Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

NationStates [[MAP]]

1,681 replies to this topic
Straznicy
  • Straznicy

    Laugh at your problems

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2008

#1531

Posted 16 April 2012 - 09:34 PM

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 20:48)
If we're going to have it based purely on role play and not on actual government spending, then I think we should have a few strict rules. Number one being no futuristic stuff, it just seems a bit too far fetched. Plus what about us nations that have steadily built up our defence spending in order to have powerful militaries, it's basically a big kick in the balls for us.

Common sense aids this. If a nation with high defence spending and a militaristic reputation warred with a nation less so, then it would be reasonable for both parties to agree who possesses the upper-hand.

The issue of technology levels is gonna be difficult to establish parameters for. Some nations are more 'serious' than others.

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1532

Posted 16 April 2012 - 09:36 PM

...those are elements of the game, though. Not only are they great, fun ways for a nation with little defense spending to defend itself, but again, they're part of the game.

Come on guys, admit it - I saved all your asses with the Anti-Shaffeyan aggression ray! tounge.gif

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1533

Posted 16 April 2012 - 09:52 PM

Yh yh you're a war hero for stopping that little brat raping any more babies. But maybe it's time to go in a different direction now, and change the rules/guidelines/unwritten agreements or whatever you wanna call it. You've had your fun, now its time to put away the make believe toys tounge.gif

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1534

Posted 16 April 2012 - 09:57 PM

...yeah, I'd much rather deal with socio-economic implications of copyright legislation in my island nation of 1.2 billion people.


...right?


Come on. I can't be the only one here. you're the one who suffered through a "zombie outbreak," after all. tounge.gif

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1535

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:06 PM

Absurdity is great fun, buuuut when we've got stubborn nations (looking at you Shaffey) embroiled in conflict, we need some reality to ground it or we'll just have godmodding (as the RPers call it "I've got a billion nukes" "I've got a billion and one" "shut up death star"). It's fine for satirical news headlines but since a few of us are playing realistically, it throws it off by having future tech.

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1536

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:09 PM

Hey man, don't joke around like that. Hudreds of our citizens had their brains eaten!

Yh I guess that was pushing the limits a bit, but it was an actual issue. I suppose a rule should be just because it's an issue that you receive, it doesn't mean you can just write it into the RP. It'd only be a matter of time before some crazy SOB blew up the moon otherwise. But I'm sure we could come to some sort of way of protecting countries that have low defense spending, without resorting to sci-fi extravagance.

Moth
  • Moth

    Sweet Roll Thief

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2006
  • Canada

#1537

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:12 PM

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 17:09)
It'd only be a matter of time before some crazy SOB blew up the moon otherwise.

Then we switch from an earth based to a solar system based system, I get dibs on Mars! Just like Cowboy Bebop!

QUOTE
But I'm sure we could come to some sort of way of protecting countries that have low defense spending, without resorting to sci-fi extravagance.

Why do we need to protect these countries? It's not my fault that they prefer welfare spending to military spending. If they need help, they should try to ally with someone else. And frankly I want to keep my space and moon based weapons...




fine the moon laser can go for RP proposes, but my space weapons stay.

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1538

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:24 PM Edited by GTA_stu, 16 April 2012 - 11:27 PM.

QUOTE (The General @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 23:12)
Why do we need to protect these countries? It's not my fault that they prefer welfare spending to military spending. If they need help, they should try to ally with someone else.

Well we don't want to make the game unfun for a large portion of the community now do we. It's about compromise and trying to find a suitable outcome for as many people as possible.

QUOTE
And frankly I want to keep my space and moon based weapons...
fine the moon laser can go for RP proposes, but my space weapons stay.


Put your nappy back on, and get those toys picked up that you threw out the crib! Compromise...

Moth
  • Moth

    Sweet Roll Thief

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2006
  • Canada

#1539

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:32 PM

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 18:24)
QUOTE (The General @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 23:12)
Why do we need to protect these countries? It's not my fault that they prefer welfare spending to military spending. If they need help, they should try to ally with someone else.

Well we don't want to make the game unfun for a large portion of the community now do we. It's about compromise and trying to find a suitable outcome for as many people as possible.

So what's stopping them from allying with each other? If they need help, they ask someone more powerful to help. This way it evens out, I have a "sh*tty" welfare and public transportation system, because I put my money towards the economy and the military.


It pretty much boils down to this

Military
Economy
Public Services

And you only get to pick two. You sacrifice one to better the other two.

ryuclan
  • ryuclan

    Maybe I'll Stay awhile

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2007

#1540

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:39 PM

This is, indeed, a pickle. Without some type of D&D type system implemented wars between nations are going to be drawn out and probably result in RL animosity. I've purposely made a few of my choices hoping that defense spending would increase and that if my little Island nation was attacked it would at least be a fight to remember.


