Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 20, 2016, 10:05:06 pm
---------------------------------------
Active Games
---------------------------------------
Intercontinental Arms Race
Links: Embassy on Bay 12 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163954.0), Embassy on Spacebattles (https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/arms-race-embassy.521083/)
Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
United Forenia on Remnant
Links: Thread (https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/united-forenia-on-remnant-arms-race-rwby-turn-3-design-phase.558967/)
Player Count: Data Outdated
Current Turn/Phase: Turn 10 Design
Last Battle Phase Update: January 9, 2018
---------------------------------------
Cult Race
Links: General (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167404.0), Chaos (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167403.0), Genestealers (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167402.0)
Chaos Cult Player Count: Data Not yet available
Genestealer Cult Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Hive Race
Links: The League (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=165137.0), The Hive (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=165138.0)
League Player Count: Data Outdated
Hive Player Count: Data Outdated
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
War of the Cinder Spires
Links: General (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164853.0), Spire Wreth (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164855.0), Spire Kasgyr (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164854.0)
Spire Wreth Player Count: Data Not yet available
Spire Kasgyr Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Mad Science Arms Race Test
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168070.0)
Faction 1 Player Count: Data Not yet available
Faction 2 Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
The Ameliorite War
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168073.0)
Nafuna Player Count: Data Outdated
Karikhita Player Count: Data Outdated
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Insurrection
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169013.0)
Authority Player Count: Data Not yet available
Resistance Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Iron Behemoths
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168914.0)
Toskesh Player Count: Data Not yet available
Nogrania Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Battle for Aljadid
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168246.0)
Toskesh Player Count: Data Not yet available
Nogrania Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Arms Race: Enemy Unknown
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168641.0)
Toskesh Player Count: Data Not yet available
Nogrania Player Count: Data Not yet available
Current Turn/Phase: Data Not yet available
Last Battle Phase Update: Data Not yet available
---------------------------------------
Haitus
---------------------------------------
Games awaiting GM Transfer to Complete
---------------------------------------
Completed Games
---------------------------------------
Sensei's Arms Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152099.0)
Sensei's Second Arms Race Game (https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/arms-race-main-thread-1913-competitive-quest.387223/)
Wands Race - Magic in Forenia (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163275.0)
Dead Games
---------------------------------------
Stellar Arms Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152370.0)
War of the Planets (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152656.msg6455400#msg6455400)
Imperial Military Design Bureau (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=144578.msg5718948#msg5718948)
The Glorious Design Bureau of the People (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.msg4614964#msg4614964)
Department of Armaments (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=150662.msg6221907#msg6221907)
Fullyautomagic's Wonder Waffle Game (https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/wonder-waffle-main-thread-1913-competitive-quest.391387/)
Arms Race 1784 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=155156.0)
Arms Race - Southeast Asia (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156705.0)
Stone Age Design (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=157238.msg6901063#msg6901063)
Forenia vs. Sectoids (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=160575.0)
Aseaheru Weapon Design Game (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=158004.0)
Dungeon Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163342.0)
Clash among the Stars (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163649.0) (Collective (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163652.0), Grand Imperium (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163651.0))
Politics of the Merchant Republic (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163696.0)
Shadow Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167431.0), (Astria (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167432.0), Merkan (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167433.0))
Systems
Sensei's explanation of the GM side of his (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156417.msg7418100#msg7418100)
Post by: Aseaheru on February 20, 2016, 10:33:02 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 20, 2016, 11:04:58 pm
This is just things using the arms race... ruleset, I guess is the best name. Anyways, things using the Arms Race ruleset only, correct?
Currently this just serves as a place to discuss the rules/potential games, and a potentially easier way to alert players. Also thinking this could maybe serve as a general OOC thread so the main thread is an easy readthrough from turn-to-turn. To be honest, I'd likely put in the Arstotzka-Ice Giant RtD and any other games created within any of the universes as well, but I don't know where the first one is and I don't think anyone has decided to create an RP or other game using the universe (maybe a group of mercenaries or a special operations squad armed with Arstotzka and Moskurg equipment? A group of soldiers fighting in one of the operations in one of the wars?).
Oh, and to respond to your statement about the largest of the threats, for the most part those will be working on the principle of basically stuffing a creature inside a massive mechanical construct with a large apparatus causing its movements to translate into certain actions and a large stock of food/water/etc to keep them moving, then setting them loose against the enemy. It's as devastating as it is cruel. Only a few exist, and even fewer are active, due to the massive expense involved in making them (as well as the numerous moral objections), but once deployed, they are extremely difficult to stop.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 21, 2016, 12:04:46 am
Well, good thing that I hadent heard of that a while ago.
That all said, what do you all think of a smaller scale arms race thing? Say, like between two post-apocalyptic communities fighting over, say, a subway system.
Post by: Kot on February 21, 2016, 06:25:00 am
Theres a frost giant RTD...It was a joke game made due to amount of salt going on in original Arms Race (which I may have been directly responsible for, but hey, RECOILESS RIFLES DON'T WORK THIS WAY).
Well, good thing that I hadent heard of that a while ago.
That all said, what do you all think of a smaller scale arms race thing? Say, like between two post-apocalyptic communities fighting over, say, a subway system.Metro 2033, eh? Sounds fun, a lot of propaganda possibilites.
Honestly I would want to continue 1st timeline through the WWII, because Germany is very dangerously well armed and implying noone makes an atomic bomb, the world might turn out very, very different.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 21, 2016, 06:44:19 am
Post by: TopHat on February 21, 2016, 08:08:33 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 21, 2016, 11:34:03 am
Honestly I would want to continue 1st timeline through the WWII, because Germany is very dangerously well armed and implying noone makes an atomic bomb, the world might turn out very, very different.
At the current time, I think it would be better to allude to the war than play through it. Only a GM of Sensei's caliber and a ruleset rebuilt to handle such a major conflict could possibly deal with it, as the current set is more suited to smaller countries. Speaking of, which of the two scenarios do you think I should use, if at all?
Post by: Kot on February 21, 2016, 12:27:09 pm
As for the scenarios... I dunno. I want to continue the story of Forenia, but both require basically solving the WW2 in arbitrary way, which is eh, though the Cold War thing speaks to me more. Maybe try a game where two sides aren't countries but rather competing insurgent (All Glory to Arstotzkan Revolutionary Front! (GOYRLILLA FIGHTERS)) gropus backed by either USSR or USA, trying to take down the Forenian tyranny and the other side. I know it would require changing rules a lot, but just think of all the propaganda posters we can make!
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 21, 2016, 08:51:09 pm
As for the scenarios... I dunno. I want to continue the story of Forenia, but both require basically solving the WW2 in arbitrary way, which is eh, though the Cold War thing speaks to me more. Maybe try a game where two sides aren't countries but rather competing insurgent (All Glory to Arstotzkan Revolutionary Front! (GOYRLILLA FIGHTERS)) gropus backed by either USSR or USA, trying to take down the Forenian tyranny and the other side. I know it would require changing rules a lot, but just think of all the propaganda posters we can make!
I consider that the direction that Forenia would take should be fully in the hands of Sensei. As for World War II, I'm pretty sure it would end up with the same conclusion, if only due to the fact that, since it is in the Pacific and had been under a long war, Japan would probably see it as a easy invasion. The axis would have to deal with a Forenia backed by the English Empire and the USSR (maybe with America joining in due to Japan attacking one of the islands under their control to get an area to strike back against Forenia after an invasion goes south. Nation might wind up being stuck in the position they were in before Pearl Harbor, though, only supplying the Allies.) With both scenarios, I'm just going to assume Allied victory due to this, but keep it extremely vague how they achieved it (besides those creatures I mentioned, of course). May want to keep WWII as a noodle incident of sorts, both due to how difficult it would be to run such a game, and to be able to write up various, potentially contradictory memories of soldiers who partook in it (the general theme of 'a United Forenia is f*cking terrifying in what they can do' and it ended up with Forenia essentially becoming a large, potentially super, power on the world stage).
Post by: Aseaheru on February 22, 2016, 12:35:12 am
I mean, hell, the US came rather close to joining up with Germany as it is.
Post by: Andres on February 22, 2016, 04:40:22 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 22, 2016, 11:45:04 am
I mean, hell, the US came rather close to joining up with Germany as it is.
Could you tell me where you found this information? I can't locate anything on the topic from my searches.
The filthy Moskurgs spell their country without a 'b', presumably because they'd send spittle flying everywhere were they to pronounce that letter with their misshapen mouths.
There was no typo. Nope not at all. Moskurg was always spelled correctly. I never spelled it wrong. Nope. Not at all.
Why do I always mispell it...
Post by: Funk on February 22, 2016, 12:33:12 pm
See Operation Unthinkable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable), rearming the Germans to fight the Soviet Union.I mean, hell, the US came rather close to joining up with Germany as it is.
Could you tell me where you found this information? I can't locate anything on the topic from my searches.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 22, 2016, 01:18:41 pm
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable (http://Operation Unthinkable), rearming the Germans to fight the Soviet Union.
Uh, may want to double check your link. And I was mostly referring to something where they would ally with the Nazi's rather than after the war.
You could go with Germany and the US team up to nuke Forenia to small pieces, and then deal with stuff afterwards.
Forgot to respond to this. As I stated in the post above yours, I firmly believe that any events that would take place upon Forenia is fully within the realm of Sensei's influence, outside of vague references to there having been something that happened. I'd very much rather deal with an Africa or Indonesia wherein outside influence had fully collapsed (heedless of attempts to create a government that ruled along colonial lines) causing there to be multiple forces vying for control of the area.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 23, 2016, 08:15:43 pm
Still, is there a preference between the two potential areas of conflict, or should I just flip a coin? If you want more options, there is also the possibility of being the gadget designers for a spy agency (same timeline as the others) or setting a post-apocalypse game (either timeline 3 or new/alternate branch).
Post by: Aseaheru on February 23, 2016, 11:02:21 pm
Post by: Kot on February 24, 2016, 09:19:31 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 24, 2016, 11:33:13 am
Alt branches sound like fun.
Referring to the post-apocalypse setting?
Cold war dick measuring contests pls.
Please specify. As it stands, this could apply to any of the scenarios except for the post-apocalypse one.
Edit: Also, I wish to hear your thoughts on having any of these games be multi-forum (ie. Bay 12 plays one side, another forum plays another.)
Post by: Kot on February 24, 2016, 12:29:15 pm
Please specify two areas of conflict. Are we still going with Africa/Asia or what? But really, I am for any of scenarios that involveCold war dick measuring contests pls.
Please specify. As it stands, this could apply to any of the scenarios except for the post-apocalypse one.
a)Arstotzka
and/or
b)Cold War dick measuring contests
in that order.
Edit: Also, I wish to hear your thoughts on having any of these games be multi-forum (ie. Bay 12 plays one side, another forum plays another.)I don't want to make an account somewhere else, and makes me thing that we could end with some forum wars, since Arms Race is srs bsns.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 24, 2016, 01:02:59 pm
Please specify two areas of conflict. Are we still going with Africa/Asia or what? But really, I am for any of scenarios that involveCold war dick measuring contests pls.
Please specify. As it stands, this could apply to any of the scenarios except for the post-apocalypse one.
a)Arstotzka
and/or
b)Cold War dick measuring contests
The scenarios that would deal with a cold war contest are the Indonesian one, the African one, and the spy one. While the former two would also have conflict with NPC nations, there will be a cold war between the two player nations. For now, that is. Things could change into an active state of war between the two nations. As for the spy one, I would probably have it set as being between a couple countries (maybe USSR and America) in the Cold War era.
Quote
in that order.Edit: Also, I wish to hear your thoughts on having any of these games be multi-forum (ie. Bay 12 plays one side, another forum plays another.)I don't want to make an account somewhere else, and makes me thing that we could end with some forum wars, since Arms Race is srs bsns.
That is a fairly decent concern. Don't want a forum war to start up by accident.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 24, 2016, 04:06:39 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 24, 2016, 06:53:46 pm
I dunno. Getting more advanced tech involved seems to like killing off games with this system.
We only have one game I am aware of that has been set further in time than Forenia, and that one died because the GM wanted to leave the forum due to spending too much time online. One data point does not imply anything.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 24, 2016, 10:30:51 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 24, 2016, 11:12:04 pm
I was under the impression that it was also due to the list of 30-odd things each group really had to have some form of, and the solitary development slot they had to do them with.
Might have been a factor. If we wind up using the Indonesian or African settings, I was actually planning on adding a second revision that could be used on anything but the other revision on that turn, so more could be done. Honestly, the Indonesian one would likely give us the best game for what I have prepared with the small additions I made. Might even wind up getting twice (on rare occasions, thrice) weekly turns, while providing a bit more, nonintrusive depth. Can post the full ruleset for later, if people wish to see it before the game starts.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 26, 2016, 01:26:01 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on February 26, 2016, 01:48:54 pm
Post by: Kot on February 26, 2016, 01:52:18 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 26, 2016, 02:18:58 pm
I have my doubts about a system that not only allows the victor to capture terrain, but also techs. That can quickly escalate, snowballing into insurmountable odds for the losing party.
It's the tech behind a design, rather than a design itself. As well, the new tech would be under the same expense penalty simply developing it would cause (though might make it 4 turns rather than 5 to add a point of desire in using it due to the expense level going away faster, but not making it go away too fast and be unfair to the original creators.)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on February 26, 2016, 02:50:14 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on February 26, 2016, 03:07:17 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 26, 2016, 03:30:17 pm
In that case, it's nearly pointless and probably needs to be removed.
We'll see how it goes. Might wind up proving more useful than you would think.
What about a chance to capture some enemy equipment, with the most likely stuff being the oldest, most common things in use. It would then have to be reverse engineered, but it gives the change to do things like use enemy equipment.
This might work. Though with the reverse engineering, would it be better to have the weapon effectively 'unlock' after a period of time, or would utilizing a revision credit? I think I'll probably end up having the capture via battle remain a tech, but I might upgrade the espionage to this idea as another result for theft than just tech.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 26, 2016, 04:06:08 pm
Post by: Kot on February 26, 2016, 04:23:30 pm
I kind of think about it in WW2 planes way - you can slowly collect enemy wrecks and pieces of scrap and try to make something out of it, by looking at pictures and comparing, or your soldiers could find an factory that had no time to evacuate, so you just got your hands on complete jet fighter prototype. Or maybe an enemy soldier surrendered with one, or something.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on February 26, 2016, 05:41:53 pm
Quote
Battles are determined via two separate d100 rolls that are modified based upon the tech of involved units and the number of units.Are you sure?
That means 100 vs 100 will lead to
0-24 Stalemate = 44% chance
25-44 Victory, Territory Gained = 13.1% *2 chance
45-59 Victory, Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 7.2% *2 chance
60+ Victory, 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 8.2% * 2 chance
Note how the great victory is more likely than good one and both of them combined are more likely than the marginal one.
Now lets give one side minor advantage
d100(A) versus d100+10(B)
60+ Victory(A), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 4.65% chance
45-59 Victory(A), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 5.7% chance
25-44 Victory(A), Territory Gained = 11.1%
0-24 Stalemate = 42% chance
25-44 Victory(B), Territory Gained = 15.1%
45-59 Victory(B), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 8.7%
60+ Victory(B), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 12.75%
Great victory for team B becomes even more likely, stalemate is still the most likely result
Large advantage
d100 vs d100+25
60+ Victory(A), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 1.2% chance
45-59 Victory(A), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 3.45% chance
25-44 Victory(A), Territory Gained = 8.1%
0-24 Stalemate = 36.7% chance
25-44 Victory(B), Territory Gained = 18.1%
45-59 Victory(B), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 10.95%
60+ Victory(B), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 21.45%
Note how common 2 territory gained becomes
Huge advantage
d100 vs d100+50
60+ Victory(A), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = impossible
45-59 Victory(A), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 0.15% chance
25-44 Victory(A), Territory Gained = 3.1%
0-24 Stalemate = 24.25% chance
25-44 Victory(B), Territory Gained = 18.81%
45-59 Victory(B), Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 15.34%
60+ Victory(B), 2 Territory Gained, 1 Tech Captured = 40.95% (doh!)
I don't know how hard it will be to get a +50 advantage, but that looks like a game over.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 26, 2016, 07:46:12 pm
I don't know how hard it will be to get a +50 advantage, but that looks like a game over.
A single tech provides a bonus between +1 and +5, while each additional increment to the ratio of how much you outnumber your opponent (ie. 2:1, 3:1,etc) provides a +5 to that side. It's extremely difficult to get a +50, though I will admit that it seems the system needs adjustment. Maybe a 0-24, 25-49, 50-74, 75+ setting for the odds?
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on February 27, 2016, 01:25:49 pm
Use output 1d100-1d100 to get probabilities, stuff like output 1d100-(1d100+5) works too.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 27, 2016, 06:17:10 pm
http://anydice.com - very useful tool for GM's that make their own systems. It allows to see probabilities
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 27, 2016, 08:27:08 pm
Nazi Germany - AS-AR34, Model 1 Service Rifle (Depends upon how it is counted.)
1934 Anonymous Buyers - Bumblebee
1920 Unknown Organization - Five-Shooter
British - T2 Breaker
Chinese Royal Army - M3 Sorraia
Chinese Communists - AS-1911
Antegria - AS-1910 Mag
American Hunting Company - the Horsekiller
Red Army - AS-T15
Post by: Aseaheru on February 27, 2016, 09:17:04 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 27, 2016, 09:28:20 pm
Are you including the things offered but not fully accepted?
Only the accepted. I may wind up having the other one be utilized in a few cases with the earliest trades, though, but I'm mainly thinking of having them just use derivations from the original weapons for the most part.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 01, 2016, 09:03:54 pm
It is the end of the fifth year since the end of the Second World War. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has recently conducted its first test of an atomic bomb, rapidly followed by successful tests in both Forenia and Tropico of their heavy automatized mecha. While it is not yet determined how they will reel in the deployed prototypes, both governments assure they are working on the problem. Furthermore, the Korean War has begun, with both sides deploying numerous amounts of both Forenian and Tropican arms, that diplomats from both nations express apparent amazement at their presence, while commenting on more effective deployments and thanking both sides for resources that are being so generously provided to both islands.
Within Southeast Asia, the governments have largely collapsed. After being liberated from Japanese control by forces from Forenia, the island nation attempted to hold control the territory it had rightfully acquired in its own eyes, creating numerous organizations to further spread their ideals to the inhabitants, many of which having grown in the region over the course of the multi-decade war on Forenia. With outside diplomatic pressures, Forenia backed off, but had decided to liberate the islands and created governments based off their own ideals, rather than return the islands to those that owned them before the war. Most of these did not last very long, however, for one particular reason.
Much of Forenian culture has its basis within holding a large amount of spite against a particular target and deciding to lash out against it. This is what had led to their massive multi-decade war in the first place, and their nation likely would have collapsed as the next generation began to rumble into power and they grew dissatisfied. With the occurrence of the outbreak of the Second World War upon their island by the Japanese, something changed. With exception to a few nationalistic organizations, the Arstotzkan and Moskurg peoples had their identities reforged into viewing themselves as a united Forenian people and were largely content. The chance of conflict would grow, but it would be with individuals outside their island or, in a pinch, the armed rebels within the mountains that stuck to the old lines.
Without these conflicts fully united the populations, most of the governments collapsed. The Federation of Malaysia and the Republic of New Guinea managed to survive through directing their populace to focus upon the other nation rather than at each other. While both nations were separated by a fair distance, it was viewed by both sides as only a minor obstacle to go through to reach the object of their focus. As an attempt to speed up their efforts, both create their own Design Bureaus to speed up the process of reaching their foe and to provide with better weaponry for their militaries, based upon the Bureaus found in Forenia. In fact, a couple Forenian engineers rumored to be on either side...
Spoiler: Federation of Malaysia Weapons Technology (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Republic of New Guinea Weapons Technology (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aseaheru on March 01, 2016, 09:49:59 pm
Mostly the lack of tanks from our side, the fact that there are no pistols, sniper/marksmen rifles, field guns, grenades, etc. etc.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 01, 2016, 11:37:48 pm
2) I think that giving ore expensive tanks is a bad idea, better give some armored cars\assault guns\light tanks or limit vehicles to trucks
3) Adding some Japanese or American weapons can make a nice mix of real world and alternate universe
4) I think modifiying designs to use uniform set of machineguns\autocannons would be nice.
5) Malaysia has no machinegun and it looks like a notable disadvantage
6) No towed guns is weird for post WW2 armies
Post by: andrea on March 02, 2016, 02:54:45 am
But overall, seems good although I'll join with Aseaheru in inner arstotzkan grumbling.
oh, and I agree with UR on the SMG. it was the main recurring character/weapon, a common theme followed by both nations during the whole game. needs more mention.
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 05:42:12 am
Secondly, given the presence of the Model 4 yellowjacket, I'd hazard that Malaysia also has the Sorraia as a result. (I'd assume the the guinean T2 has the AS-1924 in place of the Brumbies/Sorraias)
As for the SMG, I'd guess it's outdated by this point. That and the amount of lawsuits over the damn thing would make anyone using it untenable :P
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 02, 2016, 07:11:07 am
Quote
Secondly, given the presence of the Model 4 yellowjacket, I'd hazard that Malaysia also has the Sorraia as a result. (I'd assume the the guinean T2 has the AS-1924 in place of the Brumbies/Sorraias)This. + both sides should get some AA weapons. I suggest giving AC-18 to Guinea because their fighter uses it. Malaysia may get Bumblebee AT/AA. In this case Malaysian cargo ship should be slightly modified to use Sorraria\Bumblebee instead of current weapon setup.
Also, To compensate Malaysia getting a Sorraria machinegun(one more desing), I suggest to give Guinea AS-M17A motorcycle. It is a nice vehicle with a nice history
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 09:46:24 am
And considering the horrible mix of weapons nationality, I am confused which faction I should support.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 02, 2016, 09:51:34 am
Or did its orbit decay enough to impact?
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 09:55:18 am
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 09:59:11 am
As for the extra design, the motorcycle is going to make things a little imbalanced. Maybe give guinea grenades or the flamethrower instead?
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 10:09:14 am
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 10:12:56 am
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 10:14:53 am
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 10:32:06 am
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 10:33:58 am
Post by: Aseaheru on March 02, 2016, 10:40:15 am
Why not just say that your rocket is powered by patriotism and
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 10:41:41 am
So, you have more ammo than was ever made on earth.HERE- wait wrong universe.
Why not just say that your rocket is powered by patriotism andbullshitmagic?
ALL GLORY TO ARSTOTZKA, YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS OF MY SPACE NATION, DIRY FORENIAN!
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 10:53:04 am
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 10:55:28 am
Post by: Aseaheru on March 02, 2016, 11:32:56 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 02, 2016, 11:52:36 am
Mostly the lack of tanks from our side, the fact that there are no pistols, sniper/marksmen rifles, field guns, grenades, etc. etc.
The lack of Arstotzka tanks is due to them having the Navy slot all to themselves. Lack of the rest of the stuff is so I can have you capture stuff from the quite large number of warlords when you wipe them out one by one.
Secondly, given the presence of the Model 4 yellowjacket, I'd hazard that Malaysia also has the Sorraia as a result. (I'd assume the the guinean T2 has the AS-1924 in place of the Brumbies/Sorraias)
I would assume the mounting of the Sorraia in a plane has it hold a quite different design than the standard weapon. As for the Brumby, I may just replace that with the officer weapon (Making the Republic have the AS-1924 and the Federation have the Flamethrower).
And considering the horrible mix of weapons nationality, I am confused which faction I should support.
Federation has a distribution of 5 Moskurg, 4 Arstotzka, and 1 United Forenia designs. Republic has a distribution of 5 Arstotzka, 4 Moskurg, and 1 United Forenia design.
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 11:54:21 am
Actually, they beat us to the punch with vehicles. We just built better ones when we got around to doing it.YADDAADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADAAAAA I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE SOUND OF HOW GLORIOUS ARSTOTZKA IS!!! (https://youtu.be/HH3hdwIeKnk)
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 12:27:16 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 02, 2016, 12:31:18 pm
Quote
I would assume the mounting of the Sorraia in a plane has it hold a quite different design than the standard weapon. As for the Brumby, I may just replace that with the officer weapon
Tank without machineguns is not a good idea, tank with several infantry-sized flamethrowers is a potential oven for the crew. You may replace Brumbys with MK-47 that are more light machineguns than proper assault rifles
BTW, general purpose machinegun looks more useful than a Flamethrower. Add better fighter and better assault rifle and Republic is in a better shape
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 12:49:01 pm
Republic is in a better shape
Republic has a distribution of 5 Arstotzka, 4 Moskurg, and 1 United Forenia design.Self-explanatory.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 02, 2016, 04:37:06 pm
Spoiler: Federation of Malaysia Weapons Technology (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Republic of New Guinea Weapons Technology (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Common (click to show/hide)
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 04:47:18 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 02, 2016, 07:51:37 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 08:01:32 pm
Post by: Kot on March 02, 2016, 08:03:12 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2016, 08:04:23 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 02, 2016, 08:20:32 pm
Oof, the T25? Thats gonna need upgunning quick.
With the amount of downgrading I needed to do to bring down the cost of the T33 to equal the cost of the Breaker, it was essentially a T25. Might as well just use that.
For simplicities sake both should use metric. Less headaches for us non-US players :P
I originally was going to. Then I saw the happy accident that Malaysia actually uses portions of the Imperial system. Didn't know that until after I gave it the Moskurg weapons. With that and a couple other coincidences I am now noticing makes me want to keep the Imperial system around for use by the Federation.
Post by: Sensei on March 02, 2016, 10:03:42 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 02, 2016, 10:23:02 pm
Hi guys.
Greetings Sensei. Do have any complaints about the preview for the OP I constructed for the new game?
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 02, 2016, 11:06:15 pm
snipI like this balanced layout but again I suggest to add AA weapons to the mix.
Give Bumblebee AT/AA for federation, AC-18 for republic. While those weapons are rather different in role both are rather good for early Anti-aircraft use and can be used against ground targets. Federation will get more anti-tank power, while Republic will have more anti-soft target power. Different but balanced.
Alternatively you can give both a more modern 20mm automatic united Florenia AA gun based on a rather ancient AC-18 Anyway total lack of anti-aircraft weapons is wrong for island nations that were in war with Japan.
Post by: Sensei on March 02, 2016, 11:09:30 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 02, 2016, 11:36:26 pm
Alternatively you can give both a more modern 20mm automatic united Florenia AA gun based on a rather ancient AC-18 Anyway total lack of anti-aircraft weapons is wrong for island nations that were in war with Japan.
I think I shall do this, but use a descendant of the Bumblebee rather than the AC-18, so I can use a descendant of the Arstotzkan Semi-automatic pistol and have the 'combined' category remain balanced in terms of the location of origin the designs that inspired the descendants came from.
Going to put up the three threads relatively soon. Thinking of having this essentially serve as the OOC thread while the International thread of the game only displays the turns for ease of reading.
Looks decent. It's probably for the better that you've pared back the number of equipment items. The older game was at risk of getting out of hand with the variety of different small arms and artillery pieces and other items to account for. I was starting to think that if I continued much further forward, I would have to simplify the game somehow or focus on say, just the air force or just the navy.
I'm likely going to attempt to circumvent the large lists you had to deal with by having the old tech automatically phase out with a new/better design (units system should help in keeping track of when something's been completely phased out) and may help focus things by having the generals send through some requests for new equipment. Various treaties that prevent development of certain weapons will most certainly come into play (At dates that will be earlier or later than in our timeline or even ones that haven't been done in real life, so foreknowledge of treaties won't mean much), and if things start getting specialized for Jungle environments, I may have the leaders get involved in conflicts within Africa, the Middle East, or other regions to shake things up. And let's not forget the rogue giant mech prototypes of indeterminate capability that are running around in this region of the world...
Post by: RAM on March 03, 2016, 01:52:08 am
It'd be nice to see an actual cold war sometime, with lots of espionage and threats but no actual combat unless things turn hot. It would probably mostly rely upon looking like you are dangerous while trying to conserve your resources until you are ready to end the blasphemous swine and also facing the troubles of keeping the populace willing to go to war but unwilling to demand one... Possible outcomes would involve decisive first-and-final strikes, a protracted war reducing all parties into non-entity status and being overcome by external forces, or one or other party being driven to economic ruin trying to compete with an over-estimation of their enemy...
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 03, 2016, 12:32:41 pm
International Turn Thread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156705.0)
Federation of Malaysia Thread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156703.0)
Republic of New Guinea Thread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156704.0)
Will any of the old "design bureau" games be considered for inclusion?
It'd be nice to see an actual cold war sometime, with lots of espionage and threats but no actual combat unless things turn hot. It would probably mostly rely upon looking like you are dangerous while trying to conserve your resources until you are ready to end the blasphemous swine and also facing the troubles of keeping the populace willing to go to war but unwilling to demand one... Possible outcomes would involve decisive first-and-final strikes, a protracted war reducing all parties into non-entity status and being overcome by external forces, or one or other party being driven to economic ruin trying to compete with an over-estimation of their enemy...
That's generally what this will likely turn into when each side has control of a WMD. Right now, conventional conflicts are possible, but that may not be true for long.
As for the other design bureau games, I'll have them mentioned with their systems in the OP if I knew what all of them were. I know Aseaheru has one, but the rest are unknown to me at the current time.
Post by: Kot on March 03, 2016, 12:39:15 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 03, 2016, 12:44:57 pm
So... will there be a list of players on either side or are we free to come and go?
Whichever side design bureau you post in is the one you join and you cannot flip to the other one unless I decide to create an event in the espionage section that has an engineer of one side essentially kidnapped and causes them to join the other. Not really too much in favor of that, but there is always a chance it might show up later on.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 03, 2016, 12:49:39 pm
As for the other design bureau games, I'll have them mentioned with their systems in the OP if I knew what all of them were. I know Aseaheru has one, but the rest are unknown to me at the current time.I had a few.
I'll link it soon. Pretty sure it's OP links to several more iterations of the same concept.
Failure 1 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152656.msg6455400#msg6455400)
Failure 2 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=144578.msg5718948#msg5718948)
Grand Success (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.msg4614964#msg4614964)
Post by: Aseaheru on March 03, 2016, 12:51:50 pm
-edit-
Also, the OOC thread is locked.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 03, 2016, 01:04:02 pm
Also, the OOC thread is locked.
As I mentioned, this thread will be serving that purpose so that the International thread can contain all the turns right in a row for both ease of catching up and if people would want to read through them later.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 03, 2016, 01:22:55 pm
Post by: Baffler on March 03, 2016, 02:04:55 pm
Post by: Sensei on March 03, 2016, 08:28:04 pm
It'd be nice to see an actual cold war sometime, with lots of espionage and threats but no actual combat unless things turn hot.I always liked the idea of an arms race game in the cold war, but with the two player nations being part of the proxy wars fought by the US and Russia. Real life examples include the Korean and Vietnam wars. Just look at this list (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_related_to_the_Cold_War) of wars where one or both sides were supported by the US or Russia, even if US troops never fought Russian troops.
It allows for a small regional conflict which isn't historically out of character, and both sides can subtly influence the positions of their patron states. As an added bonus, if you screw up the balance of the game, you can set it back by having the US or Russia send aid (or bombers!)
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 04, 2016, 12:09:51 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 04, 2016, 01:02:01 am
I suggest to use quaterly or half-yearly turns, because we will get to 1970s while having very antique weapons
Let's see how 1 design, 2 revision on a 1 year turn compares to outside progress before we speed things up past that. Besides, the countries are on the less developed side of things, so being at least a bit behind does kinda make sense.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 04, 2016, 03:35:05 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 04, 2016, 10:34:45 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 04, 2016, 11:59:42 pm
Also, can a lurker or two find it in their hearts to join us? Preferably two.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 05, 2016, 12:19:20 am
What are the ways of getting more resources? Improving logistics as usual? In last games it was rather important to spend design efforts on civilian stuff just for that and I can't say I liked that.
Civilian industries of both sides will take ideas based upon your designs and outside ideas to improve themselves to provide more and more resources over time. Both sides will be increasing at the same rate, though, so don't worry about that. As for logistics, the only one you will have to worry about is getting your soldiers to the front lines faster, as I will be doing some basic tracking of their positions.
Oh, as forgot to mention earlier, the size of both militaries increases equally based upon the results of a 1d10 roll each turn. I may occasionally run a propaganda event where one side can increase their gains by a small amount, though nothing unbalanced.
So, can we get a count of the engies on both sides? Funk, Kot and I joined New Guinea, how many we have arrayed against us?
Also, can a lurker or two find it in their hearts to join us? Preferably two.
The Federation of Malaysia has the exact same count of individuals as you, actually. Count should grow as the game goes on, hopefully.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 06, 2016, 05:31:22 am
Quote from: rules
ResultsI am not sure it will work well for revisions. Basically revision here = add one problem and one resource of cost to your design.
The following chart is a simple list of what different rolls would provide as a result with the rolls. Sabotage causes a -1 to the roll.
0 +3 Resource Cost, +3 Problems
1 +2 Resource Cost, +2 Problems
2 +1 Resource Cost, +2 Problems
3 +2 Resource Cost, +1 Problems
4 +1 Resource Cost, +1 Problems
5 +1 Resource Cost
6 Just as Planned
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 06, 2016, 11:02:02 am
Quote from: rulesResultsI am not sure it will work well for revisions. Basically revision here = add one problem and one resource of cost to your design.
The following chart is a simple list of what different rolls would provide as a result with the rolls. Sabotage causes a -1 to the roll.
0 +3 Resource Cost, +3 Problems
1 +2 Resource Cost, +2 Problems
2 +1 Resource Cost, +2 Problems
3 +2 Resource Cost, +1 Problems
4 +1 Resource Cost, +1 Problems
5 +1 Resource Cost
6 Just as Planned
Looks like I had forgotten to add that revisions add a +1 to the roll, making it a 1 in 3 chance of things going as planned rather than a 1 in 6.
Post by: Taricus on March 06, 2016, 11:04:39 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 06, 2016, 02:52:17 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 07, 2016, 04:18:06 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 07, 2016, 04:25:16 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 07, 2016, 04:49:34 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 07, 2016, 04:50:40 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 07, 2016, 04:53:01 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 07, 2016, 04:58:18 pm
Will we have the chance to actually specify our unit organisation later?
You can send messages to the generals of the military stressing usage of certain designs that will bias deployment to units armed with that equipment. Precise deployment is not within your organization's mandate, but given enough successful designs that boost effectiveness of the soldiers, they will start to believe that you will know best with deployments. Of course, this is a double-edged sword and they will listen to you less and less if you wind up providing ineffective or detrimental designs.
So, each infantry unit is roughly a battalion? Interesting.
It's actually equal to the lower end of regiments at the time of the second World War (Edit: Also the upper end of battalions of the time, too). Should note this is only for this game, though. I had used unit so it could be scalable depending upon the size of the nation you are in charge of. If someone uses the system with you in charge of large nations, the <unit> designation could represent numbers far larger than that (ex. a far future game where interstellar empires clash could have each unit represent millions of soldiers).
Post by: Taricus on March 07, 2016, 05:00:23 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 07, 2016, 05:35:36 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 07, 2016, 05:54:55 pm
Battalions typically cap off around 800 men.
Modern do. Apparently closer to the second world war (where the setting is), the size of a battalion ranged from 400-1000 soldiers, and regiments were from 1000-2000. It's a case of either or, though I'll probably go with the former so the amount of soldiers had by each side doesn't become ridiculously huge as we reach the modern day and regiments become larger.
Post by: Taricus on March 07, 2016, 05:57:03 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 09, 2016, 01:43:46 pm
Post by: andrea on March 09, 2016, 01:56:03 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 10, 2016, 07:19:17 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 11, 2016, 05:21:15 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 14, 2016, 12:45:48 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 14, 2016, 10:51:08 am
Yo, Zanzetkuken, what are the chances of acquiring equipment, tech, designs, or similar from other countries? Impossible, possible only in special events/via capturing them, at will, or somewhere in between?
Spies can sometimes capture designs, soldiers can sometimes capture tech.
Post by: RAM on March 15, 2016, 01:11:31 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 15, 2016, 01:23:48 am
What about out-of-game nations? Can we buy I.C.B.M.s from France?
That will be akin to the design competitions of Sensei's thread. Only running the propaganda type right now, due to limited design amounts.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 15, 2016, 02:27:38 am
What about out-of-game nations? Can we buy I.C.B.M.s from France?You lost all hope to design something viable yourself? :D
Post by: Sheb on March 15, 2016, 02:33:39 am
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 15, 2016, 02:36:48 am
Post by: Taricus on March 15, 2016, 02:39:05 am
Post by: piratejoe on March 15, 2016, 03:08:36 am
Well, if you want organised, efficient and effective designs, join Malaysia. If you don't, join guinea :P
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 15, 2016, 03:12:19 am
...also expect bad times ahead.I suspect Guinea developed another shiny theoretical design to scare us with blueprints.
BTW, how is your progress? I hope you are discussing revisions trying to find a way to make whatever you designed this turn usable
Post by: piratejoe on March 15, 2016, 03:25:31 am
I suspect Guinea developed another shiny theoretical design to scare us with blueprints.You will fear the power of the [REDACTED] which is a powerful new [REDACTED] which will [REDACTED] your [REDACTED]....that's if it gets voted,then again the other thing that might get voted will still [REDACTED] your [REDACTED] though that's your [REDACTED] and not your [REDACTED+REDACTED]
Post by: Aseaheru on March 15, 2016, 03:49:19 am
What about out-of-game nations? Can we buy I.C.B.M.s from France?This is the sort of thing I was asking about, specifically.
Sheb, I would say join NG, but last I checked we had twice the population.
As for that theoretical design, thats mostly because someone decided all suppressors had to be integral to the weapon, and not detachable like how optionally suppressed weapons are.
Post by: Taricus on March 15, 2016, 03:57:07 am
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 15, 2016, 10:30:34 am
Sheb, I would say join NG, but last I checked we had twice the population.I think Federation has 7 now and looks like we are more active
Post by: piratejoe on March 15, 2016, 11:03:20 pm
Turn's out good ol [REDACTED] isnt getting made due to tech issues and also because of the new [REDACTED] we are making.I suspect Guinea developed another shiny theoretical design to scare us with blueprints.You will fear the power of the [REDACTED] which is a powerful new [REDACTED] which will [REDACTED] your [REDACTED]....that's if it gets voted,then again the other thing that might get voted will still [REDACTED] your [REDACTED] though that's your [REDACTED] and not your [REDACTED+REDACTED]
Post by: Taricus on March 15, 2016, 11:04:04 pm
Post by: piratejoe on March 15, 2016, 11:23:07 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 16, 2016, 03:39:50 am
Post by: Kot on March 16, 2016, 10:58:26 am
Post by: piratejoe on March 16, 2016, 01:54:33 pm
Post by: Kot on March 16, 2016, 02:06:30 pm
Not really.
Post by: RAM on March 16, 2016, 06:34:08 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 19, 2016, 07:54:28 pm
Post by: Kot on March 19, 2016, 07:57:37 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 19, 2016, 08:01:07 pm
-edit-
Not impossible Kot, comeon. We just never had to deal with new tech cost before, except mildly on ships, and even then we got a ship when it was new.
Though, it does have me wondering if its just one roll for the whole thing (as I suspect) or multiple rolls, which I think was how it was done initially, though Im probably wrong.
Post by: Taricus on March 19, 2016, 08:04:47 pm
You guys just need to be more... restrained in your designs.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 19, 2016, 08:07:00 pm
And the integral suppressor was Zan being interesting.
Post by: Kot on March 19, 2016, 08:08:36 pm
And the integral suppressor was Zan being interesting.Yeah, we literally just needed to upsize the suppressor from the pistol, not make an totally new tech of integrated suppressors.
Post by: Taricus on March 19, 2016, 08:30:09 pm
Post by: Kot on March 19, 2016, 08:35:42 pm
Well, I don't think you have an AR with a threaded barrel to accept a detachable suppressor at any rate so... :PConsidering that you can thread a barrel at your own fucking home with basic tools I don't see how this would have been a problem.
Oh, right, okay, other than upsizing the suppressor, we would have to thread the barrel. That's arguably still less work than making integrated suppressor.
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on March 19, 2016, 10:07:22 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 19, 2016, 10:37:06 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 19, 2016, 10:40:05 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 19, 2016, 10:46:54 pm
Besides, it wouldn't feel the same.
Post by: Taricus on March 20, 2016, 05:40:49 am
Post by: Kot on March 20, 2016, 06:29:46 am
So whatever.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 20, 2016, 09:38:53 am
I am trying to do a my own version of ruleset for a topic vs topic arms race game. Note that I will not GM it, I just want to post it here for someone else using it (or I may coGM with someone who will do the setting\writing part of the game while I will be busy with rolls)
Problem #1 of each and every design game I have seen
It is nearly impossible to get a realistic composition of forces. Players just can't design everything that army may use. Lets look at early WW2 land force: Small arms (pistol, rifle, anti-tank rifle, submachinegun, machinegun), vehicles: (truck, artillery tractor, armored car, light tank, medium tank, heavy tank) Artillery: (mortar, light AA, heavy AA, anti-tank gun, light howitzer, medium howitzer, heavy howitzer), misc(landmine, grenade, radio) One of each = 21 designs without airforce, navy and various minor stuff like sniper rifles\shotguns\motorcycles\self-propelled artillery .
Solutions of this:
1) Use limited amount of designs. It works but it creates weird wars like when two island nations created no military vessel in 26 years of conflict or when grenades and landmines get "invented" in 1930s
2) Just give players enough actions to design everything. This approach devalues actions, makes new designs boring "one of the many" and overload the GM. I think it can't work.
3) Limit design teams to some niche (airforce\navy\land vehicles\small arms) and keep other weapons in a vague background. I think this approach can work rather nicely. Yet some players may find it boring to focus in one field.
4) Declare design teams to be nothing but a part of national industry. Everything that is not designed by players exists as developed by others\procured abroad or something. The problem here is that GM either needs to design everything himself(If he tries to do that he will either go mad or abandon the game) or force players to guess what kind of local designs are their competitors and what kind of enemy designs they need to defeat in battle
Which approach do you like the most? How to counter their disadvantages? Maybe you know 5th+ way(s)?
Post by: Aseaheru on March 20, 2016, 10:11:09 am
Limiting the number of design actions has merit, but then its nearly impossible to keep limits of them that make sense, arent over or under powered, and dont swamp the GM.
Now, combining numbers 1 and 3, to let there be pools of workers who can be set to work on a number of projects, is the worst in practice, and the best in theory, atleast mostly. However, if you want there to be any form of progression in the work force at all, the book keeping gets oppressive quickly, to the point where it becomes work, hard, aggravating work, to keep track without some form of program to help with it.
One of the best weapon design game I have seen was a mixture of 1, 3, and 4, wherein the players represented the management of one design lab in a nation, focusing mostly on a few aspects of the military, although they quickly started trying to do everything and the other groups became mostly just story aspects. Plus, the GM then has to select everything else that gets designed, which puts a fair amount of bias on some designs.
There was also one where each player was a corporation, making designs costed money, and then the designs had to be produced, but, well, that dident last long. A similar system, wherein the group is, say, an independent factory of some flavor, has some merit, but then its somewhat stifling and the bookkeeping, my god, the bookkeeping...
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 20, 2016, 11:30:07 am
Post by: RAM on March 20, 2016, 04:23:44 pm
Also, you could just put a lot of effort in, reference some real armed forces, and put together a comprehensive starting point, and then scale the game-time between updates to match a realistic introduction of new technology. You would need to abstract out the rapid rate of development as people come up with a completely new engine design from scratch in a couple of weeks(What? Why, the perfect engine for our design just happened to have just now been completed after years of work by an eccentric inventor living in an iron shack), but often you find that a military uses many of the same technologies for a long time. You could also gradually increase the effectiveness of extant equipment to replicate minor revisions. Maybe something that was made ten years ago and hasn't been reviewed by the players is now on an abstracted fifth revision that means it has received some minor alterations to adapt new technologies and is not quite as outdated as a glance at its age would imply. If you look at the revision history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#Variants) of a popular weapon then you see a lot of minor improvements that would be beneath the attention of a player-entity...
Post by: Aseaheru on March 20, 2016, 04:53:27 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 21, 2016, 06:31:25 am
Quote
It would require some research, so it would only really be advantageous to G.M.s who already had an interest in that conflictResearch is not a problem at all. Adapting all real world weapons and their variants to the game system is a problem
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 21, 2016, 10:38:23 am
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 21, 2016, 11:05:24 am
But... Imagine the first turn for the GM. He will need to decide how those 20+ designs from one side interact with 20+ designs from other side and come with some kind of result.
Besides, simpler way to do it is to have several design actions per turn. Like design+revision but 3-5 from turn and players must choose from different, rather broad design categories. This way most categories will be filled rather quickly BUT the price is GM's sanity.
Speaking about broad design categories...
I am thinking about this distribution for 1930s-1950s tech period
1) Small arms
2) Misc infantry equipment (everything from uniforms to RPGs)
3) Tanks, armored cars, assault guns, IFV and APCs
4) Other land vehicles
5) Artillery
6) Navy
7) Light aircrafts
8 ) Heavy aircrafts
9) Misc (nuclear bombs, radars, ballistic missiles go here)
Any thoughts?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 21, 2016, 11:58:51 am
But... Imagine the first turn for the GM. He will need to decide how those 20+ designs from one side interact with 20+ designs from other side and come with some kind of result.
Could force parity by using 1 roll per category rather than 1 roll per design, thereby having each nation's design in a category having a rough parity. May need to give a 'basic' tech list and a limit to the new tech to keep things truly balanced to the point where the differences are effectively ignorable.
Post by: Kot on March 21, 2016, 12:48:13 pm
Basically, each player represents their own company. During each turn design phase they can propose one design which will be voted on others, and there shouldn't be any limitations on what that is, though it certainly sounds easier to focus on one group of weapons as the technologies (which could be traded for votes or something, more on that later) and production expertise (you know, the longer you make something the better you get at it) will belong to company, not the country. The companies could also try to boost their effectivity by making advertisements and propaganda to make civilians buy their stuff or donate to their companies.
The voting phase should be split in three(?) parts (one for each slot), during which players can vote on submitted designs (except their own) or vote to leave the second and third design slot empty so the choosen weapons get produced more. This would sort out shitty designs and hopefully allow for higher amount of weapons. Revisions might exist but they seem reduntant.
The problem is it could be a bit straining for both the GM (who would have to manage the clusterfuck of whatthehelleven amount of designs) and sadly, after a while, the game would become incredibly elitist and only the strongest companies would get their designs through... which atually sounds pretty realistic. The way I wrote it is horrible but eh. I have trouble explaining ideas to other people.
Post by: Sheb on March 21, 2016, 01:03:10 pm
Post by: Kot on March 21, 2016, 01:05:58 pm
How about high command require several types of design ("This turn, we wants a small arm for infantrymen, a light artillery piece and a vehicle to transport stuff"), and the players get one design action for each category?Arbitrary limitations by GM, instead of trying to outwit your enemy with ideas at right time it turns into even more RNG based basic plain text descriptions of things.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 21, 2016, 01:24:43 pm
How about high command require several types of design ("This turn, we wants a small arm for infantrymen, a light artillery piece and a vehicle to transport stuff"), and the players get one design action for each category?
