While We Wait: The Next Generation

[Abaddon]

Anyone else think someone will ever achieve the highest size rating in Abaddon/slozenger's NES? It seems really high. I'm going to need a lot of magic users to pull that off.

I think you will see an acceleration in growth, im quite prepared to allow this. Not sure if you will reach the max size though.. Vassals will be a more efficient way of generating income.

Lol. I can see an obvious "broken" part of my rules.. wonder how long it will take for someone to try an exploit it.

 

[Angst]

Woa, something to check out and break!

You realize you should change it prematurely, right?

 

[Abaddon]

Not at all! Let someone run away with it first, or attempt to at least!

 

[Ekolite]

Are there definitions of the types of NESes according to the four-way theory?

I'm not sure, but I think the upcoming EkoNES will be in a genre of its own, which is interesting. It's a bit of a hybrid I think. Of course, you could claim the genre to be ''FFHNES'' but I don't think that's appropriate considering each of the FFHNESes so far have been very different in terms of game play.

 

[Dreadnought]

Update is up. Begin planning, and plan comprehensibly. Just a tip.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Are there definitions of the types of NESes according to the four-way theory?

I'm not sure, but I think the upcoming EkoNES will be in a genre of its own, which is interesting. It's a bit of a hybrid I think. Of course, you could claim the genre to be ''FFHNES'' but I don't think that's appropriate considering each of the FFHNESes so far have been very different in terms of game play.

I think that every NES can be classified according to the four-way theory. Then again, I may be a bit biased on that account.

An Arcader NES lets the players do pretty much anything with their entity, only requiring mod arbitration when players come into conflict. An ideal Boardgamer NES runs like clockwork, only requiring the mod to punch in numbers to the formulas he's already designed. A Simulationist NES has events that follow logically from each other in the context of the game's universe, as the mod sees it. A Storyist NES is a collaborative effort by the players and the moderator to tell stories. These are the furthest extremes of each style, but every NES can be classified on these axes.

Certainly, there are other ways to classify a NES. There are fantasy NESes, Sci-Fi NESes, modern NESes, ancient NESes, character NESes, and as many other types as can be conceived.

The important point here is that none of the four styles are specific to a particular NES theme. Generalizations like "Simulationist NESes are realistic" and "Fresh starts are Arcader-style" are simply untrue. To take the two NESes I'm currently participating in as examples, Pre-ChaNES is Simulationist, but not at all reaslitic. In reality, humanity will not be colonizing the stars by 2100, faster-than-light travel will almost certainly not discovered, and giant humanoid mecha aren't a particularly effective vehicle design. However, in the ChaNES universe, the laws of reality are different than the laws we're familiar with, and events follow logically from them.

On the other hand, from what little we've played through so far, Dr.NES looks to tend more Arcader-Storyist. To answer your question, flyingchicken, I suppose I could be considered a centrist, in the sense that I can (and do) enjoy some types of NES across the board. I don't like most nationbuilding Arcader NESes because interaction between players ends up limited to expansion wars and contests to see who can find the most plausible excuse to have way more Economic Points than they'd ever need. However, I can fully appreciate a setting which is completely illogical while managing to be extremely awesome (case in point: 4 Resident Evil). I even intend to host a light, simple, fast-updating game in the interim between Pre-ChaNES and the main ChaNES whose main constraint is not realism, but coolness. We'll see how that works out.

 

[Ekolite]

Hmmm... Well I don't think it fits into any of those categories really. Or maybe you could say it's ''Centrist'' as it has some aspects of each.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Hmmm... Well I don't think it fits into any of those categories really.

That's because those are the extremes of the four styles. Every way of running a NES can be described as some combination or dilution of those ideals. I have yet to see a counterexample. From your Pre-NES thread, yours looks sort of Boardgamer-Arcader in its style, though we'll have to see how the NES runs to be sure of it.

 

[Terrance888]

Heh... What if I changed all my villages except 2 into totems and flood-summon Imps...

OMG I found the broken part! Serve up the gore please!

 

[Daftpanzer]

I didn't intend to start a discussion of Symphony D.'s character, just wondered about the status of one of the contributors to the community

The Grand Space Hamster fleet is now on stand-down orders following conformation that Abaddon has been released from prison! Let this mark the end of the NESertronian wars as we move forward to a new age of peace and happiness. [/randomtransformersthemoviereference]

Furthermore I venture that attempting to classify NESer behaviour and NESing mechanics should not be persued soley for the sake of classification, rather it should only be persued with the aim of enriching future NESing scenarios. Indeed.

 

[Shadowbound]

I have yet to see any of this discussion about the philosophy of NESing yield practical benefits.

 

[Adrogans]

I agree with Shadow on this. Mainly because I adapt to the NES I am in more than I expect the NES to adapt to me.

 

[bombshoo]

I agree with Shadow on this. Mainly because I adapt to the NES I am in more than I expect the NES to adapt to me.

Ditto.

Edit: But I suppose this would make us the "centrist" on the little graph.

