[BoP: Interregnum] Recruitment Thread

正在查看此主题的用户

状态
不接受进一步回复。
It hasn't been any trouble so far with making the CC's (up to 9 now  :grin:). My biggest concern was how to manage improvements, but I've decided to limit that, such that each province can only try to improve one statistic at a time. Which part seems particularly complicated to you?
 
Yeah, I was concerned about that too, which is why a lot of the calculations (fertility, infrastructure, resources) on my end assess your faction as a whole, rather than within the individual provinces where it matters (defense and population).
 
Something I'm curious about is how do we make detailed plans? Can we use maps from Elder Scrolls games for specifics, like village locations, fortifications, and geographical formations?
 
Dodes 说:
Just the volume of calculation needed on a turn by turn basis seems daunting.
I was never going to bother saying anything, hosting is learn by trial experience, but it does seem like you're making a ton of work for yourself. We'll see if that's true and/or if you can handle it soon enough, just keep going at your own pace.

Benno Maximus 说:
Something I'm curious about is how do we make detailed plans? Can we use maps from Elder Scrolls games for specifics, like village locations, fortifications, and geographical formations?
My main thought about that would be the need to make sure it's accurate, with Moose's game being set quite a bit earlier than any of the games, right?
 
Austupaio 说:
Dodes 说:
Just the volume of calculation needed on a turn by turn basis seems daunting.
I was never going to bother saying anything, hosting is learn by trial experience, but it does seem like you're making a ton of work for yourself. We'll see if that's true and/or if you can handle it soon enough, just keep going at your own pace.
Generally what I've found is that you want to make things as simple with only critical mechanics. Now that doesn't mean there can only be 1 thing at play or that all mechanics have to be the same. It's just that doing the processing is not as easy or quick as you expect it to be.

I would even go with something less numerical. Try to apply guidelines for GMing a RPG to the same principles of hosting a BoP.
 
Keeping a good excel spreadsheet with formulas is probably a must.
 
Benno Maximus 说:
Something I'm curious about is how do we make detailed plans?

You write them.  :razz:

But, be forewarned that I've always envisioned this game being more strategic than tactical (sorry HULK  :sad:). For example, there are seven strategic combat actions (ambush, battle, hunt, patrol, pillage, sabotage, siege) that will be available to combat units (more to come on the utility of these actions). Within those actions, there is room for some tactical creativity, such that your outcomes are more likely to succeed if you do some writing, planning, and roleplaying. But, if you want your armies to have real tactical superiority in battle, you better assign a hero and some appropriate units. Writing out a detailed plan of defense or attack won't mean much unless your army is supported by the units that can pull it off  (agents, battlemages, etc.).

Benno Maximus 说:
Can we use maps from Elder Scrolls games for specifics, like village locations, fortifications, and geographical formations?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this, but my guess is no. Improvements (new cities, fortifications, mines, farms) and other characteristics are always located in a specific province. Their location within the province matters little. Similarly, units don't move within provinces, they move between provinces. This is largely due to the fact that there just isn't enough geographic or demographic information out there compared to the real world. That's why my maps are the only maps that are relevant to this game.

This isn't to say that geography won't matter on a strategic level. Crossing a river to attack a province is more difficult than crossing a land border. Some provinces (Mountains, Forests, Jungles, Marshes) are easier to defend than others (Plains and Deserts). Flanking or encirclement is both feasible and beneficial (keeping in mind that it must occur at the strategic, and not the tactical level). And as far as general movement goes, geography matters a great deal. Combat units (other units can effectively move anywhere) will be able to move a maximum of 12 provinces per turn (unless you are able to transport them with your navy). But, this is limited by the geography of a province. Plains count for 1. Hills, Forests, Jungles, Deserts, and Marshes count for 2. Mountains count for 3. My hope is that this will keep things interesting enough to make up for the lack of tactical detail that goes into other BoPs. Ideally, every army that moves will be accompanied by a map that shows me the path you plan to take. For example...

p8FsYCm.png

As you can see, this is an example of how far an army can travel. This is a mechanic that I will double check, but the onus is on you to make sure that an army doesn't go over its limit based on the distance and terrain you plan to travel.

Austupaio 说:
I was never going to bother saying anything

Please, say all you like - I need all the input I can get!

Austupaio 说:
it does seem like you're making a ton of work for yourself

My hope is that by making everyone use a standardized Orders Form, I'll be able to shift a good deal of that burden onto you guys. We'll see how that works out though. :razz:

Grimmend 说:
Actually, I think ESO is based during the Interregnum.

Yeah, although this takes place about three hundred years after ESO.

Dodes 说:
Now that doesn't mean there can only be 1 thing at play or that all mechanics have to be the same. It's just that doing the processing is not as easy or quick as you expect it to be.