How about tying it a bit to how much land is held, the amount of designs you have increasing as you have less land and high command becomes more and more desperate for something to give them an advantage to reclaim momentum? Conversely, more land/resources means that they feel like they do not need you as much and reduce funding/designs per turn.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 21, 2016, 01:28:00 pm
I mean, not all games need to be a contest. There were plenty of games where the players went up against the GM, and that works extremely well because the GM gets to "cheat". (I mean, he doesn't need to keep a full list of all units at all times).
Post by: Aseaheru on March 21, 2016, 01:29:51 pm
However, the amount that the GM would have to do, the sheer quantity of bookkeeping required... The more so if there is to be any form of specialization of design groups, or even just a second nation applying for stuff...
Its the sorta thing that would be awesome for a computer game, but horrible for a human to run.
-ninja edit-
In some ways that would work better, and in some it would work worse. Mostly the "less designs for more land gotten" thing. Modified slightly, it probably would work, say, the more land they have the more quality they want, the less the more quantity.
-ninja edit-
Yah, that game worked well enough.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 21, 2016, 01:44:57 pm
Quote
The voting phase should be split in three(?) parts (one for each slot), during which players can vote on submitted designs (except their own) or vote to leave the second and third design slot empty so the choosen weapons get produced more. This would sort out shitty designs and hopefully allow for higher amount of weapons. Revisions might exist but they seem reduntant..I see conflict of interests here. Say hello PM alliances. "you vote for my stuff, I vote for your stuff"
System like this need no votes, it needs GM playing for high command and deciding what will be purchased by military budget and what will not.
How about high command require several types of design ("This turn, we wants a small arm for infantrymen, a light artillery piece and a vehicle to transport stuff"), and the players get one design action for each category?If this categories will be (semi)random and different for each country such system can work rather well. It will create very different kind of discussions to what we see now.
Post by: Kot on March 21, 2016, 02:08:04 pm
Welcome to semi-accurate simulation of real life. Design studios got fucked over by conflict of interests a lot.QuoteThe voting phase should be split in three(?) parts (one for each slot), during which players can vote on submitted designs (except their own) or vote to leave the second and third design slot empty so the choosen weapons get produced more. This would sort out shitty designs and hopefully allow for higher amount of weapons. Revisions might exist but they seem reduntant..I see conflict of interests here. Say hello PM alliances. "you vote for my stuff, I vote for your stuff"
System like this need no votes, it needs GM playing for high command and deciding what will be purchased by military budget and what will not.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 21, 2016, 03:43:16 pm
Nation starts with categories that have tech level with vague description like
Small arms: (National proficiency X) - Our nation is lagging behind in small arms department having access only to simple bolt action rifles, revolver handguns, shotguns. Machineguns are imported and scarce.
Every turn there are roll for each category that can raise the level and it is GMs job to decide how to comment the change and writes something like:
Small arms: (+Y in national proficiency) - During this year our army got machinegun (optional short description) and semi-automatic pistol(optional short description)
While random rolls are one way to improve national proficiency, designs proposed by a team is another. Every time when design is voted and rolled some number is added to national proficiency.
If players never touch some category it will progress but more slowly than if players invest design actions in it.
Post by: Kot on March 21, 2016, 03:54:48 pm
Post by: RAM on March 22, 2016, 03:49:17 am
About the starting point. While it would likely take a bit more time at startup and would require using custom countries or post-apocalypse groups, would it be possible to give the two groups a list of design categories (ex. Assault Rifle, Pistol, Tank, etc.) and have them fill all of it up by going through a design phase for each category?You could probably assume that all designs were legacy designs from before an intense militarisation and thus do not require rolls, they would be too familiar to have major flaws in their use and too obsolete and widely distributesd to have any exceptional properties...
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on March 22, 2016, 11:51:36 am
We're going to extremes now. Making personalized designs that differ from other is major part of the fun.Who said that players will be unable to do personalized designs?
All I can say is that when I ran my game This one (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.msg4614964#msg4614964), I focused primarily on keeping things as vague as possible, and that worked out excellently.Reread this game... Damn, It was so cool. The best naval warfare among all arms race. Great production system... Would love to see it continued\restarted
Post by: Aseaheru on March 23, 2016, 02:35:29 pm
But yes, that game's naval stuff was particularly enjoyable. Also: Cods.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 26, 2016, 11:02:17 am
Post by: Aseaheru on March 26, 2016, 11:25:30 am
Post by: Kot on March 26, 2016, 11:41:10 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 26, 2016, 01:41:44 pm
All I can say is that when I ran my game This one (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.msg4614964#msg4614964), I focused primarily on keeping things as vague as possible, and that worked out excellently.Reread this game... Damn, It was so cool. The best naval warfare among all arms race. Great production system... Would love to see it continued\restarted
There was one issue though, and that was ground combat. It never really happened.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 26, 2016, 02:38:35 pm
Post by: Sensei on April 03, 2016, 05:15:51 am
Premise:
This would take place as a war between United Forenia and some similarly powerful, ambiguously sized continent (maybe Tropico?), starting in 1937. As the war proceeds, WWII will begin in the background. The outcome of the larger historical war will be affected by the smaller player-controlled war, and vise versa. Player nations will have to accept the support of the allies or axis, under the threat of being overwhelmed by the world power aligned with the other nation if they remain independent. Instead of gaining or losing chunks of land on a continent, nations will gain and lose smaller islands.
Map:
I am thinking that similar to the map of Forenia, the map of Forenia, the other country, and the ocean in between will be split into three lanes. Each lane will consist of separate islands, and armies will automatically attempt to invade adjacent islands. It will not be possible to harass the enemy without an adjacent position unless using something like submarines or special long-range bombers. My concern with this model is that naval combat will be overly important, and worse, always play out the same since only the contents of the islands would differentiate each lane. Not sure what to do about this except maybe put a mutli-segment island in the middle somewhere.
Equipment:
Forenia will start with their equipment from the previous game, which constitutes great small arms but very few naval assets. The other nation will start with less advanced technology, but a better variety of naval assets.
Timescale:
It would be weird if you could only develop one new piece of equipment per year, given that this will take place parallel to some very fast historical advancement in technology. However, I really like having only one design per turn, it's way easier to keep track of. I'm thinking of changing the timescale of a turn to less than a year. Turns will play out just like they did before, only the outside world will advance slower. I'm leaning towards four turns per year and calling them seasons, since Spring 1937 sounds way better than, say, 1/3 1937 or First Half 1937 or whatever. I'm just hoping that isn't too many turns per year so you have jets by 1940 or something.
Resources:
I'm considering changing the ways resources work, both because using the same units for small arms and vehicles is a little wonky at times and giving the team with more land the ability to produce way more vehicles makes things one-sided quickly. Possibly instead of "This island gives 1 ore", it will be something like "Using Aluminum always raises the expense level by 1, but if you have island X aluminum is free" or "Titanium raises expense by 2, but with island Y it is only 1" so the resources and chemicals involved in making better armor, or explosives, or whatever become free/less expensive, rather than every territory gain contributing to having more of your biggest kind of tank/boat/whatever. On the upside, I think having a resource cap that's very vulnerable to attacks of shipping could be fun.
Unrelated, I probably need some more granularity around the top of the scale for, specifically, large watercraft. The difference between Very Expensive aircraft carriers, and a National Effort aircraft carrier is a little drastic to just happen suddenly.
World Powers:
You'll be interacting with the Allies and the Axis in this one. I'm thinking that providing them with good designs might earn you air support or resources. They might also want resources- regular ore, or uranium maybe, which I'd probably have as a resource that you can't use but gains favor with your patrons. Maybe they'll sometimes impose arbitrary rules that make the game or difficult, like requiring you not to use inhumane weapons or demanding that you make some piece of technology that suits their purposes. Also, I can threaten you guys with carpet bombing instead of frost giants. >:)
Bullshit:
One common complaint in the old game that I don't know how to solve was that the effectiveness of some new technology, or the difficulty in designing/manufacturing it, was a bit arbitrary. It was really a case of "guess what Sensei is thinking" for anything where there wasn't very clear historical precedent (hehe, recoilless rifles) at that time and even then it was sometimes a little unclear just how much some new technology stood to change the battlefield. People sometimes seemingly had to just hope they were reading the same wikipedia articles I did, when I researched some piece of technology. I kind of wish there was something a little more clear but the only thing I can think of would be to just draw out a tech tree or something, which would really undermine the creativity. If you have any ideas for how to make new technology feel like less of a guessing game, let me know.
Unit overload:
There's just so many kinds of things! In the previous game we had small arms, support weapons (like artillery or heavy machine guns), ground vehicles, aircraft, watercraft, and technology like radios and encryption. I'm worried that at some point in this game, one faction's junk won't even fit in a single forum post. Judging the different interactions one new gun might have between allied soldiers who are choosing it from among eight guns, and enemy soldiers wielding ten different kind of guns, was hard to keep track of and made some battle posts read really dry. It's overwhelming to re-assess the expense of everything when a nation's resources change too. I'm considering aggressively retiring less-used designs or even setting a hard limit like, "You can only have three kinds of tanks at one time." I may even consider making a spreadsheet for rapid cost calculations, publicly viewable on google docs or something.
Espionage and stealing technology:
I'm thinking of maybe laying out some more specific tasks for spies, so they don't spend nearly every turn trying to steal whatever technology your faction is behind on. Maybe I'll even nix the spy department. I was thinking of adding a "reverse engineering" rule though: If you gained ground in a theatre where the enemy was using a given technology, you get the option to spend a Revise action reverse engineering it, and learning the technology involved, with a chance to fail. You might be able to counter this somewhat by, say, implementing self-destruct devices. Maybe it could even be an espionage action to recover or destroy lost military assets before the enemy can study them...
Well that got a bit long.
Tell me what you think of the rules I've laid out, and if you have any ideas. I'm also taking suggestions for what the other faction might be.
Post by: Kashyyk on April 03, 2016, 05:45:13 am
Map: Perhaps instead of lanes you have a web of connections between Islands? That way you can mix it up with clusters of small Islands, a couple of larger ones, etc. Die to the nature of the map, naval and aerial combat will take precedent, but that happened the same way with Forenia anyway (with land instead of sea).
Equipment: Again, sounds good, so long as you feel it is balanced.
Timescale: The nature of these games is to try and invent the best stuff as quickly as possible anyway, so it'll always happen to an extent. You can always faff song with this in game after all.
Resources: As this will mainly be focusing on vehicles anyway, I think the granularity will mostly be solved itself. I like the idea of islands giving more interesting resource effects as well.
World Powers: Outside intervention really helps add a bit of variety I feel.
BS: If people are suggesting such technology, they should cite their information. Otherwise they shouldn't get upset with what you've come up with. Either way, this isn't our Earth, so anything different, so long as it is self consistent, can just be attributed to slightly different laws of physics.
Unit Overload: Perhaps you can get around this some what by having pre-defined 'equipment slots' for the armies. Ie: a light tank slot, Medium tank slot, heavy machine gun slot, etc. A design will then be created with a slot in mind, and anything already there will be considered out-dated.
Espionage: I like your suggestions on this one, not got much to add though.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on April 03, 2016, 05:50:12 am
Quote
BS: If people are suggesting such technology, they should cite their information. Otherwise they shouldn't get upset with what you've come up with. Either way, this isn't our Earth, so anything different, so long as it is self consistent, can just be attributed to slightly different laws of physics.
The problem is, there are players on both sides. So you get players from side A, saying design X doesn't work, using certain sources. And, on the other side, you have players from Side B, saying the design does work, using other sources.
Post by: Kashyyk on April 03, 2016, 05:58:14 am
This topic always bothered me a little bit, we never have the failures of our forebears because we have hindsight. We know something works because it already did. Adding this bit of uncertainty makes it more interesting, as it won't come down to googling the counter to an existing technology, then hoping you roll well enough.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on April 03, 2016, 06:04:03 am
Quote
This topic always bothered me a little bit, we never have the failures of our forebears because we have hindsight. We know something works because it already did. Adding this bit of uncertainty makes it more interesting, as it won't come down to googling the counter to an existing technology, then hoping you roll well enough.
Sadly, all your solution does is remove the part where you need to google the counter. If you diverge from reality, all that remains is the whims of the dice and the GM.
Post by: Kashyyk on April 03, 2016, 06:08:08 am
Post by: RAM on April 03, 2016, 06:35:53 am
You could have land forces on an island hold the airfields and provide uncontested fire support to aircraft in their airspace, but take massive losses if they try to land in territory controlled by a hostile navy and can be starved over time.
Aircraft could harass naval operations such that navies in enemy territory would suffer constant attrition. Navies would be able to support land invasions but would be hard-pressed to engage the middle of an island where the airfields are, so would need to wait around for a land invasion if they wanted to keep going. Aircraft carriers would bend this a little, but they would consistently be constrained by a small number of small runways...
So land would sort of beat air which would sort of beat naval which would sort of beat land and it would be very expensive or slow to advance if any one of them were resisting effectively. Mostly this would involve making the islands big enough that a battleship couldn't effectively shoot the middle...
If you give players access to uranium, they will
Brace for players to try to change their affiliations half-way through the war or for both nations to want to join the same alliance.
I had an idea of splitting technologies into technologies, parts, and products. An artillery piece might use the 150mm shrapnel ammunition and the compact mechanical aiming system and the airburst fuses, which in turn need large-calibre munitions and compound munitions and mechanical turrets and altitude detection... you could, umm, keep them separate to limit the rate of progress in any one field or something. It sounds complicated now and my mind turned off suddenly.
Post by: Kot on April 03, 2016, 07:52:34 am
Also
I'm just hoping that isn't too many turns per year so you have jets by 1940 or something.it's 1939 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_178).
1940 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caproni_Campini_N.1).
1941 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_E.28/39).
1942 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereznyak-Isayev_BI-1).
And rocket-powered planes were created as early as 1928 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_Ente) and 1929 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_RAK.1).
Brace for players to try to change their affiliations half-way through the war or for both nations to want to join the same alliance.Forenia should go with Axis maybe, I mean, we sold Nazis assault rifles and IIRC USA is pretty annoyed with us actively trying to screw stuff over for them, UK might be annoyed with us stopping being their not-really-colony-but-you-get-the-idea, and so on. This way we would also keep the obviously much better metrics, while Tropico, being the USA puppet, would use imperial.
Post by: Wolfhunter107 on April 03, 2016, 11:07:30 am
Brace for players to try to change their affiliations half-way through the war or for both nations to want to join the same alliance.That's just part of the fun.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 03, 2016, 12:34:23 pm
Also, where the hell is the Tropico weapon design game thing? Ive never seen it and I really want to at this point.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 03, 2016, 01:14:38 pm
Also, where the hell is the Tropico weapon design game thing? Ive never seen it and I really want to at this point.
If there is going to be a war between the two nations, then this is likely to be needed before the start. Could use it as a prototype for various things you would attempt.
Post by: Sensei on April 03, 2016, 01:58:23 pm
Also it would have to end in 1937 ideally, it couldn't change significant aspects of history that were talked about in the other game, and probably people would try to specifically design weapons to counter Forenian towards the end.
Post by: Kot on April 03, 2016, 02:02:17 pm
Kot, you seem to forget that Forenia also helped out the Chinese and Russian forces a fair amount, which keeps the question rather... murky.Russian forces are basically Soviet forces which, were allied with Nazis pre 1940, unless we're speaking Whites but then I don't remember a lot from the game and they don't exist anymore...
As for the Chinese... they fail at being relevant.
bit watch Kot try to make a recoil less rifle immediately, I bet he'd be ticked if it wasn't about as effective as in the other game. ;)Nay. If it was made it would work as real recoiless rifle with proper HEAT rounds, not bullshit physics AP. I don't have anything about abusing certain types of weaponry to get upper hand, as long as it's realistic. AP slugging recoiless rifles aren't.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 03, 2016, 02:20:45 pm
And ya, the main reason why we where salty over the recoilless rifle was the overt physics breakage.
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 03:17:41 pm
One last thing though: I've been thinking of hosting this one on the GiantITP forums (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?34-Message-Board-Games). That would introduce some new players and the long-term though behind this would be that, one day in the distant future, MAYBE, there could be a war between Forenia and the other Turbados where Forenia is played by Bay 12 and Turbados is played by GiantITP. You guys wouldn't be prohibited from playing in the Turbados game, if you already have an account over there or sign up just to play it. Of course, if I do ever get around to the inter-forum war (no guarantees) you would have to later pick a side.
Thoughts?
Post by: Kot on April 21, 2016, 03:21:49 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on April 21, 2016, 03:45:37 pm
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 03:48:33 pm
TBH, if we play it it will proably end with Turbados geared towards war with Forenia.That's definitely a concern I raised earlier. I don't think there's much to do about it besides rely on having different starting technology and a different environment. Beyond that, Forenia will just have to handle it. ;)
If we are doing the inter-forum thing, I might also consider suggestions for other venues. The GITP forums have some caveats, like strict rules on image size that probably haven't been changed since 2003 and a rule ostensibly banning all real-world political discussion. I don't know if that's enforced, but a forum game in which you have to weigh the financial gains versus moral turpitude of selling advanced firearms to Hitler himself could run afoul of that.
Well, simple fix to that is let Forenia have a bit of time to build up to counter Turbados.Also possible. If one side is obviously way ahead of the other, I don't doubt I can think of some kludge to even them out before having them fight each other.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 21, 2016, 03:53:13 pm
Post by: Sheb on April 21, 2016, 03:55:13 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 21, 2016, 04:11:06 pm
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 04:21:09 pm
TVTropes? They'll love this stuff.Possible, but oh my god their forum layout is ugly. That wouldn't necessarily put a halt to things though. I'm not sure if they have drop-down spoilers, or if the spoiler tag there just blacks out text. That could make it hard to organize.
What about Spacebattles?That looks like a nice one, never heard of them before, but they to be active and not too strict, as well as having the necessary forum features. Maybe I can even use that guy's vote counting tool.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 21, 2016, 05:05:15 pm
What about Spacebattles?That looks like a nice one, never heard of them before, but they to be active and not too strict, as well as having the necessary forum features. Maybe I can even use that guy's vote counting tool.
At very least the threadmarking system would prove to be stupid useful.
Oh, as a thought, you might be able to prevent the potential of weapons being designed to counter Forenia by not mentioning that there will be a conflict between Forenia and Turbados in the future. If you are careful in presenting it, it might be possible to keep them unaware Forenia was run, drastically reducing the potential bias reading through that would cause.
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 06:05:10 pm
Post by: Kot on April 21, 2016, 06:17:03 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on April 21, 2016, 06:20:42 pm
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 06:48:36 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 21, 2016, 06:54:08 pm
I did consider that, actually. However, I'm probably going to want to link to the original game as an example of play, and to get people interested. I also like the idea of mentioning historical events that were affected by the Forenia game, and even competing with the sale of Forenian arms when they do try to sell guns abroad. Maybe I'll post in their game discussion first and if people seem on board with the idea, I'll run it without mentioning the Forenia game, only showing it to them if I feel it's necessary to generate interest.
In my experience, they have a potentially unhealthy obsession with weapons. I don't think you will be lacking in people. Although, with their Play-by-Post subforum being relatively small compared to other boards, there may prove to be an issue there.
But we know that and if we play that game, we might want to sabotage or gear up against Forenia.
I personally think we should stay out of the game for a large part, so that our biases aren't introduced and they run through the game with the same level of experience. To use up our time while we wait, I could get back to work on the Stone Age Design game (smaller than the SE asia game, so lack of time shouldn't be affected) and we could determine which weapons of the combined Arstotzka/Moskurg arsenals should be kept.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 21, 2016, 07:38:58 pm
Well, without breaking history.
Thinking about it, the first time that a working design game could be set (atleast, in my view) is the American Civil War era, or just before. Before then most weapon techs seem to have taken a century here or there to get worked on, and it was also when a fair deal of industrial processes where helping to allow gunsmiths to do more and more interesting things.
Post by: RAM on April 21, 2016, 08:18:44 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 21, 2016, 08:37:21 pm
Seems to me that a stone age game would be rather tedious, since it makes me think that it would be along the lines of "OK, lets use this design of sword inorder to stab people" and then sit around for a while. Unless its something like every turn is a decade or something even greater, there wouldn't be that much of a chance to have to change things to react to new tech aswell...
Well, without breaking history.
Thinking about it, the first time that a working design game could be set (atleast, in my view) is the American Civil War era, or just before. Before then most weapon techs seem to have taken a century here or there to get worked on, and it was also when a fair deal of industrial processes where helping to allow gunsmiths to do more and more interesting things.
I'm getting around it by being simply ambiguous as possible about how long each turn is occurring over besides 'generations'. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=157238.0) Likely going to remain that way until someone makes a calendar, and even then it likely wouldn't be equivalent to our own calendar for awhile.
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 08:40:35 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on April 21, 2016, 09:25:03 pm
Post by: Sensei on April 21, 2016, 09:28:16 pm
Edit: I'll probably go ahead on Spacebattles. I got a couple people saying it would be OK. Having looked around, Sufficient Velocity's RP forum is admittedly about twice as active as Spacebattles', but that said, SB is about twice as active as Bay 12 in that department. I think it will be a decent fit. I will add a link when I have written the OP sometime tonight or tomorrow night. Now to start combing through the old thread to see where I left the rules dissertation on Armor penetration which I somehow never linked in the OP..
Post by: Aseaheru on April 24, 2016, 07:57:12 pm
As for my current weapon design game, I think I have tried to do toomuch toofast, and assuch I think its time that I end it.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 24, 2016, 10:10:23 pm
Well, one and a half weapon design games arent enough for me. As such, I plan on doing a cross-forum game shortly, with one side being on these forums and the other being elsewhere. Probably the spacebattles forums. To help keep it differentiated from Sensei's planned game of that, its going to take place in a different setting. Probably a post-cataclymsic subway system under a rather damaged and irradiated city.
As for my current weapon design game, I think I have tried to do toomuch toofast, and assuch I think its time that I end it.
Could try sufficient velocity or alternatehistory.com, so the attention on Space Battles isn't as divided and more places can be introduced to the concept.
Post by: DreamerGhost on April 25, 2016, 01:42:08 am
Fantasy version of Arms Race. Magic, faith and demihuman/inhuman allies.
Post by: Sheb on April 25, 2016, 01:45:40 am
Post by: Aseaheru on April 25, 2016, 02:12:03 am
Mostly in the form of allowing safe, large scale production of any form of gun propellant. With black powder its sulfur, with every other gun propellant its nitric(which is apparently not a word according to firefox) acid and sulfuric acid.
Post by: RAM on April 25, 2016, 04:25:07 am
Perhaps you could have distinct elements(fire), which would be extremely difficult to develop because they are inherently jealous or something, and specific disciplines(burn, combust, light, warm, explode, various effects on spirits and places such as marking out a campsite...) that need to be researched, and specific spells or rituals that need to be researched if you want to use your disciplines with any vague sense of efficiency...
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 25, 2016, 10:07:18 am
The problem is that it becomes harder to design stuff when you're not sure what the universe's rules are. It might also feel unfair if your enemy get a huge advantage from something you didn't know was possible.
So just like what we have to deal with in real life on the cutting edge.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 02, 2016, 10:56:30 am
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on May 02, 2016, 11:59:59 am
Unrelated:
Surprisingly for me, spacebattles arms race is getting stronger than Florenia in the same time period. their 1914 is very competitive against Florenia 1914. They got a nice sidearm sniper rifle, machinegun, howitzer and first real warship.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 01:22:33 pm
Warship is a new thing, and the howitzer was about equal. So, sped up optics design, new ship design, and thats about it.
Post by: Taricus on May 02, 2016, 04:27:19 pm
That being said, after a couple days effort and several days procrastination, I finally did up a list of what the Florenian army would be using.
Spoiler: UNITED FLORENIA EQUIPMENT (click to show/hide)
)Thoughts? Comments?
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 07:00:28 pm
Also, missing grenades, landmines. Moskurg made the better mines, but I dont think they made handgrenades. Also, none of your fancy armor? I also dont know if the designs from the last... Two design phases? The gaint rocks o' death and silliness, the train aircraft carrier, and the individual designs.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 02, 2016, 07:11:58 pm
-Man Portable AT: RPG-28a (This was primarily used to avoid slat over the RRs again. Of course, given the physics fuckery around those we can assume that thouse designs were nicked for power plant plans :P)
We need every advantage we can. Therefore, let there be salt.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 07:13:31 pm
Granted, slat armor stopped them, but they also stopped the RRs. And we can always design a HE rocket.
Post by: Taricus on May 02, 2016, 08:16:23 pm
As for the trucks, I'd assume both would be capable of mounting a weapons in the back or something. Rather, it's the fuel logistics and suspension system that gave the Tiger truck the spot. Keeping both but looking for a better design is something that I did with the ARs purely because neither had a definite advantage over the other
The armour is something being saved later, depending on the steam mecha jokes about turbados and Florenia. Needless to say though that steel armour has dropped out of favour due to the costs and drawbacks of it with most units aside from a few assault units.
The final design phase units are something that's essentially being mothballed. No longer in production and essentially forgotten about. Though the technical experience and technologies used in them will be far from being mothballed. Same with a lot of the stuff that didn't make the list actually
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 09:29:09 pm
Also, we dont have numbers on howmuch the Tiger can hold, but ours holds 8ton.
When was the Osprey made? The combat report should tell us which was better.
Post by: Taricus on May 02, 2016, 09:47:10 pm
As for the truck, the tiger never had a stated weight load limit. However, given the engine on it, I'd surmise that it's just as capable as the HV19, if not more so. And it was stated it had a flat bed as well, so theoretically you could mount a light AA gun or such onto it.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 10:17:09 pm
Post by: Taricus on May 02, 2016, 10:23:56 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 10:52:48 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 02, 2016, 10:54:20 pm
On another note, with the combined nations, which seems to have the better combination of traits with their people?
Moskurg - Fierce
Arstotzka - Patient
Cannala - Ingenuity
Juraki - Artful Design
Post by: Aseaheru on May 02, 2016, 11:02:45 pm
Post by: Taricus on May 02, 2016, 11:09:42 pm
EDIT:
Heyyyyy, what sorta bolt action is it?Dunno, we just said bolt-action when we designed it :P
Post by: Sheb on May 03, 2016, 12:50:57 am
Post by: Taricus on May 03, 2016, 01:04:02 am
Besides, why should we fight one another? We're all F(l)orenian. It's those damned turbadosians that need to all roll over and die.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 03, 2016, 05:11:14 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 03, 2016, 05:41:21 pm
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on May 08, 2016, 05:47:35 am
Each thread has 4 defence industry corporations. Every corp is played by one player and they compete with each other by designing one weapon per turn.
In the same time both countries fight each other in a war.
GM will need to process 8 designs actions per turn, instead of 4 with Sensei's design+revision scheme.
Post by: tryrar on May 08, 2016, 06:51:54 am
Post by: Sheb on May 08, 2016, 07:22:55 am
Got an idea for another kind of 2 thread arms race. Instead of being suggestion game, it is multiplayer.
Each thread has 4 defence industry corporations. Every corp is played by one player and they compete with each other by designing one weapon per turn.
In the same time both countries fight each other in a war.
GM will need to process 8 designs actions per turn, instead of 4 with Sensei's design+revision scheme.
Who decide what design gets accepted then?
Post by: Kashyyk on May 08, 2016, 08:11:04 am
Post by: Aseaheru on May 08, 2016, 10:40:39 am
UR, that system would have the GM screaming, along with the players, since it would require the same group of people to always show up and do stuff.
Post by: Funk on May 08, 2016, 11:49:25 am
It has no way for player to drop in with a suggestion.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 08, 2016, 04:53:13 pm
As for how the corporations themselves run, they could be on the basis of having a pool of points to represent their cash, and their designs costing a set point value for each discrete change (maybe depends upon type (ie. Gun, Artillery, Vehicle, Plane, Boat), the cost increased for the design incorporating tech that neither nation has (ex. Semi-automatic rifles get the penalty if both nations only have bolt-action). If a corporation runs out of money, a new one is made and the old is sold off to one of the others.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 08, 2016, 05:44:46 pm
In other news, Im gonna be starting a new design game in an earth-analog setting, starting in the rough equivalent of 1900. It wont be using the arms race system.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on May 09, 2016, 04:53:22 am
How I would do a corporation based idea.
1) Have 4 players each in each thread.
2) Have a waitlist in each thread to replace inactive CEO from time to time.
3) Give "production points" cost to each design, going away from oil\ore system
4) Have national production point pool. GM will distribute production points between designs and corporations will get victory points proportional to production point(s) spent on their design
5) To limit bookkeeping each side uses only stuff produced in the current turn (It is assumed that if you produce 4.0 points worth of rifle A during the first turn and 4.0 points worth of rifle during the second you still have 4.0 points of rifle. Production is spent on ammo\spare parts\replacements. Not entirely realistic but MUCH simpler)
6) Sometimes it may be better to create an inferior design to get more points for your corporation.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 13, 2016, 02:01:39 am
Post by: Kashyyk on May 13, 2016, 03:33:33 am
Post by: Sheb on May 13, 2016, 03:53:52 am
Post by: Taricus on May 13, 2016, 06:53:54 am
Nothing like the Moskurg RR, but still :P
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 13, 2016, 08:11:58 am
Sum up for people too lazy to read it all?
46 km/h tank in 1920.
That's about it, really.
Sensei also made the mistake of showing the roll results, which allows people to complain about how bad or good the effects of the roll are.
Post by: Taricus on May 13, 2016, 08:18:52 am
Post by: Aseaheru on May 13, 2016, 09:00:03 am
Sum up for people too lazy to read it all?
46 km/h tank in 1920.
That's about it, really.
Sensei also made the mistake of showing the roll results, which allows people to complain about how bad or good the effects of the roll are.
The tank also got a 1 on its transmission and a 2 on its gun, both of which still work wonders.
Next thing other side gets also rolls a 1 and is complete failure.
Salty salt salt.
Hell, at this point Im probably going to be ducking out of the game, starting another one on the spacebattles forums to get my weapon design fix, since the one here only seems to have Funk interested.
Post by: Taricus on May 13, 2016, 09:06:34 am
Post by: Aseaheru on May 13, 2016, 09:46:25 am
Post by: Taricus on May 13, 2016, 09:49:53 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 13, 2016, 10:04:16 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 13, 2016, 05:00:07 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 13, 2016, 06:35:12 pm
Oh, Zan. can you add my new weapon design game to the OP? Currently its just Funk playing, and that gets kinda slow.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 14, 2016, 02:34:18 pm
That may work, but would probably be tedious and with little benefit.
Oh, Zan. can you add my new weapon design game to the OP? Currently its just Funk playing, and that gets kinda slow.
If it's built up over time, then it shouldn't be too bad.
Game's been added.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 14, 2016, 02:59:16 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 17, 2016, 01:29:37 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 17, 2016, 01:42:56 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 17, 2016, 01:57:40 pm
Sounds like alot of work for the GM unless someone writes up a program to generate the fancy designs for you.
Just make a roll chart of different categories, then create something using existing tech that is extremely large (like the V3 Cannon) or advanced when compared to existing tech, causing it's component tech to add expense levels (like a tank in 1900). Alternatively, make it a magitech setting and go completely and utterly insane with the wonder weapons.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on May 20, 2016, 10:17:46 am
They have shitty infantry weapons. We had SMGs, light machineguns, semi-auto rifles, 20mm autocannon, recoilless rifles. They have bolt action rifles and basic machineguns.
Their "super tank" looks only slightly better than T1 Smasher.
They have no airforce at all.
Their only advantage is a real navy.
Post by: Kashyyk on May 20, 2016, 10:53:26 am
Post by: Aseaheru on May 20, 2016, 11:31:30 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 20, 2016, 01:40:33 pm
The fact that they have to consider navies at all is why their other equipment is worse. Even if only one in every four actions is naval, that still means the rest of their gear is 3/4 the effectiveness of ours.
Plus they started out a bit worse in terms of tech.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 20, 2016, 02:23:46 pm
Post by: piratejoe on May 21, 2016, 04:31:43 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 23, 2016, 07:47:31 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 25, 2016, 09:47:05 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on May 26, 2016, 02:04:20 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 26, 2016, 08:53:51 pm
Code: [Select]
using System;
using System.IO;
namespace rollResultCalculator
{
class MainClass
{
public static void Main (string[] args)
{
int uses;
Console.WriteLine ("How many times have you run this program before?");
uses = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine());
string filename = "output" + uses + ".txt";
int decision = 1;
FileStream outFile = new FileStream(filename, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);
StreamWriter writeToFile = new StreamWriter (outFile);
Console.WriteLine ("This is the output file name for this run: " + filename);
while (decision == 1) {
Random rnd = new Random ();
int randomNumber = rnd.Next (1, 100);
string weapon;
int attempts = 0;
int attemptsResult = 0;
int rollResult = 0;
int check = 0;
int penalty = 0;
string printResult;
string writerOutput;
int attemptsMultiply = 5;
Console.WriteLine ("Input weapon name:");
weapon = Convert.ToString (Console.ReadLine ());
writeToFile.WriteLine (weapon);
Console.WriteLine ("Input number of prior attempts of this weapon type:");
attempts = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (attempts == 0) {
Console.WriteLine ("Has a design similar to this type been made before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)? 1 = Yes, 0 = No");
check = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (check == 0) {
Console.WriteLine ("Has a design of this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. If design is a tank, has the foe made a tank)? 1 = Yes, 0 = No");
check = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (check == 0) {
Console.WriteLine ("Has a design similar to this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)? 1 = Yes, 0 = No");
check = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (check == 0) {
Console.WriteLine ("Has a design of this type been made upon the planet before? 1 = Yes, 0 = No");
check = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (check == 0) {
Console.WriteLine ("Has a design similar to this type been made upon the planet before? 1 = Yes, 0 = No");
check = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
if (check == 0) {
penalty = 30;
} else {
penalty = 25;
}
} else {
penalty = 20;
}
} else {
penalty = 15;
}
} else {
penalty = 10;
}
} else {
penalty = 5;
}
rollResult = randomNumber - penalty;
} else {
attemptsResult = attempts * attemptsMultiply;
rollResult = randomNumber + attemptsResult;
}
if (rollResult > 5) {
if (rollResult > 15) {
if (rollResult > 30) {
if (rollResult > 45) {
if (rollResult > 60) {
if (rollResult > 80) {
if (rollResult > 100) {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has no problems.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has minor problems with its existing components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has minor problems with its new components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has minor problems with all its components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has major problems with its new components, and minor problems with its other components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has minor problems with its new components, and major problems with its other components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design has major problems with all its components.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
} else {
printResult = Convert.ToString ("The design will not work at all.");
Console.WriteLine (printResult);
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
}
writeToFile.WriteLine ();
Console.WriteLine ("Do you want to run this again? 1 = yes, 0 = no");
decision = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine ());
}
writeToFile.Close();
outFile.Close();
}
}
}
Possibly something that can take a list of equipment and available resources and applies expense levels to them?
I shall attempt to get something up for it by tomorrow.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 27, 2016, 09:57:57 pm
Possibly something that can take a list of equipment and available resources and applies expense levels to them?
This should work. (http://www.mediafire.com/download/zjz6u94mafm6uat/expenseCalculator.zip) Code is below. It is not writing out a file, but I'm chalking that up to having encrypted the disk on my linux computer for now. Going to be finding out what went wrong with the prior one now. Tell me if there are any issues.
Code: [Select]
using System;
using System.IO;
namespace expenseCalculator
{
class MainClass
{
public static void Main (string[] args)
{
int uses;
Console.WriteLine ("How many times have you run this program before?");
uses = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine());
string filename = "expense_calculator_output_" + uses + ".txt";
int decision = 1;
FileStream outFile = new FileStream(filename, FileMode.Create, FileAccess.Write);
StreamWriter writeToFile = new StreamWriter (outFile);
Console.WriteLine ("This is the output file name for this run: " + filename);
string weapon;
int orecost;
int oreavailable;
int oilcost;
int oilavailable;
int oreexpense;
int oilexpense;
int complexityexpense;
int oreexpenselevels = 0;
int oilexpenselevels = 0;
int totalexpenselevels = 0;
while (decision == 1) {
Console.WriteLine ("Name of the Design:");
weapon = Console.ReadLine ();
writeToFile.WriteLine (weapon);
Console.WriteLine ("How much of the first resource does this cost?");
orecost = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine());
Console.WriteLine ("How much of the first resource is available?");
oreavailable = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
Console.WriteLine ("How much of the second resource does this cost?");
oilcost = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine());
Console.WriteLine ("How much of the second resource is available?");
oilavailable = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
Console.WriteLine ("How many pieces of technology that have the complex tag are there?");
complexityexpense = Convert.ToInt32 (Console.ReadLine ());
oreexpense = orecost - oreavailable;
oilexpense = oilcost - oilavailable;
Console.WriteLine ("The amount of ore needed is:" + oreexpense);
Console.WriteLine ("The amount of oil needed is:" + oilexpense);
if (oreexpense > 0) {
if (oreexpense > 2) {
if (oreexpense > 5) {
if (oreexpense > 9) {
if (oreexpense > 14) {
oreexpenselevels = 5;
} else {
oreexpenselevels = 4;
}
} else {
oreexpenselevels = 3;
}
} else {
oreexpenselevels = 2;
}
} else {
oreexpenselevels = 1;
}
}
if (oilexpense > 0) {
if (oilexpense > 2) {
if (oilexpense > 5) {
if (oilexpense > 9) {
if (oilexpense > 14) {
oilexpenselevels = 5;
} else {
oilexpenselevels = 4;
}
} else {
oilexpenselevels = 3;
}
} else {
oilexpenselevels = 2;
}
} else {
oilexpenselevels = 1;
}
}
totalexpenselevels = oreexpenselevels + oilexpenselevels + complexityexpense;
Console.WriteLine ("The expense level for the device is " + totalexpenselevels);
writeToFile.WriteLine (totalexpenselevels);
writeToFile.WriteLine ();
Console.WriteLine ("Do you want to run this again? 1 = yes, 0 = no");
decision = Convert.ToInt32(Console.ReadLine ());
}
writeToFile.Close();
outFile.Close();
}
}
}
Edit: Added a display for the number on the prior one. Turns out, it is working properly, I was just being an idiot in tracing where the results were. Here's a download link for the .exe file. (http://www.mediafire.com/download/1mezb88b6xm2e9p/rollResult.zip)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 28, 2016, 07:44:52 am
The basic structure would be identical to Sensei's games and others, so I'm not going to discuss that.
The difference would be that this takes place in the Cold War. 1950's and onwards.
For that, there are a few mechanics.
The MAD meter and influence
A defining charestristic of the Cold war is the possibility for mutual annihilation. Both sides can design nuclear weaponry and related systems, leading to greatly increasing tensions. For that matter, a MAD meter is kept, which ticks closer to armaggedon every time such a provocative weapon is designed. (Or you know, since we don't want to blow up the world on turn 3, it might result in a mutual disarmament treaty, meaning either side looses it's fancy toys.)
Now, while most of this weaponry is unlikely to be used, it has it's other benefits. Having the advantage is the arms race allows the country to more easily influence global events among other benefits.
Flashpoints
Both major superpowers never entered in conflict. So, rather than one, major conflict, there was a series of crisises, proxy wars, and so on. Both sides gain influence, which they can use at times to trigger conflicts of their choice. Things like the Cuban missile crisis and the Korean war, for example.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 28, 2016, 09:23:16 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 28, 2016, 09:38:10 am
Post by: Aseaheru on May 28, 2016, 11:08:51 am
Post by: 3_14159 on May 28, 2016, 04:05:53 pm
Here's the current code. Got an error where the rollResult int value will only go up or down 1 level upon the if-else statements, no matter what the value of penalty or attempts is set to. (Had set randomNumber to 50 during testing, only got the two surrounding it). I hold no doubts it is because I messed something up. I don't know if I messed the casing formatting up, but I get the nagging feeling I had. Have limited time for writing code, so can't track down the bug in time. Plus, a bit of feedback on the current values I have set would be good.
[snip]
I shall attempt to get something up for it by tomorrow.
[/quote]
Assuming you also would like some feedback on the code itself. It's not an attack on you or your coding, only an attempt to improve your style.
Please also note that my last C# programming is about five years back and I did not test the code below, so I might have made some mistakes.
1. Replace the question/answers with a bool-returning function, i.e.
Code: [Select]
if (ask_bool("Has a design similar to this type been made before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)?")) {
which automatically adds the "1 = Yes, 0 = No" part and conversion.2. Those nested ifs look very confusing, and you run the risk of choosing the wrong research penalty to change later on. Instead, I'd recommend either something like this:
Code: [Select]
continue_checking = True;
if (continue_checking && not ask_bool("Has a design similar to this type been made before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)?")) {
continue_checking = False;
penalty = 5;
}
if (continue_checking && not ask_bool("Has a design of this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. If design is a tank, has the foe made a tank)?")) {
continue_checking = False;
penalty = 10;
}
etc.
Alternatively, write a for-loop and store the penalty and question in a dictionary. That also cuts down on repeated code. I can't ad-lib that in C#, but in python it'd look something like this:Code: [Select]
penalty_questions = {
5: "Has a design similar to this type been made before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)?",
10: "Has a design of this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. If design is a tank, has the foe made a tank)?"
}
for k in sorted(penalty_questions.keys()):
if ask_bool(penalty_questions[k]):
penalty = k
break
3. It's the same for the actual results. The many levels of indentation make it difficult to follow and difficult to change. I'd recommend either a for-loop as above or just assigning the string, then doing the write-out later on, i.e.:
Code: [Select]
if (roll_result > 100) {
printResult = "The design has no problems.";
} else if (rollResult > 80) {
printResult = "The design has minor problems with its existing components.";
} else etc
}
Console.WriteLine (Convert.ToString(printResult));
writerOutput = printResult;
writeToFile.WriteLine (writerOutput);
Speaking of which, else-if statements.4. By the way, your random generator returns numbers from 1 to 99 (inclusive).
5. Also, you're regenerating your random number generator every time you reiterate. Don't, just do it once per run.
6. Also, ask for bools, not ints.
7. Also note that you never actually modify attempts.
8. Also note that, once you reattempt a result, you'll always ignore any previous penalty.
Also, do you know that you always have a penalty of at least 5 unless reattempting?
Lastly, I had a fun time (uglily) reimplementing it in python:
Code: [Select]
import random
def ask_bool(question):
ask_str = question + " [y/n] "
while True:
answer = raw_input(ask_str)
if answer.lower() in ["y", "yes", "1"]:
return True
if answer.lower() in ["n", "no", "0"]:
return False
def get_first_attempt_penalty():
continue_asking = True
questions = [
("Has a design similar to this type been made before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)?", 5),
("Has a design of this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. If design is a tank, has the foe made a tank)?", 10),
("Has a design similar to this type been made by a nearby faction before (ex. Design is a tank and an armored car has been made)?", 15),
("Has a design of this type been made upon the planet before?", 20),
("Has a design similar to this type been made upon the planet before?", 25)
]
worst_penalty = 30
penalty = None
for q in questions:
if ask_bool(q[0]):
penalty = q[1]
break
if penalty is None:
penalty = worst_penalty
return penalty
def print_result(roll_result, outfile=None):
results = {
5: "The design has major problems with all its components.",
15: "The design has minor problems with its new components, and major problems with its other components.",
30: "The design has major problems with its new components, and minor problems with its other components.",
45: "The design has minor problems with all its components.",
60: "The design has minor problems with its new components.",
80: "The design has minor problems with its existing components.",
100: "The design has no problems.",
}
default_result = "The design will not work at all"
for k in sorted(results.keys(), reverse=True):
if roll_result > k:
print(results[k])
if file is not None:
outfile.write(str(roll_result) + ": " + results[k] + "\n")
return
print(default_result)
if file is not None:
outfile.write(str(roll_result) + ": " + default_result + "\n")
attempts_multiply = 5
decision = True
uses = raw_input("How many times have you run this program before? ")
filename = "output" + str(uses) + ".txt"
with open(filename, "w") as outfile:
print("This is the output file name for this run: " + filename)
attempts = 0
weapon_name = raw_input("Please type weapon name: ")
outfile.write(weapon_name + "\n")
while decision:
random_number = random.randint(1, 100)
if attempts == 0:
penalty = get_first_attempt_penalty()
print("Penalty is %s" %penalty)
roll_result = random_number - penalty
else:
attempts_result = attempts * attempts_multiply
roll_result = random_number + attempts_result
print("Result is %s (rolled %s)" %(roll_result, random_number))
print_result(roll_result, outfile)
attempts += 1
decision = ask_bool("Do you want to run this again?")
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 07, 2016, 04:44:23 pm
| Sidearm | I | AS-SP30 | I | Five-Shooter |
| Mortar | I | AS-1911 8cm Mortar | I | AS-1911 8cm Mortar |
| Sniper Rifle | I | AS-F14A(?) w/ AS-O30 Optics | I | M2 Osprey w/ Eagle Sight MkII |
| Assault Rifle | I | AS-AR34 | I | MK-47A |
| Autocannon | I | AS-AC18 | I | |
| Heavy Machine Gun | I | I | M3 Sorraia GPMG | |
| Light Machine Gun | I | AS-1924 | I | |
| Submachine Gun | I | AS-MC16 | I | Cascade Sub-Machine Gun |
| Shotgun | I | Sawed-off Shotgun | I | Sawed-off Shotgun |
| Landmine | I | AS-LM20 | I | M34 Viper Landmine |
| Recoilless Rifle | I | I | Rhino Recoilless Rifle | |
| Rocket Propelled Grenade | I | RPG28 A | I | |
| Shaped Charge | I | I | Shaped Charge | |
| Grenade | I | AS-G27 | I | |
| Flamethrower | I | I | Incinerator Flamethrower | |
| Sword | I | I | Scimitar | |
| Radio | I | IP-R25 | I | Model 3 Radio |
| Encrypted Radio | I | AS-DC29 | I | Tiger's Whisper |
| Infantry Armor | I | IP-IA35 | I | Tiger Infantry Armor |
| Parachute | I | AS-P32 | I | |
| Horses | I | I | Horses | |
| Motorcycle | I | AS-M17A | I | |
| Truck | I | AS-HV19 | I | L-1 Tiger |
| Armored Car | I | AS-MV21-AL | I | Struunk I |
| Self-Propelled Gun | I | AS-MAT26-50 | I | SPAT |
| Light Armored Tank | I | I | T1 Smasher Mk II | |
| Medium Armored Tank | I | AS-T25 | I | T2 Breaker |
| Heavy Armored Tank | I | AS-T33 | I | |
| Howitzer | I | I | Bombardier | |
| Artillery | I | AS-1912 Artillery A | I | B2 Destroyer |
| Anti-Tank/Anti-Air | I | I | Bumblebee AT/AA | |
| Fighter | I | AS-HF-32 | I | Model 4 Yellowjacket |
| Bomber | I | AS-1931-HAFB | I | |
| Dive Bomber | I | AS-DB-HF-23 | I | |
| Navy | I | AS-CV22 | I | |
| Trains | I | Armored/AS-51 S/Coal | I | Model 52 Steam Engine/Oil |
| Mobile Runway | I | AS-ARAC-35 | I | |
| Rocket Boulder | I | I | Death Ball |
Assuming you also would like some feedback on the code itself. It's not an attack on you or your coding, only an attempt to improve your style.
