While We Wait: Boredom Strikes Back

[Lord of Elves]

Hopefully for you, one without England?

You know, Edwardian England wasn't the only feudalistic European society. France and Normandy were largely divided into fiefdoms as well, and of course Germany.

EDIT: And Scotland had the different Celtic clans, as did Ireland, and Scandinavia had its respective familial/feudalistic organizations, and the Basques, and Spain and... etc

 

[Ninja Dude]

And of course I'd like to see an NES with no overpowered generic horse-warrior cultures, but that seems to never annoy anyone

 

[Oruc]

Hopefully for you, one without England?

Is everybody forgetting alex? he always uses the same country in almost every nes

 

[Lord of Elves]

Also, the House system I employed as a cultural trait of the Vetharil and Albionics in DaftNES III and CivverNES respectively was largely based off the familial clans known as "Houses", in early Basque society, as was the language of the Vetharil in DaftNES which was largely eglutenating.

 

[North King]

And of course I'd like to see an NES with no overpowered generic horse-warrior cultures, but that seems to never annoy anyone

I mean, steppe empires are a basic mode of human culture. This is a ridiculous complaint, it's like saying, "I'd like to see an NES with no overpowered generic agricultural despotic cultures, but that never seems to annoy anyone." At least a steppe empire is played differently than traditional (and vastly overrated) "civilization".

Is everybody forgetting alex? he always uses the same country in almost every nes

I object to that, too. Just because you criticize one person doesn't mean you have to do it to every person who makes the same mistake.

 

[Oruc]

I object to that, too. Just because you criticize one person doesn't mean you have to do it to every person who makes the same mistake.

Well I object to you not criticising everyone who does it

 

[Kraznaya]

Is everybody forgetting alex? he always uses the same country in almost every nes

Alex at least knows something about that country.

 

[Ninja Dude]

I mean, steppe empires are a basic mode of human culture. This is a ridiculous complaint, it's like saying, "I'd like to see an NES with no overpowered generic agricultural despotic cultures, but that never seems to annoy anyone." At least a steppe empire is played differently than traditional (and vastly overrated) "civilization".

But everyone plays it the exact same way. "Forlorn steppe warrior culture attempts to ambitiously conquer the world." Thing has been done to death. I dunno. It just irritates me for some reason. It seems like giving someone a steppe culture to play as is a free ticket to dominate the world, or at least massively screw up a region in a lot of NESes.

 

[das]

I mean, steppe empires are a basic mode of human culture. This is a ridiculous complaint, it's like saying, "I'd like to see an NES with no overpowered generic agricultural despotic cultures, but that never seems to annoy anyone."

I don't remember when I last saw an agricultural despotic culture done right in a NES, actually, unlike steppe empires, which really are overrated (though maybe I'm just not paying close enough attention and steppe empires tend to simply be more noticeable? Actually, same difference, the same situation is maintained). Also: mercantile maritime oligarchies/republics, quasi-Spartan noble warrior states (okay, I'm terribly guilty of that one myself) and highly-organised, centralised, supranational churches. But where is my hydraulic despotism?

I suppose I really should try and do one of those from the outset next time I join a fresh start NES.

The OTHER problem with steppe empires is that they just don't know when to stay down, whereas historically they fall apart and die pretty easily, if only to be replaced by another, similar one. And have more in the way competitors even when ascending. And tend to suffer from infighting. I haven't seen nearly enough of any of that in NES steppe empires; they only seem to break down when they suffer a serious military defeat (which is stupid - many steppe empires survived military defeats, many others died despite or even because of a lack of serious military threats), and that's when the Thlayli Syndrome (aka the Highly Successful Exodus Disorder) sets in. That last one is enough for a wholly separate rant of its own, by the way.

 

[Yui108]

@ Bombshoo : Refine the borders, make the map more aesthetically pleasing, and add in the proper states inside the Holy Roman Empire (I will tell you what has changed).
@ Lord of Elves: 1360 NES with 1260 Mongol Victory at Ain Jalut. You can find it in the alternate history thread.

 

[Lord of Elves]

What people underestimate in my opinion is the opportunity for political intrigue stories in confederations. A loose alliance is a great place for interesting stories, politics, and a glimpse into the culture of the people involved, and the relationships between the nations involved.

EDIT: Now that's interesting, Yui108. Mongols control a decent portion of Europe, I imagine? (And when would this launch?)

 

[das]

Oh, certainly! There are many different ways to do confederacies, though. I'm not sure if I would call a classic feudal state a confederacy either. I haven't really been paying attention to your shenanigans, though, so I can't comment much. I thought the problem was less with the politics and more with implausible levels of social and cultural development?

