While We Wait: Part 3

[jalapeno_dude]

@Jal: Thinking of making a new NES?

@Everyone: Is there any particular reason why nobody else will join my NES? This is including those latecomers to my previous NES, such as Motherland, Donald, and Iownz.

No. I don't have anywhere near enough time to run a NES that would be complex enough to satisfy me.

 

[carmen510]

And to my second question?

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Anyway, LB, it's nice to know that you're still traumatized by JalNES.

'For Want of a Boat' will weigh down my sould until oblivion takes me.

Spoiler :

 

[LittleBoots]

Yes. JalNES was amazing. I myself cringed at the 300 year war with Tartessos, however with 50 year updates, it was hard to do otherwise. I think that BirdNES really changed the way I thought about long term orders. He demanded time frames for all orders within the ruleset or else they went last. I also never made good contingency orders and so my nation's reactions were only every 50 years. Eirehann was one of my favourite nations. First adventure in creativity.

 

[jalapeno_dude]

Yes. JalNES was amazing. I myself cringed at the 300 year war with Tartessos, however with 50 year updates, it was hard to do otherwise. I think that BirdNES really changed the way I thought about long term orders. He demanded time frames for all orders within the ruleset or else they went last. I also never made good contingency orders and so my nation's reactions were only every 50 years. Eirehann was one of my favourite nations. First adventure in creativity.

Yeah. At the time I thought the IT/BT system would be too complex, but I think it's necessary complexity. If I did it again, I'd use 5, 10, or 20-year updates, and ask for specific timing of events as well.

 

[Luckymoose]

JalNES was epic. I had so many wars with Rome it was fun.

 

[das]

I don't spend really any time at all on AIM and so only see whats going on here. I suppose thats probably to my major disadvantage, but I don't know how much AIM would change things.

Wouldn't know, that never disadvantaged me.

Speaking of that terrific game (INES), where has Imago popped off to?

Not sure; he did pop by to say hello two or so months ago.

But more than that, NESes have gotten more complex.

There are always many counter-examples, though. Actually, it might even be better to speak of polarisation between very complex NESes and very simplistic ones.

So, to what extent is it acceptable to sacrifice realism in a simulation-style game (a historical or alt-hist with turns of 1 year or less) for the sake of actually being able to play it?

It's obviously always very case-specific, but I think that a good way out is to settle on a simplified, practicable model of reality early on and then to stick with that. Coming up with a basic model that is at the same time sufficiently realistic, enjoyable from the viewpoint of gameplay and simple enough for me to work with it efficiently is one of the things I hope to do before I could get to my next project.

 

[Demetrias]

Carmen you maybe having trouble bringing in new players because of how long your game has been going on. I know that I personally don't like joining things in the middle.

 

[Daftpanzer]

I don't see why realistic can't also be simple. Lots of rules and stats is more about player control, in my opinion, which doesn't necessarily mean more realism. Whereas, you can take all kinds of different and subtle things into account in the update, without having concrete stats for them all. Of course, the difficulty then is letting the player know what is going on, which leads to oversize updates

 

[das]

I don't see why realistic can't also be simple.

Nor do I; not at all. I'm just trying to find a good way to balance "simple realism" with gameplay, while also trying to understand just what exactly is this "simple realism" supposed to be (basically, I'm looking for the very basics to work from - no pun intended).

 

[Symphony D.]

Symphony D., for example, is one of our biggest defenders of realism, but I'm fairly sure that he doesn't mod because he just doesn't have the time to actually carry out a NES with his desired ruleset.

No, that's not it. You should be one of the people who can figure out why.

So, to what extent is it acceptable to sacrifice realism in a simulation-style game (a historical or alt-hist with turns of 1 year or less) for the sake of actually being able to play it?

I chime in with the positions of Daft and das on this matter and add that by heavily automating statistics when possible, as Birdjaguar has done, and tying them into actual numeric values, as opposed to the more traditional descriptor based systems, it should be possible to maintain a high degree of realism while still having a manageable workload.

There are always many counter-examples, though. Actually, it might even be better to speak of polarisation between very complex NESes and very simplistic ones.