 

[North King]

I believe the "philosophizing" on NESing is no more than dangerous ideology-building, an exercise in dividing us rather than utilizing the full spectrum of knowledge. I'm not too slow-witted to understand a formula, nor too much of a philistine to like a good story, nor too much of a perfectionist to appreciate simplicity, nor too much of a humorless curmudgeon to enjoy a bit of fun now and then. NESes should aim to blend all of the elements into a mixture which will be entertaining to all, not to advertise to specific parts of a market that our minds have conjured up.

 

[Dreadnought]

How long did you take to write that? Just kidding,

I agree with the above though.

 

[North King]

Roughly three minutes. I'm a fast typer.

 

[Kentharu]

NK speaks the truth.

 

[Chandrasekhar]

Furthermore I venture that attempting to classify NESer behaviour and NESing mechanics should not be persued soley for the sake of classification, rather it should only be persued with the aim of enriching future NESing scenarios. Indeed.

I don't see a difference between the two. Classification promotes self-awareness and streamlines the whole process. To take an example, suppose I'm not really a fan of Amon's moderating style. I don't think it's lazy or incompetent, but it just doesn't fulfill the things I want from NESing. Now, the reason for this doesn't have anything to do with Amon himself - it has to do with the traits of the NESes he hosts. Many other moderators also host NESes with these traits. Rather than call such NESes "Amon-style" or some other ambiguous title, why not lump the correlated traits together under a name that's understood by everyone? At the very least, it aids discussion, which itself aids development.

I believe the "philosophizing" on NESing is no more than dangerous ideology-building, an exercise in dividing us rather than utilizing the full spectrum of knowledge. I'm not too slow-witted to understand a formula, nor too much of a philistine to like a good story, nor too much of a perfectionist to appreciate simplicity, nor too much of a humorless curmudgeon to enjoy a bit of fun now and then.

And by implication, those of us that prefer a particular style are philistines or curmudgeons or whatever. Generous of you to say so.

NESes should aim to blend all of the elements into a mixture which will be entertaining to all, not to advertise to specific parts of a market that our minds have conjured up.

I'm tempted to linger on the fact that you're just advocating centrism, not refuting the system itself, but I'm more concerned about the fact that you seem to think that the only good NES is one which contains all aspects. Do you really think that a NES that strays too far to one extreme or another is objectively bad, regardless of all other factors? Maybe you wouldn't enjoy it, but what if other people do?

I'm also not sure what you're trying to get at by saying that the market is merely "conjured up" by our minds. This is NESing. Nothing we do has a reflection on the real world. We're just conjuring stuff up with our minds like crazy, here. If anything here is real, though, it's the aspects of the members of the community. Abaddon's NESing preferences and Symphony D.'s are notably different from each other, and similar to others. Those differences and similarities can be predictively charted, and the only arguments I've seen against doing so are that it's a waste of NESing time, and that it divides the community. To the first, I respond that I'll use my time however I please, and to the second, I respond that the divides already objectively exist, and this only serves to classify them - and furthermore, that disagreement on the validity of the system is itself another division. Funny how that works, isn't it?

 

[North King]

And by implication, those of us that prefer a particular style are philistines or curmudgeons or whatever. Generous of you to say so.

I do aim to maim.

I'm tempted to linger on the fact that you're just advocating centrism, not refuting the system itself, but I'm more concerned about the fact that you seem to think that the only good NES is one which contains all aspects. Do you really think that a NES that strays too far to one extreme or another is objectively bad, regardless of all other factors? Maybe you wouldn't enjoy it, but what if other people do?

No, I happen to enjoy NESes at the extremes, too, because your system is broken. I'm sorry. I realize you worked hard on it and blah blah blah and you tried to make it reflect reality, but truth is that I simply do not fit and will not fit into your system. Maybe I'm an outlier. Maybe I'm one out of a forum. But I can enjoy any kind of NES, and will continue to do so no matter what you do with your little classification scheme. kthxbai

I'm also not sure what you're trying to get at by saying that the market is merely "conjured up" by our minds. This is NESing. Nothing we do has a reflection on the real world. We're just conjuring stuff up with our minds like crazy, here. If anything here is real, though, it's the aspects of the members of the community. Abaddon's NESing preferences and Symphony D.'s are notably different from each other, and similar to others. Those differences and similarities can be predictively charted, and the only arguments I've seen against doing so are that it's a waste of NESing time, and that it divides the community. To the first, I respond that I'll use my time however I please, and to the second, I respond that the divides already objectively exist, and this only serves to classify them - and furthermore, that disagreement on the validity of the system is itself another division. Funny how that works, isn't it?

What I'm getting at is that the divide between Abaddon and Symphony's preferences should not be reinforced by a silly classification scheme that will discourage/encourage the usage of certain elements in their rules or their moderating styles. "Oh, that's trending towards simulationism," or "Oh no, you're running an arcader NES." NESes should be judged on their own merits, on a case by case basis, not on what "school" they inherit.

I'll be damned if I let myself be pigeonholed by the politicization of NESing. You can classify away -- you'll just lose all my respect (for whatever that's worth), and my attention (probably even less important).

 

[Dreadnought]

No need to be vicious gentlemen. This is a discussion, not a sparring match.