|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 9:12:17 GMT
Not crying on anything but I would like to know that why am I being taunted so much in every war, Sherman has given me threats in the war to not be that much op and I wasn't, can anybody thus explain that what did I do in this war??
Okay I know I went mad in the second and the third war {in second that everyone said me to build my infrastructure while they themselves had occupied my territory and when I tried to liberate it, I was criticized, and in the third that I was having a fair-enough game when I was attacked by someone (intentionally not writing the name), that can make anyone mad and it did, I did get mad and thread locked again} but now what, for what am I being blamed by Sherman and endgame that I am overpowered?? Sherman leaves all rules himself behind, makes 25 destroyers/ships without telling and then criticized Talleyrand, for what? I need an explanation on this...
And then since I was being criticized WITHIN the war, there I didn't even get to say something on my own behalf and now it is locked, I need an explanation on this too as well as that why am I being taunted when I am abiding the rules....
Sincerely
Khurram
|
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Nov 4, 2015 9:22:24 GMT
I dont know if you guys are aware of not but role playing is hugely popular on the internet and thousands of people play these and have a blast of a time without getting upset and miffed at every turn.
And these theorical wars are just that,a form of role play,not DnD but same basic principle.
Which means we in the forum are probably doing it wrong and simply need to get better at it.
The way I seen it done else where is to have several groups,each group has a different leader,the leader decides the rules,the odds and everything else .
A fair and fun leader will usually be popular and have his group constantly being asked to play.
Leaders dont participates in wars,leaders only decide outcomes or introduce events unforseen events (bad weather,supplies don't arrive on time,technology stolen espionage event ect..)
The way it's run now because there is no independant leader or game master everyone make their own rules as they go and decide what's possible based on what suits them.And everyone else disagrees at all time.
Anyways,need game masters that are not participants.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 9:30:21 GMT
Well the game master or leader thing needs to be brought here as well to have entertainment like you mentioned, not like "hey I take all of (any country) you ok with it" which we ALL do
|
|
|
|
Post by Haelicon on Nov 4, 2015 9:31:11 GMT
I dont know if you guys are aware of not but role playing is hugely popular on the internet and thousands of people play these and have a blast of a time without getting upset and miffed at every turn. And these theorical wars are just that,a form of role play,not DnD but same basic principle. Which means we in the forum are probably doing it wrong and simply need to get better at it. The way I seen it done else where is to have several groups,each group has a different leader,the leader decides the rules,the odds and everything else . A fair and fun leader will usually be popular and have his group constantly being asked to play. Leaders dont participates in wars,leaders only decide outcomes or introduce events unforseen events (bad weather,supplies don't arrive on time,technology stolen espionage event ect..) The way it's run now because there is no independant leader or game master everyone make their own rules as they go and decide what's possible based on what suits them.And everyone else disagrees at all time. Anyways,need game masters that are not participants. Well maybe you Saltin? You are neutral right?  |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 9:36:14 GMT
We need new system of the wars, totally new like saltin said. Group leaders look fun tho |
|
|
|
Post by saltin on Nov 4, 2015 10:00:36 GMT
My thing is to work at improving my technical forum skills and try to be a better admin.You guys thing is to improve your play styles ah  Gimme members names and 3 or 4 people that wanna try to be non participant game masters then take turns each week 1 group is active with a different leader each time. If I get a list of names I can create groups and assign leaders,leaders decide name for their groups and what war they want to host. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 10:05:07 GMT
My thing is to work at improving my technical forum skills and try to be a better admin.You guys thing is to improve your play styles ah Gimme members names and 3 or 4 people that wanna try to be non participant game masters then take turns each week 1 group is active with a different leader each time. If I get a list of names I can create groups and assign leaders,leaders decide name for their groups and what war they want to host. scenario can be ww2 and I can be a game master. |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Nov 4, 2015 11:01:54 GMT
Not crying on anything but I would like to know that why am I being taunted so much in every war, Sherman has given me threats in the war to not be that much op and I wasn't, can anybody thus explain that what did I do in this war?? Okay I know I went mad in the second and the third war {in second that everyone said me to build my infrastructure while they themselves had occupied my territory and when I tried to liberate it, I was criticized, and in the third that I was having a fair-enough game when I was attacked by someone (intentionally not writing the name), that can make anyone mad and it did, I did get mad and thread locked again} but now what, for what am I being blamed by Sherman and endgame that I am overpowered?? Sherman leaves all rules himself behind, makes 25 destroyers/ships without telling and then criticized Talleyrand, for what? I need an explanation on this... And then since I was being criticized WITHIN the war, there I didn't even get to say something on my own behalf and now it is locked, I need an explanation on this too as well as that why am I being taunted