As well it should be, in many instances. There's really little place for the middle ground, in my opinion.

 

[Luckymoose]

An idea struck me. One which I would stick to. The old DisNES 3 had a great setting and sort of complex rules, and it failed for some reason which I am not sure of right now. I think the ruleset was pretty tough and could be tuned down quite a bit and the same setting could be used in a easier to play but equally fun game. Not some crazy out of control war fest, to the best of my ability, if I were to attempt the project. Not even sure if Dis would let me.

 

[~Darkening~]

@Those who commented on the writing question: I'm a perfectionist. I will literally write and rewrite a sentance forty times until I believe it is acceptable, and then do the whole same thing for the next line. After actually finishing a story (which in my mind must be at least 2000 words or longer or not worth posting), I force myself to go back over everything and proofread (which means probably changing almost everything in the story.) Finally, after all that, I go back in and look for words that are commonly used and look up replacements.

Out of all the stories I have begun, maybe 3% have been finished and posted.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Then you're hopeless. Try lowering your standards. It's difficult, I know, but it can be done.

 

[~Darkening~]

Not for me. Through, I'm actually forcing myself to stick with this and I think I'll actually finish it. First time in < 8 months.

 

[das]

I will literally write and rewrite a sentance forty times until I believe it is acceptable, and then do the whole same thing for the next line.

Happens sometimes, though not always.

Technically, most of the times when you actually have to rewrite a sentence often enough it probably means that it won't come out well anyway, or at least won't fit in the story (hard to explain, but that's what happens to me all the time; when things are going fine they are also going quickly, when I have to stop and think things through in the middle of it that means that something has already gone wrong). Try taking a break, and/or avoiding the sentence altogether, even if it means changing your plan considerably.

(which in my mind must be at least 2000 words or longer or not worth posting)

Length isn't necessarily all that important. The deepest meanings can sometimes be convened far better in a few sentences than in an entire trilogy. See Chekhov.

I force myself to go back over everything and proofread (which means probably changing almost everything in the story.) Finally, after all that, I go back in and look for words that are commonly used and look up replacements.

Much of that is normal practice, except for actually changing the story itself (although - if you can remake it into something better, by all means go for it).

 

[Luckymoose]

No comment on the NES I was thinking of doing? Oh well. I guess I will just do it and see what happens.

 

[Dachs]

Wouldn't know, that never disadvantaged me.

Then maybe it has something to do with the fact that I hate PMed diplomacy.

An idea struck me. One which I would stick to. The old DisNES 3 had a great setting and sort of complex rules, and it failed for some reason which I am not sure of right now. I think the ruleset was pretty tough and could be tuned down quite a bit and the same setting could be used in a easier to play but equally fun game. Not some crazy out of control war fest, to the best of my ability, if I were to attempt the project. Not even sure if Dis would let me.

Uh...you are running other NESes right now, aren't you?

 

[Luckymoose]

Uh...you are running other NESes right now, aren't you?

DwarfNES? It doesn't count as a NES at all. All it is, is me playing a game with NESers named for Dwarfs. GameNES is still on hiatus, I was meaning to redo the stats and all that so it wouldn't be so cluttery. It isn't dead though and only takes 15 minutes to update anyway. It is approaching Update VIII.

 

[Disenfrancised]

One which I would stick to. The old DisNES 3 had a great setting and sort of complex rules, and it failed for some reason which I am not sure of right now.

Both lack of orders for the great powers and too much orders from some (I did tend to do consistency research to see if the facts as presented checked out), losing my management code and not having the willpower to rewrite it, a heck of a lot of stuff to do in it, something of a disillusionment with the setting itself (1)the great power system seemed too stable (with everyone having pleasant little regional hegemonies and going for petty expansion) and 2) it was too close to the OTL for me in good conscience to just make stuff up ), a massive and unexpected surge in RL concerns (as opposed to starting a quiet 9-6 job I landed a studentship that took up far more time for far less money)...

Basically to run something of that complexity you can handle at most ten to dozen players, and they have to be reliable. Properly NPCing a great power took a lot of time.

I have made some further changes to the rule set though, as well as a few nice idea's on stats.

Feel free to use anything of it you like though.