El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1541

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:41 PM

We need a mixture. No absurdity, but not totally reliant on game stats. That way my military is quite small, but nuclear deterrents remain from the past and the budget for this year was totally blown on updating the Naval ICBM capability. There is a balance - then in real conflict we don't god mod but can ally, make tactical decisions etc.

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1542

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:42 PM

I see what you're saying General. But you have to recognise that we can't just make a really dramatic change like that which will adversely affect a number of nations in a huge way. I fear that if we make this change it will just play into war mongerers hands, and the RP that we've been tentatively building will go out the window and will be replaced by idiots just declaring war at will. It wouldn't be very fun if the region was just in a constant perpetual state of war, with very little else happening.

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1543

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:48 PM

I honestly don't think any of us have gone "too far," and I don't think anything that's allowed by the in-game issues should be disputed.

IE, nobody's tried to go for "God Mode" because none of us would have it, really.


I think this is a side argument altogether. War should be handled strictly with roleplay. If a side loses it should be because the player chooses to lose.

Moth
  • Moth

    Sweet Roll Thief

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2006
  • Canada

#1544

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:53 PM

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 18:42)
I fear that if we make this change it will just play into war mongerers hands, and the RP that we've been tentatively building will go out the window and will be replaced by idiots just declaring war at will. It wouldn't be very fun if the region was just in a constant perpetual state of war, with very little else happening.

But the thing is that hasn't happened yet. I doubt that it would, if someone is acting like an idiot, we either completely "destroy' their military in a RP sense or we kick them out of the region. The majority of the players here would not do that.

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1545

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:58 PM

Well space weaponry isn't god mode, but it is still a bit dodgy imo. I think it's best if the "top" weapon or technology available is just good ol' nuclear weapons. Makes things less complicated and keeps it simple. This isn't a dig at you Otter, but automated fleets and cyborg armies is also a bit far. We should have a cap on technology or weapons, and I see nukes as being that cap. The thing about space weaponry is it's a bit far fetched in terms of role play, but also is kind of unbeatable and so the use of it is unfair in my eyes.

Moth
  • Moth

    Sweet Roll Thief

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2006
  • Canada

#1546

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:07 AM

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 18:58)
Well space weaponry isn't god mode, but it is still a bit dodgy imo.

Why? A nuke that is launched from space is still a space based weapon, is it not? How bout rods from gods? A weapon that launches a rod of tungsten at a target from space.

Plus in reality we already have missles that can target satellites, so they are not unbeatable.

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1547

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:13 AM Edited by El Zilcho, 17 April 2012 - 12:15 AM.

Not God Mode, a 'God Mod' is a claim that is far beyond a nations capabilities i.e. sapient sharks with lasers.

And I very much doubt most people will amicably choose to lose. Not without unwieldy coalitions to illustrate to them how outnumbered they are. Even then, it isn't guaranteed - which is why we're discussing using a balance of RP and stats to make it fair and fun.

Could we not keep it grounded to modern technology, for sake of ease? Space weaponry is so cliché

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1548

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:15 AM Edited by Otter, 17 April 2012 - 12:19 AM.

I guess what's confusing me is, why - why now - you wanna take away my robot armies and space nukes? Neither are outside the realm of possibility (the US has and operates both), and sh*t, we've been having fun so far.

It's not a major problem, really, I just don't understand the need to limit us all of a sudden.

And as for war - unless both sides concede to a result (or allow the decisions of the other to stand) then it's not fair. This isn't a tabletop boardgame. It's crafting fiction that we can all share. Shaffey learned this rather early when he tired to pretty much destroy Zootopolis unilaterally - we reigned him in and he's one of the funnest members of the group.

Too many rules, not enough fun = why am I even doing this anymore? There's always Minecraft. Genny, I'm going to blow up your house with a space based alien laser.


stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1549

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:17 AM Edited by GTA_stu, 17 April 2012 - 12:22 AM.

QUOTE (The General @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 00:07)
QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 18:58)
Well space weaponry isn't god mode, but it is still a bit dodgy imo.

Why? A nuke that is launched from space is still a space based weapon, is it not? How bout rods from gods? A weapon that launches a rod of tungsten at a target from space.

Plus in reality we already have missles that can target satellites, so they are not unbeatable.

If you limited it only to nukes being launched from space, and nothing else, then I don't personally have any major problems with that, although I'd still prefer not to have it. But it's when you get into space cannons, lasers and things of that ilk that I think a line needs to be drawn. Besides that "Rods from Gods" thing is kinda pointless to have anyways since it's not (in real life) capable of being used for much other than being used as a bunker buster.

---------

Edit: Otter, it's just basically because we're trying to get some official guidelines down for the possibility of a war, and this is the first time we've attempted it. In terms of RP, having current technology just makes things simpler and more realistic.

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1550

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:17 AM Edited by El Zilcho, 17 April 2012 - 12:19 AM.

