind, but really, it's just about everyone since at least the Arsacids and when this is combined with feudalism/the dynastic appanage system it leads to a truly glorious collapse of central authority.

 

[Daftpanzer]

In addition to participating, I maintained an evolutionary tree showing the interrelations between all species, springing from the last common ancestors.

And its totally epic I need to download java runtime, or something, so I can get that program working (mindview?) and have a closer look.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Defining 'epic' in terms of scale, NESLife 3 is the most epic NES of all time.

 

[Abaddon]

I wish it would continue

 

[North King]

Defining 'epic' in terms of scale, NESLife 3 is the most epic NES of all time.

A GalaxyNES would be entertaining, though roughly impossible to run. Basic idea is that you have players running planets (from evolution of life to rise of intelligent civilization to its fall), timescale geologic, and see how the galaxy changes.