 

[Lord of Elves]

Oh, certainly! There are many different ways to do confederacies, though. I'm not sure if I would call a classic feudal state a confederacy either. I haven't really been paying attention to your shenanigans, though, so I can't comment much. I thought the problem was less with the politics and more with implausible levels of social and cultural development?

Actually, I think cultural development is fairly straight-forward in a confederation. Eventually, the confederation has to break apart or join together as a single entity. Normally, to do this what is necessary is the dissolution of the confederacy and a period of warfare/political upheaval before the rise of one of the confederate entities of prominence over the others, creating a centralized entity. At the end of this, the result ought to be a closer relationship between the cultures of the confederate entities.

 

[Thlayli]

The problem with your nations, LoE, is that they always superficially resemble 'Generic Western European semi-feudal state that IS TOTALLY NOT ENGLAND' and presume a level of technological development and political sophistication that doesn't exist in the NESes you're joining, yet.

It's annoying for a lot of people who play with you, even if you're not aware of it.

 

[Yui108]

It launches June 1st.

 

[North King]

But everyone plays it the exact same way. "Forlorn steppe warrior culture attempts to ambitiously conquer the world." Thing has been done to death. I dunno. It just irritates me for some reason. It seems like giving someone a steppe culture to play as is a free ticket to dominate the world, or at least massively screw up a region in a lot of NESes.

Well sure, but there's also, "state with religious ideals which go off to spread their faith," "empire going through a golden age," etc. People aren't very creative in general, so it seems silly to criticize them for using an entire subgroup of things.

I don't remember when I last saw an agricultural despotic culture done right in a NES, actually, unlike steppe empires, which really are overrated (though maybe I'm just not paying close enough attention and steppe empires tend to simply be more noticeable? Actually, same difference, the same situation is maintained). Also: mercantile maritime oligarchies/republics, quasi-Spartan noble warrior states (okay, I'm terribly guilty of that one myself) and highly-organised, centralised, supranational churches. But where is my hydraulic despotism?

Didn't say hydraulic despotism, said agricultural despotism. There's a world of difference there.

The OTHER problem with steppe empires is that they just don't know when to stay down, whereas historically they fall apart and die pretty easily, if only to be replaced by another, similar one. And have more in the way competitors even when ascending. And tend to suffer from infighting. I haven't seen nearly enough of any of that in NES steppe empires; they only seem to break down when they suffer a serious military defeat (which is stupid - many steppe empires survived military defeats, many others died despite or even because of a lack of serious military threats), and that's when the Thlayli Syndrome (aka the Highly Successful Exodus Disorder) sets in. That last one is enough for a wholly separate rant of its own, by the way.

Yes, this is pretty much the main problem.



By the way, das, send orders.

 

[Thlayli]

All I'll say in response to das' accusations is that a migration and an exodus are two very different things, and I have only EVER carried out one of the latter.

 

[das]

By the way, das, send orders.

Sorry, I've been embroiled in way too many things (both in the NES and out of it). Also, I thought the deadline was on Wednesday?

Well sure, but there's also, "state with religious ideals which go off to spread their faith," "empire going through a golden age," etc. People aren't very creative in general, so it seems silly to criticize them for using an entire subgroup of things.

"I object to that, too. Just because you criticize one person doesn't mean you have to do it to every person who makes the same mistake. " I suppose all those are inevitable; it would just be nice to see some more variety as there are many other such parahistorical "tropes" that are constantly neglected in NESes as compared to those. I'm not saying people should stop ruling steppe empires (though I do wish those would be treated in a way that is more true to history; sure, they won't get to go on those one-player civilization-wrecking rampages as often, but it would still make the steppes much more interesting for the rest of us and possibly for those who live there as well), I'm saying more people should try and do something with hydraulic despotism, tribal kingship, rickety overland empires a la Persia, slave-owning republics and so on. I know I'll do my part when appropriate.

Didn't say hydraulic despotism, said agricultural despotism. There's a world of difference there.

Care to elaborate exactly what you meant by it, then?

All I'll say in response to das' accusations is that a migration and an exodus are two very different things, and I have only EVER carried out one of the latter.

You still are perhaps the most guilty modern NESer with regard to not dying when you should, though.

 

[Ninja Dude]

Well sure, but there's also, "state with religious ideals which go off to spread their faith," "empire going through a golden age," etc. People aren't very creative in general, so it seems silly to criticize them for using an entire subgroup of things.

So situations that could happen to many different countries, effect them in many different ways, and have various results is just as generic as the steppe empires we see in every NES doing the exact same thing every time?

 

[bestrfcplayer]

Even though this is off topic to the current discution; is anybody watching the Cavs game today? It's on at 3:30PM EST.