While We Wait: The Next Generation

[Lord_Iggy]

That's one of the reason's it's a bad idea, in addition to the fact that people won't play a paid NES, unless it somehow managed to be much higher quality- however, this is unlikely due to competition from free NESes and the lack of players willing to pay. If anything, an economically sustaining NES should work by the webcomic strategy- as NK said, profits made only from advertisements and merchandise sales.

 

[Turner]

Offering money for NESing is probably not a good idea.

^^^ What he said.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Another question for a industrial/modern NES. Brigades vs. divisions vs. raw numbers; preferences, opinions?

 

[carmen510]

Also, isn't it possible that eventually moderators could be bribed, or would ask for 'contributions'? It doesn't matter if you're normally uncorrupt, an extra couple hundred dollars never hurts.

 

[bombshoo]

If someone on here was willing to pay money just to win an NES, their priorities would be really out of whack.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

I agree completely.

 

[BananaLee]

Another question for a industrial/modern NES. Brigades vs. divisions vs. raw numbers; preferences, opinions?

It really depends on how you plan to run combat. I feel the terms used for units (brigades, soldiers, armies, etc.) are quite arbitrary especially if combat is determined story-style.

I believe the whole point of using discrete units is to save mods the headache of keeping track of ridiculous numbers all around the place (an army is easier to keep track of than 15000 men) so I would suggest going for the brigades/divisions/thousands (any noun to describe a collective group of troops) idea.

However, I could be talking out of my arse here since I haven't run a (proper) NES.

 

[bombshoo]

Another question for a industrial/modern NES. Brigades vs. divisions vs. raw numbers; preferences, opinions?

Given a division is a force that can operate pretty much independently, I prefer to work with this the most. Expecting the player to figure out the best ratio of artillery brigades, support units, and infantry is a bit too much micromanagement for my taste.

 

[carmen510]

Another question for a industrial/modern NES. Brigades vs. divisions vs. raw numbers; preferences, opinions?

Brigades: Too much micromanagement, although usage for smaller units like artillery brigades or perhaps for today's military would be acceptable.

Divisions: Probably the best thing to work with, but depending on the timeframe, it may be too big. Example: You don't lose 10 divisions in one month unless you epically screwed up or are in a huge front like the OTL WW2 Eastern Front.

Numbers: Too specific and a mess to keep track of. However, you could list this as a general indicator of men in a nation. Also could be of use in ancient history NESes.

The best model truly depends on the timeframe.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Brigades: Too much micromanagement, although usage for smaller units like artillery brigades or perhaps for today's military would be acceptable.

Divisions: Probably the best thing to work with, but depending on the timeframe, it may be too big. Example: You don't lose 10 divisions in one month unless you epically screwed up or are in a huge front like the OTL WW2 Eastern Front.

Numbers: Too specific and a mess to keep track of. However, you could list this as a general indicator of men in a nation. Also could be of use in ancient history NESes.

The best model truly depends on the timeframe.

After 1800 divisions make sense; ideally, you would assign a score for full strength divions (say 10) and then reduce individual divisions by some amount to show partial losses. But that is quite a lot of work.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Well the timeframe is WW1-2; possibly to the Cold War. The trouble with divisions is the huge casualty rates they imply. Well I'll ask this since I notice it in other NESes.

What about divisions with some as brigades? i.e. artillery brigades with infantry divisions.

 

[bombshoo]

Well the timeframe is WW1-2; possibly to the Cold War. The trouble with divisions is the huge casualty rates they imply. Well I'll ask this since I notice it in other NESes.

What about divisions with some as brigades? i.e. artillery brigades with infantry divisions.

This usually seems to work out fine. Also, since its WWI-WWII time frame I should probably also mention when it comes to air forces and navies, I tend to think smaller units of organization works better.

 

[Supermath]

I'm personally going to use Infantry Regiments, Calvary Squadrons, and Artillery Batteries, all of which will be arbitrary. Frankly, I feel like divisions are too big, and numbers are too unwieldy. Plus, I have an excuse if they go to ridiculous numbers.

In a somewhat related note, is there anyone who would be willing to help me come up with stats for 1861? Basically, it will be similar to Das' ruleset, though the numbers will be somewhat bigger.

 

[Shadowbound]

The trouble with divisions is the huge casualty rates they imply.

Over four years of war in just the Western Front, the Allies had approximately 8,000,000 casualties. While about 3/4s of these were just wounded, that's still 800 divisions on paper. This isn't counting German or Russian casualties, or Allied casualties anywhere else (MidEast, Italy). For a WW1 setting, divisions might be too small.

 

[Symphony D.]

Retroactive deletion.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Two good points, Divisions it shall be then.

 

[sp1023]

How many are legions?

 

[BananaLee]

You do realise typing "legion" in Wikipedia or Google will solve your problem right?

 

[Dachs]

How many are legions?

Depends on the time period and,

You do realise typing "legion" in Wikipedia or Google will solve your problem right?

this.

 

[sp1023]

No, I meant how many NESes have used legions.

I think its like 5000 men.