| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Continuation | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Apr 2 2010, 01:23 PM (531 Views) | |
| Sedulius | Apr 2 2010, 01:23 PM Post #1 |
|
Field Marshal
|
I think this is more or less dead. It died in infancy. The overall system was not fleshed out, and the failure to complete a war system was the death blow. I think there needs to be a count of members that still want to continue this world. I do. I think that to continue it that major overhauls and simplifications have to be done to the system. This is because 1.) the longer it takes to make a system the more interest is lost in it, and 2.) most players do not have the time for a complex system. I think we can keep the algorithm for nation strength. This is a fairer system than the normal game and it gets rid of the need for a nationstate account. We could also feasibly keep time flow and exploration systems in place. However, I think in order to move forward the war system will have to be entirely scrapped, because it is not near complete and it is too complex to keep the game going. I think we'll just have to settle for good ol' RP, as through RP we can move forward easily enough. |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Apr 2 2010, 02:20 PM Post #2 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
I don't think I am interested in picking this back up; I would be interested in trying to revive the original NS2 RP, however. |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Apr 2 2010, 02:53 PM Post #3 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
I'd want to keep playing. I've tried to keep it going. Abnar was redoing the war system, so we really couldn't continue with it. The only one who fully understood the ins and outs of the system is Huesca, who told us he was leaving but it appears he still hasn't. One of the things I like the most of all of this, is the fact that your actions have consequences. Wars can be declared without both agreeing to it. For simplification, I think we should adopt a combination Risk and DnD type rules. Give every unit an armor class, only three can attack and two defend at a time, and so on. That's essentially what we have, but all these bonuses get confusing. I say we remove the bonuses and instead roll the dice with +0 for infantry, +1 for cavalry charges and +0 otherwise, and +1 for ranged. It needs to be discussed, but no more than a handful are talking. |
![]() |
|
| Draxis | Apr 2 2010, 04:09 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Captain
|
Personally I was a fan of TC's original where I got to play as Persia. Namely because it was a really cool idea that TC had which was scrapped too early because everyone saw that NS2 existed and hopped on that bandwagon. |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Apr 2 2010, 06:16 PM Post #5 |
|
Field Marshal
|
I think that would still be too complex. If we continue trying to make a war system, I believe this will be unsalvageable. NS1 is barely moving as it is, but the reason it continues to move is the ease of its system. It can be dropped and picked back up at any time. A story here and a story there allow for constant, even if slow, flow. A complex war system needs commitment and attention that we don't have. |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Apr 2 2010, 06:48 PM Post #6 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
This version of NS2 was launched to use Huesca's system. Roleplaying the wars isn't exactly the best way to resolve conflicts. We could at least drop back to a Risk system with maybe a bonus here or there; all the mods would have to do is throw dice for people. Not having the results planned out ahead of time adds to the allure of NS2 IMO. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 11 2010, 04:28 PM Post #7 |
|
Deleted User
|
We need to get something going for this, I really miss NS2 :sad: |
|
|
| Telosan | Apr 12 2010, 02:00 PM Post #8 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
Next week I should have more time and will try to put together a proposal and set up a test run for it. |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Apr 18 2010, 05:46 PM Post #9 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
Alright, so here's my proposal. Does everyone remember the original test run Huesca moderated for Atticus and me? The battle essentially took place in a single location, rather than a full region. I think we should change wars to single battles, because, back then, many wars were resolved in only a small handful of battles. If you remember, the Brunel War Games took place in a city and the surrounding area. We should make wars a series of individual battles, with either side retreating, surrendering, or being annihilated. This is intended to solve the problem of having 30 units in one place and trying to determine which bonuses go where, since everything is everywhere. Now, only ONE unit will occupy a single space, but allied units can move through each other. ~~~~~ Siegeworks should be reduced to a generic artillery unit and a generic battering ram unit. That should lessen the complication. Naval units should be changed to a transport unit, a light warship, a heavy warship, and a combo warship-transport. Now for the units, I think the units should be reduced to a basic infantry unit:a soldier that varies by country (keep reading), a ranged unit (rather than arquebusiers, crossbowmen, or archers), and two cavalry units: ranged and melee (rather than all the others on Huesca's list). The specifics of these generic units, infantry, ranged, and ranged/melee cavalry, are entirely up to the person they belong to. ~~~~~ The last statement is the most interesting here. You can chose how your infantry are armed, as posted in your nation description's thread, and it will affect how they fight. It will be a rock-paper-scissors method, with swords beating polearms, polearms beating axes, and axes beating swords, or some variation like this. The same will apply to the other categories, ranged and cavalry. I have not *entirely* determined how everything will work together, however. ~~~~~ Here, I'm implementing a little Dungeons and Dragons. Each unit will have an AC (Armor Class for you non-DnD people) based on the armor you have them wearing in your nations description page. Armor will be divided in three categories: light (chainmail, archer's armor), heavy (plate, knight's armor) and no armor (clothing, bare, etc). If your units have a shield, the type of shield will factor in to your AC as well, similar to DnD rules. Each unit always has a