While We Wait: The Next Generation

[flyingchicken]

They have too many numbers.

My opinion is that a most successful Simulationist game can only be run with a flexible ruleset (not a number barrage like carmen's for example), with an absolutely powerful moderator, who is well-read in and can synthesize the fields of military, history, geography, and economics (for the time period he or she is modding) at the very least. The NESing counterpart of an enlightened despot, if you will!

 

[Azale]

Yea, please refrain from using "these people" to describe the whole lot of us. Thanks.

Also, those mods you referred to never really pretended to be anything but what they are. I wretched at the CrezthNES map you posted, but there is a reason why people are forced to flock to those NES' and why mods feel empowered to run them. They used to think twice, because there was a DasNES or a NNES (for example) to make them look silly. Now they are the only show in town because they are the only show in town that ever updates.

They only have success now because people like you symphony, and people that have tried simulationist-esque games in NESings recent history have failed. What sufficed in the past had to be built upon (which is understandable), but there was never any final fruition to all the talk and the big conversations of great intellectual minds. People get impatient, seems normal to me. Not all of them are annoying 14 year olds with a hardon for ***** lingo and INVADING 4 TEH LULZ.

Of course, someone tries to bring a game with some historical depth and a bit of a twist...and he is jumped on. In the name of realism and some felt slight towards half a planet's culture. I think BirdJaguar of all people understands the cultural complexities of the old world of the Western Hemisphere.

Right now NESing is the factionalism equivalent of the bloody Soviet Union and it's ridiculous. We just need more NES' people, there is no deep seeded problem.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Moderator Action: Let's keep it about the games and not about the people. Even if we are passionate about this place and what we do, civility is important.

One of the nice things about modding a game is that you can make the game anyway you like. You can build it in your image and fill it with what you want to see. You get to manage its success or failure. Each of you who have contributed to this discussion, as well as, all the other NESing discussions, are individuals who think and differently and who imagine NESing and the perfect game differently. While many of the separate efforts fail, a lot succeed for their players and together they build a stronger community and we all get better. Mostly, I think we are here to have fun and be challenged.

 

[Terrance888]

I edited the Rules for Great War II.

You can spend 1 gold for:
10K Men (1 Military Group)
2 Naval Groups (1 Military Group)
80 Artillary Pieces (2 Military Groups)
Specification
Training/Experiance
Growth Points
Technology Research
Project Building
Upkeep
Logistics: Very simple

No Stability: too hard to put in.

Specification can be made up but more advanced types must have a technology or another less advanced specification.

Training/Quality is always
Conscript (Twice as many when buying at Conscript)- Regular- Respected- Admired- Elite

Upkeep is simply:
1 Gold per 5 Military units more than number of Cities times 5+5.

Logistics:
All campaigns need at least 1 gold! Defence needs less and can supply more.

Projects:
You get +1 build per turn and must pay 1 upkeep until finished. You can speed it up for 2 gold per 1 turn faster.

Technology:
You pay 1 gold writer's fee and then we tell you first sight. Then you pay 1 upkeep for 1 science research per turn. You can sepped it up for 2 gold per 1 turn faster.

Growthpoints: Capturing land give you growthpoints in the way of people. Invested money is needed to finally push it into a city stage as well as invested in infranstructure.

Simple right? Who wants to joing this? Should I get a poll or post in the New Neses in delvelopment or whatever because no one uses that anymore lately.

 

[Oruc]

I didn't see that wonderful transformation of him from a nitpicking critic to a silent semi-retired NESer,

Thats a bit harsh isnt it?

I wretched at the CrezthNES map you posted,

Whats wrong with it? All fresh starts used to look like that.

 

[Azale]

Whats wrong with it? All fresh starts used to look like that.

The Earth was not entirely covered by 1200 BC in even the oldest fresh starts

 

[Abaddon]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=311078
MORE PM's!

 

[Crezth]

The Earth was not entirely covered by 1200 BC in even the oldest fresh starts

Hey, they still could have colonized Siberia, by golly!

It's really disappointing because I was under the assumption that my NES (CrezNES) was 100% realistic. How foolish I was!

 

[Masada]

Basically, I am yet again compelled to agree with Symphony on people's reading comprehension skills around here, seeing as he has denied trying to "transform the NESing community into a Simulationists' Paradise" all too many times by now.

The most egregious cases are when it isn't the reading comprehension that fails. That happens much to often.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Hey, they still could have colonized Siberia, by golly!

It's really disappointing because I was under the assumption that my NES (CrezNES) was 100% realistic. How foolish I was!

Shame on you for not knowing better!

 

[Angst]

That's not what I said at all, though. Basically, I am yet again compelled to agree with Symphony on people's reading comprehension skills around here, seeing as he has denied trying to "transform the NESing community into a Simulationists' Paradise" all too many times by now.

Just answering to this; I never read him say that.

-----

Charles Li, I just read your ruleset... It seems reasonable, but the upkeep modifier is quite difficult to work with from what I understand. Every time a new unit is built, or a city is conquered, you'll have to recalculate it with a long function.

