|
Post by stoic on Dec 22, 2017 7:15:49 GMT
I feel like this type of RP needs a name. How about hhmm... Meritocracy... That would be a would be a sort of cool name... I don't have any objections
|
|
|
Post by liamcog on Dec 22, 2017 13:17:19 GMT
Yes the 1st 4, just my internet for some reason
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Dec 22, 2017 15:20:52 GMT
Yes the 1st 4, just my internet for some reason Well, and the work of a famous scholar in German is not of a great help either, I guess Well I understand copyright issues in case of popular music, literature and filming. But scholar works about antiquity!!! There are not many people on earth who will read them (even if you will pay them for that reading )
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 6:18:21 GMT
stoic,Plox host this game one day.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Dec 27, 2017 6:43:18 GMT
stoic, this is more or less the same idea of the old TWs (ofc, it's different because each individual host has been individually different in implementing their TW). The whole point of the TWs' complexity was to incorporate all of that factors in a tangible form to be played out on the forum. Sufficient to say... I have to point out that the excesses of the TWs brought them down to their current inactive status. Alt-Hist was a different approach to the TWs, on purpose focusing on the RPing leaving the details up to each player's discretion. Unfortunately, many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own forces (nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). I'm looking at you, @joshuameme. You definitely failed to consider the impacts of various things, constantly ignoring too many things. This is really a result of your style of playing; I have to inform you that particular truth. (Believe me, I'm just trying to warn, not to insult or hurt)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 7:13:33 GMT
stoic , this is more or less the same idea of the old TWs (ofc, it's different because each individual host has been individually different in implementing their TW). The whole point of the TWs' complexity was to incorporate all of that factors in a tangible form to be played out on the forum. Sufficient to say... I have to point out that the excesses of the TWs brought them down to their current inactive status. Alt-Hist was a different approach to the TWs, on purpose focusing on the RPing leaving the details up to each player's discretion. Unfortunately, many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own forces (nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). I'm looking at you, @joshuameme . You definitely failed to consider the impacts of various things, constantly ignoring too many things. This is really a result of your style of playing; I have to inform you that particular truth. (Believe me, I'm just trying to warn, not to insult or hurt) 2 Things: 1) You say "many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own force" and then say "(nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). " I am confused on which way this argument goes. Could you explain it? 2) I request that you give me an example or 2 of instances where I ignored things I shouldn't have.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Dec 27, 2017 7:43:17 GMT
stoic , this is more or less the same idea of the old TWs (ofc, it's different because each individual host has been individually different in implementing their TW). The whole point of the TWs' complexity was to incorporate all of that factors in a tangible form to be played out on the forum. Sufficient to say... I have to point out that the excesses of the TWs brought them down to their current inactive status. Alt-Hist was a different approach to the TWs, on purpose focusing on the RPing leaving the details up to each player's discretion. Unfortunately, many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own forces (nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). I'm looking at you, @joshuameme . You definitely failed to consider the impacts of various things, constantly ignoring too many things. This is really a result of your style of playing; I have to inform you that particular truth. (Believe me, I'm just trying to warn, not to insult or hurt) 2 Things: 1) You say "many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own force" and then say "(nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). " I am confused on which way this argument goes. Could you explain it? 2) I request that you give me an example or 2 of instances where I ignored things I shouldn't have. Fair questions. I was just pointing out as an aside note that powerplay and godmodding isn't proper Role-Playing behavior so the parathesis part was included at the end of that sentence. Suppose if I declare that your armies ran away from my forces just simply so. Is that fair? I would say that's unbalanced play (and definitely illegal on many sites devoted to RP writing & playing). But let say morale plays a factor, what if I'd play out some psychological warfare to weaken the spirit of your units, that's a more reasonable RPing, but ofc, it's dumb and boring to play the same tactic on an enemy player over and over. The player do have the right to respond in defuse the propagandistic effects by strengthen the morale, etc... This becomes a complex Role-Play interaction.