Please also note that my last C# programming is about five years back and I did not test the code below, so I might have made some mistakes.
I've only had an introductory class that I only partially remember to a significant degree, so anything you can provide would help. I'll implement your suggestions when I get back home.
Post by: Taricus on June 07, 2016, 09:26:49 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 07, 2016, 10:02:31 pm
Zan I already did a list a few pages back. Admittedly it is a little brief but it does sum up the equipment a united florenia would use.
True, but there are a few categories that are listed here (Radio, Infantry Armor, Coded Radios, Shotgun, etc.) that were not in yours and I wanted to provide a list of exactly what our options would be from each side are in each category rather than only listing one. Will add in a dive bomber fighter category, though.
Post by: Taricus on June 07, 2016, 10:14:39 pm
Should get around to asking Sensei if I can work on a list that would essentially be the UF armoury at the start of the next game, since it'll include a few revisions on existing equipment and a few notable units that use that equipment.
Post by: Ukrainian Ranger on June 08, 2016, 05:33:34 am
Post by: Taricus on June 08, 2016, 06:05:08 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 15, 2016, 11:25:22 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on June 15, 2016, 11:46:30 pm
Meanwhile, the sushi eaters have fake radios, no cars, strict rules against just about anything and everything, stolen military equipment and a fair amount of propaganda. also propane stoves, electric lights, and an absurd dislike of using guns in combat. The booze swilling pirates have many cars, well armed tax collectors, jsut about no laws besides taxes, much smog, traffic worse than the worst modern city, long distance phones, payphones, electric fixtures and appliances, public PA systems called radios, "Catholic" churches, and propaganda almost as shiny as Arstotzkas.
So, I think we are beating them at the moment, though I do like Sensei's writing style in the new one more than the old ones.
Post by: evilcherry on June 16, 2016, 06:20:44 am
More thoughts on this:
- Bay12 and SB will exchange someone who acts as GM on the other side.
- Both GMs will decide what the war will be like.
- Sadly, the best thing about Arms Race is always the excessive salt rubbed around. Perhaps a bot can help moving posts between fora.
Post by: Taricus on June 16, 2016, 07:11:45 am
Post by: Kashyyk on June 16, 2016, 08:09:55 am
I've also been thinking about a space-age Arms Race. It would take place across a small cluster of systems linked by wormholes. (Or possibly just one system? It's not set in stone yet). The engineers would work on warships and the modules associated with them, and possibly even invasion tech such as dropships and fire arms. As any space faring nation would easily be able to acquire resources from celestial bodies, the main resource would be Labour, representing the man hours involved in making such large vessels coupled with the costs of transporting resources off world or from distant rocks to the ship yards. There would be other rare resources to acquire in the field as well.
I imagine the expense system would have to be reworked also, due to the change in scale.
Post by: evilcherry on June 16, 2016, 08:42:53 am
The game would also have the unique opportunity to not allow any communication between sides, except perhaps a smack talk telegram passed over by the GM. I'm curious how that will work.Oh yes. After the GMs have decided the outcome of the turns, they will write up their turns separately, after the results are decided, in the perspective of the respective side. People will now need to guess or second guess what happened to the other side, and thus have less resources to plan out the game.
I've also been thinking about a space-age Arms Race. It would take place across a small cluster of systems linked by wormholes. (Or possibly just one system? It's not set in stone yet). The engineers would work on warships and the modules associated with them, and possibly even invasion tech such as dropships and fire arms. As any space faring nation would easily be able to acquire resources from celestial bodies, the main resource would be Labour, representing the man hours involved in making such large vessels coupled with the costs of transporting resources off world or from distant rocks to the ship yards. There would be other rare resources to acquire in the field as well.
I imagine the expense system would have to be reworked also, due to the change in scale.
Maybe each side can also have a chance to ask the GM a question about the other side. GM decides on how accurate an answer they will get according to difficulty.
Will seriously consider CO-GMing a game in this format.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 16, 2016, 12:37:38 pm
Post by: evilcherry on June 17, 2016, 06:12:17 am
Well, I know that Sensei is planning one... And I am doing one at this moment... It was initially planned to be a B12vsSomeone else, but the server I tried using has just about noone there for anything besides the main game.I would like to know if
- plan is still active
- there is guarantee of some playerbase
- anything relevant
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 17, 2016, 06:41:51 am
The game would also have the unique opportunity to not allow any communication between sides, except perhaps a smack talk telegram passed over by the GM. I'm curious how that will work.
I've also been thinking about a space-age Arms Race. It would take place across a small cluster of systems linked by wormholes. (Or possibly just one system? It's not set in stone yet). The engineers would work on warships and the modules associated with them, and possibly even invasion tech such as dropships and fire arms. As any space faring nation would easily be able to acquire resources from celestial bodies, the main resource would be Labour, representing the man hours involved in making such large vessels coupled with the costs of transporting resources off world or from distant rocks to the ship yards. There would be other rare resources to acquire in the field as well.
I imagine the expense system would have to be reworked also, due to the change in scale.
A problem with Sci-fi and basically any setting that doesn't use real life, is that players have no idea what can and what can not work.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 17, 2016, 01:57:20 pm
A problem with Sci-fi and basically any setting that doesn't use real life, is that players have no idea what can and what can not work.
Which is similar to what would be the case if they were actually engineers, you could then have discovering the various rules that govern this world to be part of the game.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 17, 2016, 02:07:42 pm
Post by: RAM on June 17, 2016, 03:57:41 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on June 17, 2016, 04:11:04 pm
I mean, can you imagine one side trying to build this one sorta thing for several turns, with it turning out they actually cant do it in any way shape or form while the other side develops new things that work and lead to a steamroll?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 17, 2016, 04:21:28 pm
Post by: Funk on June 17, 2016, 06:00:41 pm
A problem with Sci-fi and basically any setting that doesn't use real life, is that players have no idea what can and what can not work.And you need away to get around the poblems of a sci fi setting like Relativistic attacks, the lack of stealth in space.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 17, 2016, 08:57:31 pm
Post by: RAM on June 18, 2016, 12:01:25 am
Really, you need to soften up the science fiction a good deal to stop multiple-page arguments over speculative physics...
Post by: evilcherry on June 18, 2016, 03:26:33 am
I am pretty sure that the only stealth that you get in harder settings is loads of insulation and no thrust after you pass a major gravity well or already know exactly where the enemy is. Even that tends to be pushing it.Which means a blanket ebbor ban as he tend to lawyer through these very extensively.
Really, you need to soften up the science fiction a good deal to stop multiple-page arguments over speculative physics...
Sorry!
Post by: evilcherry on June 18, 2016, 10:46:07 am
Proposed rules:
- Double blindness. There will be no battle reports on the main thread. Instead, battle reports will be written in one's perspective on their respective threads.
-- For example, Side A introduced a 12' long gun. Side B will be told that their ships and troops are bombarded from afar, without being explicitly told that they are being shelled by long guns.
- To compensate, Each side will be able to ask one question about the other side to the GM, after their revise turns. In general, you want to ask very specifically. If you just ask for what kind of weapon are bombarding you, chances is that you get "something capable of bombarding you".
- There will still be a main thread and might be competitions from time to time for you to throw salt with, but beware that you might divulge information (or mislead your opponents) from posting.
- Some persistence of resources: If a gun uses tungsten penetrators and its supply dried up, chances are that people will make makeshift ammo with steel or anything hard, before disposing of them together. In other words, there will be a grace period of 1 turn on lost resources, though it will always lose a tie.
Comments/problems/ideas?
Post by: Aseaheru on June 18, 2016, 03:54:03 pm
Also, hosting each sides stuff somewhere off the forums to limit cheating. Say, each side has a Mumble chat room that is used for that side. Because while one can hope that people dont cheat, giving them the chance to is asking for trouble.
Post by: evilcherry on June 18, 2016, 06:57:36 pm
I would prefer that the "asking question" bit be handled as "try to get your sides spies to tell you stuff, and see if A) they know it and/or B) they are willing to pass it on", along with a few things just being news(for instance, side A builds a boat they cant get to the ocean without having it travel by rail, tying up a good deal of traffic and getting commented on in the news that side B can see alongside fluff bits about the world at large).This is what I'm trying to simulate.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 18, 2016, 07:15:07 pm
Post by: evilcherry on June 18, 2016, 08:41:18 pm
Well, point being is I personally dont like the idea of having the players ask specific things. It either leaves them not asking the right question and thus missing something important or it has them asking generic questions like "What does the entire enemy force consist of?"Its up to the player to deduce what the enemy has. The "as GM a question" works essentially as a watered down version of "sending spies to investigate something".
Vague questions will give you vague but more truthful answers. Specific questions will give you specific answers but only if you know what you are asking for.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 19, 2016, 02:40:13 am
Post by: evilcherry on June 19, 2016, 03:27:04 am
So it's a game of 20 questions with a literal genie? If done well that could be amusing but it poses higher risks of salt.Somehow spying is sometimes exactly like that.
Post by: evilcherry on June 19, 2016, 03:00:55 pm
I delivered. Need more players on both sides.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 19, 2016, 04:46:28 pm
Also, for naval stuff, can the navy capture stuff one one side (say, MANO has dominance of the seas in their entirerty and starts landing in CHSH's starting resource territories) or the armies cut off the other sides ports?(so say CHSH captures MANO's outlying stuff, cutting off their navy)
Or do the starting resourse bits even have ports?
Finally (for map stuff), can people advance from the center sectors directly to the enemy's capital?
Oh, and I see you are giving people in 1910 stuff from 1830. Joy. Also, sloops with only a single gun? And those the warships? What? Hell, even merchantman carried something like four guns minimum, and war sloops typically had something like 18 guns at the turn of the 19th century.
Post by: evilcherry on June 20, 2016, 12:58:36 am
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=158852.msg7055091#msg7055091
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 20, 2016, 12:04:09 pm
Post by: Sheb on June 20, 2016, 12:25:45 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 20, 2016, 12:38:02 pm
I see one potential issue in that one person late can bog down the whole game.
Then I'll get a couple people as backups.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 20, 2016, 01:26:41 pm
Post by: Taricus on June 20, 2016, 01:28:30 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 20, 2016, 03:14:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 3_14159 on June 20, 2016, 04:06:08 pm
Hacked out this map really quick for the game in question. Once I have a more accurate idea of how many wish to play, I'll write up the fluff text and chart out the nations and the battlefield routes and resource zones.That does sound nice. How many people were you thinking of accepting, and how fast would the turns be?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 20, 2016, 04:27:32 pm
That does sound nice. How many people were you thinking of accepting, and how fast would the turns be?
With that map, I see room for five nations, but might be able to fit in a sixth. For the latter, no data is available, but I can say once every other day is the absolute minimum.
Post by: 3_14159 on June 21, 2016, 04:44:49 am
With that map, I see room for five nations, but might be able to fit in a sixth. For the latter, no data is available, but I can say once every other day is the absolute minimum.And which era are you thinking about setting it in?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 21, 2016, 01:33:04 pm
With that map, I see room for five nations, but might be able to fit in a sixth. For the latter, no data is available, but I can say once every other day is the absolute minimum.And which era are you thinking about setting it in?
Year as 1890, tech as 1790. Will allow for use of steam to replace diesel, which could allow for some steampunk type creations, though it will wind up having a greater cost of resources. Furthermore, while you won't exist in a vacuum, the disparity in tech will prevent you from advancing too fast. I would estimate you would be roughly at American Civil War by 1900, and rough parity with initial Forenia tech by 1910, but I can't guarantee how fast you will move along.
Location is going to be in the Indian Ocean between India and Indonesia. History of the area has it being originally settled by the Siamese, later becoming a colony fought over by the British and Dutch as a naval base in the region, until the island was struck by a few meteors that wrecked the forts and efforts were abandoned on the basis of it having become too costly for its value. The individuals that stayed behind have only recently pulled things back together into some semblance of order.
As I would like to have the nations based on the input of the players and have the thread start with everything fully set up, here's a sign-up to be used.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
What I mean by 'Hard Mode' with 7 and 8 is the fact that I can fit that number of nations in, but they are in quite disadvantageous positions. In the case of the former, you would start on the island on the far right of the map, with one city (the capital) and resources consisting of a single unit of wood. It will be difficult to reach that location to conquer it, but the limited resources would make it very difficult to expand. As for the other, the nation's placement would wind up with it surrounded by everyone, and as I will try to make logistics matter, the nation has a chance to be overrun pretty quickly, with exception to its fortified mountain capital. These two are ones that won't exist if people don't select them, but there optionally for anyone who wants a challenge.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 21, 2016, 02:49:42 pm
Spoiler: Heres One! That will be edited at some point. (click to show/hide)
-edit-
Also, may I suggest bumping the tech up to about 1820's level? Then carronades and (early) steam engines are about, as are percussion caps and Minne balls.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 21, 2016, 03:38:38 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 3_14159 on June 21, 2016, 03:42:55 pm
Spoiler: St. George's Islands Coaling Company (click to show/hide)
Post by: Taricus on June 21, 2016, 06:51:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aseaheru on June 21, 2016, 06:56:44 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 21, 2016, 09:27:52 pm
Here's the map, including the routes to get from city to city. The ones connected to only cities owned by the nation are the capitals. While a bit deceptive with the length, all battle lines between cities will be 4 and start at 2 per side on the contested. 7 can only be invaded from the territories of 5 and 6, but may launch fleets to 1, 8, and 4 as well. As I didn't want to overlap the routes, some may be a bit strange, and a couple nations wound up with a bit less than outbound than others. May have those start with a dis/advantage (2 and 3 will be at 1/4 on the 1-2 and 2-3 routes). 5's probably going to be another 'hard mode' location (not to the same degree as 8, though), so if you would rather not have such an area Taricus, you may want to change up.
For those who are wanting the name of the islands, it depends upon the culture. The English currently refer to them as the Impact Islands, while the Dutch refer to them as the Ster Botsing Islands, and the native Siamese call them the S̄ngkhrām (สงคราม) Isles. First two are due to the meteor impact, while the final is due to all the battles fought over the islands.
Also, may I suggest bumping the tech up to about 1820's level? Then carronades and (early) steam engines are about, as are percussion caps and Minne balls.
Considering how fast tech was going up in the Robert Islands's arms race game, I think you will do fine. However, if the nations wind up behind the schedule I listed, I may create a couple offers by Colonial Powers to sell off some obsolete equipment in exchange for a design action or some resources. They won't be pristine and they will have an [import] tag that adds an expense level, but you'll get some tech to make some better stuff.
Out of curiosity, are we just the design team of our side, or can we also focus where we fight, trade resources, designs and/or tech with other groups, and so on?
I'm likely going to bring back the focus phase of the Roberts Islands's arms race, as well as espionage (theft can only be of tech, not design), but trade between player nations likely won't exist. Negotiations would likely be a pain to deal with and would be likely to drag out the time between turns to the point that I don't think it is worth it.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 21, 2016, 11:00:28 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 21, 2016, 11:20:05 pm
Whats the blueline in area 5?
Knew I forgot to mention something. It's a canal. Only there so if 8 captures the city, the route between that one and the capital makes sense. There are some that go over islands, but you could reasonably get small landing craft there in time. Not so much with ships, which that specific route would rely upon.
Post by: Taricus on June 22, 2016, 01:10:40 am
Post by: 3_14159 on June 22, 2016, 05:47:54 am
Post by: Aseaheru on June 22, 2016, 09:38:00 am
Post by: Playergamer on June 22, 2016, 11:05:46 am
Post by: Aseaheru on June 22, 2016, 11:09:00 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 22, 2016, 02:44:45 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on June 22, 2016, 03:09:37 pm
Post by: Funk on June 22, 2016, 03:45:57 pm
Somebody ought to make a post-apoc Arms Race. Would definitely play it.I've been thinking a about a a post-apoc setting.
It'd be semi feudal with more modern technology like guns and Vehicle being limited to the skilled techno nobles and champions.
After all most post-apoc vehicles are beat up and need lots of skilled care to keep them running.
So you'll still have guns, power armour and crazy vehicles along with mobs of crazed war boys useing clubs and scrap armour.
Vehicles would be limited by the need for champions to keep them working and use mounted guns.
Bikes would be allowed but need a noble to each dozen or so.
You'll get two designs a turn, 1 normal to be spent on anything and 1 for your own vehicle.
Now all i need is a map and some players.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 22, 2016, 04:09:31 pm
:(I am pretty sure that the only stealth that you get in harder settings is loads of insulation and no thrust after you pass a major gravity well or already know exactly where the enemy is. Even that tends to be pushing it.Which means a blanket ebbor ban as he tend to lawyer through these very extensively.
Really, you need to soften up the science fiction a good deal to stop multiple-page arguments over speculative physics...
Sorry!
But yeah, relying on people not to poke at flaws in the system is not a great idea. And banning those who do is something I'd rather dislike.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 22, 2016, 04:16:07 pm
I'm willing to switch to one of the regular slots if you don't get enough volunteers for them.
I could have the number of cities reduced and merge 1 and 2, 3 and 4, and 5 and 6 together. Would excuse the size of 8 as yours as having the most dense population and largest quantity of maintained fortifications. Actually looking at it, that might have things turn out pretty balanced if I shift a few things around (ex. put your northern island city on the mainland and having the island as a route between the north-west and eastern nations...
Maybe I could have later players join in via external companies wanting to sell stuff? Wouldn't be immediate, but say it hits around 1900? Still, would enjoy if more decided to join up for the nations.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 22, 2016, 04:30:40 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 22, 2016, 04:32:46 pm
I'm willing to take 1.
I assume I PM you the thingy.
Everyone else has posted it here, and there's no details inside that will affect things too much. It's all basically fluff.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 22, 2016, 04:39:45 pm
Posted it here.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 25, 2016, 11:42:39 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on July 01, 2016, 02:41:56 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on July 06, 2016, 09:25:16 pm
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on July 07, 2016, 01:59:45 am
Post by: Kashyyk on August 06, 2016, 04:58:58 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
If no one has any particular issues with this, and I garner enough interest, I'll create a map and some dressing technology then throw up a thread.
Post by: Taricus on August 06, 2016, 05:06:11 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on August 06, 2016, 08:27:18 pm
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on August 06, 2016, 08:31:06 pm
It looks like it would be a hell of a lot of extra book keeping, but if you want to run it that way, that's your prerogative. Removing the siege stage like Taricus said or combining it with the invasion stage should provide you with the feel that you want while making things easier all around.
So Science is similar to Tech in the latest Sensi game as far as I understand, in that having it allows you to make things relating to it a lot easier and with signficantly less complications?
You're going to want to make sure that your prep work is thorough and that you have detailed explanations of the starting designs and science in regards to how they work and why it was decided to use technology in that way. The most difficult part I see is making sure the players have a grasp of the general physics involved and how new physics affects that. All in all, I'm interested.
Post by: Aseaheru on August 06, 2016, 10:04:12 pm
Thats the main problem with open-ended games like this, you need to infodump and hope the playrs read and understand the whole thing, otherwise it just gets strange. But hey, it could be worse. If there was magic involved, hoo boy...
Post by: Kashyyk on August 07, 2016, 05:00:30 am
I think I'll merge siege and invasion though as most of the tech will overlap anyway, I suspect.
Science is similar, though it's mainly there as a mechanic to allow me to give players hints on possible designs whilst keeping it somewhat balanced. I suspect will be needed due to not having a convenient wiki of technology that works and when it was invented. If anyone wants took do some pre-research though, I'll be basing things off of the Orbital Vector (http://www.orbitalvector.com) site, amongst other places. We'll probably start at about tech level 12. I'll list the current state of affairs for each of those topics in a bit.
Post by: Kashyyk on August 09, 2016, 11:29:47 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aseaheru on August 09, 2016, 12:57:38 pm
Also, anything on Railguns, matter converters(a longshot, sure), the size and flexibility of 3d printers(could we, say, attach one to a cannon and feed it raw material for reloading), coilguns, plasma launching devices, energy generation, nanites, things like nanotubes...
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 09, 2016, 01:45:13 pm
the size and flexibility of 3d printers(could we, say, attach one to a cannon and feed it raw material for reloading)
For attaching it to cannons, I would think the speed it takes to create something (Maybe in X cm^3/s?) would be more relevant than size and shape constraints.
Post by: Aseaheru on August 09, 2016, 01:52:18 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 09, 2016, 02:06:44 pm
Well, that also depends on the speed of the printers.
I'm guessing you meant 'size' here, which could be accounted for by having it displayed in speed per size.
Post by: Aseaheru on August 09, 2016, 02:11:43 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on August 10, 2016, 05:53:21 am
@3D Printer Speed: This vastly depends on the number of printer heads that can be used at once, but you could in theory just print in batches if you have redundant heads. Each individual head can print about 3cm^3 per second, but will be slowed if it has to change material. Each head is at least 1cm apart, and they are typically fixed to a rail which moves in 3D.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aseaheru on August 18, 2016, 05:23:39 pm
Anyways, I suggest that anyone who try to do a more complex form of the Arms Race game do it with a team of people running it.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 27, 2016, 06:43:56 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on August 27, 2016, 07:04:44 pm
Perhaps make it so that there are an arbitrary amount of things that can be made a tun, and have generic stocks. Probably as something along the lines of how HoI4 does its industry's resource requirements. It would require a larger map to help with the fairness, and would probally be excruciatingly dull without some way to capture more than one area on a given front a turn, but I could see it working.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 11, 2016, 06:44:04 pm
Which of these do people want to see?
Post by: Taricus on September 11, 2016, 06:46:31 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on September 11, 2016, 07:14:45 pm
Post by: Taricus on September 11, 2016, 07:24:14 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 11, 2016, 07:29:46 pm
Nah, I wanna see Forenia fight in WWII, especially since it's probably on the same side as the germans :D
Thing is, while we know Forenia is in the Pacific, we have no idea where in the Pacific it is. Without that, we can't get an idea of how it would affect the war. In addition, as Turbados exists in the same world as Forenia (since Sensei was going to have them fight), we would have to consider that factor as well, not knowing where they are either.
Besides, if I recall correctly, Forenia has a superior land force compared to conventional militaries. While their navy is horrible, they can piggyback off of either the Japanese or United States, depending upon which set of allies they support, until they get their own up. Don't see too much challenge there. Now the Gou'ld or XCom Aliens? That's a force that need to be fought in way that is alien to Forenia and it is against a technologically superior foe. Not something the've dealt with.
Well, its supplied the Germans, the Soviets, the British(sorta), two groups of Chinese(one pro US, one pro Soviet), the civilian population of the US, pirates, and... Gangsters? I think gangsters. I think its kinda a crapshoot asto who they wind up backing, though I should note that according to the Southeast Asia game Forenia goes to war with Japan, taking it out of the war before Germany is.
I only really did that to justify my game and didn't have any input from Sensei on that decision. Realistically, other stuff might happen.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 12, 2016, 10:16:09 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on September 12, 2016, 10:34:03 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 12, 2016, 11:05:14 pm
Probably something like option two, though both options are bad in the "what exactly can we do here tech wise" sense. Plus, Aliens can get seriously curbstompy.
Could be worse. Both of these have at least a token explantion behind how their tech works that we can extrapolate from, and Forenia is roughly in early cold war tech, so there can be improvement on that front as well. Plus, I could nick some stuff from the Orbital Vector site.
I should note for either alien group, I'm not going to have them progress in tech until they notice Forenia rapidly closing in on their tech level. Gou'ld have a massive ego problem and Ayy Lmaos tend to just send stronger guys.
Post by: Funk on September 13, 2016, 06:47:48 pm
You'll need to disarm Forenia, just the sake for book keeping.
Let them pick a few designs to keep and remove the rest, it got sold off over seas.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 14, 2016, 02:07:26 am
Used this list for the United Forenia equipment (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156417.msg6973331#msg6973331), my findings of the successful trades (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156417.msg6839598#msg6839598), and combined the two tech lists to form the United Forenia tech list. Tried to convert stuff over to metric, but getting really late, so not everything may be done. May have forgot something, may not. All I know is that it is currently 2 am. I need to sleep.
Post by: Aseaheru on September 14, 2016, 05:51:36 am
Post by: Aseaheru on September 19, 2016, 03:55:37 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 19, 2016, 10:17:37 am
Yaknow, you may want to put a link to you own game in the OP Zan.
Yeah, and there's a bit of cleaning up I need to do in it as well. Done now.
Post by: H4zardZ1 on September 24, 2016, 07:04:32 am
Post by: Aseaheru on September 29, 2016, 04:43:32 pm
Post by: Funk on September 29, 2016, 11:06:11 pm
actually i still have't fleshed out Hilasistan army form The War of Ice and Lighting (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=160580.30)
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on September 30, 2016, 12:55:32 am
Post by: RAM on September 30, 2016, 04:08:49 am
Post by: Aseaheru on October 04, 2016, 12:01:58 pm
Aseaheru, what do you need kit wise for your game?
I jsut realized that you offered to help. Hurrah fro strange thought processes.
Anyways, I need most of five militaries kits, consisting of a mostly backwards army with strong navy(old ship and standard rifle already given), a bunch of mountain infantry dudes, a group with a modern army(that uses some shotguns and optics) and, on the opposite side, one arty-heavy force and one rather backwards military
Post by: 3_14159 on October 04, 2016, 02:48:27 pm
I jsut realized that you offered to help. Hurrah fro strange thought processes.Just noticed I never offered my help; consider that changed. How many designs would you need?
Anyways, I need most of five militaries kits, consisting of a mostly backwards army with strong navy(old ship and standard rifle already given), a bunch of mountain infantry dudes, a group with a modern army(that uses some shotguns and optics) and, on the opposite side, one arty-heavy force and one rather backwards military
Post by: Kot on October 04, 2016, 02:53:56 pm
I could do backwards military as long as it gets
Post by: Aseaheru on October 04, 2016, 02:57:06 pm
That was for a few items, yes. Which I think mostly got lost. In any event, Im not going to be limiting it quite the same way.
Post by: Kot on October 04, 2016, 02:57:57 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 04, 2016, 02:59:56 pm
Almost complete kits for five nations. Call it... 15 designs, due to some stuff allready being about, some stuff being shared, and not everyone needing all the same stuff.
That was for a few items, yes. Which I think mostly got lost. In any event, Im not going to be limiting it quite the same way.
Can you give a rough year of the tech level to give an idea of what is classified as 'Modern' and 'Backwater' in the setting?
Post by: Aseaheru on October 04, 2016, 03:06:01 pm
Post by: Funk on October 04, 2016, 03:30:31 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on October 04, 2016, 04:02:21 pm
I should note that everyone excepting the mountaineer nation are naval. In particular, for one of the nations they have atleast two classes of cruiser, one of which is designed and the other is rather new.
Funk, ill send you the preexisting designs for that nation, so you can have a gander.
Post by: 3_14159 on October 04, 2016, 04:09:07 pm
- Republic: Albia
- Backwards Army: Ceclavin
- Mountain Infantry dudes: Dombresson
- modern army: Cunco
- Arty-heavy force: Halinow
- Backwards Military II: Horn
Post by: Kot on October 04, 2016, 04:11:07 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 09, 2016, 02:32:02 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on October 10, 2016, 04:41:45 am
Post by: Kot on October 21, 2016, 12:14:40 pm
It would be competetive cooperative game regarding... generals. Players would be commanders of various units and would basically give orders and play it a bit like a wargame (now, there could be two factions or really just one against the GM controlled faction) but the generals would also compete with each other to be the best so they won't get executed for incompetence. Think Pre-WW2 and WW-2 Soviet Generals racing to the West to show how amazing they are and get their chests pinned with medals.
A mix of Diplomacy, various wargames, sort of Arms Race and possibly other things I can't think of yet, really. Would proably run it with some help of OpenPanzer/PanzerCorps/Whatever (if we would go WW2 or WW2 like) or maybe Armageddon (if we go Wh40k which is totally an option, Chaos against Imperial Guard, you get to choose the regiment too!) to make maps and possibly run the calculations. I also have an idea of heavily rewarding various propaganda and other creative work. I have been brainstorming the actual rules and how it goes for a while now and I have pretty good idea how to do it, but... I need an interest check and while this isin't the thread to do it, I can't really find a better place and I don't want to litter the forum with new threads yet.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 21, 2016, 05:02:57 pm
...with some help of OpenPanzer/PanzerCorps/Whatever (if we would go WW2 or WW2 like) or maybe Armageddon (if we go Wh40k which is totally an option, Chaos against Imperial Guard, you get to choose the regiment too!)
Could set it during the Arstotzka/Moskurg great war, or the Tropico civil war to expand what ammounts as a lore for the Arms Race game by having the 'design advancement' being the jury-rigging that is done by soldiers in that force, and allowing for actions of other commanders outside the player's view causing things to go as they had. Alternatively, you could set it in the WWII European fronts of the same universe, maybe in the Forenia vs. Sectoids branch? Hey, it's a possibility.
Post by: Kot on October 21, 2016, 05:06:29 pm
I guess that WW2 European Front would be the easiest and best (there are tons of stuff easily available for me to use), though people would have to decide if
a) Everyone plays as one faction and Generals compete only with each other (presumably Germany or Russia).
b) There are two factions, presumably Soviets and Germans
c) We go on full World War 2 and have Germans, Soviets, French, USA, so on. (very hard and might end up with not enough players on any side)
d) Something else.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm
(nothing personal) I ain't really fan of the UFO invasion.
Precisely why I suggested the European front if you do it within the same timeline as that. All that would be known there would be Forenia has gone isolationist with exception to the ocasional trade deal (which won't include Alien Tech. The Supreme Command would want to keep that to themselves). Besides, just setting it in the same universe would give myself/whoever takes over and anyone who wants to advance the timeline in other ways an alternate WWII they can point to and say 'pretty much that happened.'
As for factions, I would reccommend Soviets and Germans, given the 'executed for incompetence' bit you want to do.
Post by: Kot on October 21, 2016, 05:25:01 pm
Maybe I could implement some kind of anonymous voting off system.
Post by: Aseaheru on October 24, 2016, 02:44:17 pm
Also, rifle grenade launchers are awesome.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 29, 2016, 12:48:51 am
Post by: Taricus on October 29, 2016, 01:26:08 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 01, 2016, 12:57:43 pm
Post by: Kot on November 01, 2016, 01:00:21 pm
Arstotzka had completly fine 100% functioning society behind the lines, Moskurgs got their houses constantly shelled and so on.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 01, 2016, 01:11:59 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 01, 2016, 01:50:30 pm
Moskurg: ~21% population decline, ~ 9.48 million left over
Arstotzka: ~16% population decline, ~ 10.08 million left over
Total population of Forenia before war: 24 million
Total population of Forenia after war: 19.52 million
It's a really bad estimate, but it does give at least a ballpark. Interesting to note, if Forenians went around a decade of having the women run the factories but not be on the main front (they'd have to have done so eventually, and due to the times it may take that long for the break to occur), the ratio would be 2 females to 1 male on the island. If they waited through half the war, it would be around 3:1. Heh, this might result in Forenians being ahead in terms of gender equality despite a larger amount of polygamy for awhile, since there would be a higher participation of women in the workforce due to simple neccessity in the post-war, and the simple fact they were some of the main workers in the factories over the multi-generational war. Ratio would probably make it harder for homosexuals and transgenders to get equal rights, though. Alternatively, there could just be a moderately long period of male-only immigration.
Well, besides the firefighters all being armed and the like. But hey, the war went on long enough that a generation grew up to fight in the war.
...it's going to be really hard to get the two sides to cooperate with multiple generations having been exposed to propaganda against the other side for so long.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 01, 2016, 01:59:15 pm
Post by: Taricus on November 01, 2016, 02:26:08 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 01, 2016, 06:51:22 pm
I'd cut the casualty rate down to something a little lower due to the increasing mobility of warfare, and the somewhat limited production capabilities of Forenia.
It accounts for both military and civilian deaths (this war had an average of roughly 4100 combined per day. WWI seems to have had a roughly 10.3k combined per day average, for reference), though I can admit to having added a couple more years by mistake (running a 1910-1940), so the final pop would raise by about 600k (putting it at ~20.1 mil). Personally, I would think a more mobile conflict of this type would actually raise the death toll (armies would have been more akin to the Eastern front than Western), but if you don't then you can blame the United Forenia guerilla war kicking off as the conflict became more mobile as the cause.
Still, there's one thing these numbers do mean. Any other nation would have tried settling for a White Peace or even Surrendered a long time ago.
Post by: Taricus on November 01, 2016, 06:52:57 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 01, 2016, 07:08:13 pm
Forenians: Just that bloody minded. And surprisingly honourable since we didn't bother with large-scale bombing of civilians or chemical weapons.
Quote from: Former Arstotzkan General, upon being asked in an interview why there existed no large scale civilian bombings or chemical weapons utilized in the Great Forenian War despite other nations using those tactics in the shorter First and Second World Wars.
"We were fighting a war. Not engaging in a massacre. Both sides understood the lines you do not cross."
The actual reasons were probably more utalitarian, but this is could be a quote both sides decide point to in the aftermath.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 02, 2016, 03:42:09 pm
Looking at the second arms race, it seems Forenia will be in a better position at the start of the war in economic and population terms than Turbados, if Sensei goes for the competition between the two. Besides the gas attacks that will be messing with half of their lands compared to none on ours, the fighting had ended in 1936 in Forenia. Their population will still be in decline while ours has unconstrained increase (2.2% sound good to represent immigration and post-war population boom?).
Edit:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Given the likely bias towards the casualties in different areas messing with population growth rates, I'd probably put the actual dead at around 9-10 million military and civilian dead. Might be about half a million of those who fled the country over the course of the conflict. While WWI had a higher total count, this war may have been the holder of the highest casualty number of just two countries. But again, the war in Turbados is ongoing in-universe and is escalating in directions Forenia never went, so that will hold likely that title.
Edit2: If their war ended right this instant and did not have a slight conflict in the aftermath like we had, there would be a roughly 3/4 of a million population advantage towards Forenia. Given same growth rates, there will be a roughly 1 million pop advantage for Forenia vs. Turbados. I'd assume the war won't end that quick, so the advantage may actually be 1.5 million. Granted, Forenia doesn't have a navy...
Post by: Aseaheru on November 02, 2016, 04:55:57 pm
Post by: Taricus on November 02, 2016, 05:00:56 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 02, 2016, 05:34:32 pm
Transports, but that's about it. That being said out airforce is likely qualitatively better, and our ground forces certainly have an advantage in quality.
Do you think we'll be on a defensive war? Maybe some of their population came over to Forenia to escape the war and they want it back. Heh, considering our trade deal with their ally, I wonder if we could convince Japan to invade them rather than the US as a way to get a quick bit of naval support. The island is resource rich and there is a culture on there that is pretty much an insult to theirs...
Post by: Taricus on November 02, 2016, 05:39:04 pm
Unless we get what remains of the Juraki navy or something :P
Post by: Aseaheru on November 02, 2016, 06:16:06 pm
Post by: Taricus on November 02, 2016, 06:26:10 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on November 02, 2016, 07:38:50 pm
Post by: Taricus on November 02, 2016, 07:49:18 pm
EDIT: Okay, looking at the fighters the Turbadans have, We have firepower on our side, though I'd reckon they have speed on theirs. Still, unless they get a lot of carriers we'd be able to more effectively field aircraft on the defence due to the amount of airbases we'd have on our mainland compared to what they could bring onto islands.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 02, 2016, 08:00:30 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 02, 2016, 08:05:46 pm
We should keep in mind that I think Sensei is going to give us a couple free designs before the war. I don't know if that is still the plan, but an analysis would help either way.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 02, 2016, 08:08:59 pm
Help a fellow out here. (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1D4GFmvxWoUVQYtpYSjwlAhaW8aRsH2K9NyqmrWZIFjA/edit?usp=sharing)
Post by: Taricus on November 02, 2016, 08:11:02 pm
Honestly, I'm not worried about armament, we've got pretty decent guns for our aircraft. What I'm more worried about is the fact that the Juraki Tengu and Cannalan Falcon have engines that provide a lot more power, and hence altitude and speed. That's where Forenia will need to catch up on. Flip side though that we have a lot more heavily armed fighters so swarm tactics could be to our advantage. Add in paratroopers and... well, we have a decent way of island hopping that bypasses their naval superiority.
Post by: Taricus on November 03, 2016, 12:26:05 am
Communications-wise, while their infantry system is portable and lighter than ours Turbados' electronics industry is not at the level of Forenia's. The effects of this are huge as it means a lot of their vehicles lack means of co-ordination. Combine that with the possible armour superiority and a tank-on-tank battle will go wildly in Forenia's favour.
The air war is impacted just as much, but given the better aeronautics industry of Turbados and it's ability to make things like the Warhog, Tengu and Falcon means that we're going to need to step up our game if we want to secure more than just our home skies. Mind you given our timed flak and better electronics, the bumblebee is a significant threat to their air power where we deploy them, and they're cheap as all heck means we can throw up a very deadly wall of shrapnel to discourage any bombing attempts. So long as we can get something in to fill the close range gap in the air defence network. CAS-wise I'd say Forenia has a slight advantage, thanks to the autocannon the Arstotzkans slapped onto their dive-bomber: That thing isn't just going to go away after it's dropped it's load; it'll happily tear into the infantry and light vehicles of Turbados. Though admittedly the Yellowjacket would be more effective in strafing runs against infantry given the six MGs it has.
Strategically, though due a flaw with the Warhog's door placement, they don't have access to paratroopers whilst we do. That's something we would be best to exploit whenever we can.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 03, 2016, 02:44:20 am
Post by: Taricus on November 03, 2016, 02:49:44 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 07, 2016, 08:37:11 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on November 07, 2016, 11:06:23 pm
Post by: Kot on November 07, 2016, 11:09:12 pm
Remember kids, infantry wins firefights, tanks win battles and artillery wins wars.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 07, 2016, 11:46:58 pm
Post by: Taricus on November 08, 2016, 01:39:02 am
Artillery, we'll need heavy pieces but given the general mobility of our forces the effect of their artillery will be lessened. Not to mention they don't have much heavy AA that can accurately hit high-altitude aircraft reliably.
Post by: Aseaheru on January 22, 2017, 10:42:07 pm
Post by: Sensei on March 08, 2017, 06:03:08 am
Time scale:
The game will start in 1938 with four turns per year, so each turn is a "season". If the game lasts about as many turns as the previous ones, it will end around 1945. This also means I can make weather a factor! Of course, you're all in the southern hemisphere, which will makes that a bit confusing. Should years start on "fall" and end with "summer"?
Faction bonuses:
You recall that Arstotzka had an advantage in long-range combat, and Moskurg had an advantage at close range. That worked nicely. I tried to be different in the Turbados game, and made up some lame bonuses I never really used. This time, I was thinking of giving you the opportunity to pick from a few:
Possible Forenia Team Bonuses:
Patient: Like the old Arstotzkan army, Forenian soldiers are taught to watch, wait, and make the most of every shot. They are masterful at long-range engagements and indirect weapons.
Computational: Forenian soldiers and generals make better use of communications/cryptography, radio and radar equipment
Airborne: A Forenian pilot's first experience in a pants-shittingly terrifying AS-19 trainer is always a formative one. Forenian pilots have been flying for a long time, and experiences from the bad old days make them savvier than their Turbadan rivals.
Possible Turbados Team Bonuses:
Drunk: Turbadan soldiers are so fearless that if four men in a squad of five are obliterated by a mortar shell, the fifth always keeps charging. If a bullet wounds a soldier rather than killing him, he's just going to be angrier.
Dishonorable: Attempts at guile and subterfuge are better when done by Turbadan soldiers, who use landmines, traps, ambushes and sabotage to their fullest.
Salty: Hell on sea, or on sand! Turbadan soldiers have an edge over their opponents in naval engagements and beach assaults.
I would be open to other thematically-appropriate suggestions, keeping in mind that Arstotzka ended the game with the upper hand and would probably have a bigger influence. I am also considering attaching these abilities to a General, a named character you choose to represent your bonus who could later die or be replaced.
Resources:
I was thinking of starting both factions with 3 Ore, 2 Oil- about half what you had before, on the justification that your army is now about twice as large. On the map there would be about 4 Ore and 4 Oil waiting to be claimed, as well as places for Titanium and Aluminum. To address the weird problem that a ship which costs 5 ore could have four guns which cost 3 ore each, I will stipulate that resources are given for batches of equipment big enough for a company- about 100 men. That means 100 rifles, 10-20 artillery pieces, 10-20 tanks or planes (think of the ground crew), and 1-10 ships depending on how many people crew a ship. Therefore, weapons attached to vehicles have a smaller resource cost than weapons being used on their own, and don't completely dominate vehicle costs. However, [Complex] equipment which is part of a larger device (EG a radar system aboard a ship) still causes the larger device to inherit the [Complex] tag.
Incidentally, I may consider allowing perks later which cause you to ignore one [Complex] tag per design, for expense purposes. Or maybe not.
The Map:
I am thinking that the map will run from Turbados in the west, to Forenia in the east. The Forenian capitol has already been moved to Forenia's east coast, and the capitol of Turbados will have been moved to the west coast. There will be three lanes (or POSSIBLY four or five lanes) of three "regions" each (mostly separate islands, with maybe some being parts of larger islands to allow more emphasis on land battle) before making landfall on the opposing continent, at which point you will have to pass through a region on that continent before threatening the capitol. To give the losing faction a fighting chance, losing ground on your home island will not cost you resources. However, you will not battle on every front every turn. You will pick only two fronts on which to attack. It is only possible to gain ground on a front in which you are attacking; winning a battle where you are defending will not gain you ground. Furthermore if both factions attack the same front, one of them MUST gain ground, there will be no stalemates. This means that I can have a complex map if I want to, but only have to write two to four regions in each battle report.
Victory would occur when the capitol is captured, or possibly earlier in the case that one faction is obviously doomed.
Possibly there will be other islands controlled by NPCs (EG pirates, natives, axis/ally forces) off to your own side of the sea which you could attack instead, gaining bonuses like espionage opportunities, favor with the axis/allies, or resources.
I also had the idea that maybe each of the two fronts you pick could would have one General- so you would have two Faction Bonuses, but you could only apply one on each front. This additional option should help to further break up stalemates as well. If I did this, I would need to decide whether you could have both your generals attack one front and get both of their bonuses there.
Design Difficulty:
I am considering writing a table of die results to better illustrate what die rolls do. For example, if I would designate a new design as "hard" difficulty, then a 4 would succeed but have bugs, a 5 or 6 would have no bugs, a 3 would have serious bugs and a 1 or 2 would fail. A "normal" difficulty might get bugs on a 1 or 2, perform normally on a 3 or 4, and perform exceptionally on a 5 or 6. I would, however, only choose a difficulty AFTER a design has been voted upon- you would still have to make some guesswork as to how hard a design is, but when I write the design report it would say something like [Hard] [2]: Doomsday Laser and it would better illustrate why some designs where a 2 is rolled work OK and some do not. I would also include an explicit note that having failed a design will increase your future chances of success on something similar.
Background Information:
I am very loathe to approach hard numbers regarding things like sizes and distances. However, I did some thinking about the nature of the maps we've played on. After thinking about how much population would probably be involved in two large armies, and the scales involved, I concluded that Turbados and Forenia are each probably about the size and population of New Zealand or Botswana: That is, measuring roughly in the envelope of 1000 miles by 300 miles, or 600 miles by 600 miles, (roughly 350,000 square miles) with a population of 1.5-4.5 million, depending on the actual size of the army and rate of enlistment. Size-wise, this would mean a crummy inter-war bomber could only cover about 2/3 of the island on a round trip, but a good WWII long range bomber would easily cover the whole thing and beyond. For population reference, in WWII, New Zealand had about 1.8 million people and 300,000 of them served in the war, or about 20%. As an example of an extreme military dictatorship, North Korea has about 35% of its population in military service. If Forenia and Turbados are each fielding two army groups of about 200-250 thousand men, for a total of 400-500 thousand serving, they'd have between 1.5 and 2.5 million people- or up to five million (close to modern New Zealand's population) if the enlistment rate is a much more sustainable 10%.
I like the "about the size of New Zealand" estimate because it gives an idea of how big you are on the global scale- adding some importance and influence for the fact that you make and export a lot more high-tech weaponry than any real-life country that small. Forenia and Turbados are, say, big enough to be the site of a proxy war during the cold war, but small enough to only be pawns during WWII (again, cutting-edge technology aside). Plus, as I mentioned earlier, it gives an interesting prediction: In the upcoming game, long-range bombers could easily cover the entirety of Forenia or Turbados, and maybe most of the sea between them.
The only hangups with this are the extreme climate difference from the north and south ends of the islands (which is characteristic of a larger landmass) and the ability of the population to continue providing new soldiers over such a prolonged war, which should be a problem for a country of any size which is supposedly fighting all-out for 25 years and then going into another war. Ah well- in the grim darkness of the 20th century, there is only war. :P
I think that covers most of the topics I wanted to cover. My last request is if anyone has pointers on reducing the size of the equipment list without cutting anything important, especially considering that the equipment of two factions will be merged, do let me know. I would like to get as much cut out as I can, since I'll probably be running afoul of the character count limit for a single post before too long.
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 07:26:07 am
As for the bonuses, I think a mixture of the Moskurg and Arstotzkan bonuses should be merged to make a bonus that fits the medium range band to represent that... well, both sides survived the conflict. Especially since this is more an average demeanour than a particular training bonus. OR we get one trait to apply to a field marshal, which covers the entire armed forces, and then another two, less general but more powerful specific bonuses to the generals. This way you get some bonus to the entire army but the generals can act as spearheads barring any effective counterattacks. Or you could have several generals and swap them in and out as the situation demands.
Titanium is going to be... well, usuable in the games timeframe. Having it as a resource isn't going to be particularly useful or decisive.
For the additional targets, I'd suggest that these do require a general sent on them, but do not restrict an attack (Though that second attack may lack a general).
As for the tech lists, I think we may've already had that sorted with the old google doc that's in this thread... somewhere.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 08:40:58 am
For traits, if you are going for them being assigned to a general/other important figure, you could have 3-6 of them at start and let each side choose what theater they are assigned to. That would also allow for a greater range of more limited traits.
On equipment, it would make sense that the Turbadan forces would have their old cannalan gear and a selection of the more numerous Jurakian stuff, perhaps you could have Forenia choose 30 or so designs as the ones that are not surplussed, perhaps with a few bonus revisions, to reflect that there was some time to get things better worked out prior to this new wave of fighting?