basic AC, regardless of armor. ~~~~~ Now, combat. It should work simply, like a DnD combat round. Okay, that's not really simple... Anyway, combat between individual units happens simultaneously. The one doesn't wait to get hit while the other swings. This means that it is possible for both units engaging in combat can die at the same time. Your attack/defense roll will be affected by a variety of factors. When attacking, we will be looking at the attacker's weapon and the defender's AC. The attacking unit will roll a 20 sided die, which will then be modified by the following factors: Your weapon, the defending unit's type (i.e. cavalry, archer, polearm-wielder), and any flanking units (friendly or not). When defending, we will be looking at the defender's AC and the attacker's weapon. The defending unit will roll a 20 sided die, which will then be modified by the following factors: The attacker's weapon, the attacker's unit type, and any flanking units. ~~~~~ Naval engagements are different. They will have "health bars". You have a range, the number of hexes you can shoot. The defending unit DOES NOT ROLL when being fired on. All ships will have a basic AC that can only be modified once, if at all, when describing your armies in your nation descriptions thread. When posting your military, you will have one point that you can spend in one of the following four categories: speed, health, attack, and damage. If you spend it on Speed, all your ships will go +1 or 2 (haven't decided yet) hexes faster than usual. Health, you get +1, 2, or 3 (again, not decided) to your total Health for all your ships. Attack, you get +1 or 2 (not decided!) to your attack rolls. Damage, you do +1 or 2 (need I say it?) damage when you hit. You CANNOT change this once you have made you military and is UNIFORM to your entire navy. An example naval engagement: A Spanish Heavy Warship attacks a Moorish Light Warship. Spanish Roll: 14 + 1 (All spanish ships have +1 attack) Moorish Warship's AC is 14. Spanish ship hits. Heavy Warship Damage: 2 Moorish ship's health: 3 Still alive. Also, in naval engagements, when two opposing ships enter the same space, they may board each other. When this happens, the crew of each ship becomes a single Infantry unit, equipped with that country's standard weapon and no armor. The winning person then CAPTURES the losing the ship. At the end of the battle, you may either "sell the ships" and take their value in IC and add it to your total IC or "add it to your fleet". If you choose to add it to your fleet, it becomes identical to the equivalent ship in your fleet. Hopefully that makes sense... ~~~~~ CHARTS!!!! Maybe now it will make sense. Infantry Ranged Units Cavalry WEAPONS! Naval Units ~~~~~ What do you think? I'd like to apologize in advance for how confusing it is. I think it'll be MUCH easier to understand once we go through a test run. Speaking of which, I need 2 volunteers. We'll do a test run and I'll report exactly what I did as the moderator at the end of each turn so everyone knows how it works. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 18 2010, 07:18 PM Post #10 |
|
Deleted User
|
I'll do it. Though my only problem is the cap on the archers and the battles for the small region. |
|
|
| Telosan | Apr 18 2010, 07:43 PM Post #11 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
If you notice, the archers move the same speed as the infantry, so it's conceivable that someone could use an army of solely archers and just keep shooting and moving until they win. The cap prevents that. The smaller region makes the mapmaker's (Me) job easier by having a smaller thing to work with. It also adds realism because Renaissance armies didn't wage war over dozen mile long fronts that stretched across a country. The armies found each other, hacked one another to pieces, and the guy with more flesh left on his body won the region until someone else decided to give it a shot. So, if I (Venice) went to war with RD (Aragon) over the region of Morea, the war would probably span 3 engagements before one side was bloodied enough to call it quits. Anyway, I need another volunteer. I also want to test a naval engagement, so if I could have volunteers for that as well, we can do that at the same time and get the test run out of the way. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 18 2010, 09:52 PM Post #12 |
|
Deleted User
|
Yes, but that's why we had the bonuses, so you would counter the archers with cavalry. I still say we keep the bonuses. |
|
|
| Telosan | Apr 20 2010, 10:15 PM Post #13 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
Need another volunteer and we can move this along. NH! You're so interested in your siege of Tripoli being completed, so how about you help us get this trial done? |
![]() |
|
| Sedulius | Jun 15 2010, 03:45 AM Post #14 |
|
Field Marshal
|
This has been down too long. I'm out. |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Jun 15 2010, 05:37 AM Post #15 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
You're one of the only ones that wants to participate. I'm hoping enough people come around during the summer that we can continue. |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Jun 15 2010, 08:21 AM Post #16 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
I will volunteer for the siege of Tripoli, what do I need to do to get this rolling?? |
![]() |
|
| Telosan | Jun 15 2010, 06:25 PM Post #17 |
![]()
The Foremost Intellectual Badass
|
Okay, here's my thought. We'll skip the Tunisian Crusade ahead a few chapters. It's now the Battle of Tripoli, winning faction wins the war. I need someone to be the people of Tripoli (can't remember who they are) and someone to represent the combined crusading forces. If more than one person wants to do the crusading forces, we'll divide them by faction, but I don't think we'll even be able to get the original two. This will be the test run for my system that I proposed. Afterwards, we'll take a poll to see how it went and continue from there. Good? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 15 2010, 06:47 PM Post #18 |
|
Deleted User
|
Sed, you never even bothered to help bring this forward. |
|
|
| New Harumf | Jun 16 2010, 08:51 AM Post #19 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
As my troups have already been deployed ((see earlier), way earlier), I am on the attacking side here! |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 16 2010, 03:24 PM Post #20 |
|
Deleted User
|
As always, I'm in. |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · 1452 General Discussion · Next Topic » |










11:29 AM Jul 13