I don't know, I wouldn't say it was all of a sudden. It had been being discussed, we've just only got around to the mechanics of it now. But this is all getting into semantics and pedantry; if you were to engage in a war with someone, they'd have to elevate their tech to something absurd or lose outright by default. As such it'll set of a series of silly escalations. If we decide on a bit of a precedent (maybe not when messing around, but if an actual war comes around we'd stick to them) we can keep it fair and more interesting, rather than regressing to "but my laser is bigger!"

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1551

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:21 AM

I threw some more stuff in my post up above.

Bottom line - war should be a two player endeavor and just lemme keep my experimental cloning programs.

Adler
  • Adler

    Hello, Smith. ( ´-`)ノ

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2009

#1552

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:24 AM

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:13)
And I very much doubt most people will amicably choose to lose. Not without unwieldy coalitions to illustrate to them how outnumbered they are. Even then, it isn't guaranteed - which is why we're discussing using a balance of RP and stats to make it fair and fun.

For the purposes of storytelling, parties at war should decide who wins or loses. That way, no one would make a fuss over losing if they would willingly want to, and besides, the winners don't gain anything. I'm sure one side would want to lose, and if not, maybe toss a dice or rock, paper, scissors?

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1553

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:28 AM

QUOTE (Adler @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 01:24)
QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:13)
And I very much doubt most people will amicably choose to lose. Not without unwieldy coalitions to illustrate to them how outnumbered they are. Even then, it isn't guaranteed - which is why we're discussing using a balance of RP and stats to make it fair and fun.

For the purposes of storytelling, parties at war should decide who wins or loses. That way, no one would make a fuss over losing if they would willingly want to, and besides, the winners don't gain anything. I'm sure one side would want to lose, and if not, maybe toss a dice or rock, paper, scissors?

That would be a nice solution, but then who flips the coin? tounge.gif

I don't mind so much what we do, I've no intention of blitzkrieging anyone but now we've started this idea of setting it in stone, we might as well see it through properly. I just thought that if we have aggression, rather than friendly and planned conflict, we need some ground rules.

Moth
  • Moth

    Sweet Roll Thief

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2006
  • Canada

#1554

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:28 AM

QUOTE (Otter @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 19:15)
There's always Minecraft. Genny, I'm going to blow up your house with a space based alien laser.

Not until I nuke Sandy Boot!

Also space based weapons cliched? Isn't it where technology will take us? War should be something that involves the entire region. It's started by one or two people, but the victor is decided by the region, maybe based on who's RP was better?

stu
  • stu

    I drink it up

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 22 Feb 2011
  • European-Union

#1555

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:33 AM

I think some of the more silly and eccentric stuff is ok, just as long it isn't military related and can't be used in the event of a war. What does everyone else think about that?

As for the actual war mechanic, I'm starting to lean more towards it being exclusively for people who discuss it via PM and plan it. Using stats to work out a winner is pretty pointless, for the main reason being it's simply not fair to the loser. At the end of the day we don't want people quitting because they're not enjoying it. I still think there needs to be some degree of consideration for the actual govt. spendings though.

It's what gives our nations the flavour and depth. If you just completely ignore them then it makes it incredibly ambiguous as to just what a nation's personality, and make up is.

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1556

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:34 AM

We need a balance - if you're a small nation, you can't topple a billion population, but you can mount a defence.

The reason we're looking for rules is because in the event of spontaneous war, rather than affably planned RP. Planned RP wouldn't involve any issues or disagreement; which is why we need some ideas for competition in a genuine 'war'.

Adler
  • Adler

    Hello, Smith. ( ´-`)ノ

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2009

#1557

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:37 AM

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:28)
That would be a nice solution, but then who flips the coin? tounge.gif

Coin Flipper!

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:28)
we might as well see it through properly

That reminds me, what about the map you guys??

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:34)
We need a balance - if you're a small nation, you can't topple a billion population, but you can mount a defence.

If you're the nation with a billion people and you decide to lose, then where's the harm?

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1558

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:42 AM

QUOTE (El Zilcho @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 16:34)
The reason we're looking for rules is because in the event of spontaneous war, rather than affably planned RP. Planned RP wouldn't involve any issues or disagreement; which is why we need some ideas for competition in a genuine 'war'.

Anything that isn't affably planned is trolling and unnacceptable. Were it done against me, I'd roll with the punches and play along. Against someone else? It's their prerogative to completely ignore it.

Christ, I feel like I'm Charisma Nettlebaum here. tounge.gif

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#1559

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:46 AM

So we can just not play along? Seems a little, meh. Whatever, you guys decide it's too late for debate (that rhymes).

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#1560

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:49 AM

I mean - it's no secret that some of us RP more than others. Were another active member to declare war on me? I'd feel obliged to allow it. But if some new import comes in, launches a nuclear strike against me and claims I've been wiped off the map... that's just obviously bad form and it should be ignored. I'd hope the rest of us would be able to judge when that's the case. tounge.gif




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users