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 09:06:52 am
As for the Turbadan forces having juraki gear, I'd say make them vote for what they can salvage from the somewhat perpetual nerve gas clouds of southern Turbados. Should lead to some amusing descriptions at the very least :D
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 08, 2017, 09:14:03 am
As for the bonuses, I think you should apply them upon a basis of which front the forces are fighting in. That way, if you use three fronts, you can have all three of those in play.
...perhaps with a few bonus revisions, to reflect that there was some time to get things better worked out prior to this new wave of fighting?
We did have a longer period peace more than them.
Though alternatively, we could have gotten some fleeing members of the Juraki government, so instead of making new tech, we were reverse engineering a couple of theirs instead.
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 09:25:53 am
Post by: Kot on March 08, 2017, 10:07:02 am
Regarding generals - it reminds me of a similar idea I wanted to do - a game more focusing on certain people, the generals, their abilities and other stuff, with additional competition between players of one faction for more troops and more resources (think prestige systems from Panzer General games), so they would be able to choose what exactly they want to fight with, giving specialized orders to their troops and as I mentioned, trying to be the first one to conquer enemy capital before other generals of his faction (I was mostly inspired by the late WW2 rush for Berlin). I was even thinking about making it hex-based like those PG games, with people moving actual troops, but I think it would be too much to handle.
GLORY TO
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 10:42:22 am
Now Zan the abilities here are mutable, they aren't set in stone just yet. So there's plenty more we can come up with.
Thus, a general suggestion:
Major General Tarik Zahir Karim:
-Panzer Leader: Displaying the typically northern forenian penchant for aggressive manoeuvres and mating it with the speed and power of a combined arms formation, General Karim's expertise and just plain aggressive nature lends to his units being adept in assault; they need to be able to keep up with the command tank as he tries to run into his foes and attempting to hit them with his scimitar from the commander's cupola. Tank and mechanised units perform better under his command.
EDIT: Shouldn't there also be a thread, or at least a link, for this on SB to let the turbadans set their generals and such up too?
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 11:04:06 am
Post by: evictedSaint on March 08, 2017, 11:16:35 am
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 11:24:46 am
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 11:52:44 am
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 12:07:59 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 12:17:06 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 12:22:47 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 02:14:23 pm
Still, we would be better off replacing it with a new design, or using the MK-47 instead of adopting a brand spanking new round used in one thing. For that matter, we could just take our 8kg machinegun, rework its furniture to be fired like a rifle and call it done.However, with our wide array of assault rifles, light machineguns, proto-assault rifles and our amazing snipers now behind rather good bolt-action rifles with decent optics, do we need a battle rifle?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 08, 2017, 02:42:02 pm
Still, we would be better off replacing it with a new design, or using the MK-47 instead of adopting a brand spanking new round used in one thing.
Why not use one of the revisions, if we get them, to merge the two designs? Both gives us a better weapon, and is a bit symbolic of the combining of the two countries into one by having the main infantry weapon have heritage from both sides.
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 02:49:24 pm
As for a battle rifle, it has it's niche (And means we're practically sorted for marksman weapons. We aren't getting much better than the ones we have now barring an anti-material rifle.)
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 02:55:00 pm
-ninja edit-
Yer .280 round is not a rifle round, so we arent going to chamber a full-powered rifle with it. We cant, because it wouldn't be a battle rifle then, just the world's second assault rifle if we put a fire selector on it.
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 03:03:48 pm
That being said a gas-operated AR would be a good thing. Slap it into plastic furniture and it'd be the equivalent of a modern rifle.
Post by: Sensei on March 08, 2017, 04:59:06 pm
You guys aren't getting any Juraki weapons or defectors, at the very least not before the war actually starts, so don't go planning on incorporating their weapons into your arsenal. You also shouldn't sweat exact plans you want to do too much yet- the game will not be for a while and I'm just trying to hash out the rules. You can reasonably have, say, Moskurg guns converted to metric calibers, that being the new measurement system of United Forenia. Aside from obsoleting guns though, I don't plan for any other major changes before the start of the war.
In regards to your weapon lists, I see no reason why any weapon which still fills some role of its own should be removed- if anything is different enough that you're going to find yourselves wanting to make a replacement, it should stay. I will also want to re-write many of the weapon descriptions to get them as short as possible, while still being descriptive as some people will be seeing them for the first time.
I will have to think about titanium- maybe I'll just make an island with a source of manganese or something again. Let me know if you can think of any other strategic resources that might make sense though.
Regarding faction bonuses, I'm pretty confident that I don't want to make a combination of the Arstotzka and Moskurg bonuses. "Some of your dudes are good at short range and some of them are good at long range so overall they're good at medium range" doesn't seem very workable. Having one general who does each separately could possibly be an option though, but I probably wouldn't have both available at the same time just because that seems arguable a bit OP. Also relevant is the fact that the Turbados faction bonuses were both lame and pretty much need to be replaced. Anyway, I'm trying to pick bonuses that are unique to Forenia or Turbados which show how they're different or represent unique accomplishments in the previous war. I feel like logically, bonuses that either side could conceivably have would not give one side an advantage over the other, and I also never want to offer the same bonus to both sides and have them literally cancel out in battle.
I do like the idea of having two generals, but I would certainly stop short of being able to attack 3 places at once: The main purpose of the "you can only attack limited areas" idea is to allow me to have a large region, but not have to write about too many places in the battle report. I thought writing about four separate territories in the Turbados campaign was borderline too much for each turn, so having reports on between two and four regions each turn seems like a good idea. I also would say that if I'm going with the 'generals' idea, then there would not be an additional blanket bonus for your faction, just that for the general in that region. I don't want to have to account for more than one background bonus in addition to weapon changes.
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 05:13:07 pm
As for generals, I'd say have as many as there are fronts, and just tie the two offensives mechanic's explanation being that both sides only have the capacity to support two attacks no matter how many generals they have. And theoretically this allows you to enable a third offensive front as a reward too.
Post by: Kot on March 08, 2017, 05:36:05 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 05:42:02 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 06:52:44 pm
Taricus, we have a gas-operated AR. Its the worlds firs- AAH. I JUST NOTICED THAT THE TITLE OF "WORLDS FIRST AR" WAS STOLEN BY CANNALLA! Which means that the AS-AR34 is the worlds seco- No, its the sodding THIRD. The first assault rifle is from 1926 in this timeline, and the second is from 1933. Well, fine. Its the worlds second gas operated assault rifle.
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 06:56:28 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 07:01:53 pm
Meanwhile the BAR was... Selectfire feeding from detachable magazines chambered for a rifle round. So one of the first battle rifles.
-edit-
Turns out theres more requirements, mostly to keep SMGs from being listed as one. One also needs to have a range of over 300 meters.
Post by: Kot on March 08, 2017, 07:15:27 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 08, 2017, 07:17:10 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on March 08, 2017, 07:21:15 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2017, 04:39:04 pm
Hmm... Having looked at the starting resources it seams like the tiger truck will end up being the one in general service due to it's cost.
Post by: RAM on March 29, 2017, 10:52:43 pm
Lovecraftian arms/design race/bureau.
I see three plausible factions:
Unfathomables: The faction of exceeding limits.
A dream is a common thing, and variations in size or form are too numerous to notice. In all things, however, there comes a matter of scale. To experience a dream is mild, to be a product of a dream, less so. The tree may be large, the mountain larger, the planet just a vague concept of standing upon a sphere and looking upon its curves, a star is just a long ways off, but easy enough to convey as a theory. When the combination of all that one has ever imagined to be possible is so very much less than a thing in scale that all comparisons result in nothing more than a terrifying and confused sense of vastness then a difference in size becomes a conceptually troubling matter...
Impossibilities: The faction of breaking truths.
Colour is known. There is a spectrum. Visible colours are normal, beyond the visible colours have been assigned. They are not truly colours to a human, but to more sensitive entities they are normal enough. It is quite impossible for an unknown colour to be within visible limits. Colours are simply a form of reflection, to be contagious is quite nonsensical. To have its own brand of will and purpose is right out! The shortest line from A to B is straight. There are very boring reasons for that which really don't need explaining. If one feels that some dimension-twisting malarkey disobeys that then one is simply failing to translate the straight-line to the new format. If your straight line is longer than your wacky zigzagging, if your triangle has a thousand sides, if a geometric progression plots a penguin, then something is profoundly off...
Subtleties: The faction of abnormal normalcy.
There are few things as comforting as a nice warm foyer. A roaring fireplace, decadent chairs, tea and cookies on polite tables, a great old clock reliably recounting the passage of time, beautiful landscapes depicted upon the walls, voluminous curtains keeping the troubles of the world from intruding, a stout pet curled upon one of the dense carpets... It is somewhat less comforting when ones ship runs aground on one in open ocean... Especially so when the simple desire for peace and good conversation compels one to take their place upon those warm, comforting chairs. A common thing in the wrong place can work wanders...
It can go the other way, too. Too much of a mundane thing. There is a best way to do most things, it should be no surprise to see everyone adopt the same method at the same time for the same reasons...
The objective, one imagines, is to make the world more familiar to your own sensibilities, and a little direct obstruction always hurts, which is so often a good thing...
If you really want to go overboard, a fourth faction could be Team Steampunk!! constantly striving to maintain the familiar conventions...
I feel that a victorian setting would be most befitting, but people always want to nuke Cthulhu, so there is that...
Everyone would probably start with cultists and mutations and some sort of very minor summoning and might gather influence points with which to inflict more profound changes.
Post by: Kot on March 30, 2017, 06:05:40 am
I feel that a victorian setting would be most befitting, but people always want to nuke Cthulhu, so there is that...I don't see why Victorian setting would stop anyone from nuking Cthulhu...
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on March 30, 2017, 07:12:18 am
I like the idea, but how about having it as an Outsider v Insider thing. One group seeks to unleash their Reality while the other seeks to keep things as they are. The former has win conditions of bringing about the Apocalypse, which could be done by Summoning something or by releasing such a meme as to convert the World or by doing a Reality Altering Ritual, or somehow slaughtering the other organization that is hunting them while the latter has win conditions of stomping out the cultists or slaying whatever entity they worship somehow.
I'd imagine that things could either start asymmetrical with a small cultist group and a large hunter group, the latter not being aware of the former quite yet, or a symmetrical start with both groups starting off small.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 04, 2017, 09:58:35 am
Post by: evictedSaint on April 04, 2017, 10:51:00 am
Post by: Kashyyk on April 04, 2017, 02:44:07 pm
Post by: NUKE9.13 on April 04, 2017, 03:18:45 pm
(I have no idea what the space battles forum is like. I'm sure they're very nice and intelligent people)
Post by: evictedSaint on April 04, 2017, 03:26:29 pm
Post by: Taricus on April 04, 2017, 03:31:10 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 04, 2017, 03:40:28 pm
Does anyone have a link to that forum? Does anyone have a link to where sensei talked about this? I'm interested
Here's the specific posts where Sensei spoke about it. Latter is newer than the former.
Bay 12 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156417.msg7384952#msg7384952)
Spacebattles (https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/arms-race-main-thread-the-war-is-just-beginning.387223/page-64#post-33461740)
Post by: Aseaheru on April 07, 2017, 06:10:41 pm
Also, my last arms race game(republic VS monarchy) has been dead for about two months. However, I am thinking of making a new armsrace game, set in a pseudo-fantasy time period, complete with elves, dwarves, and similar. However, no magic, because magic is good at making me sad.
Post by: Azzuro on April 08, 2017, 11:25:14 am
So it's a good time to make that game, I'd definitely participate. Why no magic, though?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 08, 2017, 12:34:46 pm
However, no magic, because magic is good at making me sad.
Hey, to make things even more inventive, disallow gunpowder as well.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 08, 2017, 01:50:53 pm
Ill probably have (super early) gunpowder, but people would need to work for it. I was thinking one side might start with a (basic, almost comically so) form of it, but they would also be less likely to have exceptional design results to help even things out. There will probably be a fair amount of asymmetric stuff in general.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on April 08, 2017, 02:00:15 pm
Well I think both are dead, though I might be a little premature in saying that. A pity for the Wands Race game, it was fun while it lasted. The Clash Among The Stars game is just bad, little to no effort by the GM to describe things and poor spelling/grammar to boot.
So it's a good time to make that game, I'd definitely participate. Why no magic, though?
It's not dead. The Collective just need their revision phase and order. From there, first official combat begins.
And time is not my friend. I am a very busy man in real life. From charity work, finding my next pay check with odd jobs, or currently keeping my home clean by myself. But if I had time, I would have made the tech list have like sixty or so entries. Do not believe me? Gaze into the horror that's Inferum at Gamersblick. That's me with free time.
It's just very hard to manage everything significant, and so forth. Does not help this phone has no correction for grammar. Typos are my bad though.
But seriously I designed it that way so the two player sides can ultimately invent their own killing devices using their own imangiatiobs with no need of my input.
As this is a very smart crowd.
Not going to give reasons for my posting or challenge you to fill in my shoes, I got some form of pride and civility to maintain.
But yeah reason I could not update until like now was two charity events back to back. As well as start of spring cleaning. Just saying.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on April 08, 2017, 02:38:03 pm
Well I think both are dead, though I might be a little premature in saying that. A pity for the Wands Race game, it was fun while it lasted. The Clash Among The Stars game is just bad, little to no effort by the GM to describe things and poor spelling/grammar to boot.Uh. I'm not sure where you get the impression that Wands Race is dead? Iituem may be in China, but evictedSaint took over as GM- the game is still going strong.
So it's a good time to make that game, I'd definitely participate. Why no magic, though?
Post by: S34N1C on April 08, 2017, 02:44:15 pm
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on April 08, 2017, 02:46:43 pm
yeah the game isn't dead.Well I think both are dead, though I might be a little premature in saying that. A pity for the Wands Race game, it was fun while it lasted. The Clash Among The Stars game is just bad, little to no effort by the GM to describe things and poor spelling/grammar to boot.Uh. I'm not sure where you get the impression that Wands Race is dead? Iituem may be in China, but evictedSaint took over as GM- the game is still going strong.
So it's a good time to make that game, I'd definitely participate. Why no magic, though?
Post by: RAM on April 08, 2017, 04:29:02 pm
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on April 08, 2017, 04:34:48 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on April 08, 2017, 08:19:31 pm
Quote
On a different subject, heres a suggestion Sensei. There was alot of salt in both games how troops getting to the battlefield was so abstracted. Howabout instead of only resources being mined requiring transport, men and material going forward also need transport? Particularly as most of the fighting is likely to be along ocean routes such a change would add a fair deal of depth to things going forward, and would also allow for things like submarines to have more of an effect.
Thoughts?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 08, 2017, 09:41:43 pm
Bringing this idea over from where I suggested it on the Spacebattles thread.QuoteOn a different subject, heres a suggestion Sensei. There was alot of salt in both games how troops getting to the battlefield was so abstracted. Howabout instead of only resources being mined requiring transport, men and material going forward also need transport? Particularly as most of the fighting is likely to be along ocean routes such a change would add a fair deal of depth to things going forward, and would also allow for things like submarines to have more of an effect.
Thoughts?
We really need to make a standardized thing for GMs for what we do have, in my opinion. Everyone seems to make their own thing and barely anyone releases GM side information. Get that done, then we can make tools that we can then expand to make doing stuff like you suggest really easy to do.
Post by: Aseaheru on April 08, 2017, 10:08:16 pm
Post by: Light forger on April 08, 2017, 10:45:57 pm
Post by: Azzuro on April 09, 2017, 12:47:51 am
Post by: evictedSaint on April 09, 2017, 02:37:58 am
Post by: Kot on April 09, 2017, 07:01:18 am
Post by: Taricus on April 09, 2017, 12:18:12 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on April 09, 2017, 02:11:12 pm
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on April 09, 2017, 04:17:25 pm
The period is WW2. But it's fictional we2. Meaning super science and magic exist. Also made a logistics system in investing in it. In terms of how many units can have made and where to put them. Also units themselves are on power lecvels based on how much cost to unlock and what you add on to them.
Only reason have not updated list here is it breaks word count per post. So thinking its too complicated to be worth a damn.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 04:41:20 pm
Quote
For designs, I generally picked a number that I felt like the design needed to be successful. This was, normally, a 3 or 4.
If your design met or exceed the number, it worked. If there were obvious flaws in the design, I might change them myself when you exceed the number. For example: "Your new RPG has special fins to help it fly farther. You also realized it needed a little more propellant to accomplish this goal and put that in." If you did not meet that number, you either didn't accomplish your design goals (usually this happens for designs that try to improve in multiple areas) or got a bug.
For example, if you tried to make a plane that had better machine guns, a new type of construction material, and a better engine, I might say: "You got more machine guns fit in and built it out of your advanced alloy, but this didn't leave you time to work on your engine" or, "Your tank with a supercharged engine goes fast, but the transmission breaks down often" If you rolled a 1 I might give a bug so bad, it makes the design nearly useless. This might even occur on a 2 or 3 for super ambitious designs. EG, "Your motorcycle mostly works, until it falls apart and the person riding it probably dies"
Now, in the next game I'll be expanding on this idea by assigning all designs a difficulty so you can see my thought process a lot better like, "Your jet fighter design was [Impossible], so even though you rolled a 5, you only got a barely working prototype jet engine that is more expensive than conventional engines, and not as powerful"
So after the design phase we get to battles. I look at the theater you're in, and try to decide which weapons matter the most. For example, if you're in the mountains, you would be engaging with long-range rifles, tanks would mostly not be an important factor, and only light weight artillery would be available. So I might say: Faction A has better sniper rifles, that's one discreet "advantage" for faction A. Then faction B has portable mortars, but faction A only has large artillery pieces
So that's one discreet "advantage" for faction B. In my head, they're roughly equal now.
Faction A has better fighter aircraft than faction B, so add air superiority to the mix. Does faction A have ground-attack aircraft capable of targeting small groups in the mountains? If so, add another advantage to faction A. If not, it's mostly a moot point. Let's say faction A doesn't, I'm left with faction A has better sniper rifles than faction B, and faction B has portable mortars whereas faction A doesn't have any explosives that are useful here. Faction B also has sniper rifles that aren't as good I'd probably tie-break it by saying that the difference in the artillery section for faction B is bigger than the difference in the sniper section for faction A, and say faction B gains ground. There might be more factors but that's the rough process.
I do not use dice rolls to determine the outcome of battles, so this will keep getting the exact same results until something changes.
Like let's say faction A makes better fighters and has even more air superiority. That might matter in another theater but not here. Normally a faction with advantage gains one section of ground. If a faction has an enormous advantage, like maybe three discreet "advantages" more than the other faction, I might give them two sections at once but this doesn't happen very often.
Had a war game that can be arms race style or a style in which each player (fm included) Rod as said nation ( as it invokes alliances so multiple nations and can be up to three in hand going at it.)
The period is WW2. But it's fictional we2. Meaning super science and magic exist. Also made a logistics system in investing in it. In terms of how many units can have made and where to put them. Also units themselves are on power lecvels based on how much cost to unlock and what you add on to them.
Only reason have not updated list here is it breaks word count per post. So thinking its too complicated to be worth a damn.
Sounds like it might be easier to post in a google doc and linked, then someone could program a tool to make it easy to use.
Post by: evictedSaint on April 09, 2017, 04:57:42 pm
Simplified rules are better for the GM - every new tech gives a bonus to the side, modified by the terrain - but dont accurately reflect the shifting state of technology and result in salty players who are mad their new tech doesn't completely negate an aspect of the enemy's battleplan. But more complex systems are harder on the GM, and can break down with laterally-thinking players and are less flexible for shifting battle dynamics.
It would be nice to have a single area where GM's can post their code/game rules and allow newer GM's to puruse the library to select one that works for them.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on April 09, 2017, 05:12:39 pm
Technology: Advancing field of technology in kilingbyour enemies.
Logistics: Some must be picked atvstart. But it shows how much resource you can support to your war effort.
Tactics: How your fightingbforces work outside the box despite tech to keep fighting interesting.
Society: How your government runs people. Affects things like how obviously good or bad you are and certain units. As well as bonus towards things like more research or morale or more productions
Magic: Throw science aside and stick to magic. Not as detailed as technology and has a weakness to certain picks. Butbstill awesome.
Super Powers: Totakly made up to spice things up. Funding research and employing special people for war effort. In time even creating your own.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 06:50:43 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on April 09, 2017, 06:52:03 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 06:56:25 pm
afaik arms race games are a bay12 phenomenon.
There's been a few on Spacebattles aside from Sensei's Canalla-Juraki Arms Race. There's one by Fullyautomagic in the OP and I believe Aseaheru ran one there that was a counterpart to a game on here. As such, I feel I need to ask.
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on April 09, 2017, 06:59:09 pm
Curious, anyone know of any off-Bay12 arms race games going on? Got the three going on upon this forum listed in the OP, though I don't see a main thread for Dungeon Race.This is the link for the Dungeon Race Game (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163342.0)
The Game is on a hiatus, I did pm the OP on when it's is arriving back, no response yet. Also yeah, SpaceBattles has a few arms race style of games in the forum.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 07:41:34 pm
Curious, anyone know of any off-Bay12 arms race games going on? Got the three going on upon this forum listed in the OP, though I don't see a main thread for Dungeon Race.This is the link for the Dungeon Race Game (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163342.0)
The Game is on a hiatus, I did pm the OP on when it's is arriving back, no response yet. Also yeah, SpaceBattles has a few arms race style of games in the forum.
Thank you. Moved it to the 'Haitus' section of the OP.
Got bored and went into RPG Maker on a lark. Someone give me a time period and a war justification, and I'll run a game using it.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: evictedSaint on April 09, 2017, 07:52:04 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on April 09, 2017, 07:58:01 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 08:17:30 pm
The year is 2020. The USA has been literally torn apart by the bitter fighting between democrats and republicans. Either side has taken up residence on the remaining shreds of the country, with Washington DC floating on a magical pillar of land between them. Both sides must draft legislation to combat the other, with the winning side gaining the presidency.
Ooo tempting, very tempting. However, that salt is a bit...dangerous in my opinion if I leave it as Democrats and Republicans. Though using political parties vying for the highest position does give me an idea...
Post by: Sensei on April 09, 2017, 10:13:11 pm
The exact results for each difficulty, the nature of each tier, and the descriptions used for each tier are all up for debate. This is the second version. Changes are that I mentioned in several places designs might simply not achieve their goals rather than having bugs, I added a sentence about revisions being able to be trivial in the first paragraph, and a few sentences about what revisions might qualify for some of the difficulties. Assuming people are mostly OK with the ideas given here, I will probably make no major changes except a second pass for brevity, as some of this is probably more verbose than necessary.
Spoiler: "Dice Rolls" (click to show/hide)
There are announcements to be made besides this! I have been considering how the the competitors will be able to communicate with each other (as this was always a source of great amusement), as they are on different forums and there would not be an easy "middle" thread. I've been considering having an "Embassy" thread on both forums, where visitors from the other forum are allowed to post.
Also, there is now a Discord server (https://discord.gg/ejE9j2w) dedicated to the Arms Race game. Aseaheru is hosting it, and there are public chat channels as well as chat channels which are private to each faction. Aseaheru, Zanzetzukan and I are admins and can assign people to factions. There are still some bugs to work out, and of course a Discord splits up the discussion a little bit and makes it hard to read back through old discussion, so this may be a temporary arrangement. Those of you who'd rather not join the Discord can rest assured that design proposals and votes will only be tallied on the forum, so you won't be left out.
Lastly, if you're reading this thread and haven't read the old Arms Race thread in a while, I have bumped that thread with a link to this one. There will be some ongoing discussion there: United Forenia needs a new flag and banner, as well as to decide which designs you'll be using from between Arstotzka and Moskurg's separate armories.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 10:26:49 pm
Threads of each side are a bit barebones as I am limited to mobile devices right now, which makes them a bit difficult to fill in.
Post by: RAM on April 09, 2017, 11:11:31 pm
It had been the depths of the cold war when it was proposed. Not even then was it a genuine suggestion, just a logical conclusion of the idea of mutually assured destruction(M.A.D.), a single bomb big enough to render the world's land uninhabitable for years, no matter where it hit... Despite this it, along with other hypothetical projects, acquired the proper paperwork and signatures and was stowed in a classified file and hidden away to be forgotten. Only later did unknown hands whisk it away and pass it on in secret, to be built under the strictest of concealment. In time, these same hands, driven mad from isolation, saw the shadows encroaching and their own demise imminent...Curious, anyone know of any off-Bay12 arms race games going on? Got the three going on upon this forum listed in the OP, though I don't see a main thread for Dungeon Race.This is the link for the Dungeon Race Game (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163342.0)
The Game is on a hiatus, I did pm the OP on when it's is arriving back, no response yet. Also yeah, SpaceBattles has a few arms race style of games in the forum.
Thank you. Moved it to the 'Haitus' section of the OP.
Got bored and went into RPG Maker on a lark. Someone give me a time period and a war justification, and I'll run a game using it.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
As the massive warhead descended, plummeting towards the shallow waters between two small island nations, it stopped... As did every other object near the planet that functioned upon electronics or... "excitable" chemicals. Telephones froze in people's pockets, cars spontaneously lost their inertia and became fixed, aeroplanes hung in the air as people on the ground frantically searched for ways to break a fall from such heights... Technological nations became mired in floating obstruction and lost services and the great powers were barely able to maintain themselves, with only the smallest expeditions able to seek out the nearly forgotten missile that had so recently been the obsession of every monitoring station on Earth. No explanation could be found for the phenomena. Nervous systems, electric eels, lightning, these things still worked, as did lava and low-grade fuels, such as wood and lamp-oil. Attempt at producing circuitry from neither of silicon and metals had met with no reliable successes.
Eventually these two islands, too poor and proud of their culture to adopt much technology before the event, gathered their most technical minds, along with some investigators from abroad, and set out to investigate the bomb. Floating platforms set out, great bolts flew, rope-ladders almost beyond measure were scaled and supplies hauled. A small camp was built atop the terrible device and work commenced. There was little news of note, at first. Flags spoke of climate and view, camps and construction... Eventually excitement waned and communication became repetitive and uninformative...
Then, with a great flash of light, a strange thing happened. People from the expedition flew from the camp, and fell upon the islands in two groups. They fell impossibly slowly, landing unharmed, with a frightening tale. From the depths of the expedition a cry had been heard, and answer had been found, and then, madness... The others began gibbering incoherently. The sounds they made were angry and savage, the poor researchers had to defend themselves, and then violence erupted, followed by a great light from below, and then they found themselves safely upon this island, along with all of the researchers that remained sane. Donning telescopes they saw that a group of the mad ones had landed upon the other island, and the inhabitants were crowding around them like worshippers. The madness must be spreading, the others are lost, and must be contained at any cost...
A mechanical-focused design-game with a contemporary setting and a mysterious prize if the centre can be held and a means if scaling it researched. Everyone gets free earplugs and orders to kill anyone who tries to understand the enemy...
P.S.
Ninjas...
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 09, 2017, 11:23:42 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 17, 2017, 03:03:53 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 20, 2017, 01:13:47 pm
And in other news, I am debating(slowly) starting a weapons design game taking place among either a mostly isolated, out at the least somewhat backwater, nation roundabout 1860-1870, a heavily industrialized region with lotsa wars going around but also much AI competition in the marketplace or a roughly cold war era region under arms embargo, thus allowing local companies to thrive without major outside companies screwing with things.
In any case, it would likely consist of a number of individual players who have characters that can collude, and one or more people acting as govermental agents out looking for designs. Thoughts?
Post by: Taricus on May 20, 2017, 01:37:05 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on May 20, 2017, 01:46:51 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on May 20, 2017, 02:08:10 pm
It's because we live in !!Dwarf Fortress!!!
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 20, 2017, 02:10:43 pm
Probably for the same reasons as why magic and future games dont go well. Salty salt salt over "we could do that?!"
While I don't know about magic, Orbital Vector (http://orbitalvector.com/), its analysis of various pieces of technology, and its tech levels system could be useful for letting people know what is possible in a future game. Granted, it was last updated in 2012, it appears, so we are nearing the point it labelled Tech Level 11 now, so that should be kept in mind when going through the lists.
Post by: RAM on May 20, 2017, 03:33:13 pm
Orbital Vector (http://orbitalvector.com/)There is also Atomic Rocket (http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/). I can't vouch for its accuracy, but most of it makes a lot of sense and it might be an interesting read for people who are into technological speculation.
Post by: 3_14159 on May 21, 2017, 07:04:58 am
In any case, it would likely consist of a number of individual players who have characters that can collude, and one or more people acting as govermental agents out looking for designs. Thoughts?So every player plays a single engineer?
Post by: Aseaheru on May 21, 2017, 11:18:38 am
Post by: Aseaheru on June 06, 2017, 04:58:13 am
Post by: Draignean on June 06, 2017, 02:13:58 pm
Take your D&D core basics, I'm familiar with 3.5 so that's where my mind goes, and then just give the starting empires the bare ass minimum.
Bronze Weapons
No Exotic Weapons. No Crossbows. No Composite Bows
Access only to the 0-level spells as prototypes
Access only to the Warrior and Adept classes
No 'feats' per se. (So no creation of magical items at start)
Limited Race Selection dependent on starting side
I could not do any justice to running it, but it's a fun idea to kick around.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 02:18:51 pm
Post by: Draignean on June 06, 2017, 02:41:19 pm
So, in D&D the (usual) world is fairly advanced. It's basically the Stock Elf+Dwarf+Orc+Human Fantasy blend at its core, and then people throw in all the spices and nuance and vagaries to transform it into something new and different.
In a typical stock 3.5 game, the world is typically stuck in sort of a golden era of Swords and Sorcery. Dragons, Sphinxes, flying cities, vampires, rivers that are very pissed about you pissing in them and are now going to curse with a raincloud to piss on you for a year and a day, demonic pacts, eldritch entities from between the stars, that kind of thing.
As far as swords... Steel is commonplace. Weapon manufacture is reasonably advanced up to, and occasionally including, basic black powder. Conventional units are often complemented by trained animals and non-conventional units of varying stripes. (Griffon Riders, Sapper teams that have bargains with Thoqqua [Burrowing flame snake things], etc)
As far as sorcery... Spell lists go from 0-level (Not terribly useful unless you're clever or really in a bind) up to 9th level, at which point you've got things like Wish and Miracle that can do basically anything you want. All of those spells are all filled out in lists that will make your eyes fall out of your head if you try and read them all at once, and probably represent at least a millennium of research.
There are several dozen classes in D&D. Warrior is a watered down and weak version of Fighter, and is basically an NPC only class. Adept combines some arcane and divine spellcasting at start, but it's also a strictly NPC class that's just all around bad compared to a Wizard or Cleric of the same level.
Giving the players only bronze and basic weapons at start means they're free to go for more exotic metals than are initially present in 3.5. Restricting people to 0-level spells means they have to invent all the useful stuff themselves. Restricting it two classes basically means that, to make people that are good at anything, you have to design new classes from there.
In my opinion, on of the reasons that the Arms Race games that are semi-historical in nature, or at least borrow heavily from history, do well is that people always have a drawing board to go back to. A bronze age edition of D&D set around the first real discovery of magic gives people the ability to ignore most of the parts of D&D they don't know and just focus on the parts of fantasy they like, while still keeping a reference that people can refer to and go: 'huh, where to do we go now...'
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 04:42:26 pm
Are we the researchers inside the characters' heads? By which I mean the GM is also the DM and therefore responsible for giving us an overarching goal and tossing encounters at us every "turn"? Presuming, of course, that we're working with, say, a standard group of 4 adventurers (I know a little bit, anyway) versus DM/the world.
Post by: Draignean on June 06, 2017, 04:48:47 pm
So you're inventing....what?
Are we the researchers inside the characters' heads? By which I mean the GM is also the DM and therefore responsible for giving us an overarching goal and tossing encounters at us every "turn"? Presuming, of course, that we're working with, say, a standard group of 4 adventurers (I know a little bit, anyway) versus DM/the world.
You'd still play as nations, still the same type of game overall. Mostly a setting change, with the guidance of a slightly more D&D way of going about endeavors. Probably more focus on challenges and human resources management.
If you're playing as a party, you might as well just play D&D, you can still do all the inventing there and its going to more granualar.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 06, 2017, 04:53:07 pm
Maybe you could have it centered around parties instead of the typical wide-scale armies Arms Race games go for. People would still be the designers for a nation, but the designs would be deployed in small scale engagements in parties. You could potentially go even further and have something vaguely similar to quests that both sides have to leverage their designs for.
Like instead of "Your soldiers are really good against the enemy's armor thanks to the swords you designed!", it can go "Thanks to the invisibility spell, we were able to sneak up to capture the ambassador before the enemy's party even realized it! But then their ..."
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 04:55:22 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 06, 2017, 04:59:45 pm
Ooh!
Maybe you could have it centered around parties instead of the typical wide-scale armies Arms Race games go for. People would still be the designers for a nation, but the designs would be deployed in small scale engagements in parties. You could potentially go even further and have something vaguely similar to quests that both sides have to leverage their designs for.
Like instead of "Your soldiers are really good against the enemy's armor thanks to the swords you designed!", it can go "Thanks to the invisibility spell, we were able to sneak up to capture the ambassador before the enemy's party even realized it! But then their ..."
So in contrast to the constant massive battles of a typical Arms Race, the nations would instead be supplying small, elite groups that enact most of the combat, with larger garrisons that try to counter the actions of those groups?
Post by: Draignean on June 06, 2017, 04:59:52 pm
Small Group vs. Small Group
Not Territory Based
Likely Based on Certain Challenge Objectives which push the assumed background war.
I'm really liking the idea.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 05:04:39 pm
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 06, 2017, 05:07:08 pm
To make it so what the relevance of their designs to the challenges isn't completely random, you should give them the challenge(s) at the end of the preceding combat phase. So people know what they're designing for and don't have to just hope their designs are relevant enough. I'd also think that the players should be given an opportunity to come up with a basic and broad strategy. If they're told to save the ambassador, they should be able to give a basic strategy like "Use the invisibility spell but ..." in order to dictate the basic battle plan. Nothing too specific, of course.
To make up for the lack of territory, you could maybe implement some kind of currency system for winning challenges? Something like "The Ambassador thanks you for saving him and his nation gives you 100 gold pieces." But coming up with a use for whatever currency you get and keeping it from encouraging total snowballing could be a challenge.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 06, 2017, 05:09:43 pm
Fantasy Special Forces Arms Race?
Small Group vs. Small Group
Not Territory Based
Likely Based on Certain Challenge Objectives which push the assumed background war.
I'm really liking the idea.
Actually, could run it more in lines with a Cold War style of Arms Race, with each side equipping small groups that perform specialized strikes to get an edge in the conflict, as well as building up garrisons to prevent the other side from winning.
Given in such a conflict territory wouldn't be gained like in the Arms Race games, a different win condition might need to be implemented. Maybe you could take inspiration from some of the Paradox Interactive grand strategy games, and instead use a 'war score' meter, that when one side achieves a certain level of advantage on the meter, they've won. Descriptor wise, this could mean that one of the nations have essentially been knocked out as being a meaningful power in the region.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 05:29:28 pm
Or the order: "Kill those guys" then carried out with our weapons and summarized by a single die roll. "We got them all with a single burst of suppressed weapons fire and nobody noticed" compared to "Bob tripped over his own feet on the way in, fumbled the grenade, and killed the entire team. Good job, man"
Post by: Draignean on June 06, 2017, 05:52:30 pm
If you want to go "hybrid AR and DnD" then really you ought to consider inventing everything, and then having a simplified DnD-esque phase where the players direct their team on how to accomplish the mission. You wouldn't have rounds or combat or anything, you'd say "Do this" and they do that with X chance of success or whatever, you roll the die and say "You picked the lock very quietly" or "You picked the lock, but accidentally set off the door charge and now your stealth specialist has been decapitated and all the stuff you needed to get out is destroyed."
Or the order: "Kill those guys" then carried out with our weapons and summarized by a single die roll. "We got them all with a single burst of suppressed weapons fire and nobody noticed" compared to "Bob tripped over his own feet on the way in, fumbled the grenade, and killed the entire team. Good job, man"
Not hybrid, more just flavored. D&D sort of has an event horizon, where, if you approach it too closely, it becomes better to just play D&D with an odd plot.
So, to respond to both Zanzetkuken and Chief, I like the idea of a Warscore system. However, I also like the idea of a more normal background war because there's some interesting things you can do with it.
For instance, let's assume that the exact details of all weapons/abilities/artifacts/spells/classes currently in use by one sides magical
However, let's say there's a system called Remittances, where the spec-ops team can let some of its researched stuff by put into use by the general military. This grants a small buff to the background war and uptick in war score. However, doing so makes the capacities of the ability/class/etc public knowledge, and the other side can launch a team on a special project to extract information about this thing. If they win they get a research credit relating to said thing.
So, for instance, in the earlier example of invisibility, that spell can be kept just to the special operatives where it's safe, but it can also be issued out to the military in order to boost the war effort for a time. This in turns allows the other side to mount an abduction to capture and interrogate a mage who knows the new invisibility spell, after which point they gain a step up that potentially makes researching Invisibility Purge simple, or allows them to work on their own line of invisibility spells.
So the play loop would be something like:
1. Present Available Challenge Opportunities and areas.
--A. Assassinate Enemy General (The Enemy Gets a Defense Event)
--B. Defend Temple Celebration (The Enemy gets an attack event)
--C. Clear out infested mine (Resource Event)
--D. Deal with Dragons (PVE defense event)
2. Design Phase!
--We all know how this goes
3. Revision Phase
-- Still normal
4. Assignments and Remittances
-- Assign your adventuring parties between the available challenges
-- Declassify magitech to the army
-- Basically a reskin of the strategy phase.
5. Resolution
-- Everybody sees what happens
6. GOTO 1
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 06, 2017, 06:12:45 pm
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 06, 2017, 06:22:48 pm
But then with games like Wands Race, you have a much more different way it plays out. At this point, both sides are so radically different in technology and magic, that they almost always have the different approach to the same problem. Moskurg develops ballistae, and Arstotzksa develops a steam cannon. Moskurg develops flying carpets and Arstotzka "develops" trained Falcons to take down the carpets.
The many possibilities for designs, their interactions, and the different approaches are in my opinion what makes the game really fun. Though it does come at a cost of harder balancing for the GM.
@Draignean: The problem with Remittances is that it seems a bit too... much. It's, in my opinion, adding another mechanic to the game where it's not really needed. The war should really just be decided by the main focus of the game - the parties. Adding extra mechanics to also influence the "big war" seems like it'd change the focus of the game too far away from the "spec-ops" aspect as well as making the GM's life harder; they have to combine how the main war is going combined with the spec-ops aspect in order to get a satisfying overall state of the war.
Basically, I just think that the focus should be on the spec-ops and only the spec-ops. So both the GM and players can focus on that aspect to maximize its potential.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 07:50:27 pm
You are the aristocracy of a (Terminally unstable, though it never becomes an issue....probably) kingdom with a terribly old king who is perhaps slightly not-all-there. You are now responsible for the military and political sides of this nation, which has several? (Willing to run with more than 2 sides to this game? Might make writing harder, but it'd get a lot more !!FUN!!, I think) not-quite-enemy kingdoms in the same political situation nearby. None of them like each other, but nobody is willing to go to outright war. So they act through a third party: Adventurers. There's a nearly limitless supply of them running around. You must decide how to use this resource, what to give them, and how to keep them. Do you keep them alive and develop a small but highly trained strike force using your nation's great skill-at-arms? Or do you work the disposable route, using your kingdom's massive population to feed a steady stream of extras into your loose-knit party of business associates? Or perhaps, you never actually go anywhere at all, working great magics in secret, casting phantoms and striking death from the second plane with a small cadre of holy mages from your abnormally religious society?
It's up to you to decide what you will do, and how you will do it. The only way to win the shadow war is to guarantee victory for your nation. Kill the enemy generals, steal their money, destroy their equipment, or increase your own prestige, bolster your magical abilities, hone your weaponsmithing and armor-making, and empower your own nation. Force them to surrender...or die. There will be a conflict. You must force your enemies' hands.
Drafted that up for fun. I'm not creative, original, or experienced enough to run the game myself, but that might make a really cool description if this happens. I was thinking that you have a wealthy nation (What can't money accomplish? You can pay your way to new heights), a warlike nation (Bonuses to militant technology like destructive magic and regular old swordplay), a populous nation (SETBACK?!?!?! I have another THOUSAND of those crappy second-level fighters just lying around back home!), and a devout nation (Obviously comes with bonuses to holy magic of various sorts).
But then you can start out with a choice:
Wealth:
City Nation--Your nation has plentiful reserves of food, and thus has a large and well-fed population, with many....side industries. You gain a bonus to the occasional adventurer, who will have additional skills in less-than-legal professions that rely on the wealth of others.
Industrious--Your nation is wealthy from the work of its own peoples' hands, and you gain an occasional bonus of craftsmanship to your mundane (Non-warfare-based/not a weapon or weaponized spell. Think rope, or enchantments of hard-wearingness. Or hard-wearing enchanted rope) equipment.
Warlike:
Mercenary: Your nation is famous for its mercenaries, and thus you have a ready supply of better-than-average adventurers.
Military Machine: War is your nation's constant companion, and its inventors have become adept at designing the weapons and spells of war. You gain an occasional bonus of skill to your weapons and spells used by your armies (Healing, fireball-ing, resurrecting? [Probably an end-game sort of thing, I'd say])
Populous:
Poverty--Your nation is filled with poor laborers. Make use of them. You gain the ability to send many extra adventurers on your missions, though they will be extremely low-skilled. Highly replaceable.
Melting Pot--With so many people, it is inevitable that some of them have useful talents, and that some of THOSE people will join up. You gain a chance for each of your adventurers to have a random high-level skill. It might not be a useful skill, but it will be high-level (And then there was the Legendary +12 CHEESEMAKER!)
Devout:
Martial Deity--Your deity is....vengeful. You gain bonuses to things like smiting, bringing pestilence, and killing nonbelievers with large metal lumps on the ends of sticks. You do not, however, do well when you attempt to heal things.
Peaceful Deity--The reverse of the above, you gain bonuses to nonviolent holy magic, and a disadvantage to violent magic.
I just spent a lot of time on that....Ah well.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 06, 2017, 08:18:12 pm
I do like the idea of just going away with the big war entirely. Having this be more of a black ops scenario during peacetime is much more interesting. It opens the doors to a lot of really cool possible settings, objectives, and challenges. Players are in charge of a secretive division of their nation in charge of this stuff and the weapons they use.
You can have a lot more political intrigue and other cool settings while pretty much being able to do any unique things that you could do in a large-scale war.
Alternative idea to the Remittances with this scenario: Selling designs. If there is a currency, you can decide to sell designs for money. Of course, the designs would probably become public. Maybe even have a chance of letting another side buy it for money?
I do like the idea of currency. You could save up for Research Credits, or you could buy a generic design off the black market. So many things possible with it.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 08:31:11 pm
Wands Race became a "MOSKURGERS MORE" and "ARSTOTZKANS BETTER" sort of game, where Quantity was facing off against Quality, or Intercontinental, where AIRCRAFT face SHIPS.
Obviously, those were just fast ideas that don't really matter (Especially since I'm not going to run this game lol). But the idea was the same.
I considered a currency-based advantage for the wealthy nation, based on trading and purchasing designs from outside rather than making them yourself...but I thought that might be a bit OP.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 06, 2017, 08:49:27 pm
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 06, 2017, 08:59:19 pm
Turning a game about fantasy and magic into magical World War 1 is fun!
I think Arms Race games should either follow that or some other way to make designs unique. Just following history is, to me, somewhat boring. One of my favorite parts in Wands Race is coming up with rationalizations for these crazy designs. How to use magic to make kind-of-replicas of real world technology. Then knowing that we have this stuff so long before they would ever really be introduced.
I can replicate an Ironclad using magic, or I can say "Let's make a bigger fireball." I mostly just enjoy the former.
Though if Draignean does do a D&D-type Arms Race similar at all to what we've been talking about here, then that kind of stuff shouldn't be too much of a problem. I doubt things like magical steam engines would ever become relevant in a D&D-like setting with such a small focus.
Probably.
Post by: Taricus on June 06, 2017, 09:01:41 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on June 06, 2017, 09:18:15 pm
Moskurg has a magical metal, flying carpets rolled up and saddled like horses, and also some things I'm not going to mention until after this coming turn.
Post by: Funk on June 06, 2017, 10:07:09 pm
There not point in trying to build a laser cannon if the setting will not let it work i.e. it's ww2 or the late bronze age.
One thought that strikes me is how can we make the game more akin to reality, with multiple designs being introduced, often rapidly, without the players just racing through decades of research with ease thanks to their ability to use hindsight of what worked in our world.An idea i've toyed with is having delayed designs with some designs haveing multiple turn delays so we get redundant weirdness not just X to counter there Y.
A delay could add an element of randomness to the game, and give players something to spy for.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 06, 2017, 10:31:27 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 06, 2017, 10:39:24 pm
One thought that strikes me is how can we make the game more akin to reality, with multiple designs being introduced, often rapidly, without the players just racing through decades of research with ease thanks to their ability to use hindsight of what worked in our world.An idea i've toyed with is having delayed designs with some designs haveing multiple turn delays so we get redundant weirdness not just X to counter there Y.
A delay could add an element of randomness to the game, and give players something to spy for.
So give multiple designs, but things like infantry weapons can be put out in one turn, while stuff like tanks ties up a design action for, picking a random number out of my head, three turns? Could be interesting if roll results have to wait til the end of the period before seen...
I do have a different idea of a way to slow down the tech progression rate, at least a bit. Make it so the revision actions can't be used on the designs you got the results for on that turn. True, in all odds this would only take things a single turn longer to fix, but with some tech, that could mean a lot with cutting edge tech.
Post by: Funk on June 06, 2017, 10:41:27 pm
One way to do that is to add in production times, but any sort of "this isint in quite yet" adds a whole bunch of bookkeeping.I had it all set out for arms race Forenia vs the Martians, the Martians would make a bunch of designs on turns 2 and 3 and i'd just roll for them each turn to see which landed from a list.
Of course the production being delivered from Mars meant that Forenia could get spy reports and the lag would have the right war of world vibes.
Post by: Happerry on June 07, 2017, 07:02:38 am
Does that sound fun to anyone?
Post by: Madman198237 on June 07, 2017, 08:41:33 am
Honestly, this fool. It's an Arms Race game. You can never have enough killing-things-inventions!
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 07, 2017, 12:57:09 pm
As a side effect, with the five year gap, you can have the nations have a small war where territory is exchanged in a peace treaty at the end of them, marking territorial gains. Game would be a bit more realistic due to alternating short bursts of war divided by peace is a bit more realistic for nations to wage rather than an eternal war like a standard Arms Race.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 07, 2017, 01:31:46 pm
Post by: RAM on June 07, 2017, 03:42:08 pm
With everything done simultaneouslyThat reminds me of an idea that I had. Simultaneous voting with things split up into technologies, parts, designs, versions, tactics, and usage instructions.
They could produce either one technology or two-three parts, one designs or two-three variants, and one tactic or two-three usages.