I would even go with something less numerical. Try to apply guidelines for GMing a RPG to the same principles of hosting a BoP.

Point taken. I suppose if I have to switch some things, we'll find out soon enough. I think I've also decided to cut the distinction between raw and finished goods though after some more thought. Instead, raw goods will go directly towards unit production. It keeps things simpler and it doesn't require any changes on my current CCs (up to 12 now, so we're past the halfway mark!  :grin:).

DoctorPainkiller 说:
Keeping a good excel spreadsheet with formulas is probably a must.

Yeah, most of my spreadsheets were taken care of last week when I started making the CCs.
 
Plains: Mid Green
Hills: Light Red
Mountains: Dark Red
Deserts: Orange
Forests: Dark Green
Jungles: Lime Green/Yellow
Marshes: Blue-ish

I think. 100% unofficial.
 
Benno Maximus 说:
Sorry to ask another question

How dare you?  :mad:

:razz:

Forgot to add that bit. I'll update that map with a key on the main page when I finish work today. :oops: But yes, that is correct.  :razz:

Everyone should be expecting a PM from me later this afternoon, and I would be extremely grateful if you could give me a quick response so I can delete all of your older PMs. The main purpose of this is to help organize communication between myself and the players, because I don't like to deal with multiple topics with different names from the same individual. A secondary benefit is that by limiting my communication to PMs, I can hopefully avoid revealing sensitive information. I'm excited about this game, and I love to talk about it. But, I worry that talking too much can become meta-gamey, especially if I talk more with the players that I like.  :oops: I'm still okay to talk by Skype or Steam for the time being, but once the game starts I'd like to keep it to PMs. Gives me a chance to think before I type.  :razz:

On that note, I suppose I'd like to get some player feedback regarding some of the more meta-game rules of this BoP. Obviously, there will be a strict no-editing rule in the thread. Similarly, players are asked to not quote other players or information on their CC verbatim in the thread. But, I wanted to know peoples thoughts on extending that outside of the thread. Personally, I don't have a problem with players copying their CC or copying someone else's PM and sending it to another player. But, some hosts in the past have made rules against that sort of behavior, and I'm wondering what you guys (players, but also hosts that have used that mechanic) think?

Similarly, I'm a bit curious about what you think about PMing the host all diplomatic information. I'm interested in seeing it, but I also don't want that to become a burden on you guys if you think it invades your privacy or you are talking about me and my ****ty rules or whatever. My thought was that it would be an informal rule - I'd like to see your diplomacy, but if you don't want to share everything that's fine too.

On a game related note, 15 CCs done, 8 to go, then I gotta do a bit more write up involving the rules before we get going. Sunday still feels like the right day to get started, and I've got a clear schedule this weekend. Let's hope I'm ready.  :razz:
 
I'll be waiting for it.

Glad that you're being careful with being overly talkative, particular where Skype is involved - it can be problematic.

I think these sorts of rules, disallowing direct copies of any communication, are important.

I think that CCing the host all your PMs is no hassle at all, and I was rather annoyed in Dacralia that people refused to do so, you can request that people do it but prepare for them to only CC you certain things or CC you nothing at all.

The rules are good, they're important in my opinion, just know that they'll be repeatedly and belligerently broken.
 
Austupaio 说:
I think these sorts of rules, disallowing direct copies of any communication, are important.

Could you expand on this?

Austupaio 说:
just know that they'll be repeatedly and belligerently broken.

That's why I'd like to bring it up. As a conscientious objector (:razz:) myself, I know full well that the rules will be broken. That is why I'd like to have a chat about the costs and benefits of such a rule, so that players will at least be able to understand the logic behind my decision to use or not use this sort of rule, and maybe that could lead to more players honoring the rule.
 
I've always kept Aust and Hulk in the loop about more private diplomacy and the sort, it's something I can understand as being interesting to the hosts and I'm glad to share the information. I try to forward pretty much everything, just sometimes it's more rushed and I forget to forward to the hosts or it's very minor.
 
Harkon Haakonson 说:
I've always kept Aust and Hulk in the loop about more private diplomacy and the sort, it's something I can understand as being interesting to the hosts and I'm glad to share the information. I try to forward pretty much everything, just sometimes it's more rushed and I forget to forward to the hosts or it's very minor.

Ditto.

As far as directly quoting conversations or other info I support a rule against posting it in the thread but I find it can really help clarify stuff in Skype chat or PM's, especially when trying to conduct diplomacy with your allies. It's just a lot more convenient that having to re-word a conversation you've had with someone just to tell someone else that it happened.
 
状态
不接受进一步回复。
后退
顶部 底部