when I am abiding the rules.... Sincerely Khurram Dear Khurram, Yes, I was being OP in my last German turns, but keep in mind that I have been having a utter shoot week, I was extremely upset, and I was tired of everyone thinking they could just carve up the C.Powers like they were nothing. Does that justify my actions? No, not really, but quite frankly when youre pissed and salty, you don't care about anything. Again, I'm sorry for that last turn. However... To say your turns weren't OP is a lie. Now, tell me this sounds fair: "The British completely push the Germans out of Belgium and start advancing into Germany, taking three of their largest cities." Completely OP. And don't give the excuse that "Well it was OP that the Germans just swept through Belgium and N.France so quick." I wouldn't have done that if not for the fact that the GERMANS ACTUALLY DID DO THAT IN THE WAR. Just please, everyone, make turns that aren't OP and turns that could've happened historically. Do some historical research before going in. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 11:16:25 GMT
Not crying on anything but I would like to know that why am I being taunted so much in every war, Sherman has given me threats in the war to not be that much op and I wasn't, can anybody thus explain that what did I do in this war?? Okay I know I went mad in the second and the third war {in second that everyone said me to build my infrastructure while they themselves had occupied my territory and when I tried to liberate it, I was criticized, and in the third that I was having a fair-enough game when I was attacked by someone (intentionally not writing the name), that can make anyone mad and it did, I did get mad and thread locked again} but now what, for what am I being blamed by Sherman and endgame that I am overpowered?? Sherman leaves all rules himself behind, makes 25 destroyers/ships without telling and then criticized Talleyrand, for what? I need an explanation on this... And then since I was being criticized WITHIN the war, there I didn't even get to say something on my own behalf and now it is locked, I need an explanation on this too as well as that why am I being taunted when I am abiding the rules.... Sincerely Khurram Dear Khurram, Yes, I was being OP in my last German turns, but keep in mind that I have been having a utter shoot week, I was extremely upset, and I was tired of everyone thinking they could just carve up the C.Powers like they were nothing. Does that justify my actions? No, not really, but quite frankly when youre pissed and salty, you don't care about anything. Again, I'm sorry for that last turn. However... To say your turns weren't OP is a lie. Now, tell me this sounds fair: "The British completely push the Germans out of Belgium and start advancing into Germany, taking three of their largest cities." Completely OP. And don't give the excuse that "Well it was OP that the Germans just swept through Belgium and N.France so quick." I wouldn't have done that if not for the fact that the GERMANS ACTUALLY DID DO THAT IN THE WAR. Just please, everyone, make turns that aren't OP and turns that could've happened historically. Do some historical research before going in. okay I did op like taking three cities but you also made like 15 ships in a turn... and if this stuff is making you really weird (like I am feeling here) then follow saltin's model, it can help us a lot in reviving this th. war |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Nov 4, 2015 11:29:59 GMT
okay I did op like taking three cities but you also made like 15 ships in a turn... and if this stuff is making you really weird (like I am feeling here) then follow saltin's model, it can help us a lot in reviving this th. war If we're doing saltins model, I am not being a country. I will be an overseer. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 4, 2015 12:18:26 GMT
okay I did op like taking three cities but you also made like 15 ships in a turn... and if this stuff is making you really weird (like I am feeling here) then follow saltin's model, it can help us a lot in reviving this th. war If we're doing saltins model, I am not being a country. I will be an overseer. same here, I will guide others what to do without being over powered. |
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Nov 14, 2015 0:24:04 GMT
Pat yourselves on the back everybody. The war has lasted 5 days now! But the conquering has only just begun.
|
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Nov 14, 2015 13:43:51 GMT
maybe some idea to get the dicing system a bit fairer.
for every war you have to decide what number you have to throw for victory.
the rule right now is. standard = 7, you can give arguments to decrease/increase the number. by now. most people give only arguments to decrease the number (of course). so this lead to lower numbers than it should be.
so here is my new system. in this system. you have to fill in the below thing to determine your number.
standard number: 7
enemy stars:
higher + 1
lower - 1
equal + 0
enemy technology:
higher + 1
lower - 1
equal + 0
enemy army:
larger + 1
smaller - 1
equal + 0
naval support: (of course there cant be naval support on land battles)
yes - 1 or - 2 (depending on importance
no - 0
defensive works: (or advanced nationalism)
1: +1
2 or more: +2
no: +0
events:
depends on event
other arguments:
for every argument: -1
arguments has to be defendable and reasonable.
example: (dutch invasion of oost-friesland)
normal number: 7
enemy stars: +1 (8)
enemy technology: +0 (8)
enemy army: +1 (9)
naval support: -1 (8)
defensive works: +0 (8)
events: -1 (7)
other arguments:
dutch minority in the area: -1 (6)
it leaves as final result a 6
if you think this takes to long. just try it. youll see you do it in only 1 minute
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Nov 14, 2015 14:02:10 GMT
Well the format looks good, I like it it makes the game even more fair rather than decreasing the dice standard number to win a war like we do it.
Let's see if the others like it....
|
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Nov 14, 2015 18:47:26 GMT
thoughts everyone?
|
|