That way they would be able to learn how to make pulsed laser emitters or build a rail turret and a plasma pistol from their existing magnetic turret, automatic aiming, automatic ammunition feeding, railguns, plasma projection, plasma containment, and pistol case technologies, or maybe just plasma and rail tech.s...
They could design a new armoured wagon from their armoured horse-cage, armoured wagon, and gattling gun turret parts, or upgrade their gatling guns and cannons to use the new exploding rounds.
And they could instruct their horse-archers to focus on surrounding the enemy to concentrate on unnerving the enemy as they suffer through the new stink-arrows' morale effects, or they could could be instructed to use the wooden hoplite platform to make their double-decker phalanxes bi-directional instead of just all obviously facing forwards and instruct your midget hoplites to save their spring-loaded spears for emergencies rather than just blowing them all at the start for shock value.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 07, 2017, 03:51:46 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 07, 2017, 03:58:40 pm
Five years is probably far toomuch time inbetween turns. Two years(with two designs, two revisions) would probably be better.
I was wanting a length of time a decent length war could take place in. Five years seemed to be good, as you could get a few options on how long one could last.
Figured out another way to slow things down a bit. A GM could be make technology mean something by introducing a research phase with a number of actions where new tech is researched, and Designs and Revisions have to have existing tech to work off of.
Post by: RAM on June 07, 2017, 06:19:24 pm
RAM....that is unintelligible gibberish, and your point is lost in all the contradictory terms. AHHHH MY SCIENCE/HISTORY SENSES! THEY'RE BURNING!Well, I can't agree with you, but I tried to fix it with some formatting and typo correction and filling in some terms.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 07, 2017, 06:33:46 pm
Maybe instead of just "multiple designs/revisions", it could be done so the GM gives [both sides/the players] a list of designs that the nebulous upper commanding entity wants. Then it's up to the players to design a solution to each one.
So if you have two sides, after one combat phase, you can say "High Command wants something to bombard the enemies from afar, wants [this], and wants [that]." Then players design three things to fulfill each individual requirement.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 07, 2017, 07:04:29 pm
The issue with that being that innovation in the field of warfare steps both up and down during wars, with more recent wars going faster(mostly becasue would-be designers are slightly less likely to die in wars these days).
I was wanting a length of time a decent length war could take place in. Five years seemed to be good, as you could get a few options on how long one could last.
RAM, yer "vote for all actions at same time" has some significant issues, mostly when it comes to votes being split. Also, the last three paragraphs are rather confusing.
Waffles, main issue with that is it adds in tons more work for the GM.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 07, 2017, 08:22:52 pm
Every turn, the players have the following options:
Take one (1) Technological Innovation turn, and design a new technology.
OR
Take 2 Implementation turns, and use technology to revamp or improve old equipment with new parts.
Take one Design turn, and design a new piece of equipment.
OR
Take 2 Adaptation turns, and create a new variant of an old piece of equipment---perhaps an amphibious version of a tank, or an armed version of an APC.
Take one Strategy turn, and design new grand strategies for the war effort.
OR
Take 2 Tactical turns and design two new small-scale tactics for how your soldiers use your equipment.
(All numbers subject to change. May have played fast 'n loose with a few of your ideas)
Post by: RAM on June 07, 2017, 08:59:20 pm
Alright, so, RAM, your idea is the following:Pretty much, I made some adjustments to make it more closely match the original, but it is just theory so the specifics are not important.
Every turn, the players have the following options:
Take one (1) Technological Innovation turn, and design a new technology.
OR
Take 2 Implementation turns, and use technology torevamp or improve old equipment withdesign new parts that are not automatically implemented.
Take one Design turn, and design a new piece of equipment from existing parts.
OR
Take 2 Adaptation turns, and create a new variant of an old piece of equipment---perhaps an amphibious version of a tank, or an armed version of an APC. Generally just exchanging one part for a similar part. Possibly replacing a cheap hull with an amphibious hull of the same internal dimensions, adding armaments where they did not previously exist would generally be too much without special considerations, such as a turret-blank...
Take one Strategy turn, and design newgrand strategiesways of coordinating different equipment for the war effort.
OR
Take 2 Tactical turns and design two newsmall-scale tactics for how your soldiers use yourspecific usages of individual pieces of equipment.
(All numbers subject to change. May have played fast 'n loose with a few of your ideas)
My intention is that there is a choice between something completely new or a new implementation of the old stuff in each category, and that there is a clear listing of what current options exist and a clear method of acquiring new options. The first item would be a matter of imagining new things or new ways to use things. The second would be more of a mix-and-match game with slotting parts together to make new pieces. A large vehicle would require more different parts so keeping it current would be slower but once you had the parts you could just mash up a large vehicle as quickly as anything else. The third is to give them some relevance to the battlefield in a manner which would be appropriate to engineers. They can comment on how the equipment is intended to work, but are not going to be telling the generals what to do. Presumably the footsoldiers would be mentally inhibited tothe point where simple instructions would be helpful.
I like to think that this would be suited to a science fiction setting where things can get a bit vague and a lot of the designs are likely to be similar. Giving players clear instructions as to how to push the boundaries would help keep some sanity to exactly how much new stuff they try to put on a design.
Post by: Happerry on June 08, 2017, 12:50:24 am
Though I'm still trying to decide if I want to have research actions be an actual thing.
But anyway, that way sometimes they're putting out new gear (and with two actions can take a chance on something fun), sometimes they're just upgrading old gear, and sometimes they're doing the normal balance.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 17, 2017, 11:05:55 am
Post by: Madman198237 on June 17, 2017, 11:34:15 am
Plus at that point it becomes a question of "Why bother rolling?" Just propose designs and have the GM decide which is better.
Unless you have difficulty like in ICAR, where an ambitious design might be less powerful than a regular old improvement, because the roll was a 4 and the VH design thus has too many bugs or something. Either way, you're back to "Why not just propose designs and skip the rolls?"
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 17, 2017, 11:44:16 am
A better idea may be to use 2 identical pools of X dice (hidden from the players).
Every turn one dice is selected at random from the pool, and either side gets the same dice added to their pool to replenish it.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 17, 2017, 11:54:57 am
Well, yes, that would balance the game. But then it becomes FAR more subjective---the GM can't rely on the rolls to say "Well this is just so much inferior", he/she/they instead has to justify WHY, IN HIS OPINION, Design A gives advantages over Design B....isn't that the point, though? If it were just a question of "who rolled higher", why bother putting effort into the designs?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 17, 2017, 11:57:37 am
Post by: Madman198237 on June 17, 2017, 12:05:00 pm
Ultimately, Arms Races are ENTIRELY SUBJECTIVE. Even Sensei's sometimes very mathematical approach relies on his opinions---with basis, for sure---as to what does what, why, and why it gives that side an advantage.
Like in Wands Race: How does evicted determine whether repeated lightning strikes are more powerful than cannonfire? Well, I don't know, but being Moskurg, I agree. (It's probably because we're pinpoint accurate at striking cannons from airships now. Also, it gets hard to see when your retinas get fatally overexposed because of the Hammer)
Post by: VoidSlayer on June 17, 2017, 12:07:53 pm
This is even more pronounced with "tech" where early successes can mean fundamental new, easier design options so that even if the rolls average out later, a 2 later game can mean a lot different then a 2 early game.
Not sure how to fix it, or even if you want to, just an observation. Letting one side steam roll, win the game, and then move on to the next one may be preferable to an endless war depending on the GM.
Post by: andrea on June 17, 2017, 12:10:30 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on June 17, 2017, 12:13:51 pm
I can guess, but I want your opinion.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 17, 2017, 12:28:37 pm
Yeah, but if rolls are going to be identical every turn, why bother rolling at all?
The different difficulty levels of various designs would mean that even identical rolls could end up with very different results. As an example, the meaning of a 2 can be completely different for each side if one has proposed a design that would be Easy while the other has proposed a design that is Very Hard.
Well, yes, that would balance the game. But then it becomes FAR more subjective---the GM can't rely on the rolls to say "Well this is just so much inferior", he/she/they instead has to justify WHY, IN HIS OPINION, Design A gives advantages over Design B.
This happens anyway. Giving different rolls or giving the same rolls won't make this more or less of a thing that happens.
Plus at that point it becomes a question of "Why bother rolling?" Just propose designs and have the GM decide which is better.
Because players often use hindsight and are very ambitious, so you need something in existence to prevent/counteract Assault Rifles in the late 1800s (slight exaggeration to get the point across).
Wands race eliminates the resource system.... and let me tell you, that introduces a whole host of new issues.
If I recall correctly, that game uses rolls to determine how expensive something is. In my mind, that is advancing in the wrong direction, though given it is using magic, it is a bit hard to work with (though a mana resource could have been made, though that runs afoul of the problems of the resource system)
A possible way to get around the resource system is to have categories carry different costs, such as light tanks having a default value of 'Expensive,' medium having a value of 'Very Expensive,' and heavy having a value between Very Expensive and National Effort, and these costs are modified by complex, rare resources (ex. Titanium in areas where mining of it is limited), shoddy construction, and other tags added due to the tech being very advanced, the design specifying hard to get items, poor rolls, deliberately producing cheaply, and other things.
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on June 17, 2017, 01:46:27 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on June 17, 2017, 09:25:00 pm
Most importantly, how does one have this element of complexity and strategy without burning out the person running the game?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 17, 2017, 09:40:35 pm
Which brings in its own kettle of fish. How abstracted is it going to be? Do things take resources to make, or just time? If they take resources, how is that represented? To some things get cheaper due to bulk production, or new designs using existing weapons being cheaper? What about shared parts, or things that have another design in them? And if you are doing more than one designed thing in a vehicle or ship, how the hell does that work?
Most importantly, how does one have this element of complexity and strategy without burning out the person running the game?
Honestly, if we want to get any real depth to both the expense system and the battle systems, tools need to be made to offload all the stuff the GM has to deal with.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 17, 2017, 09:45:35 pm
Anybody wanna get on this?
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on June 17, 2017, 10:07:35 pm
Post by: RAM on June 17, 2017, 11:26:46 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 17, 2017, 11:43:19 pm
Basically, in order make this objective, you would have to program yourself a complete physics simulator. With combat mechanics. And somebody has to draw everything up. And design it into this game.
Anybody wanna get on this?
That seems a bit too far in the other direction (i.e. A greater quantity of work than the benefits you would get out of it.), and seems a tad too ambitious a goal that would lead to turnout. We don't need perfect, just good enough.
Post by: VoidSlayer on June 18, 2017, 12:55:00 am
Post by: RAM on June 18, 2017, 02:17:46 am
Post by: 3_14159 on June 18, 2017, 03:37:37 am
Or we could go Aseahera's route and have things have an abstracted production cost and the involved parties need to make and manage production centers.That's the question, though. In my opinion, we saw two game styles for those kind of games:
Design Bureau: Those came first. They are characterized by a lower abstraction; players can design multiple things per turn, assign engineers, and (in the later games) decide what to produce. The last of those games included a competitive element.
Arms Race: Highly abstracted game, featuring one design (and one revision) per turn. Those are characterized by their competitive nature, and the abstractness makes them fast and nice to play.
Introducing production cost and production assignments into an Arms Race game risks making it far more complex for little gain.
I mean, just a good spreadsheet program to calculate expense levels and bring up what designs belong in each category of unit so it is easier for the GM to compare stuff.I tried that before to track production assignments and losses. In the end, I spent half of that time to get a working python script. Production assignments are complicated.
Post by: NAV on June 23, 2017, 12:19:48 pm
-Allowing two revisions per turn AND/OR not allowing revisons to be used on the newest design.
I don't really like how revisions are usually used to fix the newest design instead of fixing older designs. I also think there should be more revisions than designs.
-Strategy designs and revisions.
If you start with infantry lines, then design assault rifles without updating your strategy, your soldiers will just stand in rows firing their assault rifles like muskets. Basically, I don't want to think of the best way for you to use your tech, that should be the player's job.
-Food resource.
Determines your population, and also the cost of animals. A high food/low ore army would have to design as cheaply as possible whereas a high ore/low food army could give each of their very few soldiers a private tank.
Most importantly, steampunk.
Electricity just doesn't exist in this universe, the laws of physics don't allow for it. Good quality fuels suitable for internal combustion engines don't exist either. Same with smokeless gunpowder.
I want to see how far you can take this limited tech, and encourage creativity and experimentation rather than strictly following real life advancements.
Post by: milo christiansen on June 23, 2017, 01:23:50 pm
I keep wanting some way to influence rolls. Like maybe getting identical dice pools to spend over a half-dozen turns? That way you could save up your good rolls for after you have some foundation research or... But it would be kind of obvious that you were doing dud rolls, and you wouldn't ever see people mixing their rolls, it would always be "jump ahead then cruise along on the bad stuff" or "research research research then dump it all on a great design"...
Or maybe a set number of "extra dice" that can be allocated at will? Basically dice can be added to an aspect of a design, then the extras are rolled with the normal dice and the highest result used.
Post by: Draignean on June 23, 2017, 01:54:42 pm
I keep wanting some way to influence rolls. Like maybe getting identical dice pools to spend over a half-dozen turns? That way you could save up your good rolls for after you have some foundation research or... But it would be kind of obvious that you were doing dud rolls, and you wouldn't ever see people mixing their rolls, it would always be "jump ahead then cruise along on the bad stuff" or "research research research then dump it all on a great design"...
Or maybe a set number of "extra dice" that can be allocated at will? Basically dice can be added to an aspect of a design, then the extras are rolled with the normal dice and the highest result used.
What about Each round you get a certain number of dice, let's say five. A design needs 3 dice, a revision needs 1, but you can overspend. Five dice per round lets you do a design and two revisions with no safety net, but you can also do one revision and use the extra die to give the design efficacy (or bugs, or price) two rolls.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 23, 2017, 09:04:36 pm
Post by: milo christiansen on June 23, 2017, 10:02:47 pm
One thing this system does is allow rolls above 6, each rolled 6 adds 1 to the result. Roll two 6s, the result is 7. Not sure if criticals like this would work in an arms race or not... It would probably need some tweaking.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 25, 2017, 03:05:28 am
Surely you have room in your life for just one more wafer-thin Arms Race?
Post by: VoidSlayer on June 25, 2017, 03:22:56 am
All joking aside, we really haven't made a lot of designs on either side, so it is very open to new ideas.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 25, 2017, 05:29:55 pm
Evil Genius Arms Race : Superheroes vs Supervillains.
Freezerays, sharks with laserbeams, batmobiles, stuff like that.
Post by: Taricus on June 25, 2017, 05:31:10 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on June 25, 2017, 05:33:08 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 25, 2017, 05:36:19 pm
So, interest check.
Evil Genius Arms Race : Superheroes vs Supervillains.
Freezerays, sharks with laserbeams, batmobiles, stuff like that.
For a bit of madness, could have a set number of major heroes and villains controlled by single players so various individual hero themes could be made, and a collective action for general boosts to a side.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 25, 2017, 05:37:49 pm
Explain the rules, ebbor, and swear to Armok you'll see it through.
Odds are I'll unceremoniously steal someone elses rules, then work further from that.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 25, 2017, 05:39:42 pm
Pretty much any ARs have got my interest.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 26, 2017, 03:53:57 am
And as a similar question, would the villains be a team of Lex Luthors/Grus/etc, or have some superpowered nonsense as well?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 26, 2017, 04:08:03 am
Post by: RAM on June 26, 2017, 05:17:00 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 26, 2017, 05:19:17 am
But, with perhaps a bit less of emphasis on superpowers.
Post by: RAM on June 26, 2017, 05:38:30 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 26, 2017, 05:49:45 am
Post by: milo christiansen on June 26, 2017, 08:37:10 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 26, 2017, 08:39:03 am
Post by: Madman198237 on June 26, 2017, 08:46:10 am
That said, have a possible way to do it:
Gameplay:
Villains must survive for, say, 50 turns. Number highly variable, likely dependent on the speed with which things might happen. Perhaps 20-30 would be more reasonable. But anyway. The Heroes have to, in that time, figure out how to infiltrate the Villains' base to derail the project, setting it back by X number of turns with various actions. The victory condition, of course, is for the villains to fire their weapon of mass confusion that shouldn't work or for the heroes to inexplicably and irreversibly blow it up without harming the crowds of gaping onlookers.
Turns:
Design--make a piece of equipment or perhaps even, at later stages, a person.
Defense--Figure out ways to defend your base, how to use your tech (Villains can infiltrate to steal plans or prototypes, or just blow things up to do temporary damage to weapons' stockpiles)
Attack--What will you do to your enemies this turn? And how? Who and what will you send?
Other:
You might include limited numbers of NPCs to run missions with, or perhaps limit superpowered individuals based on the number of players.
Post by: milo christiansen on June 26, 2017, 09:29:39 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 26, 2017, 09:58:56 am
1) A play-by-post multi-character game where the players are a group in a post-apocalyptic world, and they design equipment through the Arms Race mechanics. Each design would be a one off creation limited by supplies available and require time to pass for their creation, but can freely be done rather than being limited to once every x period of time.
2) An arms race game wherein the players personal message the GM which side they are on, and the GM assigns them the role of scientist or infiltrator. Scientists join the thread of their side and design, while infiltrators join the opposing side's thread and attempt to vote up designs that are would have many problems or are weak against what their scientists are designing. Infiltrators can read their own side's thread, but cannot post so they cannot contact their scientists to tell them what the opposing side is working upon.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 26, 2017, 10:04:58 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 26, 2017, 10:18:46 am
I'd be up for number one. Spoiling the voting results seems like it'd just be infuriating. Plus you'd have to retain people, and then how do you decide what constitutes balance? Even scientists and infiltrators? Fewer infiltrators? It'd be a real pain. However a survival/RPG/Arms Race mix would be pretty interesting.
While this effectively disqualifies me from running the latter, I'd probably go the route of not telling the infiltrators who their fellow infiltrators are, then secretly staff both sides 100% in infiltrators. Because it would be hilarious.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 26, 2017, 10:28:28 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 28, 2017, 03:44:31 am
Why not, instead of all the competitive arms races, bring this one back?
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.0
Post by: Aseaheru on June 28, 2017, 07:06:32 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on June 28, 2017, 07:09:57 pm
It is back, and more GOYRLIOUS than ever
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164690 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164690)
Post by: Draignean on July 09, 2017, 10:16:26 pm
Post by: Taricus on July 09, 2017, 10:17:16 pm
Post by: Devastator on July 10, 2017, 12:35:45 am
Post by: Aseaheru on July 10, 2017, 02:12:44 am
In other topics, apparently someone wrote a book about how weapons have been procured by various nations in the last 150 or so years, mostly focused on the UK.
Post by: Devastator on July 10, 2017, 06:32:38 am
Simply put, it didn't need most of what it was putting in, and shouldn't have been afraid to leave stuff unsaid. 20 paragraphs describing someone's life simply is boring, when it's one person after another, and all it serves to say is 'Here is how you spot the chapter centred around this character.
It reminded me of reading some of the Wheel of Time, where you know nothing important is going to happen, but there's going to be 600 pages of endless description. It wasn't as bad as that, as occasionally people were allowed to interact with each other, and some scenes were interestingly described, even if you knew exactly what was going to happen 400 pages ago.
In the end, I think that there are two good choices for serial novels. You can have one centred around a relatively small number of characters, where you introduce things slowly, and each novel is a self-contained episode of the story. Over time you let things develop, see how people work with each other, and phase out those who don't fit and bring in new elements. Jim Butcher sometimes had a problem letting people go in the Dresdenverse, and he would shovel more past references in than is probably necessary. Alternatively, you could go the pulp route and write books to entertain people with your writing, where it isn't so much about journeys or characters, but it's about creating a book as a piece of artwork. It might be similar to other things like it, but it's still enjoyable to be consumed.
This did neither. It was like a pulp novel in that it had some entertainingly designed scenes, (I could spend 150 pages easy bouncing the captain off the excessively polite magic user and thoroughly enjoy it, for example.), but it was too afraid to be a pulp novel, because you couldn't have any flat characters, and hence each and every one of the 20-plus characters had to get pages and pages and pages of endless description that would normally have been spread out over a dozen novels. It also wasn't a long-term interactive story because it wasn't brave enough to leave us with two or three main characters and to tell that story, there had to be a dozen or twenty or more to hit every part of the world and every archetype.
It was like Poochie from The Simpsons. Written and designed by commitee, a novel without a soul.
Post by: Draignean on July 10, 2017, 11:43:50 am
Honestly (though I would come to its defense with a lukewarm 'It was better than Codex Alera') I'm not interested in the book review of the Aeronauts windlass, more drawing an expy of the tech and situation.
So, for those who haven't read the Aeronaut's Windlass (Which I will maintain is a fun read if you don't have anything better at hand and you can read quickly) the tech situation is roughly thus...
It's all City States: The surface of the planet is fuckawful. No one owns it, no one wants to own it. Some people gather resources there, but it's a dangerous job filled with monsters that want to nom your head back into your shoulders. People live in Spires, which are improbably tall cylinders of stone created by some group from the distant past. These Spires are basically indestructible frames that humans have built sprawling vertical cities inside of. Because each spire exists in relative isolation from all other spires, each spire is its own political entity.
Aether: At the altitude of the spires, the air is filled with invisible strands of Aetheric energy. This has several effects which will be noted in detail later, but, most importantly, it exists and there's a lot of it. The Aether is the basis of most magic and technology. Some humans, after sufficient exposure, can learn to manipulate the aether without a device, but this ability steadily erodes their mental state and generates multiple psychotic effects- some benign, others not.
---| Webbing: Designed to capture filament of aetheric energy and channel them into a ship's core crystal. Airships rely entirely on webbing in order to derive the energy needed to stay aloft. Fragile and easily obliterated.
Pretty Crystals: Vat grown crystals that are designed to interact with the Aether are the primary physical component of most magitech. Lift and trim crystals, core crystals, weapons crystals, etc. Short version, crystal can draw and channel energy from the aether.
---| Weapon Crystals: Channel destructive blasts of aetheric energy. Can be used in cannons, or specially designed small arms.
---| Lift Crystals: Bathtub sized crystals that react inversely to gravity when powered by electricity.
---| Trim Crystals: Small crystals that produce directional gravity when powered by electricity.
---| Core Crystals: Large crystals that can transform aetheric energy into electrical energy, and act as electrical capacitors. Can also generate an energy field called a shroud, which is capable of absorbing a limited amount of energy weapon's fire before it buckles.
Iron Doesn't Work: Something in the atmosphere, perhaps the aether itself, reacts powerfully with iron and steel. Exposed ferrous metals will rust and rot away to nothing but red pulp over the course of a few days. Copper cladding is frequently used as a sheath for iron and steel in order to prevent them from rotting.
Guns sort of work: Gunpowder exists, and firearms of the flintlock persuasion. However, they are famously unreliably device. In order to contain detonation pressure, the chamber (and to a lesser extent, the barrel) is steel clad in copper. If the energy of the shot nicks a hole through the copper, or the corrosive gunpowder eats through the lining, the atmosphere will eat through the weapon's internals and cause the weapon to explode on the next shot. Mostly for shooting through defenses meant to stop aetheric weapons and for killing wizards.
So, for a game, you'd have the nations playing as their own Spires, with Demi-spires in between that they can capture for resources and territory, and a lot of sky to watch.
You'd start people off with a list of basic tech, akin to the original arms race games, consisting of your bare bones cannons/crystals/etc. It'd be interesting to give the founding fathers of each of sides a a free design or two at start, before engagement, so that the sides have room to diversify a little.
Post by: Devastator on July 10, 2017, 12:17:13 pm
For that, I'd probably recommend having more than two sides, maybe one side per player, and focusing on a naval-centric game, where gear takes a while to build and comes out a couple years later, and is expected to stick around for a while before being scrapped or whatever. I'd also recommend having a damn good idea of how the naval combat works behind the scene, so you can adjudicate changes to the environment or the impact of new vessels.
As such, you'd need changes to be more incremental improvements than world-shattering changes each turn, and you'd probably need a production phase where each player decides what to build. Along with some upkeep so that risking some ships on battles or ventures is acceptable, despite the time take for replacements, as it'll let you build more new ships to make up the losses.
Post by: Draignean on July 10, 2017, 03:03:00 pm
Yeah, it's a good setting for an arms race, although with the loose definition of magic in the series, I'd probably aim for more of a diplomacy/naval bent to it.
For that, I'd probably recommend having more than two sides, maybe one side per player, and focusing on a naval-centric game, where gear takes a while to build and comes out a couple years later, and is expected to stick around for a while before being scrapped or whatever. I'd also recommend having a damn good idea of how the naval combat works behind the scene, so you can adjudicate changes to the environment or the impact of new vessels.
As such, you'd need changes to be more incremental improvements than world-shattering changes each turn, and you'd probably need a production phase where each player decides what to build. Along with some upkeep so that risking some ships on battles or ventures is acceptable, despite the time take for replacements, as it'll let you build more new ships to make up the losses.
Definitely Naval focused, with a side of marine action. Magic would be very nearly exclusively magi-tech as wizards (as depicted in the series) don't give a damn about politics and are too damn crazy to ever get integrated into a military structure. 'Spells' would not be a thing that gets researched. If you spent a long damn time on it, you might get a NE wizard who can reasonably be relied upon to target enemy ships, but he'd basically just be a powerful piece of combined offense/defense magitech for critical engagements rather than a mainstay.
Some things, I imagine could be done relatively quickly, others would be more impressive projects. Hmm, it might mesh well with the 'you get X dice' system I talked about a couple pages ago. Basically, each round you get a number of dice, and you can spend them any way you like.
Full Design actions need at least three rolls: Time estimate, initial progress, and project expense.
Instead of creating an object immediately, design actions create Projects which run in the background. Each Project has a time estimate, determined at creation. The time estimate is a number, usually between 6 and 60 that dictates how much engineering effort needs to be expended to get this thing off the ground. When a project is created, it gets an initial progress roll which partially fills the time estimate bar. Every round thereafter, when the team is allocating dice, any number of dice can be allocated to progress the project. Project expense is the material cost of doing research and testing. Every time you progress the project by any amount, you must pay the project expense cost. For each additional die spent on project progress, you pay the expense cost again.
Additionally, while rolling for project progress, one may opt to 'rush the project'. When rushing, you can roll an additional number of dice up to the number of dice you're already rolling for progress. These add progress normally, but, for every die you roll the project gains a bug, or the severity of an existing bug increases.
When a project reaches 50% completion, you get a prototype. The prototype gets the efficacy/expense/bugs rolls everyone knows and loves. Essentially, you'll get an idea of how the project will turn out at this stage. Once you have the prototype you can spend revisions on the project in order to correct any flaws, and/or you can field the prototype as a single unit.
Projects can be scrapped at any time. This yields resources equivalent to 50% of their total investiture, and a number of dice equal to project progress divided by 6, rounded down.
Revisions are unchanged, with a single roll controlling efficacy.
So, for example, let's say you get five dice in a turn. Your spire produces 3 ore, 1 crystal, and 4 wood per turn. Existing revisions to your current single lift crystal wooden hulled main combat vessel have been yielding diminishing returns, so you elect to spend one more revision on trying to get metal plating for your wooden hulled ship and spend 4 dice on the design of a new brass-clad combat vessel with a heavier core crystal and dual lift crystals to support the additional armor. You spend 2 dice on the time estimate, one on initial progress, and 1 on expense.
You roll 6 and 3 for your time estimate, giving you a 6. You then roll a 5 for your initial progress and a 3 for your project expense.
The DM, after reviewing your rolls consulting the pagan gods, tells you that the project needs 20 units of work, with 5 already put in by that initial roll. Each roll spent working on the project will cost 1 of both ore and wood. Thus, each round, they nation can spend up to 3 dice to get the design finished, although that will bring their ore production to a grinding halt.
Another round passes, another combat encounter goes through. You elect to spend two dice on working on the project, toss a revision somewhere, and save the remaining two dice in order to work on revisions for the prototype you're hoping to get at the next turn.
Your progress rolls for the design are 2 and 5, bringing you to 13/20 progress, and netting you a prototype.
Efficacy: 3 Cost: 6 Bugs:6
The good news is that she's going to be relatively cheap, costing only 3 crystal, 5 ore, and 3 wood, and that her design appears robust and free of unforeseen failure points. The worse-but-not-bad news is that she excels nowhere. She can take a beating, but she's not invulnerable. The extra lift crystal keep her maneuverable despite the armor, but they don't make her nimble. Her gunnery is better protected than that of the older vessels, but her firepower is mostly similar.
From there you can end up spending your revision to beef the up-and-coming design up a bit, revise current combat doctrines/equipment, or save back dice to finish working on the new ship in a burst.
Essentially, the revising of current tech/strategy is kept to a quick clip, but the production of entirely new products is moderated to a relatively slow pace- with the opportunity to field prototype vessels/equipment if you get pressed and things get a little bit dire.
Make sense?
Post by: Madman198237 on July 10, 2017, 03:14:22 pm
Post by: milo christiansen on July 10, 2017, 04:22:44 pm
Post by: Devastator on July 10, 2017, 06:57:19 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on July 10, 2017, 07:39:36 pm
Post by: RAM on July 10, 2017, 07:49:26 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on July 10, 2017, 07:58:55 pm
Post by: RAM on July 10, 2017, 08:12:24 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 10, 2017, 08:55:38 pm
Yep, all this, of course, falls apart once you say "a wizard did it" and it just doesn't work because this is a "guns are unreliable" setting. But it does really need to be a choice at the outset whether it is about finding a way around the established rules or about working within them. Saying "my justification for guns not working is foolproof, jest let them try bringing guns into my perfectly gun-proof setting" is a recipe for disaster. Someone is bound to think of something that you didn't consider and suddenly you have to start bending your rules to stop them, adding new rules on the spot, or letting them get away with it. Better to just say "Guns work but will always have a high failure chance, here is some justification for it but the important part is that they are unreliable and the fluff is just background" so that everyone knows that finding a way to make guns work reliably within the given setting is not an option.
As stated, the setting is "Guns work, sort of", you're welcome to find ways around it. As a caveat, you'd best have a specific niche you want a firearm to fill, otherwise you're likely going to get outclassed by aetheric weapons that have higher firing rates, more range, and better damage.
Gunmetal doesent have any iron, but it does have issues of not being the strongest material out there. Still, for, say, a black-powder cartrage or a light intermediate one it should go right fine.
Huh. Didn't know about that. Let me take a look...
Well, there's actually a decent in-universe justification. Aetheric small arms rely on copper conductors and copper heatsinks, so they both require (primarily) the same material. Since you get higher damage, and you don't need to reload aetheric weapons except to maybe exchange a heat-sink, there's a pretty clear reason why you'd prioritize using copper for aetheric weapons and devices, rather than on firearms.
Still, it's certainly a worthwhile design if you wanted to increase the reliability of your firearms.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 10, 2017, 08:58:02 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 10, 2017, 09:23:07 pm
Cooling things to superconductive levels is hard. Cooling things to superconductive levels using victorian era-technology+magic is nearly impossible. I mean, you could make a cooling crystal, sure. And then you could pump additional designs and revisions in until you reach very frickin' cold temperatures, but there really isn't any specific interaction between aetheric energy and superconductivity. Superconductivity would likely be a boon for your core crystal, but I'm scratching my head as to what you mean by... everything after the comma.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 10, 2017, 09:29:00 pm
Well, you generate electricity, duh. Then, you can use the extreme magnetism or the lack of resistance to produce other things. Railguns/coilguns or similar devices would become simple. Also, you would probably create some form of magically-assisted electricity gun, like a stun gun but with bonus range.
Since it was evidently not clearly understood, it was a joke. While superconductors would be extremely useful in modern times, a lot of the conditions set for this world make them less useful.
Including, you know, the whole Victorian-era thing.
Post by: Draignean on July 11, 2017, 04:02:33 pm
An Arms-Race game that is in some places blatantly copied from, and in some places loosely inspired by, the various arms race games that have occurred. The technology and setting is copied from Jim Butcher's The Aeronaut's Windlass, which is a book I'd recommend to anyone who already likes Jim Butcher and is waiting for Peace Talks to come out.
Spire Kasgyre
Spire Wreth
No nation fights to control the surface of this world. The surface is covered in dense and perpetual mist, and there are monsters within that mist. Awful creatures that bear humanity no more enmity than a spider harbors enmity for a fly- and setting up a colony within their territory would be as foolish as a fly setting up a colony within a spiderweb. Humanity, thankfully, does not live on the surface. They live in the Spires.
The Spires we're built millenia ago, frames of nearly unbreakable spirestone designed with the specific intent of preserving humanity. Each spire is a cylinder approximately 2 miles in diameter and the same measure in height. Internally divided into several hundred floors which are each roughly 50' in height, each Spire is a nation unto itself. Vat farms produce vegetables, meat, limited wood supplies, and, most importantly, crystals.
Above the mist of the world's surface, in the high air of the spires, there is a peculiar energy known as aether. Its whimsical nature is the subject of much study, and (despite its unpredictable nature) it's the core of most all technology. Properly conducted and channeled into a carefully prepared crystal, aetheric energy has marvelous properties. Including the ability to cause a specifically designed and faceted crystal experience strong directional gravity. When such a crystal, known as a lift crystal, is paired with a method of harvesting aetheric energy on the fly, a decent sail (or more crystals), and is locked into the spine of a ship- you get a very basic airship.
Such airships are essential for travel between spires, as traffic overland is suicidal. In peace times, the most important role of airships is in making runs between the Spires and various Demi-Spires; protusion of stone similar in nature to Spires, but thinner and filled with rock and earth thrust up from the surface and locked into a frame of nearly unbreakable stone. Raw resources of metal and stone are frequently mined from such demi-spires, largely removing the need for surface mining.
Spire Kassgeir and Spire Wreth are two Spires which have lived in uncomfortable proximity for many centuries- always at each other's throats for one reason or another. Recent advances in airships and aetheric weapons spurred spurred border expansion and antagonistic rivalry- eventually culminating in a series of horrific raids on mining camps on various demi-spires. It's not known who struck first, but the resulting series of escalating engagements have stripped the two spires back to a few bare bones mining camps, and have set the stage for open war.
Rules and Play Sequence
These rules are adapted from a couple different arms race games, with enough new twists that they're worth reading again even if you've played all the arms race games.The game runs on 1 year=1 turn system. Every year both teams go through stages for design + project maintenance, revisions, and production + deployment cycles. At the start of the new turn, both teams get a base pool of 5 dice to allocate towards designs, projects, revisions, and basically everything good and useful.
At the start of each year designs and project maintenance is handled. Members of each team may propose designs. Everyone is allowed to vote for a design, or to vote for 'no design'. Each player has one and only one vote, and that vote is an integer with value 1. During this same time, players of each team propose resource allocation plans for various pre-existing projects. These are voted on in the same was as designs. The design (if any) with the most votes gets rendered into a new project and the progress for the funded existing projects moves ahead at the end of this stage. Any created prototypes or finished projects are described.
After designs and projects have been worked out, then the players move on to revisions. Revision are cheap, but best suited to address minor problems or incremental improvements. For example, if you finished an aetheric cannon last round that had issues with overheating, one could try and revise a better copper baffle in order to pull heat away. However, if you finished an aetheric cannon last round, one could not revise an aetheric rifle from it- even if the original cannon design was flawless.
Any dice not spent on revisions/designs/projects are saved back for the next round. Each team can bank a total of 5 dice, giving them a maximum of 10 dice to spend at any one time.
After revisions comes the deployment, tactics, and construction phase. During deployment you can set and modify standing movement orders to your ships, sending them to various locations to do ship things. Simple enough. Tactics is telling ships and marines how to engage. Tactics are designed/revised just like normal technology. The last part, construction orders, is about allocating resources to actually build new weapons/ships. Each player gets a single value 1 integer vote for each of these three.
After that's decided, ships are moved, and combat is resolved.
At the end of the combat phase, any resources coming in on transport ships, or directly from the spire itself, are added to the totals of the respective teams.
Definitions and Resources
Designs
Designs are the gateways to projects, and require a minimum of 3 dice: one for to roll time estimate, one to roll initial progress, and one to roll project expense.
Instead of creating an object immediately, design actions create Projects which run in the background. The Time estimate roll of a project, combined with how ambitious the project is natively, determines how much engineering effort it will take to actually make a deployable technology. This effort is quantified in a number usually in the range between 6 and 60. Determining this number is a nebulous process largely subject to GM fiat, but (in very general) rolling a 1 will cause the project to take twice as much time as it would have with a 6. If players elect to spend additional dice on rolling for time estimate, the result is the highest of the numbers rolled.
Initial progress is a roll that determines a small bonus to the start of the project's progress. Importantly, this progress is free and does not come with an associated resource cost. Additional dice spent on initial progress are additive, but, regardless of how many dice you spend, initial progress cannot rush a design past the prototype stage (50% progress).
Project Expense aids in determining how much it costs to keep a project going. After its creation, every time a team wants to make progress on a project, they have to allocate a number of die and pay certain resource costs. A high roll for project expense indicates and efficient project flow that costs a lower number resources to do research. For instance, a project that requires one of wood OR ore OR crystal on a 6 might require 1 wood + 1 ore, and one more of ore, wood, or crystal on a 1. If players elect to spend additional dice on rolling for Project Expense, the result is the highest of the numbers rolled.
Projects
Projects are created from designs. A project represents a long term investment of man-hours and resources into building prototypes, live fire drills, good old fashioned research, and rigorous testing.
As mentioned in designs, all projects have an amount of progress that needs to be filled, and a certain cost associated with that progress. A project header for an ambitious new core crystal looks something like this,
Zulu-Type Core Crystal: 12/30 | 1 Crystal + 1 Crystal OR 1 Ore | Rushed 0 times | 4 Crystal, 2 Ore Invested
Name, followed by current progress/total needed, then how much each die of progress costs, the number of times the project has been rushed, and the total resources that have been currently invested.
Every round, during the design phase, a team can elect to spend any number of their dice on progressing projects. For each die they spend on a project, they have to pay that project's resource cost. So if you elect to spend 2 die on the above, you have to spend 2 crystal and 2 from any combination of Ore/Crystal. For every die you spend resources on, you can also elect to rush the project. This gives you an extra die that adds to project progress normally, but also adds a bug to the project, or worsens and existing bug.
Once a project reaches 50% completion, the team gets a prototype. The prototype gets three rolls: Efficacy, Cost, and Bugs. These are all fairly self explanatory and (barring revision) represent the final product. Higher efficacy means it's a better product, higher cost roll means its cheaper, and a higher bugs roll means that it's got fewer unexpected kinks to iron out. As long as you do not deploy the prototype, you can make revisions to it what will effect the final product of the project.
If you choose to deploy the prototype, either because you're satisfied with the design or because you're in desperate need of an edge, you cannot rebuild it after it's destroyed/lost. Large objects, like heavy weapons or ships, get a single prototype. Small objects, like jetpacks or experimental body armor, get enough to outfit a single fireteam.
A project can be canceled at any time, and its resources re-allocated. When a project is canceled, the team gets 50% of the invested resources back at the end of the next turn, and a number of die equal to the project's current progress divided by six and rounded down.
Revisions
Revisions are as standard in Arms Race games. They cost only one die, but they yield incremental (and diminishing) returns. Importantly, revisions are improvements and modifications to existing technology and/or tactics. If you find yourself wondering whether something should be a revision or a new design, ask yourself whether it uses the same frame, and whether the addition is a technology by itself.
Some situations are tricky, and if you overreach you might get a really crappy version of what you wanted and a none-too-subtle hint that you should spend a design somewhere.
As an example, take two different tactical doctrines. Paratrooper tactics and officer sniping. Paratrooper tactics, even if you already parachutes lying around, is a full on design. You're not making a small change to how your soldier fight, you're asking them to do something entirely new and different. Officer sniping, by contrast, is a revision that tells your squads to keep a designated gunner whose only job is to look for the opposing side's officers and eliminate. That's a revision.
Resources
One of our big breaks from conventional arms race games, along with the changes to Designs and the addition of Projects. There are four resources: Crystal, Ore, Wood, and Silk. Resource numbers don't just indicate amount, but quality and effort in working. So just because something is small doesn't make it inexpensive.
Crystal refers to the ability to vat-grow crystals, and is the most difficult resource to expand collection of. The vats needed require years to get started growing even small crystals of usable purity, and you can't naturally mine the crystals needed. You start with a decent crystal production, but it won't hold you over forever- particularly not when it's the main component in many of the systems most critical to airships and aetheric weapons. Each nation's spire starts with 8 Crystal production.
Ore refers to various metals mined from the earth, either from the surface (stupidly dangerous, but it's how you get ore in the spire) or from other Demi-spires. You get a short supply of ore at start, considering how much it's used for, but it's the easiest to expand the collection of. Just go and capture a Demi-spire, and it'll at least produce ore. Each nation's spire starts with 5 Ore production.
Wood is wood, of various treatments and flavors. It is both cut from the surface when an exotic type is need and grown from vats for more typical fare. It's relatively easy to produce, and tree farms can be set up on demi-spires relatively easily. Who knows, with a bit of maintenance you might be able to design floating tree farms! Wood is a plentiful resource at start, and one that's relatively easy to expand, but is used in rapaciously for ship building and expansion. Each nation's spire starts with 10 wood production.
Silk refers to aethersilk, a unique material with the ability to conduct aetheric energy. In its base form, it's a sticky, ropy secretion created by surface monsters. For obvious reasons, this makes it rather difficult to obtain. Harvesters work on the surface in the area directly around spires in order to harvest silk, usually with heavy firepower to back them up. Sometimes it's enough. Silk production is low at start, but each demi-spire you control gets you another area that you can mine the base of for Silk. Each nation's spire starts with 3 silk production.
Setting Modifiers
War in Heaven: There's little reason to design a tank, because controlling the surface of the planet is similarly implausible to controlling the surface of the sun. All combat either takes place in/on demi-spires or in the surrounding sky. The 'bottom' of the battlefield is a perpetual shroud of mist, tangibly different and colder than a normal cloud. Monsters dwell in the mist, so, while it's great for stealth, it's not a good idea to hang out there. The ceiling is the higher air where it becomes difficult to breathe. The aether is stronger there, and it provides more energy to a ship, but it's also more unpredictable and steadily drives humans insane. So while it's great for high power maneuvers, it's not a good idea to hang out there. The battle space between the two is chaotically streaked by clouds, storms, upwellings of mist, and general environmental nuisances, but it's still safer than the other two options.
Less than Ultra-Marines: When capturing the demi-spires, you NEED marines. The spirestone frames means that an entrenched force can weather basically any bombardment. You can blockade a demi-spire with ships and starve the enemy out, but, to actually take and hold territory you need boots on the ground.
Powered by Spiders: Aethersilk, the best material for conducting aetheric energy, is prepared from a ropy secretion used by the surface monsters to catch prey. As one can imagine, this makes it somewhat difficult to obtain. It's like if battleships ran on tiger milk- if tigers were poisonous, as large as a buick on steroids, and impossible to tame.
Pretty Crystals: Vat grown crystals that are designed to interact with the Aether are the primary physical component of most magitech. Lift and trim crystals, core crystals, weapons crystals, etc. Short version, crystal can draw and channel energy from the aether.
Iron Doesn't Work: Something in the atmosphere, perhaps the aether itself, reacts powerfully with iron and steel. Exposed ferrous metals will rust and rot away to nothing but red pulp over the course of a few days. Copper cladding is frequently used as a sheath for iron and steel in order to prevent them from rotting.
Guns sort of work: Gunpowder exists, and firearms of the flintlock persuasion. However, they are famously unreliably devices. In order to contain detonation pressure, the chamber (and to a lesser extent, the barrel) is steel clad in copper. If the energy of the shot nicks a hole through the copper, or the corrosive gunpowder eats through the lining, the atmosphere will eat through the weapon's internals and cause the weapon to explode on the next shot. Mostly for shooting through defenses meant to stop aetheric weapons.
Starting Technology
Spoiler: Tech (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Tactics (click to show/hide)
Post by: Madman198237 on July 11, 2017, 04:09:49 pm
The Spires need traditional Arms Race names: One should start with A, the other with M.
Everyone knows that the M-names are better.
Post by: Draignean on July 11, 2017, 04:11:12 pm
I take it you're planning to run this?
I'm not sure, it's an entertaining notion, but there's always that notion of time.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 12, 2017, 02:08:20 am
Either way, it sounds interesting. I like the dice pool idea.
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 09:46:39 am
Did you leave the crystal and silk costs off of the starting ships on purpose? I'm assuming the corvette, for example, would also cost 8 silk. Meaning it would take three turns to build, yes?
Either way, it sounds interesting. I like the dice pool idea.
The resource costs are just for the hulls. Everything else is plug and play. So, for a corvette frame, you need 15 wood and 4 ore. Then, for the necessary internals,
8 silk for 4 reams of webbing
12 crystal and 2 ore for the lift crystal, trim crystal, and core crystal
then 6 more crystal and 6 more ore to outfit it with light cannons.
Total cost of a single small ship at start: 15 Wood, 10 ore, 18 crystal, 8 silk.
So, later, when you have multiple components of varying sizes, you can mix and match. Building new components doesn't automatically replace all fielded components, they need to be brought back to port for a refit.
EDIT: 3 turns does seem a bit long for a corvette...
Post by: evictedSaint on July 12, 2017, 09:58:50 am
Post by: Kashyyk on July 12, 2017, 09:59:35 am
I also recall you mentioning upkeep for ships. Did you think anymore on that?
Finally, do you intend for engagements to continue until one side is completely destroyed, or will it be more common to incapacitate the enemy and then either have them escape or be captured?
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 10:19:06 am
Unless you have persistent units and are counting ships and troops individually, I'm not sure saying "it takes x turns to produce a ship" is a workable idea.
Persistent units, ships and squads are counted individually. Similar to Planetary arms Race.
You can also bank resources back, but I'm not sure on the amounts as yet.
You could easily double the starting amount of resources for each side and/or allow projects to increase resource supply within a spire (naturally, with diminishing returns).
I also recall you mentioning upkeep for ships. Did you think anymore on that?
Finally, do you intend for engagements to continue until one side is completely destroyed, or will it be more common to incapacitate the enemy and then either have them escape or be captured?
Projects to increase resource gain was the original idea.
Upkeep for ships was generally meant for larger vessels, in order to slightly contain the escalation simply building for bigger and bigger warships. Still, it's an idea I'm less in love with as I warm to the modular design steps.
Engagements, at least in the beginning, will usually not continue until one side is destroyed. Unless one side can manage a clear advantage, it's just a bad idea for a captain to go all-in with a VERY expensive ship. Two ships of equal weight will scuffle, but unless one has clear orders to take/hold the area at any cost, they'll attempt to disengage before they go down.
A typical result from the engagement of two of the Betsy Basic ships would be for both to lose a ream or two of webbing, and for the loser to burn out one or two trim crystals disengaging from the fight. Pursuit is difficult for ships of perfectly equal class, since the pursuer would (on average) burn out an equal number of trim crystals and would have a good chance of leaving both ships dead in the water.
If things go badly for one ship, either via ambush or plain bad luck, you might lose a couple cannon mounts, burn more web, blow out more trim crystals, and require structural repairs when you get back to port. However, a captain will still do everything in his power to disengage before going down, including diving down into the mist and limping home blind.