You asked for an example of where you neglected to incorporate factors that might have a postive or negative impact on your play's outcome: a good example... you had pretty much just ignored the geographical aspect until you realized what you had overlooked. It's funny to me that you talk in THIS thread about how the Alt-Hist WW1 game was missing features. The Alt-Hist game was supposed to be encourage freedom to incorporate complex factors in a player's turn if he wishes to. The reason why the game was missing those factors is that you left them out of your turns. Makes sense why it's a bit silly to talk like that, especially from what you had posted so far? I'm just speaking in general terms, not specific, I admit. I want you to be able to apply principles not just in one event but many other possible situations where you will face in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Dec 27, 2017 7:44:00 GMT
As a positive post here... you're asking good questions by the way, @joshuameme.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 8:07:55 GMT
As a positive post here... you're asking good questions by the way, @joshuameme . Gaining answers does not right the wrong, but thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 8:20:40 GMT
2 Things: 1) You say "many of the newer players have been abusive in their power to determine things happening to their own force" and then say "(nobody is allowed to unilaterally decide what happens to someone else's forces ofc). " I am confused on which way this argument goes. Could you explain it? 2) I request that you give me an example or 2 of instances where I ignored things I shouldn't have. Fair questions. I was just pointing out as an aside note that powerplay and godmodding isn't proper Role-Playing behavior so the parathesis part was included at the end of that sentence. Suppose if I declare that your armies ran away from my forces just simply so. Is that fair? I would say that's unbalanced play (and definitely illegal on many sites devoted to RP writing & playing). But let say morale plays a factor, what if I'd play out some psychological warfare to weaken the spirit of your units, that's a more reasonable RPing, but ofc, it's dumb and boring to play the same tactic on an enemy player over and over. The player do have the right to respond in defuse the propagandistic effects by strengthen the morale, etc... This becomes a complex Role-Play interaction.
You asked for an example of where you neglected to incorporate factors that might have a positive or negative impact on your play's outcome: a good example... you had pretty much just ignored the geographical aspect until you realized what you had overlooked. It's funny to me that you talk in THIS thread about how the Alt-Hist WW1 game was missing features. The Alt-Hist game was supposed to be encourage freedom to incorporate complex factors in a player's turn if he wishes to. The reason why the game was missing those factors is that you left them out of your turns. Makes sense why it's a bit silly to talk like that, especially from what you had posted so far? I'm just speaking in general terms, not specific, I admit. I want you to be able to apply principles not just in one event but many other possible situations where you will face in the future. I'm not saying this is an argument, of course, everything you said is right, after all you are FAR more experienced in this than I am. (This part is not technically gramatically correct but I just wanted to write it this way.) But I can't really respond because, as mentioned earlier, you are completely right.
Thanks for explaining what you meant. Part of some things I included that it would be different for NPC and players as each battle (If complex) would require both sides to be active for the complexity. NPC fights would have possibly someone else act as the nation for that battle. (I know I just came up with that and the original point was "If you are fighting an NPC the other side determines disasters.) PvP fights would (as mentioned earlier) require both sides to be active.
I admit blatant ignorance and stupidity that I ignored the fact there is so many mountains. I apologize for my stupidity and ignorance and hope I won't be stupid again. You are once more again, completely right. But there is a level of strangeness when someone is making a super complex turn and then there is the person that says "We require a 7 for this battle." I mean that also adds a level of unimmersion. I don't really have an excuse. Once more you are completely right.
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Dec 27, 2017 8:48:06 GMT
That's the thing, it's up to each player to be complex or simple. You're right, disruption of immersion is there. Ideally, both players play at the same depth (high or low, whatever).
Sometimes, I can do pretty deep stuff, but other times, my RL prevent me from making the time to do so. I do consider the conditions of other people's lives, so I try to accommodate a shorter, quicker, simpler war with another player when necessary.
Plus English isn't my first language, so it's actually stressful to write out a good post because I am too much of a perfectionist. It bothers me if I don't write well as I could have.
Math, on the other hand, comes to me a lot easier, hence why I tend to like more mathematically based games over literature-minded games but if we try to mimic too much complexity (aka Paradox Interactive Studios games like EU3), then it will be too cumbersome to keep track of too many numbers and systems then it becomes a boring chore.
The modern games runs well with heavy number crunching because the computer itself handles the calculations automatically for you. So to play games on a forum, it's best to make it simpler, like older RPGs that had worked out great with nothing but a pencil and papers. I don't have those 70s games myself but I would think those kinds of old games would suit forum-based mathematical RPs excellently, because they are designed to be processed by human brains, not calculators and computers. Note: this discussion about how complicated or simple a TW ought be... it has been already discussed in old threads in here WiF.
I think you could review them to get a good idea of what I am talking about. I'm kinda repeating myself by saying "less is more" in here as I have said in the past 1.5 years.
|
|
|
Post by Basilikon Agemos on Feb 19, 2018 14:23:26 GMT
Dibs on Lacedaemon.
(Let's get the Greek league rolling.)
|
|