Alternately, you might drop upkeep altogether, and instead simply reasoning with whenever players train too many soldiers (Compared to their economical strength ofc), and shoving penalties down their throats.

Otherwise, you could add a manpower stat that showed how many soldiers the nation could carry without suffering from overspending.

 

[Crezth]

Otherwise, you could add a manpower stat that showed how many soldiers the nation could carry without suffering from overspending.

In my opinion this is the best way to go about that. EQ demonstrates in his NES that such a system easily accommodates mobilization as well.

However, by that same token, mobilization only doubles the amount of manpower on hand, so if you built many soldiers before you mobilized (say, pre-war military buildup) you won't be on par with someone who mobilizes later. Allow me to demonstrate using math.

Say two nations have 600 manpower sitting around. One of them decides to build 300 manpower worth of soldiers, and the other doesn't. Then they go to war.

The nation which built-up first mobilizes and gets 600 manpower (an addition of +300). The nation which didn't mobilizes and gets 1200 manpower (an addition of +600). So the nation with foresight ends up with the 300 soldiers plus the 600 manpower's worth for a total of 900; the other, 1200 soldiers from the manpower pool. Ultimately prescience is damaging using this system.

So I suggest if you use the EQ manpower stat re-tooling it so manpower adds a set, pre-determined pool of manpower (which increases alongside the regular pool). Of course this may be more work.

reasonable explanation

OK, I'm clear now. Thanks for your time.

 

[Oruc]

The Earth was not entirely covered by 1200 BC in even the oldest fresh starts

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=536202&postcount=536

If RTOR 2 had a player in Australia and South America they would be almost the same. Crezth nes was just old fashioned

 

[das]

Just answering to this; I never read him say that.

It came up in the DOCTRINE: Simulationism discussion and (if I recall correctly) in some of the previous WWWs. Those little arguments would not be nearly as annoying if they weren't so back-and-forth.

 

[Azale]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=536202&postcount=536

If RTOR 2 had a player in Australia and South America they would be almost the same. Crezth nes was just old fashioned

Ok, so if two more continents were filled up, RTOR2 would be ALMOST the same as CrezthNES1?

 

[Masada]

Symphony's 'glorified risk' comment has got me thinking and he's yet again right on the money. The only real difference between 'glorified risk' games and risk itself is economic growth and you could simulate that with houses and hotels from monopoly and a die roll for each different section of the board. I know some people prefer to have minimal rules to have the NES, 'fun', 'flexible' and 'with significant freedom of movement for the players', that's fine. But what have do you use that freedom for? Do you write stories with an eye to pulling of some grand and totally implausible plot? Of course not. Do you invest in the NES beyond 1 minute orders, stories prodded out by the mod and the occasional flame war in the thread - by the same group of people who always indulge in that kind of behaviour. When was the last major innovation in these NESs which used their much touted player freedom? A major innovation does not include a reforming of the fundamentals here "EC/Banked/Growth changed to whatever EC/Growth/Banked" but something fundamentally new and unexplored up until that point.

It would seem to me that the freedom that NESing affords you in being able to come up with elegant plots and complex schemes are never used in 'glorified risk' games, we play them as board games and poor ones at that. We simply are not invested in them sufficiently to care about using that freedom. It's possible to say that many of the NESers who play these games if anything prefer a rigid framework of rules, one that is not swayed by the player beyond "invade with 5 armies lulz". It's amusing that the more complex rulesets provide more player freedom by giving a complex and nuanced structural framework to work in. In a 'glorified risk' game a mod would refuse to grant a player a substantial bonus in say the military no matter how much you used your 'freedom' in an argument simply because the effect would be far greater since your only looking at a small number of variables (more than likely one number of armies vs. number of armies). Whilst in a Simulationist game and most NESs which require some degree of nuanced player input you can make a reasoned argument get those extra troops or what have you and not break the game irretrievably because simple numerical strength is not the sole determinant of success or failure.

So ask yourself honestly, are you satisfied with something that allegedly has so much freedom and never makes use of it?

Disclaimer: This was written at ungodly hour.

 

[Thlayli]

If it is of interest or consolation to anyone, upcoming collaborations will attempt to accurately simulate local economies on the small scale.

Simultaneously, they may involve more Storyist/Immersionist approaches to sociopolitical happenings.

Obviously, details will come in due time.

 

[Crezth]

Ok, so if two more continents were filled up, RTOR2 would be ALMOST the same as CrezthNES1?

In all fairness I had many more players than RTOR2.

 

[Oruc]

Ok, so if two more continents were filled up, RTOR2 would be ALMOST the same as CrezthNES1?

Because there weren't any players in South America (at least from the start) or Australia.
Seriously imagine what South America and Australia would look like if they had a player in them at that point in RTOR2 that had been in the nes from the start.

 

[Oruc]

So ask yourself honestly, are you satisfied with something that allegedly has so much freedom and never makes use of it?

Yes ..,..,..,