In the event that one side has a clear advantage, the aggressor will still usually shoot to disable rather than destroy unless otherwise ordered. Airships are valuable, and bringing back juicy core crystals as loot makes everyone happy.
Post by: Kashyyk on July 12, 2017, 10:29:35 am
How will repairing damaged ships work? Would the ship just miss the next engagement, the next turn? Would it cost resources?
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 12, 2017, 10:33:42 am
...even then, fleets are gonna be pretty small, and destroying/capturing a ship is gonna be a HUGE advantage for whichever side pulls it off. To avoid that, you'd have to either allow sides to quickly gain more resources, or even increase starting resources so you can build more than one corvette a turn.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 10:35:56 am
So, as for combat: Everything takes place in an airship. Everything. You've pretty well explained that the ground is suicide and you'd better be capable of unleashing a lot of !!Fun!! on the ground or you'll die horrible unmentionable deaths. This means that we should start out with some form of replenishable, disposable airship that we don't care about. Perhaps something like a skiff or just a really small sailboat that requires, well, basically nothing so we always have some form of army/navy/air force/whatever.
So, having lost my train of thought while doing other things:
1. Make the basic vessel MUCH less expensive, even if that means making a two-cannon tiny skiff or schooner with a minimal amount of, well, everything.
2. Include a smaller version of the Core Crystal to start, as said skiff would not need a full-size one and needs to be reasonably priced in order to be readily available.
3. Definitely do the modular-ships thing, and I'd love the option to make a Really Nasty Cannon Of Unrealistic Ignoring Of Physics and stick it on the Formerly Undergunned Skiff without needing to design (Given the REALLY LENGTHY design process).
You're definitely trying to jump in the middle of a Design Bureau game and a regular Arms Race game, so you've gotta grab some of the other elements (Namely, disposable troops to use smaller weapons without needing the apparently-expensive large(r) airships)
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 11:10:49 am
In that case, spending multiple turns on cutting-edge vessels isn't a bad thing in my opinion.
How will repairing damaged ships work? Would the ship just miss the next engagement, the next turn? Would it cost resources?
Bring ship back to port, and pay resources based on the damage done. Burn out a pair of trim crystals and lose a ream of web? 1 crystal, 2 silk. Lose your bow cannons in a horrific explosion that cracks your lift crystal and rips apart your hull? 2 crystal, 2 ore for the cannons, 3 crystal and 2 ore for the new lift crystal, and up to 50% of the original Hull cost to repair the structural damage.
There should be a mechanic for scuttling and scrapping old ships for 50-75% of current value.
Crew damage is refilled automatically when you bring a ship back to port. The idea is that you can keep damaged ships out, albeit at reduced combat effectiveness. So if you have a battle going on, one side isn't liable to immediately wipe out the other, but you're liable to start wounding ships pretty badly. You can keep them in the fight and improve the odds of the existing ships, but risk losing expensive assets entirely, or you can withdraw them to fight another die and risk an inconclusive battle. The latter was a relatively common occurrence in the later years of the age of sail.
So, having lost my train of thought while doing other things:
1. Make the basic vessel MUCH less expensive, even if that means making a two-cannon tiny skiff or schooner with a minimal amount of, well, everything.
2. Include a smaller version of the Core Crystal to start, as said skiff would not need a full-size one and needs to be reasonably priced in order to be readily available.
3. Definitely do the modular-ships thing, and I'd love the option to make a Really Nasty Cannon Of Unrealistic Ignoring Of Physics and stick it on the Formerly Undergunned Skiff without needing to design (Given the REALLY LENGTHY design process).
These are three excellent points. I think the starting 'combat' ship will be reduced to something akin to an 18' foot skiff that can run on a crew of four to ten people with limited supplies and REALLY uncomfortable sleeping arrangements. Besides, that way both sides can have fun making their first real ship themselves.
Granted, that skiff is going to die. A lot. There's just not enough size for it to survive if a shot breaches the shroud, and a secondary explosion from a damaged weapons crystal would just blow it to splinters.
Yeah, it might make sense to double- or more- the starting resources. Research costs should probably increase by the same factor, but if it takes three turns to build the simplest warship you're never gonna get anything done. I think you should aim for being able to pursue a project of moderate cost whilst also building 1 corvette per turn.
...even then, fleets are gonna be pretty small, and destroying/capturing a ship is gonna be a HUGE advantage for whichever side pulls it off. To avoid that, you'd have to either allow sides to quickly gain more resources, or even increase starting resources so you can build more than one corvette a turn.
It's a fair benchmark, and I will likely increase things somewhat, but it's likely going to be optimized around the new skiff.
Post by: evictedSaint on July 12, 2017, 11:17:45 am
If you critically damage an enemy ship, they have to pay to repair it. Meanwhile, you can just build a new ship. Then next turn you have two ships, and the enemy still has one.
And the system seems biased towards high-speed ships; either for escaping without damage, or for chasing down fleeing damaged enemies.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 11:29:54 am
Ships-of-the-line will still have their place. If they have to get really close to a ship with lots of guns in order to deal any damage to its toughened armor plating, any enemy is going to lose a lot of his speed advantage. Not to mention most of his ship.
Repairs should be just that, repairs. They should cost *less* than the original cost of the vessel's components, even if perhaps a shade unreasonable, because otherwise, as eS said, the enemy is liable to build more and more vessels.
So, multi-turn building of ships. You should be able to say "Lay aside these materials and build this ship" with a set rate of construction per turn for that ship, OR you say "Build this ship as materials come available".
Or you could lay aside materials and then take them later for a quick boost. Let's say you're building a corvette, and it takes three turns to do so. You lay aside all necessary materials, and the first turn you use up most of the wood and metal as the ship itself is built, along with lift and core crystals. Then, next turn, you take the weaponry crystals out of the stockpile because you need to upgun another vessel. The ship is constructed more, but the weaponry will not be built next turn unless you add more crystals to it. You don't have time to make more weapon crystals, so the ship is built as an unarmed corvette that will require a turn of refit to have weaponry, but can be used in the meantime.
Obviously the corvette should not take that long, I'm trying to give an example and explanation of what I see as a logical building system.
WITHOUT CONSUMING RESOURCES!!!! you should get, every turn, a set number of skiffs. They don't carry over between turns, but you'll always have, say, 15 of them (Five per lane on a three-lane map...if this AR/DB even uses lanes). They would use the most basic of basic cannons (So you don't have balance issues with them compared to player-designed cannons), basic crystals, etc. Any upgrades would require you to then pay for the upgraded skiffs (While still getting the default 15 skiffs with no upgrades, no matter what you do with the design).
These skiffs can be assigned to lanes as you wish, meaning that, if you are willing to risk losing a lot of ground to the enemy, you could go for a full-force 15-ship push on one lane, or you could play it safe and go 5 per lane, or perhaps 4 and one important lane of 7.
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 11:51:34 am
It seems like the system encourages runaway victories.
If you critically damage an enemy ship, they have to pay to repair it. Meanwhile, you can just build a new ship. Then next turn you have two ships, and the enemy still has one.
And the system seems biased towards high-speed ships; either for escaping without damage, or for chasing down fleeing damaged enemies.
As to the first, it's still a better outcome than a destroyed ship in terms of runaway victories, and the assumption there is that you can critically damage an enemy ship without becoming damaged yourself. If you're capable of making clean victories over enemy vessels, well, things are already pretty well gone to shit for them.
As for speed... Well, it's a rather crucial factor of naval engagements, or really engagements of any kind. Range and speed together allow you to control how and when the engagement happens. Of course, heavier armor and shrouds can make it impossible to 'peck' through a ship that's heading off to fuck about with your mining outposts.
I made an updated section with a couple notes about airship combat, but the gist is this. All power that comes into an airship comes in through the webbing that a ship lays out. If you run out a lot of web, you can push your crystals to the limit and get gale speed out of a small ship, but webbing is vulnerable. A single shot from an aetheric cannon will burn through swathes of the stuff- not to mention that having a lot of it out constrains your own firing angles since you certainly can't shoot through your own web. Webbing will still work from inside a shroud, which offers some protection, but there's not enough room inside a shroud to run even close to a full web.
So, for a fast ship to be optimally fast and maneuverable, it has to let some very energy sensitive material hang a considerable distance outside its shroud. If that web gets shot, your power drops until the crew can hook in and run out another ream. Depending on how well trained your crew is, that's a very long time for a ship that's designed to work on the principal of speed and maneuverability to be neither fast nor maneuverable.
WITHOUT CONSUMING RESOURCES!!!! you should get, every turn, a set number of skiffs. They don't carry over between turns, but you'll always have, say, 15 of them (Five per lane on a three-lane map...if this AR/DB even uses lanes). They would use the most basic of basic cannons (So you don't have balance issues with them compared to player-designed cannons), basic crystals, etc. Any upgrades would require you to then pay for the upgraded skiffs (While still getting the default 15 skiffs with no upgrades, no matter what you do with the design).
These skiffs can be assigned to lanes as you wish, meaning that, if you are willing to risk losing a lot of ground to the enemy, you could go for a full-force 15-ship push on one lane, or you could play it safe and go 5 per lane, or perhaps 4 and one important lane of 7.
Not wild about this idea, I'll consider it, but the idea seems a bit odd considering the minutiae of everything else.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 11:59:01 am
It's basically a means for fighting to always occur, as opposed to this system, which would be rather like if al-Mutriqa and Myark were the only fighters in Wands Race. We'd have lots of weapons, but they injure each other and suddenly all fighting stops for eight turns as we panic, heal them, buff them, heal a bit more, buff some more, etc.
Basically, it's a combination of Arms Races' unlimited manpower and Design Bureaus' granularity and total control.
Post by: Khang36 on July 12, 2017, 12:18:20 pm
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 12, 2017, 01:00:13 pm
WITHOUT CONSUMING RESOURCES!!!! you should get, every turn, a set number of skiffs. They don't carry over between turns, but you'll always have, say, 15 of them (Five per lane on a three-lane map...if this AR/DB even uses lanes). They would use the most basic of basic cannons (So you don't have balance issues with them compared to player-designed cannons), basic crystals, etc. Any upgrades would require you to then pay for the upgraded skiffs (While still getting the default 15 skiffs with no upgrades, no matter what you do with the design).I think this is a good idea. This would mean that losing a single ship when you have two 'real' ships doesn't mean 50% of your navy has been lost. It also provides fodder for enemy ships to kill, which is more fun than reading 'you dealt minimal damage to the enemy and they immediately withdrew'.
These skiffs can be assigned to lanes as you wish, meaning that, if you are willing to risk losing a lot of ground to the enemy, you could go for a full-force 15-ship push on one lane, or you could play it safe and go 5 per lane, or perhaps 4 and one important lane of 7.
The second part, I'm not sure about. Maybe they should be locked to 5 to a lane (assuming you use lanes).
Also, yeah, the resource cost for repairs should be 50% of the build cost, rounded down.
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 01:18:35 pm
The idea is "These things are so cheap we churn out as many as we want, but this is all we DO churn out because otherwise it starts to affect production of other things like bigger warships".
It's basically a means for fighting to always occur, as opposed to this system, which would be rather like if al-Mutriqa and Myark were the only fighters in Wands Race. We'd have lots of weapons, but they injure each other and suddenly all fighting stops for eight turns as we panic, heal them, buff them, heal a bit more, buff some more, etc.
Basically, it's a combination of Arms Races' unlimited manpower and Design Bureaus' granularity and total control.
Heh, it's not quite as bad as that, but I take the point. I don't like the mechanic because it's more of a stopgap to get things off the ground than something that feels like it would become a mainstay further in.
Hmm. I've partially written a couple versions of 'perhaps', but they all come off as a bit hollow. The problem is thus: There needs to be system such that I don't have to keep track of much more than 25 individual (major) ships per side (because that would be horrific), but also such that ships can be produced with sufficient speed that battles can be a bit vicious and the loss of a single caravel doesn't doom one side.
I might steal a couple more notes from Planetary Arms race, and have certain Crown/Spirearch sponsored production lines. Perhaps only 1-3 at start, but so that your Spire will auto-build certain ship frames and outfit them without you worrying too much about it. You'd need to be able to both create and revise 'patterns' (what an ideal candidate for a revision die!) that consist of a frame and a pre-selected set of equipment. So, in the beginning, you'll by default have the skiff on one (perhaps your only) production line. It'll auto-build a certain number per turn (let's say 2) up to a max limit (let's say 10). Such ships will not auto-upgrade, and will have to be manually refitted, but you can also revise their production pattern with new weapons as needed- though this will likely effect how many you can field.
Once you design a new ship class, you can do a revision to see how many you can get on the sponsored production lines. It might be limited production, and you might only be able to get part of the cost of very large vessels sponsored depending on your economic status, but it'll be something you don't have to worry about.
On another note, I'm thinking of giving both sides a mostly free design/project that was completed before the war began in an effort to help diversify at start. Thoughts?
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 01:28:24 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 01:36:59 pm
Definitely do the pre-war project (Otherwise there's *literally no point* to writing the BR, since it would be "Complete stalemate, all fronts!"), but possibly make it two or three (So 10 or 15 dice, spend as you will).
2-4 quick years with no aggression seems like a good idea. Enough time for the completion of 2-3 projects.
Post by: Kashyyk on July 12, 2017, 02:10:49 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on July 12, 2017, 03:04:36 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 03:27:48 pm
I'd actually been thinking about the idea of having "docks" of varying size as another resource. In order to build/repair/refit a ship you need a dock of sufficient size. This could be one way to limit the number of ships aside, and be another thing to spend projects on.
Aha! That's an excellent idea! It's something to do with wood (which is a bit lonely), and ties well into the sponsored line mechanics.
Start with one, small dock on your spire. That's enough for your one production line of Skyskiffs. It can build and refit small ships without issue, but doesn't have the infrastructure for large construction. A medium dock could probably run two small production lines, or one medium one. So forth and so on, with potentially specialized docks.
Maintenance costs is another possibility. Each ship requiring some food, water, and crew(along with thing like munitions if a ship is armed) would place some caps on numbers of ships, and may also give some focus on development of support ships, akin to wet-navy colliers, stores ships, and/or floating drydocks.
I've thought about supply systems to limit troops, I truly have, but it's one of those things that gets into the issue of exponentially exploding complexity.
Currently the Marine system works like this. If a ship has capacity, you can fill it with Marines at your Spire. You pay then for whatever additions you want the Marines to have. Once you drop off the Marines, you basically just drive the transports back and reload them as a refit actions.*
So, basically, infantry are free except for the stuff they're carrying. Life is cheap, stuff is expensive- as with all Arms Race games.
Support and Supply ships, I think, would work best as very simple archetypes- basically carrying replacement parts for ships and requiring resupply runs in order to to keep them useful. Early versions would simply be barges carrying additional webbing and trim crystals, while more advanced ships would be mobile forges capable of repairing heavy armor and fixing damaged cores on the fly.
*Though I can imagine a design and project for a Marine academy that essentially generated a production line for marines.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 12, 2017, 03:59:27 pm
Start with one, small dock on your spire. That's enough for your one production line of Skyskiffs. It can build and refit small ships without issue, but doesn't have the infrastructure for large construction. A medium dock could probably run two small production lines, or one medium one. So forth and so on, with potentially specialized docks.Would these be production lines like in Planetary Arms Race?
...that'd be a shame, because I like the idea of having to balance research and production.
Post by: Kashyyk on July 12, 2017, 04:14:09 pm
Say you start with four size 1 docks. Each turn you can use those four docks to build new skiffs or refit/repair your existing ones. But if you've dedicate one is those docks to a multi turn construction you can't use it for refitting an existing ship. Similarly, I'd you're designing a new size 1 ship hull, you'll need a dock to work in.
This way you could potentially have more then four size 1 ships, but if they all get damaged or obsoleted by new tech you won't be able to repair/refit them all in one turn.
A size 1 ship will obviously not fit in a size 1 dock, but a size 2 dock could be used for a size 1 dock. You wouldn't be able to fit more than one ship in a dock though, regardless of how much bigger the dock is compared to the ship.
Post by: Draignean on July 12, 2017, 04:40:28 pm
Start with one, small dock on your spire. That's enough for your one production line of Skyskiffs. It can build and refit small ships without issue, but doesn't have the infrastructure for large construction. A medium dock could probably run two small production lines, or one medium one. So forth and so on, with potentially specialized docks.Would these be production lines like in Planetary Arms Race?
...that'd be a shame, because I like the idea of having to balance research and production.
The idea behind the production lines is that they give you a certain bare minimum ships that you don't have to pay for their basic equipment, but you still have to pay for their refits and any additional ships beyond the total number.
So, if your starting production line for skiffs gives you ten skiffs, those skiffs come out regularly and reliably without cost. However, they only come outfitted with the Betsy Basic pattern. (Not a bad deal at start) Any Skiffs beyond the initial ten can be built, but must be paid for in their entirety.
Furthermore, as technology advances, the ships on the production line will not update until a revision is spent on updating the production pattern- which will most likely produce fewer ships than the original. It's a way to abstract the costs of the 'base fleet' away and allow the battles to be a bit more vicious without killing your resources.
So, you still have to balance your resource production against your research, but you won't have to wonder: "Hmm, will I be outnumbered 4:1 if I don't invest everything I have in resource and ship production NOW?". Instead, (with Skyskiffs in the beginning of the game as an example) you'd be outnumbered 14:11, and hopefully have a tech advantage outfitted on some of your ships.
I was actually thinking of using docks in a different way:
Say you start with four size 1 docks. Each turn you can use those four docks to build new skiffs or refit/repair your existing ones. But if you've dedicate one is those docks to a multi turn construction you can't use it for refitting an existing ship. Similarly, I'd you're designing a new size 1 ship hull, you'll need a dock to work in.
This way you could potentially have more then four size 1 ships, but if they all get damaged or obsoleted by new tech you won't be able to repair/refit them all in one turn.
A size 1 ship will obviously not fit in a size 1 dock, but a size 2 dock could be used for a size 1 dock. You wouldn't be able to fit more than one ship in a dock though, regardless of how much bigger the dock is compared to the ship.
I like the concept, and I was originally going to write in that a small dock would let you refit a single medium vessel in twice the normal amount of time, but then I thought of how ridiculous that is. Two years? For a (probably) simple refit? It's either possible, or it isn't. It doesn't take two years.
Similarly, constraining the number of refits you can do to one per turn/per dock seems a little unfair. As does construction time. For current considerations, construction always has ships available at the start of the next year, as long as you pay the resource costs.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 12, 2017, 04:42:59 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on July 12, 2017, 04:44:36 pm
Post by: milo christiansen on July 12, 2017, 09:26:36 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 09:30:22 pm
:Salty: :Salty: Saltiest:
Post by: Chiefwaffles on July 12, 2017, 09:52:50 pm
EDIT: Though I do like the idea of infrastructure being of concern in Arms Race game. Of course it should take second priority to actual designing of weapons and the like, but they add a unique gameplay element.
Though some things probably shouldn't be done. "More wizards/higher percentage of trained wizards" is one thing; "make our soldiers fight gooder" is another. Like with everything, there's a limit to how far you should go.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 12, 2017, 09:54:21 pm
But I'm tempted to suggest a revision to reduce the price of some of our deadlier spells.
Post by: RAM on July 12, 2017, 09:59:44 pm
I jut had yet another idea that I will never do anything with : (
King Arthur versus The Black Knight arms race.
Historically, King Arthur fled the field after giving in to The Black Knight's furious taunting. Can you change the outcome? A small-scale arms-race where the teams try to establish new stances, grips, feints, aggressive bleeding techniques... Trying to give their knight an advantage in the course of a single duel. Battle progress could be tracked by measuring the number of severed flesh-wounds.
Post by: Draignean on July 13, 2017, 12:40:35 am
Speaking from experience, don't give players the option to "make x school to make x stronger" or "make y factory to make y better". It gets into this weird psuedo-arms race area where the best option is to just upgrade your infastructure rather than build new weapons.
On the other hand, there should come a point where the players need to sit down and go take a long hard look at their infrastructure. Base production and supply typically outweigh chasing wunderwaffes. The good thing about this setting, since it works off resource consumption, is that most infrastructure can be represented as an improvement in resource production.
Anyway, what do people think about an initial two lane system that can, with tech investments, by opened up into a three-ish lane semi-open system? Something like...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where the Everstorm and the Calm are both impossible to sail through, unless one has prepared heavily and in radically different ways. The Calm being a region without aetheric currents or real wind, and the Everstorm being a gigantic and horrifically intense storm. If you have a ship that can get through both you can skip from one side's core straight to the other side.
Post by: Aseaheru on July 13, 2017, 01:18:01 am
On the map, I may be a bit dense, but if the player sides are Arstana and Moskine, where are those extra lanes you where talking about?between the satellite points and wrackspire/burned mountain?
Post by: RAM on July 13, 2017, 01:41:55 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 13, 2017, 08:36:29 am
Calm and Storm: Interesting idea. I guess it might serve as a way to end the game faster once its gone on long enough for people to develop the relevant tech. Though, it seems like developing the tech to go through one half should let you travel through that half, logically, without requiring the tech to go through the other if all you want to do is go halfway (To Wrackspire or Burnt Mountain)
...hmm. This is shaping up to be quite interesting. Think you're going to try running this, or will it remain theoretical for the foreseeable future?
Post by: Taricus on July 13, 2017, 09:03:51 am
Post by: Draignean on July 13, 2017, 10:17:51 am
I'm with nuke, the old names were better, besides, there was no tradition for A&M naming schemes as far as I can recall. Only IPAR and ICAR/WR nations had those.
Bah. I do it one way, people complain. I do it the other, people complain...
I feel like I'm already running an Arms Race game! :P
Calm and Storm: Interesting idea. I guess it might serve as a way to end the game faster once its gone on long enough for people to develop the relevant tech. Though, it seems like developing the tech to go through one half should let you travel through that half, logically, without requiring the tech to go through the other if all you want to do is go halfway (To Wrackspire or Burnt Mountain)
Right, so if you can get through the wrackstorm, you can traverse the upper right nearly freely. If you can get through the calm, you can traverse the lower left nearly freely. If you can traverse both... You can go nearly anywhere.
...hmm. This is shaping up to be quite interesting. Think you're going to try running this, or will it remain theoretical for the foreseeable future?
Uh...
Mebbe? I'm still part-way through writing a turn for my irregularly scheduled forum game, staring at a seemingly infinite array of boxes retrospectively could use better labeling, trying to start a game of electronic D&D to comfort my old group, and training a replacement to fight vampires at my old college. Time is a commodity, and I'm not too far above the chrono-poverty line.
Well the obvious infrastructure thing is to build more pylons. If you research a better way to refine crystals then you can support 5 ships per fleet instead of four. If one side had five ships and the other has 4 better ships then both logistics and weaponry have some relevance.
Err, well, I'd rule that a better way to refine crystals would just give you a bonus to crystal production- which in turn effects how many ships/equipment you can produce. If you wanted to expand how many ships a production line could produce, you'd want something akin to expanded dockyards/floating drydocks/Administrative Efficiency/etc.
Post by: milo christiansen on July 13, 2017, 12:42:06 pm
(You would still need to do designs and revisions manually, but the program could handle production, battle, and other things with hard rules.)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on July 13, 2017, 01:08:55 pm
Though I do like the idea of infrastructure being of concern in Arms Race game. Of course it should take second priority to actual designing of weapons and the like, but they add a unique gameplay element.
Though some things probably shouldn't be done. "More wizards/higher percentage of trained wizards" is one thing; "make our soldiers fight gooder" is another. Like with everything, there's a limit to how far you should go.
You know, a possible fun little Arms Race game could be a war between two nations that have parity in weapons technology, and the players are designing infrastructure and defenses in order to best utilize what they have. Could be interesting.
Post by: Draignean on July 13, 2017, 01:58:32 pm
How well defined are the mechanics? I could write a simple program that does most of the rolling and calculating. Just insert fluff.
(You would still need to do designs and revisions manually, but the program could handle production, battle, and other things with hard rules.)
Rolling isn't really that difficult, and basically everything else besides resource ticks (an easy spreadsheet job) requires GM attention. Fluff is rather important in an arms race game, critically so. If someone's ambitious new hyperwave cannon gets a 4-1 on efficacy, what does that mean exactly? What situations does it beat a Quantum Defenstrator that got a 4+1? How much does it cost on a 3 expense versus how much on a 4?
Battle is even more impossible to automate. Sure, there are rolls in there to determine the circumstances of engagement, but it's a lot about squinting at fluff+sacrificing virgins to pagan gods+procrastinating by looking a erotic dolphin pictures+drinking until you reach a stupor before you can really interpret what the rolls actually MEAN. Worse, you have to describe it right, otherwise the parties don't have a good idea of what to focus on.
I'll try and update the hypothetical OP, repost, and get another round of opinions.
Post by: milo christiansen on July 13, 2017, 03:34:24 pm
If the game was mine I would do a tool simply because I like doing that kind of thing. For you it probably wouldn't be worthwhile...
Post by: evictedSaint on July 13, 2017, 03:56:34 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on July 13, 2017, 03:57:19 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on July 13, 2017, 03:59:49 pm
Post by: milo christiansen on July 13, 2017, 06:29:44 pm
That said, using my own stuff makes it a lot easier to fix bugs...
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 10:48:28 am
An Arms-Race game that is in some places blatantly copied from, and in some places loosely inspired by, the various arms race games that have occurred. Various mechanical details contributed by random internet street people. The technology and setting is copied from Jim Butcher's The Aeronaut's Windlass, which is a book I'd recommend to anyone who already likes Jim Butcher and is waiting for Peace Talks to come out.
Spire Kasgyre
Spire Wreth
No nation fights to control the surface of this world. The surface is covered in dense and perpetual mist, and there are monsters within that mist. Awful creatures that bear humanity no more enmity than a spider harbors enmity for a fly- and setting up a colony within their territory would be as foolish as a fly setting up a colony within a spiderweb. Humanity, thankfully, does not live on the surface. They live in the Spires.
The Spires we're built millenia ago, frames of nearly unbreakable spirestone designed with the specific intent of preserving humanity. Each spire is a cylinder approximately 2 miles in diameter and the same measure in height. Internally divided into several hundred floors which are each roughly 50' in height, each Spire is a nation unto itself. Vat farms produce vegetables, meat, limited wood supplies, and, most importantly, crystals.
Above the mist of the world's surface, in the high air of the spires, there is a peculiar energy known as aether. Its whimsical nature is the subject of much study, and (despite its unpredictable nature) it's the core of most all technology. Properly conducted and channeled into a carefully prepared crystal, aetheric energy has marvelous properties. Including the ability to cause a specifically designed and faceted crystal experience strong directional gravity. When such a crystal, known as a lift crystal, is paired with a method of harvesting aetheric energy on the fly, a decent sail (or more crystals), and is locked into the spine of a ship- you get a very basic airship.
Such airships are essential for travel between spires, as traffic overland is suicidal. In peace times, the most important role of airships is in making runs between the Spires and various Demi-Spires; protusion of stone similar in nature to Spires, but thinner and filled with rock and earth thrust up from the surface and locked into a frame of nearly unbreakable stone. Raw resources of metal and stone are frequently mined from such demi-spires, largely removing the need for surface mining.
Spire Kasgyre and Spire Wreth are two Spires which have lived in uncomfortable proximity for many centuries- always at each other's throats for one reason or another. Recent advances in airships and aetheric weapons spurred spurred border expansion and antagonistic rivalry- eventually culminating in a series of horrific raids on mining camps on various demi-spires. It's not known who struck first, but the resulting series of escalating engagements have stripped the two spires back to a few bare bones mining camps, and have set the stage for open war.
Rules and Play Sequence
General Play Loop
These rules are adapted from a couple different arms race games, with enough new twists that they're worth reading again even if you've played all the arms race games.
The game runs on 1 year=1 turn system. Every year both teams go through stages for design + project maintenance, revisions, and production + deployment cycles. At the start of the new turn, both teams get a base pool of 5 dice to allocate towards designs, projects, revisions, and basically everything good and useful.
At the start of each year designs and project maintenance is handled. Members of each team may propose designs. Everyone is allowed to vote for a design, or to vote for 'no design'. Each player has one and only one vote, and that vote is an integer with value 1. During this same time, players of each team propose resource allocation plans for various pre-existing projects. These are voted on in the same was as designs. The design (if any) with the most votes gets rendered into a new project and the progress for the funded existing projects moves ahead at the end of this stage. Any created prototypes or finished projects are described.
After designs and projects have been worked out, then the players move on to revisions. Revision are cheap, but best suited to address minor problems or incremental improvements. For example, if you finished an aetheric cannon last round that had issues with overheating, one could try and revise a better copper baffle in order to pull heat away. However, if you finished an aetheric cannon last round, one could not revise an aetheric rifle from it- even if the original cannon design was flawless.
Any dice not spent on revisions/designs/projects are saved back for the next round. Each team can bank a total of 5 dice, giving them a maximum of 10 dice to spend at any one time.
After revisions comes the deployment, tactics, and construction phase. During deployment you can set and modify standing movement orders to your ships, sending them to various locations to do ship things. A ship can go anywhere within two spires of its current location, but will be halted by enemy activity. Simple enough. Tactics is telling ships and marines how to engage. Tactics are designed/revised just like normal technology. The last part, construction orders, is about allocating resources to actually build new weapons/ships. Each player gets a single value 1 integer vote for each of these three.
After that's decided, ships are moved, and combat is resolved.
From there it's all clean up work. At the end of the combat phase, any resources coming in on transport ships, or directly from the spire itself, are added to the totals of the respective teams. Any ships generated by build orders or production lines are added to the fleet totals.
Production Lines
At the start of the game, both teams start off with the 'light dock' and 'marine academy' techs. These provide two production lines for the teams to work with at the beginning, and it's important to understand how they work.
Production lines are abstractions of government funding that automatically produce ships (or units, in the case of the marine academy) at a specified rate up to a certain numerical limited in a specified 'pattern' for as long as the line is active. Patterns are techs created through revision, and they specify all the components that will be made along with a ship. For instance, the basic Skyskiff production line comes with a pattern that outfits any Skyskiffs it builds it with a VS Core Crystal, a VS Lift Crystal, four trim crystals, two light cannons, and two reams of webbing. If a new cannon is created, a revised pattern can be created that outfits the Skyskiff with the new guns. Beware, however, that this will very likely reduce the total number of the Skiffs the production line will build and may decrease their build rate as well.
As an example, the Skyskiff production line creates up to 10 Skyskiffs, and creates them at a rate of 2 per turn.
For every production line EXCEPT the one granted by the marine academy (which produces marines) switching what ship is on a production line is just a declared action at any point during a team's turn. However, any ships created by the now inactive production line must either be paid for or be scuttled. You cannot rotate production lines to buff up your numbers, nor can you gain resources by scuttling production line built ships.
Capturing Ground and Controlling the Air
Control in the game differs depending on whether you're talking about controlling the air or the ground. Let's start off with ground control, since that's the easiest to consider.
Each spire and demi-spire is broken up into four sections. In general, much of the fighting is done within the network of interior caves within each spire- where soldiers are insulated from any incoming fire from outside the Spire. Artillery support from ships outside, no matter how striking, will make very little difference due to the spirestone frames. Every spire is different, sometimes not by much, some times critically so. Burned mountain is hot as hell, and the wrackspire is so badly shattered that marines need to break out dinghies to move between pillars. No matter the challenge, the basic idea is the same. Get transports, load them chock full of marines, and send them off to a spire.
Any ship with a transport capacity can be used to transport troops. Every 2 units of capacity indicates that a ship can carry one squad of marines. Each squad of marines consists of about sixteen men, usually broken up into four teams of four. Each team determines (and pays for) their loadout when they're loaded onto whatever ship has been chosen to carry them. The transport can then be moved to its final destination where (assuming it doesn't get blown to cinders on the way) it will disgorge its troop load. The transport can then be moved back to a friendly port and reloaded with marines. Repeat as needed until you control the spire or until you're forced to evacuate. Each individual demi-spire has a 'marine presence X/Y', which determines the maximum number of marines you can reasonably have deployed there at one time. Some places are better controlled by a few elite units, where others benefit from more Russian tactics.
Critical to the objective controlling ground is controlling the air. In order for a ship to drop infantry it has to actually reach a spire and (usually) come to a near stop in order to launch dinghies to get marines on the ground. If the other team effectively has a spire blockaded, then there's no point in sending marines with fancy weapons and expensive armor, since their transport will get reduced to ash before they ever make it close. Controlling the air around a spire is (compared to controlling open sky) a straightforward. That is not to say it is simple. It's important to remember that spires, even demi-spires, are miles in circumference, and its difficult to completely watch all points. Lastly, one must remember that spires go a long way down, and that a transport can land dinghies at any point where there's an opening. While defensive ships can do their damnedest to patrol the known openings, a crafty captain can always try to find a new crack large enough to slot troops in. A suicidal one can even look for such an opening at the level of the mist.
Basically, if you focus your forces into a grand fleet to defend a spire, you'll have the best odds of resisting a focused assault, but your odds of being able to stop stealth transports goes down. If you fragment your forces into pursuit groups you're much more likely to catch and burn isolated transports, but you're in a weaker position of a focused force shows up. A good mix of ships makes for a good defense, but nothing is ever guaranteed, and whatever tactic you have the defending ships employing makes quite a difference.
Despite the amount of sky, it's important to remember that airships are but means to an end. Wars are won by boots on the ground, and airships are just a way to deliver boots, stop boots, or support boots.
Definitions and Resources
Designs
Designs are the gateways to projects, and require a minimum of 3 dice: one for to roll time estimate, one to roll initial progress, and one to roll project expense.
Instead of creating an object immediately, design actions create Projects which run in the background. The Time estimate roll of a project, combined with how ambitious the project is natively, determines how much engineering effort it will take to actually make a deployable technology. This effort is quantified in a number usually in the range between 6 and 60. Determining this number is a nebulous process largely subject to GM fiat, but (in very general) rolling a 1 will cause the project to take twice as much time as it would have with a 6. If players elect to spend additional dice on rolling for time estimate, the result is the highest of the numbers rolled.
Initial progress is a roll that determines a small bonus to the start of the project's progress. Importantly, this progress is free and does not come with an associated resource cost. Additional dice spent on initial progress are additive, but, regardless of how many dice you spend, initial progress cannot rush a design past the prototype stage (50% progress).
Project Expense aids in determining how much it costs to keep a project going. After its creation, every time a team wants to make progress on a project, they have to allocate a number of die and pay certain resource costs. A high roll for project expense indicates and efficient project flow that costs a lower number resources to do research. For instance, a project that requires one of wood OR ore OR crystal on a 6 might require 1 wood + 1 ore, and one more of ore, wood, or crystal on a 1. If players elect to spend additional dice on rolling for Project Expense, the result is the highest of the numbers rolled.
Projects
Projects are created from designs. A project represents a long term investment of man-hours and resources into building prototypes, live fire drills, good old fashioned research, and rigorous testing.
As mentioned in designs, all projects have an amount of progress that needs to be filled, and a certain cost associated with that progress. A project header for an ambitious new core crystal looks something like this,
Zulu-Type Core Crystal: 12/30 | 1 Crystal + 1 Crystal OR 1 Ore | Rushed 0 times | 4 Crystal, 2 Ore Invested
Name, followed by current progress/total needed, then how much each die of progress costs, the number of times the project has been rushed, and the total resources that have been currently invested.
Every round, during the design phase, a team can elect to spend any number of their dice on progressing projects. For each die they spend on a project, they have to pay that project's resource cost. So if you elect to spend 2 die on the above, you have to spend 2 crystal and 2 from any combination of Ore/Crystal. For every die you spend resources on, you can also elect to rush the project. This gives you an extra die that adds to project progress normally, but also adds a bug to the project, or worsens and existing bug.
Once a project reaches 50% completion, the team gets a prototype. The prototype gets three rolls: Efficacy, Cost, and Bugs. These are all fairly self explanatory and (barring revision) represent the final product. Higher efficacy means it's a better product, higher cost roll means its cheaper, and a higher bugs roll means that it's got fewer unexpected kinks to iron out. As long as you do not deploy the prototype, you can make revisions to it what will effect the final product of the project.
If you choose to deploy the prototype, either because you're satisfied with the design or because you're in desperate need of an edge, you cannot rebuild it after it's destroyed/lost. Large objects, like heavy weapons or ships, get a single prototype. Small objects, like jetpacks or experimental body armor, get enough to outfit a single fireteam.
A project can be canceled at any time, and its resources re-allocated. When a project is canceled, the team gets 50% of the invested resources back at the end of the next turn, and a number of die equal to the project's current progress divided by six and rounded down.
Revisions
Revisions are as standard in Arms Race games. They cost only one die, but they yield incremental (and diminishing) returns. Importantly, revisions are improvements and modifications to existing technology and/or tactics. If you find yourself wondering whether something should be a revision or a new design, ask yourself whether it uses the same frame, and whether the addition is a technology by itself.
Some situations are tricky, and if you overreach you might get a really crappy version of what you wanted and a none-too-subtle hint that you should spend a design somewhere.
As an example, take two different tactical doctrines. Paratrooper tactics and officer sniping. Paratrooper tactics, even if you already parachutes lying around, is a full on design. You're not making a small change to how your soldier fight, you're asking them to do something entirely new and different. Officer sniping, by contrast, is a revision that tells your squads to keep a designated gunner whose only job is to look for the opposing side's officers and eliminate. That's a revision.
Resources
One of our big breaks from conventional arms race games, along with the changes to Designs and the addition of Projects. There are four resources: Crystal, Ore, Wood, and Silk. Resource numbers don't just indicate amount, but quality and effort in working. So just because something is small doesn't make it inexpensive. As long as a demi-spire is controlled completely, the resources will be automatically transported back to the spire through the miracle of commerce.
Crystal refers to the ability to vat-grow crystals, and is the most difficult resource to expand collection of. The vats needed require years to get started growing even small crystals of usable purity, and you can't naturally mine the crystals needed. You start with a decent crystal production, but it won't hold you over forever- particularly not when it's the main component in many of the systems most critical to airships and aetheric weapons. Each nation's spire starts with 10 Crystal production.
Ore refers to various metals mined from the earth, either from the surface (stupidly dangerous, but it's how you get ore in the spire) or from other Demi-spires. You get a short supply of ore at start, considering how much it's used for, but it's the easiest to expand the collection of. Just go and capture a Demi-spire, and it'll at least produce ore. Each nation's spire starts with 8 Ore production.
Wood is wood, of various treatments and flavors. It is both cut from the surface when an exotic type is need and grown from vats for more typical fare. It's relatively easy to produce, and tree farms can be set up on demi-spires relatively easily. Who knows, with a bit of maintenance you might be able to design floating tree farms! Wood is a plentiful resource at start, and one that's relatively easy to expand, but is used in rapaciously for ship building and expansion. Each nation's spire starts with 10 wood production.
Silk refers to aethersilk, a unique material with the ability to conduct aetheric energy. In its base form, it's a sticky, ropy secretion created by surface monsters. For obvious reasons, this makes it rather difficult to obtain. Harvesters work on the surface in the area directly around spires in order to harvest silk, usually with heavy firepower to back them up. Sometimes it's enough. Silk production is low at start, but each demi-spire you control gets you another area that you can mine the base of for Silk. Each nation's spire starts with 5 silk production.
Setting Modifiers
War in Heaven: There's little reason to design a tank, because controlling the surface of the planet is similarly implausible to controlling the surface of the sun. All combat either takes place in/on demi-spires or in the surrounding sky. The 'bottom' of the battlefield is a perpetual shroud of mist, tangibly different and colder than a normal cloud. Monsters dwell in the mist, so, while it's great for stealth, it's not a good idea to hang out there. The ceiling is the higher air where it becomes difficult to breathe. The aether is stronger there, and it provides more energy to a ship, but it's also more unpredictable and steadily drives humans insane. So while it's great for high power maneuvers, it's not a good idea to hang out there. The battle space between the two is chaotically streaked by clouds, storms, upwellings of mist, and general environmental nuisances, but it's still safer than the other two options.
Less than Ultra-Marines: When capturing the demi-spires, you NEED marines. The spirestone frames means that an entrenched force can weather basically any bombardment. You can blockade a demi-spire with ships and starve the enemy out, but, to actually take and hold territory you need boots on the ground.
Powered by Spiders: Aethersilk, the best material for conducting aetheric energy, is prepared from a ropy secretion used by the surface monsters to catch prey. As one can imagine, this makes it somewhat difficult to obtain. It's like if battleships ran on tiger milk- if tigers were poisonous, as large as a Buick on steroids, and impossible to tame.
Pretty Crystals: Vat grown crystals that are designed to interact with the Aether are the primary physical component of most magitech. Lift and trim crystals, core crystals, weapons crystals, etc. Short version, crystal can draw and channel energy from the aether.
Iron Doesn't Work: Something in the atmosphere, perhaps the aether itself, reacts powerfully with iron and steel. Exposed ferrous metals will rust and rot away to nothing but red pulp over the course of a few days. Copper cladding is frequently used as a sheath for iron and steel in order to prevent them from rotting.
Guns sort of work: Gunpowder exists, and firearms of the flintlock persuasion. However, they are famously unreliably devices. In order to contain detonation pressure, the chamber (and to a lesser extent, the barrel) is steel clad in copper. If the energy of the shot nicks a hole through the copper, or the corrosive gunpowder eats through the lining, the atmosphere will eat through the weapon's internals and cause the weapon to explode on the next shot. Mostly for shooting through defenses meant to stop aetheric weapons.
A word on Airships and Airship Combat
A few important things bear specific mention with regards to airships and the way they fight.
The most important detail to discuss is webbing. Most airships will run several spars (similar to thin masts) that are designed to run out the web. The web is the actual device that catches aetheric energy in the atmosphere and transfers it into the vessel. The more web you can run out, the more energy you can take in, which in turn increases the rate at which you can fire weapons and the speed at which you can maneuver (up to the strain limit of your crystals). However, webbing is fragile, and a single blast of aetheric cannon fire will fry large sections of the web into drifting ash. With damaged webbing, a ship is forced to rely on the internal capacity of its core crystal and whatever power they can eke out of the remaining strands. At best, this renders a ship slow and vulnerable. At worst it slowly depowers the ship's lift crystal, resulting in a slow death by monster for the crew. Webbing still functions within the area of a shroud, and combat vessels typically optimize for web patterns that allow them to run out as much web area as possible within the area of the shroud without compromising their firing arcs. Even given that, the maneuvering and firepower advantage to running out extra web is usually valuable enough that combat vessels are outfitted with extra reams of web, so that they can afford to have a few extra sections burned off.
Short version: ships are powered by running out web, which is really fragile. The more you web you can put down, the better, but your shields can only protect so much. If you get your web shot off, you're dead in the sky. Unless you've got a sail, and even then you've got to worry about falling.
Shrouds, as mentioned elsewhere, are energy shields generated by core crystals. Their base level is ONLY effective at stopping aetheric energy blasts, and even then it will buckle after sustained fire. Shrouds aren't entirely Star-Trek shields, though they do have similarities. A Shroud surrounds an airship in a rough oval, generally of the shame shape as the ship's core crystal. Much like a normal Sci-Fi shield, if it takes too much overall damage it will buckle in a shower of sparks. However, it can also be penetrated on a point by point basis. Focused fire can tear a hole in a shroud, even if it doesn't have enough energy to actually buckle the shroud completely. Holes shot in shrouds will fill in relatively quickly, within minutes, but a shroud that has been completely buckled requires the airship to bring the core to near zero power in order to reset. Doing so without depowering the lift crystal and plunging a ship on a one way trip to the surface is something of an art, and a heroic feat to do under combat circumstances.
It's important to note that Airships behave more like dirigibles than planes or ships. While they can run on sail, they typically use trim crystals to maneuver, which lets them pull off pinpoint maneuvers and turns that would make a sailing ship green with envy. Inertia is the greatest controlling factor in airship maneuverability, though more powerful lift and trim crystals can help offset this issue.
Airships themselves are constructed from various components,as you can see in the starting tech spoiler below. You can outfit a ship with whatever you've constructed that will fit, but the ship has to come back to the spire (or a forward port if you've built one) in order to complete the refit. If you make a revision that modifies an existing hull design, for instance making a version of the basic ship with a single medium size fixed position bow gun instead of two small cannons, those refits can also be performed only at a port.
Starting Technology
Spoiler: Tech (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Tactics (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Infrastructure and Production Patterns (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: General Purpose Conduct Rules and Disclaimers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Madman198237 on July 14, 2017, 11:05:02 am
It seems....strange for that to be true.
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 11:15:28 am
Draig, all I can say is "Yikes I can't even buy a single Skyskiff per turn!"
It seems....strange for that to be true.
That's because it isn't true.
VS C-Crystal: 3C x1
VS L-Crystal: 2C+2O x1
T-Crystal: 1C x2
L-A-Cannon: 1C+1Ox2
Webbing: 2S x2
Skyskiff Hull: 5W + 2O
Total Cost: 9C, 6O, 5W, 4S
You produce 10 crystal, 8 ore, 10 wood, and 5 silk from your home spire alone. There are three more demi-spires right next to your home spire.
I would make a quip about your inability to perform addition, but I admit there's a lot of text, and it's entirely possible you skimmed through the (almost unchanged) resources section.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 14, 2017, 11:16:13 am
I meant two xD
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 11:23:00 am
Actually it was just a mental hiccup.
I meant two xD
Well, if you have less than ten you're producing 3 per turn, and you've got 3 'home-ish' demi-spires so... Working as intended? It'll be interesting to see how the surplus in other resources shapes development.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 14, 2017, 11:25:26 am
Are the nations going to start by controlling the demi-spires nearest to them?
Post by: NAV on July 14, 2017, 11:39:55 am
Cladding a steel cutlass in bronze makes no sense. Just make the cutlass entirely from bronze. Cutlass is a short heavy blade, so steel's strength per weight isn't important, and it's cladd in bronze so steel's sharpness doesn't matter. Just make the whole sword from bronze.
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 01:50:14 pm
Flintlock pistols and muskets should be separate items. One's a sidearm and the other's a main arm.
Cladding a steel cutlass in bronze makes no sense. Just make the cutlass entirely from bronze. Cutlass is a short heavy blade, so steel's strength per weight isn't important, and it's cladd in bronze so steel's sharpness doesn't matter. Just make the whole sword from bronze.
Bah, the cutlass thing is from the books. I tried not to take too many liberties with it, but it can be altered if it offends you. As for the pistols/rifle thing, you're right. It shall be altered.
That's what's missing---you didn't include the map.
Are the nations going to start by controlling the demi-spires nearest to them?
During the initial phase of the game, the one where you do some very rapid research, you get to pick one near spire to retain control of from the outside. The others were presumed to be destroyed recently by those 'vicious raids' mentioned in the fluff. The sides are naturally encouraged to name the spires that are part of their territory.
