Your Favorite IOT Type....

[mythmonster2]

I enjoy Basic ones. If I want to go more complex, I'll play a NES.

 

[GamezRule]

Someone from the NES forum would have a heart attack from hearing you compare NESes to IOTs.

*keels over*

 

[Double A]

Dibs on his stuff.

 

[Optical]

Someone from the NES forum would have a heart attack from hearing you compare NESes to IOTs.

I'm in the NES forum a bit now, actually

But yeah, I can see where you're coming from. My main point is that I&B is so complex it's kind of the midway point between IOT and NES. Which IMO, after beginning to play in a couple of NESes, is definitely a good thing

 

[Sonereal]

My own thoughts on the five categories.

Mini-IOTs: very simple and very straightforward, often little more than a map. Players freely create their own fantasy countries and generally do whatever.

According to Tambien, these are incredibly easy to GM which means they should probably be faster than the following since updates take shorter. Unless you're heavily into nation-building, then you may get bored fast because of the incredibly simplistic battle system (only can attack 5 territories at a time). So yeah, great for roleplaying nation-building.

Examples

Mini-IOT Eastern Asia by Tambien
Mini-IOT Terranova by Tambien

Basic: a map and a few rules, mostly regarding combat. The original IOT by Taniciusfox is an example of this.

I don't really see the difference between this and Mini-IOT: East Asia really. I don't even think there's an active example of one of these fitting this description except the two running Mini-IOTs.

Detailed: a bit more complex, with the addition of rules governing diplomacy, income, trade, espionage, events and special projects. These often have extensive backstory, include NPCs and a more complicated combat system. Examples include Sonereal's Revolution IOT, Thorvald's IOTIV, TK's IOTVI.

Unlike Mini->Basic, the jump from Basic to Detailed is distinct. Many IOTs that are running, including even SimpleIOT, falls into this category.

SonIOT falls into here though, it'd probably end up falling into Complex around the Renaissance.

Complex: yet more complicated, comparable to some of the simpler NESes or lazyNESes. Examples include Imperium Universalis, Sons of Mars, and the ill-fated "community" IOTV.

I think Fox owns this category.

Super-IOTs: these are the largest and most complex IOTs. Iron and Blood is in this category. Look for large number of players, a very long game thread, a detailed game world and extensive roleplaying, multiple very large social groups, and perhaps an off-site wiki dedicated to the game.

Iron and Blood is probably the only one that falls into this category. Before Mini-IOT and Iron and Blood, only the mid-three tiers really existed. Then again, at what point does an IOT become a LazyNES?

 

[Double A]

I don't really see the difference between this and Mini-IOT: East Asia really. I don't even think there's an active example of one of these fitting this description except the two running Mini-IOTs.

What about Thorvald's game?

 

[Sonereal]

To be fair, I'm completely confused as to how IOTIV plays out.

 

[Tee Kay]

IOTIV Aftermath is mainly story-driven ie the game flows according to what people post. It doesn't have many hard rules but I'd put it in the Detailed category due to the detailed nature of the backstory and the sheer number of NPCs.

 

[mythmonster2]

I don't really see the difference between this and Mini-IOT: East Asia really. I don't even think there's an active example of one of these fitting this description except the two running Mini-IOTs.

I felt that Simple IOT is an example of a Basic IOT.

 

[DroopyTofu]

Generally I like the basic ones where there's not much for the player to keep up with. But Thor's IOT and Iron and Blood have been the two most fun one's I've ever played. So I'm torn between voting Simple and Iron and Blood...

 

[Sonereal]

I felt that Simple IOT is an example of a Basic IOT.

If a Basic IOT, at it's heart, is just a map with combat rules slapped on with it, then your technology and colonies kinda bump you up to Detailed.

 

[Omega124]

The best was IOT IV. Simple, yet fun!

 

[Tani Coyote]

I think Fox owns this category.

Some level of complexity does cut down on powergaming - you have to earn your "largest economy" status!

Though having IOTs where people are more spread out in stats, more willing to take on more/less of a challenge, would be a good idea... a lot more realistic than equal starts as well.

What I need to do, is find some way to simulate most of the IOT through a game, but not so much it'd make more sense to just play multiplayer.

The best was IOT IV. Simple, yet fun!

Yeah, hard to deny. Joecoolyo's antagonist roleplaying probably helped considerably in this regard.

 

[Double A]

Some level of complexity does cut down on powergaming - you have to earn your "largest economy" status!

I tried that in one of your games once. Then Mary Sue blew my fun up.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Mayhaps I was a bit carried away in Imperia Mobiana's Sonicness. At the very least such loopholes are now addressed!

I do like IOT IV MkII's map style however, a bunch of states of varying power. Lots of flexibility(choose your size based on difficulty preferences) and also a bit of an emphasis on soft power; nobody's strong enough to dominate the world alone.

Though, I am in favor of alliance bans, real or virtual. A virtual ban means bad things happen to those who spam alliances. Makes sure nobody can dominate the world.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

You know, I am thinking that my favourite type will be one where the Game Master can commit to making frequent and regular updates, so as to keep the interest of the players.

A good IOT will also be:
a) An IOT where the Game Master is good at responding to questions instead of ignoring messages (be they private or in the thread)
AND
b) An IOT where the Game Master rules fairly and consistently
AND
c) An IOT where the Game Master explains the details of what was done, be they decisions that were made or be they an explanation of what happened in terms of attacks, claims, and other actions that can be performed by players, so that everyone can have a handle of what went on in the world beyond their own little empire

In my opinion, the type of IOT itself will matter far less than the above points.

 

[Double A]

d) An IOT where the GM doesn't (ab)use loopholes so he can win with his Mary Sue NPC faction.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Wrt frequent updates, that is where complexity often meets its end. Most complex rule systems are just hard to do, as we work with pretty much pencil and paper. So, complex ones fall apart barring incredible GM time or delegation of responsibility.

For example, every recent game, I've had to calculate:

-Events for flavor
-Income for spending
-Revolt risk for deterrence

As well as make sure I get each and every order right. It all adds up.

 

[Double A]

If a game is complicated, then updates should have more stuff happen. Not like more work, but more XPs/money for everyone. Updates take twice as long as normal games? Double income.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

As well as make sure I get each and every order right.

Well that comment leads to another point:
e) An IOT where the Game Master is fully willing to take the time to edit maps and messages to correct mistakes that the players point out. It's far better to have a Game Master that is willing to make corrections than to have one who believes that they are incapable of making mistakes and tries so hard to get it right "the first time" that when the inevitable mistakes happen, they refuse to admit them or correct them