Spoiler: Map (click to show/hide)
To answer the inevitable question: Why do the names have those shitty nameplates behind them? The answer is I'm missing xcf file that has the non-compressed layers. :-\
Post by: Aseaheru on July 14, 2017, 02:05:07 pm
Post by: milo christiansen on July 14, 2017, 02:20:33 pm
I can see flame thrower using high pressure bronze impeller pumps as a possible good weapon too...
This setting has lots of possibilities!
Post by: Iituem on July 14, 2017, 02:22:18 pm
Wands Race used a tool to determine combat, and it...wasn't particularly effective.
Yeah. Tools can be very useful, but they lend themselves to mechanics bloat and give you more possibilities for typing the wrong plus/minus in and cocking things up in weird ways.
Bronze is also a good material for the inside of a cannon because iron sparks against iron, so when you launch iron cannonballs inside an iron shaft it can cause tremendous friction (if I remember correctly, which may be entirely wrong, but I swear this was a problem with early cannons).
Post by: Aseaheru on July 14, 2017, 02:44:01 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on July 14, 2017, 02:57:25 pm
Please don't use it in a weapon.
Post by: Aseaheru on July 14, 2017, 03:06:17 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 03:07:27 pm
Holy crap don't confuse cast and wrought iron. Cast iron is technically a form of steel, as I recall. It's got a high carbon content and EXTREME hardness because of the way it's cooled (Really hot to cold, fast as possible). It's brittle enough to be shattered by a single hit from a child using a hammer.
Please don't use it in a weapon.
Cast iron cannons were the main alternative to expensive bronze cannons during the age of sail. They were noted for their occasional... explosive tendencies.
It was used in weapons all the time.
Post by: milo christiansen on July 14, 2017, 03:07:48 pm
I'm assuming iron only rots at altitude? As in it can be worked without issues near the base of the spire? If not, how are iron items made at all?
Holy crap don't confuse cast and wrought iron. Cast iron is technically a form of steel, as I recall. It's got a high carbon content and EXTREME hardness because of the way it's cooled (Really hot to cold, fast as possible). It's brittle enough to be shattered by a single hit from a child using a hammer.
Please don't use it in a weapon.
Cast iron is simply iron that has been cast directly out of the smelter. It has more impurities than wrought iron, and is more brittle. You can make cast iron cannons, but unless they are quite thick and perfectly cast they tend to have issues with bursting. As long as you can make good casts, cast iron is actually not half bad for cannons since it is so cheap.
Wrought iron is made by beating or puddling cast iron to remove impurities and anneal it somewhat. Due to the extra processing required it is more expensive than cast iron.
Steel is wrought iron alloyed with carbon. Even more expensive.
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 03:11:33 pm
I'm assuming iron only rots at altitude? As in it can be worked without issues near the base of the spire? If not, how are iron items made at all?
Right, within the first half mile of a spire, below the mist-line of the spire, you can have foundries that can work iron. The lower the better as far as quality control goes. Once the plating is made it's typically waxed or immersed in oil until its ready to be shrouded in copper/bronze/brass.
Post by: milo christiansen on July 14, 2017, 03:15:21 pm
:P
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 03:22:49 pm
You realize, that if you don't run this game now you are going to have legions of angry forumites after you?
:P
It's an arms race game, if I run it I'll have legions of angry forumites after me. :P
Damned if I do...
Post by: Taricus on July 14, 2017, 03:25:53 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on July 14, 2017, 03:32:07 pm
So, as to cannons.
The original cannons ("Bombards") fired stone balls. Concrete's not out of the question.
Technically steel isn't necessarily wrought iron. It's just that the more purified the iron is, the better the resulting steel. The Bessemer process, in fact, is just a way of producing pure(ish) iron without the wrought-iron process, which involves a forge, a burly smith, a sledgehammer, and several hours of heating and pounding.
CAST iron, nowadays, specifically refers to iron that is heated VERY hot (Sometimes hot enough to melt and be cast into a form or mold) and cooled rapidly, creating a very hard, very brittle metal with a high melting point (This is why it is used for charcoal forge fireboxes, in fact).
As always, cast iron has a spectrum of hardness versus brittleness, but in general it's not terribly suited to warfare, unless in certain designs such as katanas, which trade extreme hardness (Technically of steel, but same difference) at the edges and softer metal on the back of the blade, to give both sharpness and flexibility (Both of which a sword needs, which is normally a trade-off between flexing and hardness).
Post by: Aseaheru on July 14, 2017, 03:52:11 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 14, 2017, 04:58:05 pm
Well, if you run it you can tell them to shut the hell up so... :P
Ask and ye shall occasionally receive (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164853.0) things against my better interests.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 17, 2017, 08:15:22 pm
Post by: RAM on July 17, 2017, 08:25:53 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on July 17, 2017, 08:52:49 pm
Anyway, yeah, I'll help.
Post by: Draignean on July 17, 2017, 09:41:39 pm
Alright, is anybody willing to help me develop Arms Race mechanics? To me, it looks like these games are freakishly complicated and I'd like to design a system that isn't freakishly complicated, for the good of all us prospective Arms Race GMs.
I can help you make a freakishly overcomplicated rules out of a simple concept! It's one of my strongest abilities.
As for going the other way, I don't think I can help you.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 18, 2017, 02:20:29 am
Alright, is anybody willing to help me develop Arms Race mechanics? To me, it looks like these games are freakishly complicated and I'd like to design a system that isn't freakishly complicated, for the good of all us prospective Arms Race GMs.I think ICAR is about as simple as you can get without losing a lot of what makes an Arms Race an Arms Race. I mean, can you give some examples of undue complexity that you'd be looking to eliminate?
Post by: Madman198237 on July 18, 2017, 03:05:29 pm
Either explain to us your suggestions for AR mechanics and we'll disassemble them with utmost violence, or you could walk through a regular turn of, say, ICAR, and tell us what confuses you and what should change.
Or do both, and walk US through a turn in your proposed AR system (First you have to have a selection of rule-changes decided on, however)
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 18, 2017, 05:04:02 pm
Post by: Draignean on July 18, 2017, 05:18:03 pm
Well, frankly, I have no idea what die rolls go on behind the scenes in any Arms Race game on these forums. The design and revision rolls make sense, but as to how victory is decided, I have no idea. Every attempt at designing my own behind-the-scenes system so far, however, has resulted in an overly complicated mess with not much flexibility.
Oh, that's easy.
I intend to use a mixture of D20s, pagan sacrifice, wikipedia, websites dedicated to war-history
It's a complex process, but it gets results.
Post by: Happerry on July 18, 2017, 07:28:05 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on July 18, 2017, 07:58:26 pm
Well, frankly, I have no idea what die rolls go on behind the scenes in any Arms Race game on these forums. The design and revision rolls make sense, but as to how victory is decided, I have no idea. Every attempt at designing my own behind-the-scenes system so far, however, has resulted in an overly complicated mess with not much flexibility.
Sensei's actually posted a system on how he does it. Basically, he has a set of categories and whatever side has a bigger advantage due to quality and cost of their designs in that area gets a point, with ties awarding no points. Whichever has the most points wins in the area. The system is somehow weighted based on what the category is as well as terrain and we don't know how that precisely works, but that's the barebones of it.
Given this, we could possibly make a spreadsheet to give values for categories to make what amounts to an Arms Race battle determination grid. First column would be a list of labels defining categories and subsequent columns being different biomes with data determining what each category's weight in that biome would be. To keep things balanced, all of the weights could total up to a specific number.
Example for that last bit: For Plains, Hills, and Mountains, Rifles could have a weight of 1 in each for a total of 3, and Tanks could have a weight of 1.5 in Plains, 1 in Hills, and .5 in Mountains also resulting in a total of 3.
This would admittedly result in a bit of min-maxing, but that is kinda done in reality since people do want to get the most effect in an area...
Edit: One thing I can admit is that players and GMs could come up with things that wouldn't fit into existing categories, but if we steadily expand we will get more and more of these unforeseen slots covered.
Edit 2: Probably want to divide between pre and post gunpowder (far future can kinda get bundled up into this latter. Just need to rename the biomes to planet types, and sea to space, and you can get a rough fit). They could intermix, but the latter kinda drastically overturned how warfare is waged. Magic is kinda a difficult fit, but what can't fit into one of the existing categories if you squint (ex. Magic Carpets could considered to work along the lines of aircraft) can be made to have their own section (ex. Summoning).
Post by: Madman198237 on July 18, 2017, 08:13:58 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on July 18, 2017, 10:32:45 pm
That is, unless you as a GM want to have about a score of modifiers assigned to each piece of design work based on where they are, and are willing to change those modifiers as other items are made each turn.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 24, 2017, 06:05:40 pm
I can do roll to dodge style gameplay fairly easily. Coming soon: Fists Race, where the players that design magical martial arts moves also get to use them.
On another note, do you folks think an Arms Race subforum would be a good idea?
Post by: RAM on July 24, 2017, 06:15:07 pm
Then again, they are a bit tricky to run, I am not certain that they will be this numerous long-term.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on July 24, 2017, 07:20:45 pm
Spoiler: Please read and critique. (click to show/hide)
Post by: RAM on July 24, 2017, 08:29:24 pm
King Arthur versus The Black Knight arms race.Your proposal has much less Monty Python references. Honestly not sure how that would play out in popular opinion... I assume that dismemberment and bleeding-as-a-weapon would be uncommon?
I see the combat being either minimally interactive or rather prolonged. Given how enthusiastic people are about designing things and how few options they are likely to have at the start, I would suggest multiple designs between fights or mid-fight(Inspiration in the heat of battle?) designs.
I do not see any replenishment options. Starting at zero would make most recovery abilities extremely strong and it isn't even clear if characters recover after fights.
Are weapons permitted? Can characters be described as "not in their true form" when first created? Is destroying the planet a valid combat manoeuvre?
Post by: Tack on July 27, 2017, 10:55:02 am
Boy am I pooped though.
Let me know if I missed anything?
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 27, 2017, 11:09:43 am
Post by: Tack on July 27, 2017, 11:48:56 am
It was all done on my phone though so I'm sure I've missed quite a bit.
Post by: Madman198237 on July 27, 2017, 12:07:11 pm
Post by: Tack on July 27, 2017, 12:34:59 pm
Research using up materials would be pure torture so that has to go, but Draig's other rules seem kosher.
Edit: Okay, I think (read: hope) I've got a workable system.
5 dice, or one dice per 10 specialists rounded.. somewhere.
Three to start a design, giving Success|Cost|Progress. Extra can be thrown in if need be.
Designs finished immediately will still get a "prototype" bonus in the successive revision phase.
Designs get assigned a difficulty in the background, and a number of "time parts" up front.
"Time parts" are the amount of extra dice needed to see it through to completion.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on July 27, 2017, 07:50:47 pm
Wands Race, but instead of a nation or a similar entity, it's just one person and one side. Kind of like a standard suggestion game (think the "You are a ______" SGs [like You are an Independent Scientist!]) crossed with Wands Race.
The setting can really be anything, but I'd imagine it'd be either during a similar time to the actual Wands Race or during the Renaissance. Magic has been recently discovered ~5-10 years ago and applications are still quite sparse. Some nations are incorporating wizards who can cast simple fireballs into their armies. Alchemy is starting to become a profession. Hospitals in big cities begin to see very simple "Heal" spells. And Mages Guilds are starting to be established as the science of Magic is taking root in society.
Basically, the setting is in the transition from the [renaissance] to standard D&D-like fantasy.
And the character is in the center of all this, with a lab and their choice of a spell/wand/artifact (perhaps even player-suggested) bought with the rest of their life savings.
Money would play a very large role, perhaps taking precedence over the standard Design/Revision phases. The character would have to deal with maintenance costs and costs for producing their items+researching them. Then they'd have to turn that into money, with contracts with guilds/nations/etc. or just selling their stuff outright.
There would likely be three phases, partially [mostly/loosely?] based off of Draignean's system. I don't know the exact details off hand, but it's mostly the general ideas behind it.
- Research & Development. Spend money on dice for research/development projects. There would be a difference between Designs/Revisions - perhaps in the amount of money spent on dice?
- Production. Spend money on building designs. Pretty straightforward - designs have a money cost (and maybe occasionally a production time) and you can say "Build 3 Fireball Wands for $300" and be done with it.
- Distribution. The most "SG-like" part of the game and also the vaguest phase so far. Likely the players would be presented with a list of leads. Leads can be pursued (maybe >1 or maybe just 1 per phase) and done in a SG-like format - talking with people, doing things, etc.. And deals are arranged to sell your produced designs.
So ultimately, the idea is to create a "hybrid" SG/Wands Race-type game in a slightly new setting. Like if you crossed "You are an Independent Scientist" (which I'm too lazy to link) and Wands Race. A game based on a single character but with largely Arms[/Wands] Race-like mechanics.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 03, 2017, 06:47:41 pm
Post by: Iituem on August 07, 2017, 10:06:25 am
Post by: Tack on August 08, 2017, 10:52:37 am
Post by: Aseaheru on August 08, 2017, 02:09:34 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 08, 2017, 07:53:39 pm
Post by: Draignean on August 15, 2017, 12:49:45 pm
Post by: Tack on August 15, 2017, 12:52:37 pm
Even after blowing us out of the sky with that awesome ship?
Post by: Kashyyk on August 15, 2017, 01:04:43 pm
Post by: Jerick on August 15, 2017, 01:13:03 pm
Post by: Draignean on August 15, 2017, 01:14:52 pm
On the plus side, Kasgyre is also a lot more chill and I don't have to tell them to stop poking each other with lit cigarettes nearly as much.
Post by: evictedSaint on August 15, 2017, 01:25:24 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 15, 2017, 04:40:04 pm
Post by: Draignean on August 15, 2017, 05:10:20 pm
Its very similar to Moskurg/Arstotzka in Wands Race. Moskurg usually has just one or two designs that get voted up pretty quickly, and Arstotzka has huge debates that end with a dozen designs with two votes each.
Yeah, the difference is that we're missing the 'pretty quickly' part. Wreth argues a lot more, but they also come to decisions faster. I'm just worried about Kasgyre languishing too much.
Not that languishing seems to have hurt them.
Anyway, it'll be fun to see you around, ZtG.
Post by: Kashyyk on August 15, 2017, 05:13:40 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 15, 2017, 05:15:08 pm
Maybe if we fund a honeymoon...
Post by: Draignean on August 15, 2017, 05:17:18 pm
Once you poke Kasgyre we seem to come to a decision fairly quickly. Maybe everyone needs a couple of days to go away and think about things? Who knows. I am curious how bad Arstotzka must be getting though, if evicted was forced to give us in game bonuses because of it.
It's pretty much the entire the reason I don't really vote there anymore. It's just painful to read through.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on August 15, 2017, 05:40:42 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 15, 2017, 09:35:56 pm
Post by: Iituem on August 15, 2017, 09:52:23 pm
Its very similar to Moskurg/Arstotzka in Wands Race. Moskurg usually has just one or two designs that get voted up pretty quickly, and Arstotzka has huge debates that end with a dozen designs with two votes each.
Starting to see that flavour developing in Hive Race. The Hive tends to put out a few designs off the bat, then pick favourites and revise them to win support, while the League like to deliberate for a couple of pages on general ideas before they form usually one or two concrete designs they all go behind.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on August 16, 2017, 09:01:37 am
Honeymoon?Well, you see, RAM and Chiefwaffles got married. Our King liked the marriage so much we got a minor bonus out of it.
Sadly, the couple still fights quite a bit. Maybe they'll settle down once they have children.
Post by: Tack on August 16, 2017, 10:38:05 am
You've put us in charge of an absolute shambles of a country.
Post by: Aseaheru on August 16, 2017, 11:48:26 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 16, 2017, 11:59:51 am
I'd say that's more of an issue of the asymmetrical arms race, Iituem.
You've put us in charge of an absolute shambles of a country.
Well, plenty of opportunity to improve, no?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 19, 2017, 05:17:26 pm
Post by: Kot on August 19, 2017, 05:33:39 pm
Spoiler: Whatever. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 19, 2017, 10:28:29 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on August 22, 2017, 04:29:43 pm
I'm blaming SMMI, for his incessant linking of that blasted Lords Among the Ashes thing or whatever it was called.
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on August 22, 2017, 04:43:17 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on August 22, 2017, 04:52:14 pm
Post by: somemildmanneredidiot on August 24, 2017, 11:27:55 am
No, I was blaming YOU for ME wanting to play it.
I recognize that and was complimenting you on getting the name correct.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 25, 2017, 01:12:45 pm
It's about two factions who were in a endless war, fighting over a world, its two moons, and maybe the solar system its in.
One side is a system of machines, all internetworked (The Architects Many), while the other being what amounts to high energy beings encapsulated in shells with an angel mythos about them. (Verdant Colonials)
I'll write up a little more as time comes by, but I'm wondering if there is any interest for another arms race game happening.
Post by: Madman198237 on August 25, 2017, 01:14:26 pm
Post by: Draignean on August 25, 2017, 01:19:01 pm
Main concern (IMHO) with sci-fi games is the escalation of destructive power. Whether it be nukes, quantum interface bombs, or the Little Doctor, destructive ability tends to increase exponential faster than the ability to defend soft structures against it. It's something to think about, in order to keep your war from going all floppy and cold when both sides just start threatening MAD instead of actually fighting.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 25, 2017, 01:31:23 pm
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 25, 2017, 03:31:43 pm
In short, they can develop weapons of mass destruction, but it is so heavily discouraged by the fact that 99% of theire forefathers died because of it, and they are wise enough to learn not too.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on August 25, 2017, 03:46:37 pm
You think people learn from past behaviour.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 25, 2017, 03:52:20 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on August 25, 2017, 05:14:15 pm
There is no overkill, only "Open fire!" and "I need to reload!"
Post by: RAM on August 25, 2017, 05:31:05 pm
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 25, 2017, 06:38:15 pm
Post by: Kot on August 25, 2017, 08:27:35 pm
There is no overkill, only "Open fire!" and "I need to reload!"And the whole point of Arms Race is working very hard to eliminate the latter.
Post by: VoidSlayer on August 25, 2017, 09:12:26 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on August 26, 2017, 04:10:08 pm
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 26, 2017, 05:01:27 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on August 26, 2017, 05:12:24 pm
Post by: Blood_Librarian on August 26, 2017, 05:33:18 pm
Essentially, It's gonna be less about two military forces fighting eachother, and more two ant colonies fighting eachother. Yeah, there might be mortars and artillery, but the bigger something gets, the less effective that thing is gonna be.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 01, 2017, 08:07:18 am
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 08:11:21 am
You could get the ICAR Cannalan crew to participate, I bet.
If you can manage that, go right ahead. Always better to get a bigger audience.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 01, 2017, 08:20:25 am
Edit: I probably need to figure out a proper combat system before I do anything about this.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 09:05:16 am
Post by: Aseaheru on September 01, 2017, 11:31:32 am
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 01, 2017, 01:10:35 pm
Post by: NUKE9.13 on September 01, 2017, 01:13:09 pm
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 01, 2017, 04:02:43 pm
The two factions I have in mind are essentially psionic based energy beings powered by genetically developed ecosystem and a Self-replicating machine civilization, I'll post up some unit descriptors and other things just for show in a little bit.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 04:07:39 pm
Seriously, I'd take the machine side. All you've gotta do is get progressively smaller, and you'll win for certain. You replicate a single material-consuming machine capable of assembling copies of itself, and keep controlling it as it replicates. Then, you have it start making variants, and suddenly they can link together into a ten-foot armored humanoid with a fusion reactor and a plasma cannon, and the enemy can do nothing about it, because the robots are eating the planet out from under them.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on September 01, 2017, 04:23:14 pm
I'd definitely appreciate an Arms Race with psionics, but it feels like putting them against robotics kind of misses the point.
Post by: RAM on September 01, 2017, 05:35:18 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 06:22:24 pm
It takes exactly ONE, ONE Von Neumann machine making landfall to completely decimate your entire planet. Literally, it will eat the whole thing bit by bit.
We're not talking biomechanical here, RAM. These are literal nanobots, measured in nanometers, but still plenty complex enough to do a variety of things. The real genius, of course, would be getting them to mimic OTHER materials in large-scale, allowing a swarm of nanos to act like a starship hull, or a concrete bunker, etc etc. However, in this case, merely possessing molecular-manipulation capability means that my army can build any material that it wants or needs, provided it can acquire the atoms and the energy. And it can, this is science FICTION.
Post by: Happerry on September 01, 2017, 06:46:33 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 06:55:11 pm
And it hits the ground, and immediately does what it was built to do: It drags together molecules, and builds a copy of itself.
Two is not many, I'll grant you that. But add a bit of time, and suddenly, there is a small group of them, building more as time goes buy, and they're digging around underground, invisible, perhaps even mostly undetectable, until suddenly there's a billion of them swarming up out of the ground to consume people. Yes, they're destroyed, but some of the nanos stayed underground.
Post by: RAM on September 01, 2017, 09:31:09 pm
Radiation is likely to be your go-to response really. Just track any incoming projectiles and blast them with something highly penetrative. Lead doesn't stop everything and enough rads will break anything, starting with the most sophisticated elements...
Once you get a swarm together then you can start construction a mind of some sort, which can then coordinate energy raids, likely hunting animals, and energy networks to transmit energy to your mining operation, solar if you think you can get away with it or hunting if you think you can catch anything with measures that won't reveal your presence. Then you need to spread like crazy, because once they find you they can kill you. They may need to reapply the napalm a few times to be certain, but it will work. But unfortunately you are up against psychics, and all they need to do is pull off a "bad vibes" effect and they can start triangulating all your incursion sites and start cleansing the area until their psychic senses give the all-clear.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good technology. Machines built from the stuff would be capable of insane field-repairs, the efforts the enemy need to go to to sanitise an area after a battle would be significant, and its ability to irritate as you constantly throw invasion packets across known space would be effective, but they are extremely far from unstoppable. Mostly, though, they would be slow. People love to show stuff just melting in media, but likely it would take a great many revisions to get something that effective. Most grey-goo in media seems to have many many many generations per second, and I would expect it to be more like a couple of generations per day when you start out. Don't be surprised if someone falls naked into the vat of grey goo, climbs out, goes through decontamination, and spends a couple of days with symptoms resembling sunburn before being back no worse for wear.
Certainly worth pursuing, but nowhere near an autowin.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 01, 2017, 09:48:56 pm
Depending on the depth of the vat, of course.
Things on the molecular scale happen faster than we can track. That's just how scale works. Any self-replicating machine is capable of terrifying feats of destruction, because there is no waste. They consume all the matter available to them, and nothing is inedible.
When I say that they dig in, I mean they create more nanobots. Yes, some of the dirt is moved, but it's mostly a chain of nanos tunneling under the surface for the material they need. Yes, it will take a while, but not as long as you might think. Exponential increase, after all.
Tunneling isn't even the best option, it's just one that occurred to me. You could also use air-based nanos and lots of solar power for micro-sized ion thrusters.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 01, 2017, 10:23:27 pm
Spoiler: Verdant Colonials (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: The Architects Many (click to show/hide)
It's a bit less hard on the Science hardness scale but I thought its cool. I am gonna add more as time goes by, but this is what I got right now.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on September 06, 2017, 09:13:10 pm
The number one problem is conflict. The two sides need something to fight over and they need tangible benefits/feedback as they win or lose, but coming up with something that works with the ideas of spies/operatives is a bit tough.
Right now the working idea is that some superpower (almost definitely the British Empire) withdraws from the traditional small landmass at approximately 1870, leaving a bunch of free land between two feuding-but-at-peace nations. The nations naturally start settling this land, and want to capture more land without resorting to violence for approval-related reasons.
So players are the heads of their nations' newly-formed espionage bureaus with the task of using espionage to secure their nation's control over all of the new land.
But this doesn't really make too much sense as that means that land would be bloodlessly-yet-hostilely switched over year after year. All via espionage.
Anyone have suggestions for things to have the players realistically fight over using espionage?
Post by: Blood_Librarian on September 07, 2017, 08:53:45 am
Post by: Tack on September 08, 2017, 01:50:45 pm
'Cos I want to once again make a Warhammer game.
Problem is, I've got two ideas swirling and only really the time/playerbase to run one.
I realise there's a bias because of this thread's occupants, but I was hoping on getting some help with the decision.
So, here goes: they're both genestealer cult themed, 'cos.
Spoiler: 1. Arms race: Cultist Clash (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: 2. Traditional RPG: You Are Cultists (click to show/hide)
Post by: Happerry on September 08, 2017, 04:25:41 pm
Post by: Tack on September 09, 2017, 03:20:20 am
Well, giving it a swing anyway.
Edit: for anyone interested, our xenomorph (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167402.0) team is lean on members.
Seems these are generally destined to be lopsided.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 25, 2017, 03:19:26 am
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 25, 2017, 08:22:10 am
Post by: Kot on September 25, 2017, 08:31:56 am
Post by: Taricus on September 25, 2017, 08:34:35 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on September 25, 2017, 08:34:50 am
I want to take a while to clarify that Wands Race is not canon, and there is not a single instance in which Moskurg could have beat Arstotzka.Hey, hey. As you like to say, Arstotzka hasn't been defeated so long as some of its citizens remain free and (hypothetically) alive- in SPAAACE.
Yeah, uh, some Arstotzkans escaped into space rather than submit to unification.
AGAIN.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 08:35:43 am
Arstotzka has been defeated. Good game, everybody, but always remember: Faith a lightning beats crappily-done magitech.
Post by: Kot on September 25, 2017, 09:34:16 am
Of course, we're going to ignore Kot and his ultranationalistic views on, well, everything, especially when they're wrong.Wands Race isin't canon and I am right.
Arstotzka has been defeated. Good game, everybody, but always remember: Faith a lightning beats crappily-done magitech.At least that we can agree on - Wands Race Arstotzkans were really crappy, especially since I wasn't helping them.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 09:40:11 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on September 25, 2017, 09:42:13 am
Post by: Kot on September 25, 2017, 09:47:37 am
It absolutely is canon- all the events in Wands Race canonically take place in the ICAR universe in a series of books.Yeah that's the point. The book is Continentalist propganda, which explains why Arstotzka lost - the Moskurgs had to force balant lies and trash down the throats of new generation just to make the shameful defeat Moskurgs suffered at hands of Arstotzkans in real life more bearable for them. DO NOT LET THIS PROPAGANDA FOOL YOU, MAKE ARSTOTZKA GREAT AGAIN!
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 09:49:40 am
Moskurg has personality. Arstotzka? You just have a crappy name scheme that nobody understands.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on September 25, 2017, 06:26:56 pm
Hey, hey. As you like to say, Arstotzka hasn't been defeated so long as some of its citizens remain free and (hypothetically) alive- in SPAAACE.The question is whether or not cat hybrids count as Arstotzkans.
Yeah, uh, some Arstotzkans escaped into space rather than submit to unification.
AGAIN.
Post by: RAM on September 25, 2017, 06:54:33 pm
And Arstotzka has all manner of logistics, magecraft fields, communities, stories of survival on the tundra... Kegbog just had a rancid heap of verbal waste drowning under the delusion that it could qualify as artistic.
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 07:35:11 pm
All we ever got to see was the perennial "Arstotzka stronk because Arstotzka" that sounds like you regurgitated partially-digested Russian propaganda, mixed with a foul sludge of "mathemagics" as an excuse for everything that happened.
I can only point out that both sides discovered valid ways to manipulate magic, and the winner was simply better at it.
Post by: Iituem on September 25, 2017, 07:59:42 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 08:01:56 pm
They just NEVER LEARNED to follow up on technologies.
Seriously, whenever I or anyone else succeeded in pushing through a revamp of older techs, the effects were HUGE. Look at lightning! The first turn we re-unleashed it, the Arstotzkans lost on every front.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on September 25, 2017, 08:43:23 pm
Hell, I think one of my biggest mistakes was pushing for the Lightning. We spent three designs and multiple revisions and an expense credit getting it to a state where it was useful at all. That could have been used for much more useful thing.
Crystal is the result of following up on it. We have spent so many designs and revisions on it, which is why it's better than adamantium.
As awful as the high-altitude bomber was, it was still following up on old tech. Expanding our air game. Basically all Arstotzka did was follow up on old tech.
But the real reason for Arstotzka's loss (other than luck/RnG) is, in my opinion, magitech.
Not that we did magitech, but because of the game's rules surrounding it.
Spoiler: Why? (click to show/hide)
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 08:48:58 pm
And the other direct lines of tech you didn't follow up on.
We were raining lightning across the whole BATTLEFIELD (And every Mage and above was doing it) and yet you guys had stopped developing fire-walls to go run off and play with magitech.
Had you moved to a new fire attack capable of incinerating whole swathes of battlefield, you might've won. Well, gained a lot of ground, which may have been the same thing.
Had you followed up on the Protector design, you might've had tanks resistant to anything we might've made, forcing us to expend design(s) on a counter to stop the bleeding, as it were.
Had you cheapened your guns earlier, so that every man had one a lot sooner, it might've helped.
I mean, the list goes on and Moskurg is equally guilty. Mob consciousness, I'm afraid. But hindsight's 20/20, so I think it's time to pack up and say "Good game all" and move on with our lives.
Post by: RAM on September 25, 2017, 09:29:40 pm
I can only point out that both sides discovered valid ways to manipulate magic, and the winner was simply better at it.I am not getting the joke here. Is it appropriate to respond to this comment with an honest analysis?
That's just false, though. Arstotzka's end-game technology was purely a result of religiously following up on new techs.Oh verily. Remember how many actions we spent getting hand-held rifles? Unless the descriptions of the accomplishment were sarcastic I am pretty sure that it was a serious effort every step of the way.
Had you moved to a new fire attack capable of incinerating whole swathes of battlefield, you might've won. Well, gained a lot of ground, which may have been the same thing.We were repeatedly told that fire did nothing in the presence of adamantine, and that adamantine was cheap as dirt and implemented everywhere. On that point, we had a spell that devastated entire swathes of battlefields with cold, and it was completely annulled by adamantine being universally distributed on everything.
Had you followed up on the Protector design, you might've had tanks resistant to anything we might've made, forcing us to expend design(s) on a counter to stop the bleeding, as it were.
Protectors could never have been immune to everything. That would have been a hard-counter, and hard counters stopped being introduced at that point. There was nothing at all that could have prevented them from succumbing to concerted bombardment, and the things were too slow to be of any real relevance to the air war, which basically dictated everything because it was literally impossible to have enough dakka to prevent overstuffed whales filled with unstable explosives from lazily drifting past until directly overhead, because hard-counters stopped existing.
Arstotzka had lots of trouble developing magitech, but once developed it was comparatively powerful, which turned out to be problematic so to entrance difficulty and effectiveness dropped, which was a good thing, but kind of hurt. Moskurg kept developing hard-counters, which kept rendering long-term projects with lots of actions completely irrelevant. This was no fun so hard-counters stopped existing shortly after Moskurg easily modified their antimagic to have no effect at all on their own stuff and completely disable every magical element of Arstotzka's forces, which meant fighting blimps with swords...
Post by: Madman198237 on September 25, 2017, 09:50:17 pm
As for the "hard counters" thing, well, welcome to war. Reimagine your stuff.
Ah yes, the antimagic trick. Truly a wonder of the battlefield---we made it have a 5m or so exclusion zone---the antimagic had user-definable shape but did not effect anything within 5m, and was then deployed from Skyskiffs because you relied so heavily on magic to shoot us down.
Anyway, as for the comment you commented on, that was an honest assessment---we tried different things (As nations), but ultimately only one group could win.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on September 25, 2017, 11:50:54 pm
Shadow Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167431.0), the Arms Race about tactical espionage action, could definitely use some more players. While Merkan is less populated, I have been waiting on Astria for two days to propose a revision. So new players should feel encouraged to join either side!
It may not fill up the void that Wands Race leaves, but I can guarantee it'll fill up at least 7%.
Post by: RAM on September 25, 2017, 11:54:52 pm
So, in short, it is inappropriate to state superiority outside of jest in this instance, and ultimately Moskurg ceased to exist as a nation, so they certainly didn't win...
As for the "hard counters" thing, they were explicitly declared to be against the game's rules. Welcome to games! Indeed, the reimagining of stuff was a large part of the problem, Arstotzka's stuff was reimagined away from the things that would have shut down Moskurg's entire army because the rules suddenly changed. It would be like supersonic explosions suddenly becoming impossible in 1941... Of course, most of Moskurg's existing hard-counters continued to operate and it only really served as a barrier to new developments.
As to skyskiffs... How was it possible to survive piloting them?
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 26, 2017, 01:15:37 am
...aaanywaaays...
Shadow Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167431.0), the Arms Race about tactical espionage action, could definitely use some more players. While Merkan is less populated, I have been waiting on Astria for two days to propose a revision. So new players should feel encouraged to join either side!
It may not fill up the void that Wands Race leaves, but I can guarantee it'll fill up at least 7%.
UFoR is also low on players and while it was awhile ago, I believe I heard the Genestealer side of the Cult Race is lacking in players...
A thought occurs. Is anyone in favor of having the information on active games expanded in the OP? Specifically, having GMs estimate the number of players on each side (or just player count in the case of single-factions) as well as including the last date of updates?
Post by: Iituem on September 26, 2017, 03:49:03 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 26, 2017, 04:13:29 am
Relevant to this, Hive Race currently has a 7:3 distribution of players between the Hive and the League. Humanity is grossly under-represented. o_o
Sorry I missed yours. Added it in with an attempted revamp of the Active Games section of the list.
------------------
Speaking of, anyone have any thoughts on the revamp to the OP I had done for the Active Games section?
Post by: Kashyyk on September 26, 2017, 05:43:45 am
Also, I'd like to add Arms Race: Cinder Spires (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164853.0) to the roster.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on September 26, 2017, 05:55:58 am
GM decisions, and rule changes both formal and informal provided a significant advantage to the Moskurgian side.
Edit : I do still regret proposing the steam engine though. That eventually caused the setting to jump the shark.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 26, 2017, 06:02:00 am
I like it. Once some of the info is populated it'll be pretty useful. Will likely involve some heavy bookkeeping to keep up to date, but Arms Race GMs should be prepared for that already. :p
Also, I'd like to add Arms Race: Cinder Spires (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164853.0) to the roster.
I'm going to be having the 'estimated' tag next to player count to allow for a bit of leeway between the listed numbers and the actual (though major changes should hopefully be noted) and both the Current Turn/Phase and Last Battle Phase Update (may change to 'Last Battle Report') would only need them to make a post here, so it really isn't much for heavy bookkeeping. Heck, it's light enough I may wind up sorting them by most recently updated at the top when all of them are filled out.
Added.
Anyway, reading through the discussion here, and looking a bit at recent updates, it seems that I was indeed right.
GM decisions, and rule changes both formal and informal provided a significant advantage to the Moskurgian side.
Shameless plug, but if you are tired of dealing with factions, there's UFoR. If you know anything about fortifications or tech that wasn't explored due to being countered by Earth militaries but may be useful against giant monsters, you can probably do quite a bit...
Post by: 10ebbor10 on September 26, 2017, 06:11:23 am
Anyway, reading through the discussion here, and looking a bit at recent updates, it seems that I was indeed right.
GM decisions, and rule changes both formal and informal provided a significant advantage to the Moskurgian side.
Shameless plug, but if you are tired of dealing with factions, there's UFoR. If you know anything about fortifications or tech that wasn't explored due to being countered by Earth militaries but may be useful against giant monsters, you can probably do quite a bit...
Minor hint. When introducing people to new things, don't assume they know the abbreviation.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 26, 2017, 06:21:26 am
Anyway, reading through the discussion here, and looking a bit at recent updates, it seems that I was indeed right.
GM decisions, and rule changes both formal and informal provided a significant advantage to the Moskurgian side.
Shameless plug, but if you are tired of dealing with factions, there's UFoR. If you know anything about fortifications or tech that wasn't explored due to being countered by Earth militaries but may be useful against giant monsters, you can probably do quite a bit...
Minor hint. When introducing people to new things, don't assume they know the abbreviation.
Counterpoint: How many games in the Active Games section match that abbreviation?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on September 26, 2017, 06:28:34 am
Post by: RAM on September 26, 2017, 06:57:18 am
More to the point, being on a different forum is a bit of a barrier to entry, but one assumes that there is a suitable population of self-promotion within its local climes so it is not as though it is trying to take our jobs.
Post by: Kot on September 26, 2017, 02:28:21 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 29, 2017, 01:09:35 am
More to the point, being on a different forum is a bit of a barrier to entry, but one assumes that there is a suitable population of self-promotion within its local climes so it is not as though it is trying to take our jobs.
Not really...I mean, a lot of people do seem to be looking in on the thing, but very few of them are actively participating in the game.
Counter-counter point : People are lazy
Did you just essentially insult yourself there?
Anyway, for the love of god, someone send a fortifications guy. Or just someone who notices what I've beens saying about their defenses. Despite several times stating their defense designs are insufficient for defense and giving them a free fortification design for the special design category, (while it is early) the current votes are all for just putting out defenses faster rather than making something actually new to put up. For reference, all there are for emplacement designs are trenches and simple pillboxes.
Oh, and in other designs, there's one for an airship that calls for machine guns mounted on the bottom, sides, and top. Is possible to have that configuration at all?
Post by: Jilladilla on September 29, 2017, 01:21:33 am
Oh, and in other designs, there's one for an airship that calls for machine guns mounted on the bottom, sides, and top. Is possible to have that configuration at all?
I don't see why it wouldn't be, as long as the thing is properly ballasted (IE, heavy stuff on bottom), but I'm only a Dabbling Airshipologist so don't take my words as law...
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 01:36:09 am
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 29, 2017, 02:13:05 am
Oh, and in other designs, there's one for an airship that calls for machine guns mounted on the bottom, sides, and top. Is possible to have that configuration at all?
I don't see why it wouldn't be, as long as the thing is properly ballasted (IE, heavy stuff on bottom), but I'm only a Dabbling Airshipologist so don't take my words as law...
The question is, how do you get up to it? Only late-Interwar to WWII-tech, so you can't have it electronically controlled.
I imagine that it would call for some significant internal conveyance and structural support, but they probably ought to be using internal bags anyway, so it would just be a problem of adding extra weight to provide enough structure to hold up whatever gun+turret+ammunition+operators+life_support+supports_for_the_supports+armour+whatever on the top/sides of the ship to stop the guns from falling off or crushing the ship without overloading it. And, of course, overloading it could somewhat be solved by making it bigger, which in turn would increase the amount of surface each gun needs to defend... But yes, they should be able to run a metal scaffolding through the middle of an airship and stick a gun on top of it without breaking the fundamental laws of airships.
Good to know. It's a bit of a pain to find information on airships, especially armed ones.
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 02:18:01 am
Post by: Aseaheru on September 29, 2017, 03:12:00 am
If they do want remote weapons beyond just having the gun attached to a periscope, you may want to look into the hydraulically controlled systems used late in WW2.
As for joining the game, the setting really just doesn't grip me or my imagination at all.
Post by: NAV on September 29, 2017, 09:06:18 am
Post by: Madman198237 on September 29, 2017, 10:05:36 am
Basically, yes, it's VERY possible to have machineguns and/or external accessways at any point on a zeppelin's surface.
How you reach them? Take a staircase, or sometimes a ladder.
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 10:49:42 am
Post by: Madman198237 on September 29, 2017, 10:56:06 am
Well, as long as the gasbags are intact it is. It could thin out the oxygen pressure relative to total pressure enough that you'd have people passing out and dying, but other than that the primary effect is going to the voice thing due to gas seepage from inside the bags. That, by the way, stops as soon as you leave the area filled with helium---as soon as the gas is out of your lungs, your voice goes back to normal.
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 11:19:51 am
Post by: Madman198237 on September 29, 2017, 11:25:00 am
They'd have to land the airship in the middle of the riot and then slowly vent the helium into the area so that the crewmen can keep breathing it as they riot, so they have high-pitched voices.
Seriously, one deep breath and strong exhale will clear even pure helium out of your lungs. About 15 seconds of normal breathing at MAX will take care of the noticeable voice-pitch elevation.
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 03:45:09 pm
They'd have to land the airship in the middle of the riotOh yes! Good suggestion! "Stronk Forenian Soldier fears squeeky voice" was never a serious objection to the proposal. It just seemed like a humorous scenario...
Post by: Draignean on September 29, 2017, 05:50:35 pm
Kasgyre had 7 people on the last vote.
Wreth had 7 people on the last vote.
We are currently on turn 14.
The most recent update was the year 364.
Post by: andrea on September 29, 2017, 06:48:55 pm
Post by: Draignean on September 29, 2017, 07:31:28 pm
49 is 7*14
26 is 364/14
3 is the integer division of 7 and 26
52 is 3+49
Cinder Spires is Illuminati Race confirmed.
Post by: Aseaheru on September 29, 2017, 10:14:13 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on September 29, 2017, 10:40:04 pm
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 10:48:02 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on September 29, 2017, 10:49:09 pm
Also, helium doesn't burn.
HYDROGEN is cheap, and it burns scarily well.
Post by: Draignean on September 29, 2017, 10:53:32 pm
Draig, 7*7 is 49, NOT 7*14.
Clearly you don't understand basic illuminati mathematics.
Post by: VoidSlayer on September 29, 2017, 11:06:45 pm
Wait that's not a zeppelin.
Post by: RAM on September 29, 2017, 11:34:10 pm
HYDROGEN is cheap, and it burns scarily well.-_-
...
>_<
Yes, that...
And buoyancy may become less and less relevant as your speeds increase, and may even add instability, but that is no reason not to combine them!
Post by: Khang36 on September 30, 2017, 02:05:08 pm
Gases other than hydrogen and helium where(and are) used in airships. Ammonium was used at times by the USN, coal gas and Blau gas where used by some German designs(in addition to designs for a Hindenburg using helium, there where also designs for both hydrogen and helium, with some also including Blau gas).
Looking at the wiki for Blau gas it used as fuel in place of gasoline not as a sup to hydrogen and helium.
Post by: Aseaheru on September 30, 2017, 02:24:02 pm
Post by: Failbird105 on October 07, 2017, 08:01:22 am
Post by: Aseaheru on October 07, 2017, 09:58:27 am
Lower fantasy games though, thats something that may well work. And if one is truly insane could be combined with various things to represent more aspects of low-tech warfare.
Post by: Draignean on October 07, 2017, 10:23:37 am
I honestly wish I had input, but I don't besides wishing there were more high-fantasy arms race games.
Make your own. An arms race game about various fantasy races growing commercial weed and other narcotics. PCP ravaged trolls fighting meth harpies for control of the opium fields.
High fantasy at its finest.
Post by: Tack on October 07, 2017, 10:34:21 am
Post by: Failbird105 on October 07, 2017, 11:23:19 am
The Steampunk-fantasy one is pretty fun so far.If you're referring to War of the Crimson Spires, I think that mostly comes from it having a good basis to work off of, and well thought out limits and capabilities on the fantasy tech.
As for me running my own game, you might as well have me build a pair of salt mines on the ends of a seesaw. I CAN'T do balance, other people can TRY at the very least, but I'm about as good at balance as a lopsided elephant with one leg.
Post by: Madman198237 on October 07, 2017, 11:38:59 am
Anyway, high fantasy would be cool, but you kind of need a basis for that, unless you're willing to do some EXTREME world-building.
Lord of the Rings Arms Race, anyone?
Post by: Failbird105 on October 20, 2017, 03:20:11 pm
Basically, an Arms Race with super low tech levels, as in, metal weapons and tools are somewhat rare. However with a twist, in that you get a pre-war turn to design species. Starting with your own species, and then a small set of animals and plants(with the rest being normal).
Trying to be somewhat realistic however. That said I'm still working on the species design bit. I want it to be so that while you do have SOME control over what the creatures are, it mostly just gives the major features, and then the details are filled in. I'm considering making a vs NPC test game once I have it figured out.
Post by: Aseaheru on October 20, 2017, 05:25:03 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on October 20, 2017, 05:38:54 pm
Well, theres still kinda sorta a stone age arms race...
I know there was one I had made a long while back that is now dead, but I don't recall any active ones on the list. And If someone's started one up, then I don't think I'm aware of it.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on October 20, 2017, 06:28:04 pm
So you'd have a standard "Design" and "Revision" phase (with extra phases at the start to design species and whatnot) but would be limited to much higher up stuff. Gods wouldn't bother themselves with the day-to-day mundane affairs of mortals, after all. Turns would take place over much longer periods of time, and another aspect of the game would be the natural technological/societal development of the species by themselves; this development could be aided by the players but not directly interfered with.
Theatres would be centered around magicbabble like leylines and whatnot that serve as conduits for prayer -> mana. Or something.
Would be quite ambitious but it'd definitely be really fun if someone pulled it off.
Post by: Failbird105 on October 20, 2017, 06:52:11 pm
An example of how creatures would effect the game is that each team gets to design a creature one their side AND the enemies. So the question is do you want a low risk animal with less use as a war beast or weapon, but more utility uses, and what kind of creature do you try to give the enemy? Do you risk giving them a mighty beast in order to weaken them early game, or something relatively harmless to yourself, but of utility useage to the enemy.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on October 20, 2017, 06:56:26 pm
Though out of curiosity, how would it avoid extra salt and the like?
Post by: Failbird105 on October 20, 2017, 07:05:22 pm
This one is limited by being mostly based on real physics and biology.
Post by: Aseaheru on October 20, 2017, 08:35:18 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 01, 2017, 05:06:21 pm
Post by: piratejoe on November 02, 2017, 06:57:35 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 02, 2017, 10:10:44 pm
It was indeed yours Zan, last I knew it was on hiatus but not over.
At this point, consider it dead. Comp that had all the details on it died anyway.
Starting a new Arms Race test with a vastly different system: Mad Science Arms Race Test (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168070.0). Where every player gets their own design if they want it, but can collaborate for a better chance of success.
Added.
You already know about it zan, seeing how you joined and all, but I would like it if you could add The Ameliorate War (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168073.0) to the list of active games.
Added.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on November 03, 2017, 08:25:48 am
It's open to both sides, don't worry about spoilers.
https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/arms-race-embassy.521083/
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 03, 2017, 08:46:10 am
Zan, here is the link for the Space Battles Embassy for the Intercontinental Arms Race Embassy
It's open to both sides, don't worry about spoilers.
https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/arms-race-embassy.521083/
Thank you.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 03, 2017, 11:53:41 am
Mad Science Arms Race TestUpdated entry.
Links: Main (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168070.0)
West Oregon Player Count: 2
East Oregon Player Count: 2
Current Turn/Phase: 1920, Development Phase
Last Battle Phase Update: Has not yet occurred
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 14, 2017, 06:54:22 pm
Post by: RAM on November 14, 2017, 08:27:53 pm
Number 73348: Figment Wars: Snack?
Shoulder Angels versus Shoulder Devils in a war to determine whether or not a blank-slate character eats a snack.
The can produce arguments to push the character towards one decision or the other,
Invent details of the character's background to have them lean more towards certain arguments or provide evidence for such,
Or attack each other directly, but cartoon physics are in play, so death is mildly inconvenient, the same thing doesn't work twice, and irony is more consequential than injury.
Maybe have multiple paths, like guilt, greed, rationality, and emotive lanes with a requirement to hold two and a half or something...
Not really enough for a working game, but I thought the idea was mildly amusing so decided to share the concept. If it inspires something then so much the better.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 16, 2017, 06:56:34 pm
As an aside, one of the people from Spacebattles by the name of Mandemon is working on incorporating Forenia and Canalla into a wargame of their own devising in the Discord, and the Discord also now contains permanent links to all the game discords I'm aware of and some other useful resources, such as the random map generator used for Arms Race 1780.
Post by: Madman198237 on November 16, 2017, 08:18:54 pm
Mandemon is not making his system for ICAR (Forenia vs. Cannala) but rather he is planning on using the wargame system in his own Arms Race.
He is using ICAR units, right now, only for balancing and testing purposes.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on November 17, 2017, 09:13:09 am
It would be soft-ish sci-fi, an intra-system conflict between two human colonies, fought in space and on a number of other planets. Basically the same as Chiefwaffle's Planetary Arms Race.
I'd be using a 2d4 instead of a d6, which would work like this:
Spoiler: How to 2d4 (click to show/hide)
E: Combat reports would be asymmetrical.
I am open to suggestions for features to add/change/remove, though I should mention that whilst all suggestions will be take aboard, some may be thrown over once we leave the harbour.
Post by: Kashyyk on November 17, 2017, 02:24:40 pm
One of that thoughts I had to add a logistical aspect and change up expense levels is to be able to produce multiple copies of a design. Thus instead of gunning for a tank to be under a certain cost metric, you could choose to build less boats to save the resources and then build more tanks.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on November 17, 2017, 03:17:23 pm
I've been wondering about the reason behind asymmetrical battle reports, because it just looks like way more effort for the GM for not much benefit.Hmm. After thinking and talking about it on Discord, I think I've changed my mind. I'll do symmetrical battle reports, and maybe keep certain things hidden from the other side if it makes sense.
Quote
One of that thoughts I had to add a logistical aspect and change up expense levels is to be able to produce multiple copies of a design. Thus instead of gunning for a tank to be under a certain cost metric, you could choose to build less boats to save the resources and then build more tanks.Hmm. I see what you mean. You know what, I actually like that idea. I'mma do something like that. Not quite Spires Race level of resource management, but not totally abstract Cheap/Expensive/VE either.
Post by: evictedSaint on November 17, 2017, 03:20:47 pm
I've been wondering about the reason behind asymmetrical battle reports, because it just looks like way more effort for the GM for not much benefit.
One of that thoughts I had to add a logistical aspect and change up expense levels is to be able to produce multiple copies of a design. Thus instead of gunning for a tank to be under a certain cost metric, you could choose to build less boats to save the resources and then build more tanks.
It is such a pain in the ass. Battle reports are the most time consuming part of the game, and you have to write two of them each time.
That logistics phase sounds like waaaay too much overhead. As a GM you aren't counting beyond +1's and +2's, so having to figure out how to divide it down into even further fractions when your players want to sacrifice their bayonet production to boost their bolt-action production is way too much work. I don't know how spires race can bear to count their silk threads and wood and every single man, let alone balance it appropriately.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on November 17, 2017, 03:25:33 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on November 17, 2017, 03:41:40 pm
Another logistics phase is another 3-7 days before you get to see how well your weapon did or design a new one. It's too much paperwork, not enough of the real meat of the game.
Post by: RAM on November 17, 2017, 04:12:33 pm
I feel as though it bogs down the game to deal with logistics and detracts from the players favorite part - designing cool weapons.I am a big fan of simultaneous actions. It means that you lose the chance to revise your latest design, but then you don't get to see janky wrecks thrown onto the front lines, and it makes sense that you can get something out faster if you don't wait around to revise it. I mean, sure, the revisions can probably be done concurrently with retooling production and don't actually use up much time, but it still feels like it should be a thing. And logistics ought to be a challenge. Intercontinental has a strategy phase that is basically always a landslide. Add some excitement to it by not knowing if your new mine-clearer design will give you the naval advantage you need to invade their homeland! And it also means faster turns because there is only one voting phase...
Another logistics phase is another 3-7 days before you get to see how well your weapon did or design a new one. It's too much paperwork, not enough of the real meat of the game.
The downside is more chaos, because multiple things are being voted on concurrently. The G.M. would probably be well advised to provide some explicit formatting rules to ensure that it was always clear to what was being referred. Probably also some votebox guidelines to prevent it from being misleading. Probably also impose a voting system to avoid too much convoluted voting politics in a game about fictional engineering. If you want voting politics then you can play mafia...
Post by: Aseaheru on November 17, 2017, 04:51:28 pm
Post by: RoseHeart on November 18, 2017, 05:12:21 am
And pitted the winners together? +Story elements introduced to balance their starting points
Post by: Jilladilla on November 18, 2017, 05:18:36 am
Has anyone ever taken two finished games...
And pitted the winners together? +Story elements introduced to balance their starting points
Intercontinental Arms Race (by Sensei) did this, pitting the United Forenia that formed from the aftermath of the Arstotzka vs Moskurg Arms Race, against Cannala, who won their own Arms Race against Juraki. The Cannala/Juraki Arms Race is somewhere on the Spacebattles forum, and so is the Cannala thread for Intercontinental.
Post by: Madman198237 on November 18, 2017, 01:35:21 pm
Has anyone ever taken two finished games...
And pitted the winners together? +Story elements introduced to balance their starting points
Story elements?
These are ARMS RACES, the only "story" elements involved are the players' decisions on what their nation's character is going to be. Everything else is just composed of varying amounts of killing, maiming, burning, and a few different levels of environmental desecration.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 18, 2017, 01:58:23 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 19, 2017, 09:55:17 pm
Post by: Tack on November 20, 2017, 09:58:45 am
Post by: NAV on November 20, 2017, 01:05:16 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 20, 2017, 04:07:57 pm
Zanzet you are a lunatic trying to run two arms races at the same time.
Yeah, I'll probably be hating myself if I wind up getting a double battle phase, but right now both are going really slow. Hell, the 4chan one may have a difficult life. I know Faction 1 currently has only 1 person on it while Faction A has 7.
Train wreck indeed. “Keep out of eachother’s threads” is not gonna work.
Maybe. Going to join in?
Post by: Detoxicated on November 21, 2017, 08:44:23 am
Imagine you have a master of magic like arms race. Each side plays a wizard king. It is inevitable that the two wizard kings want to take control of the land so they start to create races and technology as well as powerful spells. It would be quite like magic race but only you would get to see different races of humanoids fighting instead of two nations.
Post by: Funk on November 21, 2017, 07:35:17 pm
It might be better with at it takeing place at the same time as the design phase or haveing a waiting period untill designs can be revised.
I'm pondering the old aliens vs Forenia idea.
While we can have rules to keep the power of the aliens weapons in check, they need the enslaved forenians to mine rare elements.
So thay can't trash the place too badly.
The aliens lack of an exsiting armoury will be countred by letting them have mutiple designs on the first few turns.
Maybe let them work on nonweapon fields i.e. super soliders
Forenia will get the power of longer term projects takeing maybe 3 or 4 turns to complete.
But there going to be a spy on both sides that can leak some details to the other side.
Im thinking of spliting the map up into three frounts (Arstotzka, Moskurg and new westen city of Forenia)
Probably have more then one diffrent alien (catgirls, lizardmen, and greys?) just to shake things up.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 22, 2017, 10:12:51 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on November 22, 2017, 10:15:28 am
Well, one of my Mad Science test players needs a replacement. Anyone up for it?Yeah, alright.
Post by: Aseaheru on November 22, 2017, 10:19:27 am
Although, if you do go and do it with Forenia, can we keep it just Forenia or(if one must include Cannala) update each sides designs to use the same sort of basis?
Post by: Kashyyk on November 22, 2017, 11:19:26 am
What are your thoughts?
Post by: FallacyofUrist on November 22, 2017, 12:49:57 pm
Post by: Funk on November 22, 2017, 04:15:02 pm
Giving non-equipment designs to aliens would be interesting, particularly if they could do the standard alien thing of alien-human hybrids. There there are the super soldiers, nanites, biowarfare, etc. etc. etc. that they could do.Asymmetric non-equipment designs are something i want to have, as it keep things fresh, not just a B side with laser weapon paint.
Although, if you do go and do it with Forenia, can we keep it just Forenia or(if one must include Cannala) update each sides designs to use the same sort of basis?
I was planing on just haveing Forenia.
(The aliens are few in number but the advanced tech and remote localtion make it an ideal landing zone.)
Post by: Draignean on November 22, 2017, 11:44:50 pm
Yes please. I love unconventional(read: physics-ignoring) Arms Race games.
Hold my beer.
I've got this 4x Arms Race I've been cooking up. Don't have a map yet, but I think all the rules are there.
Maybe. There have been a couple revisions.
Galactic Race
The 4x arms race game no one asked for, with all the complexity no one wanted.
General Play Loop
These rules are adapted from a couple different arms race games, with enough new twists that they're worth reading again even if you've played all the arms race games.
This arms race plays out over 3 phases: The design and project maintenance phase, the revision phase, and the production, deployment and tactics phase. In the absence of other modifiers, each team gains 5 dice to use at the start of every year. Every year, each team will cycle through the three phases in order, spending dice and resources to capture worlds and advance their cause.
At the start of each year designs and project maintenance is handled. Members of each team may propose designs. Everyone is allowed to vote for a design. During this same time, players of each team propose resource allocation plans for various pre-existing projects. These are voted on in the same way as designs. You can vote for any number of projects so long as there are enough dice for everything you're voting for to be done simultaneously. You cannot vote for the same design or spending more than once. It is not possible to directly vote against a design, but it is possible to vote for meta-goals such as 'no design' or 'only 1 design'. The design (if any) with the most votes gets rendered into a new project and the progress for the funded existing projects moves ahead at the end of this stage. Any created prototypes or finished projects are described.
After designs and projects have been worked out, then the players move on to revisions. Revision are cheap, but best suited to address problems with improvements to existing desings. For example, if you finished a ship based beam laser last round, you can try a revision to make a pulsed version or to fix an overheating issue. However, one could not immediately turn around and revise infantry laser weapons from a ship based beam laser. Do not make the mistake of thinking that smaller is less complex. Revisions to improve a technology beyond the original design will face diminishing returns quickly, but correcting bugs in the original design does not count against that soft limit.
Any dice not spent on revisions/designs/projects are saved back for the next round. Each team can bank a total of 5 dice, giving them a maximum of 10 dice to spend at any one time.
After revisions comes the production, deployment, and tactics phase. During deployment you can set and modify standing movement orders to your ships, sending them to various locations to do ship things. A ship's range is determined by its engines, but its movement will be halted by enemy activity. Ships can be ordered to only engage under certain conditions, but Captains may have imperfect information depending on sensors and a variety of other factors. In the event of engagement, ships will do their best to carry out whatever tactic they have assigned. For soldiers on the ground, orders are of three major flavors: Advance, hold the line, and retreat. Advance tactics attempt to take ground, but are liable to be costly. Holding the line is better to keep from losing ground against a stronger attack force, but will never gain territory. Retreating voluntarily gives up ground, attempting to spare lives and equipment for the defenders when possible. The last part, construction orders, is about allocating production points and/or resources to actually build new weapons/ships/regiments. Each player gets a single vote for each of these three types of commands, with the same rules as voting for revisions and designs applying.
Combat in Space
Combat in space will not be realistic. Realistic space combat is... a pain. If you've played SoTS or Starsector, that's more the feel I'm aiming for. If you haven't, think more of Star Trek naval combat, though with the distances being a bit longer. At the start of the game, each ship can be outfitted with a single tactic, and command ships can have an additional tactic. In ship-to-ship combat, vessels will attempt to carry out their assigned tactic to the best of their ability- with one exception. If the tactic in the command ship's bonus slot would be better than what the fleet member is currently using, they can switch to that one freely. For instance, if a fleet vessel's primary tactic is to attempt to hit-and-run enemy vessels, but the enemy suddenly presents a faster and more maneuverable ship, their tactic breaks down. However, if the command vessel has a defensive tactic in reserve, the day may yet be saved. Superior officers, discipline, communication, and training, will still pay off and improve any tactic- and you may be able to expand the number of tactics that a ship can hold or that a command vessel can hotswap.
One important note, if the command vessel is destroyed, the ability to hotswap tactics is naturally lost.
Unless given instruction otherwise, combat vessels will attempt to engage until they face a clear defeat, at which point they'll prime emergency FTL and attempt to bug out. This will, however, damage the power systems of the surviving vessels, and potentially cause cascading failures and even the destruction damaged ships. Non-Combat vessels, massively outclassed combat vessels, or vessels ordered not to engage, will attempt to create distance at sublight speed before making an FTL jump when forced into a combat encounter.
After a battle, if there are any ships capable of towing, derelicts from destroyed vessels can be hauled back by whichever side gained area control. Such derelicts can be scrapped for resources and a look at the operational parameters of surviving equipment.
Planetary Combat
Planetary combat is split into two parts, planetary bombardment and landings.
Planetary bombardment serves two purposes. First, it can allow attackers to 'soften up' strategic ground targets in order for later landing forces to have an easier time actually invading. Second, it can be used to inflict quick economic damage on an adversary without actually needing to spend the resources on a full-on invasion fleet of transports. At start, you have two flavors of bombardment: soft target bombardment and hard target bombardment. Hard target bombardment attempts to hit military installations and defensive infrastructure, reducing their efficacy, and potentially reducing the army value of a planet. If there are no defensive armies and a planet's defense grid is destroyed, the resistance to capture the world will be minimal- assuming that the other nation hasn't done hijinx to the contrary.
While that sounds nice, Hard targets, true to their name, are usually hardened against bombardment. In some cases you may find yourself in a position where you don't have time, resources, or firepower to start hammering down defenses so you can send in an invasion force. Still, if you can manage to get a fleet around an enemy planet, you want to try and deal damage. That's where soft-target bombardment is helpful. True to its name, it attempts to hit soft targets of your opponent's economic infrastructure- farms, research labs, mines, etc. Destroying these not only reduces the amount of resources they get per turn, but forces them to spend money rebuilding. Of course, in an ideal world you'd like to capture a planet with most of the soft targets intact so you don't have to rebuild them yourself (see Planets and Planetary infrastructure), but war doesn't always allow for ideal worlds.
You may be able to spend designs and revisions to improve the efficacy of or prioritize certain targets with orbital bombardment.
Planetary landings require transports filled with troops. Landing regiments then face pushback against defense forces, directly engaging ground forces in a bid to conquer strategic reasons. Importantly, basic ground troops do not inflict damage to infrastructure. They target enemy troops and attempt to capture strategic areas to control the planet, and thus any surviving infrastructure is turned over to attackers. Ground attacks do not utilize tactics. Regiments of troops are assumed to include a mix of basic units- infantry, armor, artillery, etc. However, certain units, such has high-power mech, elite psychic infantry, unspeakable eldritch horrors the size of small mountains, may be manufactured and shipped separately from basic regiments. Basically, if it's very expensive to build/train, it'll be its own special unit, not part of a standard invasion regiment.
If the attackers are doing well and overwhelming the defenders, they'll begin to gain dominion over the planet. Dominion is represented as x/4, much like territory in a standard arms race game, and represents how close you are to being able to control the important parts of the planet. 4/4 Dominion doesn't necessarily mean that you own and actively patrol every inch of territory, it just means that you're free to rain fire and death on anyone who wants to question whether you own any particular piece of territory.
It should be noted that while certain special units, such as a massive abomination or a temporally unstable supersoldier may be able to devastate armies on their own, there's nothing like thousands of boots to actually take ground and root out the enemy.
Definitions and Resources
Spoiler: How Rolling Will Work (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Designs, Projects, and Revisions (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Combat Essentials (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Resources, Planets, and Infrastructure (click to show/hide)
Setting Modifiers
Soft-Serve Science: You want your reactor to run off the power of a forsaken psionic child channeling the energy of a dark star God? Sounds great, just give me a write-up. This isn't a hard science game- this is a game where one could conceivably get away with SPEHSS MAHRENS and SPEHSS MAGICKS, not one where I'm going to nag you over perfectly reasonable details of science and 'but reality doesn't do that'. I'm not going to make you write a paper on the exact physics that justify an waveforce shield or a mantra powered Buddhism laser- but you do need to beware the golden rule of the universe: 'Shit ain't Free'. Everything, no matter how advanced, has a price.
Begin at your Beginnings: This game will have a special opening phase, seven turns in length. During this period, the final phase of each turn is skipped- so there is no production, deployment and tactics. Instead, you are given ten dice per turn, and you will be asked to create the designs for most of your starting tech.
Post by: milo christiansen on November 23, 2017, 12:14:57 am
Edit: I really like the bell-curve dice though. Less chance of total disaster.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on November 23, 2017, 05:46:57 am
Then again, Spires Race has worked out pretty well so far (certain 1% scenarios notwithstanding).
Post by: RoseHeart on November 30, 2017, 04:18:42 am
Post by: Tack on December 01, 2017, 12:09:02 pm
Seems the division between the Tzeentch and Alpha-Legion worshippers has made everyone sullen and unresponsive.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 09, 2017, 11:20:24 am
XCOM vs Aliens
An asymmetric Arms race between an XCOM expy organisation, and an Ethereal expy organisation. XCOM needs to protect and maintain the trust of their member states, while the Aliens need to gradually disable and take over the Earth. In typical XCOM style, battle will not be huge fights between grand armies, but rather small clinical strikes from the aliens than need to intercepted by the XCOM team.
Notable things
The basic structure of the game is a bit different from most traditional Arms Races, in that there's no linear map. The aliens have spaceships, and can land anywhere they want. A panic system replaces the territorial control of the arms race system, but it's more or less similar.
In order to make this work, the turn design is different. Both sides will not be taking actions at the same time, instead, they follow the following table.
Aliens XCOM
Phase : Revision Design
Phase 2 : Planning Attack Revision
Phase 3 : Design Planning Interception
Phase 4 : Battlephase
The Design, Revision and battle phase are similar to other games. The Planning phase is somewhat different. During the plan phase aliens choose which nations they want to attack with what purpose and equipment. During the Interception phase XCOM gets a list of what ships they've seen, and what stuff they can shoot down.
Another notable thing in the XCOM games is taking an enemies stuff and reverse engineering it for yourself. That will be introduced as well. As a reward for successfully completing missions, tokens can be granted that reduce the cost of various designs. Since resource improvements will be relatively rare, the token mechanic will be important to field expensive, powerful units.
The last thing is missions. In a way similar to the tactic mechanic that's used in Spire Race, missions are things that can be designed or revised and that alter the behaviour of your forces on the field, and which forces are best. A chryssalid is very good if you plan a terror mission, but if you want to infiltrate the governement, you may want to send a thin men or faceless instead.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 09, 2017, 01:22:27 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 09, 2017, 02:04:10 pm
The first thing that mitigates the Alien Tech advantage is that they're absurdly outnumbered. There are only a few UFO's, and very few aliens. They can't simply land and overwhelm an entire country because they don't have the numbers to do that. So, the aliens will have to deploy relatively few, relatively small squads on surgical strikes, so that they can then convince or force nations to make deals with them.
The second thing that mitigates the Alien Tech advantage is a need for human DNA. As XCOM 2 shows, adding human DNA to aliens gets you much stronger aliens, and distilled human will thus be a part of many better units.
The third thing is that I'm not going to give the Alien Faction all the toys the Ethereals had. At least, not from the start. You start with Sectoids, a small UFO, and basic plasma pistols. All other stuff is stuff you have to design or revise. If you want a justification why you don't get them, I'm blaming it on allergies to the Terran biosphere.
Post by: Funk on December 10, 2017, 01:26:32 am
I'm always a fan of XCom. In order to balance the alien tech advantage, the aliens usually have to be played as idiotic in order to give humanity a chance. Is that where your missions idea comes in, or do you have other thoughts for that?Limiting the amount of the aliens transport helps.
As might fudgeing the units, have some ambiguous alien units and we can avoid too much salt over alien weapons being weak.
Post by: Happerry on December 10, 2017, 10:27:06 am
The third thing is that I'm not going to give the Alien Faction all the toys the Ethereals had. At least, not from the start. You start with Sectoids, a small UFO, and basic plasma pistols. All other stuff is stuff you have to design or revise. If you want a justification why you don't get them, I'm blaming it on allergies to the Terran biosphere.I'm sure the temple ship will finish up the paperwork needed for mass Sectopod deployment sometime next century. Until then, why not use local resources to produce a few? Can't be too hard, right?
...Well, anyway, I'd definitely play this.
Post by: Cnidaros on December 11, 2017, 11:44:52 am
Also, I'm thinking of making a limited Arms Race. Specifically, one in which the players only design for their country's air force or navy (leaning towards air force as it's more exciting). Other technology such as machineguns and cannons can be requisitioned from the army, or designed with a revision phase if it doesn't meet your needs. The army of both sides will be equally matched, depending on the air force or navy to swing the battle outcomes. Any thoughts on this format?
Post by: NAV on December 11, 2017, 11:58:15 am
Post by: RAM on December 11, 2017, 04:45:23 pm
That sounds like it will end up with 2 very similar sides making the same things, even more so than a typical arms race.Well you could make them religious fanatics. One side doesn't use spirals and the other doesn't use spheres...
Post by: Draignean on December 11, 2017, 04:49:19 pm
One side can't coil wires/rope around things, the other side can't use bearings.
I don't know who is more fucked.
Post by: Aseaheru on December 12, 2017, 02:17:43 am
Post by: Blood_Librarian on December 12, 2017, 09:05:37 am
Coilless men won't be able to use electromagnets, transmissions, motors, some times of engines, and maybe some types of industrial machinery
Post by: Failbird105 on December 12, 2017, 09:11:15 am
Post by: Blood_Librarian on December 12, 2017, 09:16:53 am
Post by: Draignean on December 12, 2017, 09:56:47 am
Post by: Kot on December 12, 2017, 10:33:13 am
It's a race. Can the anti-spiral boys prove that subatomic particles can be modeled as spheres before the anti-sphere gang discovers that DNA takes on a spiral shape?What would they even do in that case, explode or something? Cease to exist? Shrivel up and die?
Post by: Blood_Librarian on December 12, 2017, 10:52:56 am
Post by: Draignean on December 12, 2017, 12:00:45 pm
It's a race. Can the anti-spiral boys prove that subatomic particles can be modeled as spheres before the anti-sphere gang discovers that DNA takes on a spiral shape?What would they even do in that case, explode or something? Cease to exist? Shrivel up and die?
Shrivel up and die.
Each side isn't struggling to destroy each other by war, merely to prove that the other is an abhorrent abomination against the universe by their own philosophy.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 03:29:50 am
Rules and Play Sequence
These rules are adapted from a couple of different arms-race games, with enough twists that they’re worth reading again even if you’ve played all the others.The game runs on a 1 turn = 1 arbitrary time unit (month, season, year, I haven’t decided yet). Every turn both teams go through stages for design and deployment cycles. At the start of a new turn, both teams get a pool of five dice to allocate towards designs, revisions, blueprints and pretty much all the standard Arms Race stuff. At the start of the turn the Design phase is handled. Members of each team design potential blueprints and vote on their preferences. Any voting scheme is allowed, so long as at any given moment it is clear exactly what the team is voting on and how much support each option has.
Any dice not spent are saved for the next round. Each team can bank a total of five dice, meaning they will have a maximum of ten dice to spend at any one time.
After Designs come Deployment. During Deployment, teams will decide what blueprints to fund the production of, and which front those units will take part in. Any front-wide tactics will also be decided on at this stage. After that’s decided, units move, fronts engage and combat is resolved.
Definitions and Resources
DesignsDesigns produce Blueprints or Tactics and require a variable number of dice. Each new “thing” in the design will require an additional die, and the success or failure of each die roll associated with that design will correspond to the success or failure of the overall blueprint. A few examples:
- Taking a tank mounted heavy blaster cannon, and converting it to a rapid fire light cannon for your robot infantry will cost two dice, one for the size reduction and one for rapid fire capability.
- Designing a new behemoth creature, with laser proof hide, the strength to flip over a tank and the ability to vent noxious gas (when before all you had had blueprints for was a goat) will cost four dice, one for a new creature, one for size, one for laser proofing, one for excessive strength and one for gas venting.
- Taking pieces from different blueprints and slapping them all together, such that the only new thing is this configuration of parts will only cost one dice.
As you may have thus noticed, the classic “Revision” phase has been folded into the Design phase to speed up the game.
Resources and Production
There are four resources available in the game: Metal, Biomass, Energy and Production. Metal is the Robot’s primary resource, Biomass is the Swarm’s and Energy & Production is used by both. Each region in the game will increase your Metal and Biomass caps, and some locations will also provide Energy. Energy (and especially Production) will primarily be acquired through infrastructure blueprints.
A particular Blueprint will have a cost in the following format:
“Centurion” Light Infantry Robot – 4 Metal 2 Energy (2 Metal 1 Energy)
To create a new Centurion unit, it will cost 4 Metal and 2 Energy, plus 1 Production. It will cost 2 Metal, 1 Energy to maintain an existing unit of Centurions. Typically a unit will only cost 1 Production to produce and none to maintain, but particularly Complex Blueprints will cost more.
Metal specifically refers to any metallic substance and is the primary building material of the Robots. It used to armour their units, wire them together and sometimes as ammunition.
Biomass is organic compounds of various types (be it from a digestion pool, grove of trees or hunted from the countryside) and is necessary to produce more minions for the Swarm.
Energy is what makes your units go, be it literal energy for Robots, or the more figurative food stuffs for the Swarm. It’s also required in the more exotic weaponry, such as lasers and bioplasma.
Production represents your ability to create the machines/monsters of war you need to stomp the other side into submission, and can be factories or birthing pods as required.
Finally, each region will have a maximum cap on the resources available, but you will not be extracting that much at start. Carefully timed infrastructure production is the key to overrunning the enemy.
Setting Modifiers
Robots vs Monsters: All things mechanical are the Robots purview. All things Biological are the Swarms modus operandi. They do not cross the line.The Many vs the Few: The Swarm will very quickly be churning out large numbers of critters in an attempt to overrun the Robots. The Robots will have to rely on their ridiculous tech advantage to make up the difference.
Sci-Fi Soft: The laws of Physics are more like guidelines and actual rules. Teleportation, deflector shields and bugs vomiting literal balls of plasma are all possible.
Pre-War Escalation: There will be five rounds of designs and production at the beginning of the game, before any deployment or combat is occurs, so as to cover any weaknesses revealed by each side’s starting Blueprints.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on December 21, 2017, 04:17:30 am
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 04:28:29 am
Post by: Chiefwaffles on December 21, 2017, 04:38:06 am
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 05:11:19 am
I used the wrong word when I said front-wide tactics, I had a derp moment and meant Strategies, which are intended to be more far-reaching and give a general focus for the front.
Post by: evictedSaint on December 21, 2017, 05:36:02 am
It's just tedious having to spend revisions making your ORGANIZED RETREAT tactic work properly, to make your PINCER MANEUVER actually work, etc. Tactics don't really even fall under the "design" role anyways. You need to spend a year to figure out how to make your officers give orders? You have high tech weaponry in the field you simply can't use because you don't have a tactic developed for it? Why would an engineer be explaining to infantry grunts how SURPRESSING FIRE works when they could be building a supersonic jet or a new battle tank or something cool?
I strongly advise against having a tactics aspect.
I also have doubts about using multiple dice for designs, especially if it expands the way you're talking about. Players would have an incentive to cram 5 new things in each time, because each gets it own roll and it counts as 5 advancements in technology.
For example: a new tank with a bigger gun is 2 rolls. But you get 5 dice per turn, right? So make it faster, too. And with thicker armor. And put in a new laser sight too - we've got the extra dice, why not? Now every turn is FIVE new changes, essentially FIVE new designs and FIVE advancements in technology. And these dice rolls will be all over the place since they're just D6's, with no way to normalize strings of good/bad luck (and before you say it all averages out, that has absolutely never been true in any arms race ever. The winning side has always had the higher average rolls).
The design rules are a nice thought, and it's possible I'm being pessimistic, but I would advise simplifying them. Or at the very least, run a short "test" game to figure out how it works out in practice.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 05:49:27 am
You're aren't restricted to only designing one thing a round. You could create two two-dice designs and a one dice revision, or throw everything at a big 5 dice design. I've never liked the arbitrary difference between "Design" and "Revision" because everyone draws the line differently and sometimes you get bit.
I did have a thought regarding normalised dice. Instead of actually rolling dice it'd be a deck of cards. Say 36 cards, with six of each number. You have to go through the entire deck before it's shuffled and started again, forcing an even dice distribution between the sides. This risks card counting however, but anything that isn't literally random has ways to game the system.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 21, 2017, 06:00:43 am
Quote
Taking pieces from different blueprints and slapping them all together, such that the only new thing is this configuration of parts will only cost one dice.
Makes me think that the preferred strategy will be a bunch of feature farming designs, and then several 1 Dice Lego designs that use all the best results.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 06:33:30 am
If Team One have a feature farm for five dice, one will be for the new design, and four will be features. It probably won't be usable as is that turn (unless they're lucky). Next turn they spend four dice to plug each feature into existing designs.
Team Two instead builds off of two existing designs, improving one thing each for a total of two dice per design. Next turn they do the same thing. They've spend a die less, and the opportunity to get two designs in the field last turn. Meanwhile Team One might have deployed their complex design if it was workable and can only field their four plug-and-play designs this turn.
I think that's acceptable situation.
Post by: Madman198237 on December 21, 2017, 10:17:37 am
As for the "die per feature" thing....that's going to be a salty mess, I'd guess. Just because your players are going to say "this is clearly only X number of parts" and you're going to say it's not, and so on and so on. And without a revision phase (Or at least a second opportunity to spend a single die) a failed design isn't getting another go that turn, meaning that your hypothetical team 1's method of mass improvement is quite literally killed by the system, because if their base design roll goes poorly, they're not going to be able to fix it until next turn, and so they're probably going to lose this turn.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 10:45:26 am
As for the "die per feature" thing....that's going to be a salty mess, I'd guess. Just because your players are going to say "this is clearly only X number of parts" and you're going to say it's not, and so on and so on.We don't have this issue when it comes to Designs vs Revisions, and that's a much less clear cut difference. I think you're overestimating the potential for salt.
And without a revision phase (Or at least a second opportunity to spend a single die) a failed design isn't getting another go that turn, meaning that your hypothetical team 1's method of mass improvement is quite literally killed by the system, because if their base design roll goes poorly, they're not going to be able to fix it until next turn, and so they're probably going to lose this turn.That is a risk they choose to take by going for an ambitious design. Team Two is playing more cautiously and guarantees that they don't get four new features on the field in a single turn, but is more resistant to the whim of the dice. Extra dice can assigned to a design to make up for this risk as well.
Post by: Madman198237 on December 21, 2017, 10:55:01 am
Yeah, but design versus revision doesn't have such sharp consequences, either. Maybe your revision rises in difficulty a level (Or some undefined amount, depending on the system), but it doesn't outright stop your design from actually happening.As for the "die per feature" thing....that's going to be a salty mess, I'd guess. Just because your players are going to say "this is clearly only X number of parts" and you're going to say it's not, and so on and so on.We don't have this issue when it comes to Designs vs Revisions, and that's a much less clear cut difference. I think you're overestimating the potential for salt.
-snip-My point is that it's too much risk, it makes the all-or-nothing option completely nonviable, because a single roll still decides whether or not the thing is useful, correct? The new-project roll itself, I mean. After that, yeah your tech might advance, but because you can't fix that single roll in a revision phase you're kind of screwed for a turn. It enforces a "right" way of doing things, I suppose, which is probably not a good thing as far as an Arms Race goes.
That is a risk they choose to take by going for an ambitious design. Team Two is playing more cautiously and guarantees that they don't get four new features on the field in a single turn, but is more resistant to the whim of the dice. Extra dice can assigned to a design to make up for this risk as well.
In case you didn't notice, I'm definitely playing devil's advocate at least a little. Poke the system more now, hurt less later.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 11:31:56 am
In case you didn't notice, I'm definitely playing devil's advocate at least a little. Poke the system more now, hurt less later.It's good. I'd much prefer to straighten these things out before we start.
Yeah, but design versus revision doesn't have such sharp consequences, either. Maybe your revision rises in difficulty a level (Or some undefined amount, depending on the system), but it doesn't outright stop your design from actually happening.I'm expecting the designers to correctly predict the number of dice most of the time. This happens already with people predicting easy/moderate/hard difficulties, and having a concrete number of things to count should make it easier. Over-budgeting just refunds the extra dice unless you specifically say otherwise as well, so there's no risk of "wasting dice" by overcompensating.
My point is that it's too much risk, it makes the all-or-nothing option completely nonviable, because a single roll still decides whether or not the thing is useful, correct? The new-project roll itself, I mean. After that, yeah your tech might advance, but because you can't fix that single roll in a revision phase you're kind of screwed for a turn. It enforces a "right" way of doing things, I suppose, which is probably not a good thing as far as an Arms Race goes.
Other Arms Races have more risky points of failure in my opinion. Original doesn't even give you directly usable experience on a bad roll and Cinder Spires can kill a design if Cost, Efficiency or Bugs are too bad. Admittedly, we do not have the subsequent revision phase to allow you to react to these failures immediately, but I feel that the "buy in cost" along with restricted Production should prevent one side from getting completely mobbed with the first good design the other side produces. I could include a revision phase, but I like the idea of quick turn around between design and implementation.
Post by: Madman198237 on December 21, 2017, 11:55:44 am
Post by: RAM on December 21, 2017, 04:57:08 pm
I like the idea of tactics and strategies given the setting. Presumably most of the robots save construction costs and energy expenditure by reducing their processing capacity, the same would be identically true for biologicals. Both teams have tailor-made forces with an acknowledgement of expendability. Adaptation without learning is difficult, and learning is difficult if you tend to die quickly, and it is difficult to protect something that has to do the thinking for a whole army.
It think that it could work well if all of the standard tactics and strategies pre-exist. So long as they have a decent amount of leeway in their design they should only need to be updated if the battlefield changes dramatically. I would expect that you would need an indirect fire tactic if indirect fire hadn't existed before, and competent indirect fire isn't just a matter of the rank-and-file having common sense(and sense tends to become less common in the midst of chaotic situations, such as battlefields) it is a matter of tools, coordination, and mathematics used quickly in a battlefield, someone at home-office is going to come up with most of that and formalise the rest. Sure, your dedicated howitzer is limited to line-of-sight without indirect fire, but you can use indirect fire with things other than dedicated howitzers, and the alternative is to just magically do all this without designing the tools for the spotters. Really, in that example the indirect fire tactic is a simplification to make everything easier, otherwise you need to invent new equipment for your spotters every time technology changes, by splitting technology and tactics you can just assume that new technology is incorporated into existing tactics where appropriate. For example, an indirect fire tactic might focus on keeping communication open, so unreliable radio equipment wouldn't mean unreliable spotters, it would mean slow spotters because they have to carry backups and spare parts and technicians, but they could do this automatically without needing to revise the radios in order to have your howitzers fire with any regularity. It is also an opportunity for small improvements. You don't need infantry squares to fight cavalry, but they help.
Tactics also look a lot like equipment. They can improve incrementally or dynamically, they have to adapt to changing situations, they build up from the existing framework, and given that you are dealing with made-to-order bodies, tactics offer more room for creativity than one finds when everything is limited by incorporating humans as the base. You can come up with insidious new tactics involving rapid burrowers or swarms of beetle-sized things or self-destructing infantry...
If it were me, I would forgo tactics on the basis that tracking two distinct technology streams would be an exponential pain...
Post by: Draignean on December 21, 2017, 05:16:54 pm
Quote
[...] will cost four dice, one for a new creature, one for size, one for laser proofing, one for excessive strength and one for gas venting.
1+1+1+1+1 = 4.
This arms race is officially beyond my kenning.
:P
I like the idea, but I'd personally have difficulty breaking categories up. I mean, with the goat monster, there are so many biological changes in there that would need to happen under the hood. 1 die for a size change seems a light cost, all things considered, if that size change is arbitrary. If it isn't arbitrary, then you get into situations where you need to wonder what costs more than one die for a particular change.
I'll definitely lurk and heckle.
Also, kudos on the sexy formatting.
Post by: Kashyyk on December 21, 2017, 05:23:22 pm
I'll throw together some starting loadouts soon, and if I can't convince myself that it is a bad idea I'll see about starting the game up in the new year.
Post by: Draignean on December 22, 2017, 05:10:22 pm
Instead of having wishy-washy armchair general versions of combat, wherein the GM has to come up with a bullshit system for bonuses to combat in different environs, bullshit imaginoscopes to sort of conceptualize whatever madness the players just pulled off, and/or bullshit pseudo-historical references for tiger mounted recoil-less rifles, the arms race is cast as a card game. So that all players have a clear and concise representations of their units and creations. In this manner, combat is more deterministic, and all the GM has to do is come up with bullshit stats for the cards that players design.
At the beginning, each side starts with a basic deck of 100 cards and a command unit. This isn't really that impressive, since 40 will be resource (land) cards, and there will be a number of copies of basic cards. All in all, each side might start with <10 unique non-resource cards plus a commander. Before play actually commences each team gets a few rounds (probably 5) to do revisions and designs to cards. It's possible I'll cut revisions entirely and just go with designs, but it's a possibility to still allow it.
Spoiler: Example Cards (click to show/hide)
Once the game commences, the rules change a bit. You draw your seven cards, and can take Paris mulligans if you need to. Rules of play would naturally need to be explained in more detail for people who haven't played magic, but I'm not going to do that here. Cards that would be Instants in MTG will be redubbed as 'Reactions' or 'Contingencies'. Basically, when playing, you set up conditions on which they fire- such as if the targeted creature would be killed, the enemy player casts a buffing spell, a monster of sufficient power is summoned, etc. After both sides agree on plans, their actions are carried out, with the appropriate interference from triggered instants.
The comes the weird and fun bit- the in-game design and revision phase. If a card is in the field or in the team's hand, it cannot be changed by either design or revision. However, cards not in play may be altered. Furthermore, any new card created can be freely swapped into the deck to replace unplayed cards. You don't know where it's going to be swapped in, you just have the assurance that it can be drawn in place of some number of other cards.
I'd likely be rolling using either the 2d4 or the normalized d6, system, with a single roll for each card. However, the rolls only do so much. A perfect roll won't let you get a 5/5 with trample and hexproof for one colorless. It might get it for a lower price than normal, or it might reduce the rarity (read more) of the card but it's not going to be an instagib. Revisions are more likely to generate versions of existing cards than actually offer dramatic improvements without cost.
Rarity is going to be fairly important to the game. In addition to resource costs, it's going to be the primary measure to control very powerful cards. A card's rarity determines how many copies of it your deck can carry. A common card can be in your deck 10 (maybe more) times, uncommon 6 times, rare 3 times, mythic 1 time.
So, err, interest?
Post by: Failbird105 on December 22, 2017, 05:23:37 pm
Post by: NUKE9.13 on December 22, 2017, 05:51:08 pm
The only challenge will be having the cards make more sense than early-gen roborosewater cards.
Post by: Jilladilla on December 22, 2017, 06:05:18 pm
Post by: RAM on December 22, 2017, 06:26:05 pm
Post by: Draignean on December 22, 2017, 07:09:00 pm
I am extremely interested, but am hesitant to go to the effort to pillage artwork and arrange cards and upload stuff... While I may well be a minority, I could see this negatively impacting your population.
Well, I'm actually using a program called Magic Set Editor, so I was thinking of doing the major work of putting cards together myself. If people wanted to throw in images for what they wanted, that's cool, otherwise I'd just raid google for something like I did with the examples.
A couple pieces from the original thought that I need to modify and/or add
Turns will actually depend on how many sides there are. If 2, I'm totally just going to do one phase and bundle revisions with designs. That way the game can just trade off turns between two players so that one team is always in their design/revision phase and the other is always in their battle and planning phase. If 3, then revisions can be their own phase, and each team will just step through a staggered cycle of Combat/Design/Revise. I'd kind of like to do a 3 way FFA, as that's one of my favorite ways to play EDH, but I worry that would take too long.
Which brings us to victory. I'd kind of like to do it tennis style, where it's the first team to get a lead of two victories. However, this is an issue with the 3-way FFA unless there's an elimination mechanic, as the two losing teams would have no reason not team up and keep the leading team from winning decisively.
Post by: Happerry on December 22, 2017, 09:31:21 pm
Post by: Detoxicated on December 22, 2017, 09:49:33 pm
Post by: frostgiant on December 23, 2017, 03:41:11 am
Post by: Failbird105 on December 29, 2017, 06:12:06 pm
Effectively, it's an Arms Race themed on DnD and other tabletop RPGs. One team is the Dungeon, the other is the Town. I'm working out some of the specific details of the systems still, but the basic idea is that it's very small scale, the town hires individual adventurers while the dungeon makes monster templates and spreads them around itself a few per room. The main thing is that units would have stats, rather than me just judging success abstractly based on somewhat vaguely defined details.
I'll make an in depth explanation post when I have an in depth explanation I can post.
Post by: frostgiant on December 30, 2017, 12:14:27 am
Overlord race is set in a generic fantasy world, Evil and good wage an eternal war blah blah blah. But recently said eternal war kinda ended, on the side of evil.
Evil Has won the grand argument, personal Strength and tyranny Wins. And honestly it was a fairly embarrassing loss for the forces of good, They lost... Because that Generation of heroes was so busy looking for the "Real" threat that they completely failed to stop the overlords from slaughtering their armies.
The force of evil looked so incompetent that Good let them win.
But now the Evil gods are having a bit of an argument now, There were Two overlords that Toppled the forces of good, both backed by half of the evil gods. So which Evil Gods get more of the Credit. And you can see where this is going.
So now the Orcish Horde, Led by Overlord Grommok Elf-Bane Are going to war against the undead Legions of ZeemZua The undying.
The classic arms race, for the most part, You are engineers/Magic men. You will not be Making Tactics or choosing deployment of units. It will be using the Cheap, expensive, very expensive Scale.
Another Difference is that You cannot create New schools of magic, You can stretch what you have, but you can go from, say necromancy to designing Nature magic. new magic schools cannot be researched.
New races, cannot be created wholesale. They have to be based on something that you have Whether an Already Existing Unit, beast and using a school of magic to twist them. Your geniuses, not Gods.
But there is a way around these limitations. That is the dungeon phase.
The twist is that the world is littered with what is known as dungeons, Dimensional pockets filled with loot, creatures, and magic texts from all across the Eons that Good and evil had wared. There are more lost Races and Items in there then there are Pimples on a troll.
Every turn each team will have what is called a dungeon phase, basically, it will come after revision but before Battle. This is a Points cost system will be coming in. you will only have so many points of units that you can throw into the dungeon. If you have a good mix of units, And units trench as well as a particularly good loot roll, you will get a very good reward.
It is possible to Design Unit specifically for use in the dungeon, in order to increase your chance of victory or improve your loot rolls.
There are a couple basic categories of rewards with some spillover deepening on Loot roll.
Magic Items: which you can then reverse engineer to Gain the enchantment for application elsewhere.
Tokens: such as Expense token (from a large amount of treasure) Or research tokens (large texts based on something that's not new to you)
Beasts: creatures that are not sapient, like horses or Gryphons.
Races: Sentient races that are willing to join your faction, sometimes. Requires a High tier loot roll but not Impossibly difficult. You could always send a negotiator after all, in case you run into such a race. You can then take a revision Action to incorporate them into your army in a general role or a specific faction (Ex.Revision: Kill all elves and turn them into zombies)
And lastly, Unlocking an Entire magic School for further use. examples of school are Arcane magic, Enchantment, golemancy, Elementalism, necromancy
As there are different dungeons that each Race has, the chosen dungeon will give a reward in line with its theme Such as, a Giant tree in the impossible forest would give nature related Loot. Dungeons would give dungeons things and underground things while ruins would give things that could presumably belong to an ancient race, or even said ancient races.
This is the Basics of what I have for Overlord race... Other than a map and The basic Starter tech for both sides. I wanted to post this before I tried to make a thread or anything.
Map
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Happerry on December 30, 2017, 12:16:04 am
Okay, so. I had an idea, I call it: "Dungeons and Designs"This sounds pretty cool to me. But also risks DM overwork if you actually do DnD style combat every room or something.
Effectively, it's an Arms Race themed on DnD and other tabletop RPGs. One team is the Dungeon, the other is the Town. I'm working out some of the specific details of the systems still, but the basic idea is that it's very small scale, the town hires individual adventurers while the dungeon makes monster templates and spreads them around itself a few per room. The main thing is that units would have stats, rather than me just judging success abstractly based on somewhat vaguely defined details.
I'll make an in depth explanation post when I have an in depth explanation I can post.
Post by: evictedSaint on December 30, 2017, 04:54:49 am
Post by: evictedSaint on January 01, 2018, 03:59:59 am
Iron Behemoths (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168914.0)
Largely inspired by the Iron Harvest game, taking place in 1951 as the Cold War begins to brew. The nations of Nogrania (British Culture) and Toskesh (Chinese Culture) duke it out on the island-continent of Serouda. The Geneva Conventions have banned the use of treads, wheels, fixed-wing aircraft, and fully automatic weapons. Players are encouraged to think laterally and build weapons to bring their side to victory.
Post by: RAM on January 01, 2018, 04:52:02 am
Post by: Kashyyk on January 04, 2018, 08:44:50 am
Robots
Spoiler: Blueprints (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Units (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Infrastructure (click to show/hide)
The Swarm
Spoiler: Gene Pool (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Units (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Infrastructure (click to show/hide)
Better names for each side would be appreciated, but that could also be one of the first challenges posed to players, so I'm not overly fussed.
Anyone who bothers to do some maths will notice that The Swarm will be able to produce 17 Swarmlings before reaching capacity, whilst the Robots will only be able to produce 7 Doxs. This is balanced. The Swarm is supposed to be throwing around large numbers of units, but as they're all biological it is to be expected that a robot with an automatic weapon should be able to take down several before being overwhelmed and the numbers reflect that.
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on January 04, 2018, 09:01:44 am
For names, I guess since the robots are going for quality in their depiction in this fictional universe. Maybe the "Iron Legion, Robotic Legion, etc", or simple just the Legion to state that they have a decent amount of powerful troops, but not a army. As for the genetic swarm, I guess the "Hive Swarm" would make for a good name I'd imagine, since their trying to depict both numbers and their pheromone genetic manipulation :P.
I also made the realization of a route that it's a Human Vs. Robot Vs. Hive Swarm Arms Race. I understand from many posts in the Discord, that a three-way Arms Race is a pretty bad idea, but as long as you stop two sides from ganging up on one as the GM through the power of the GM, it could be interesting. The humans for example could develop psionic powers, while robots would have technological mastery, and the hive mind would have genetic mastery.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on January 04, 2018, 09:28:47 am
Determining what an entire factions technological/strategic name based on its name is kind of shallow don't you think? I think that it would mainly focus on which players would join which side.
I am 90% sure that in planetary scale environment, robotic machines would be able to gun down swarminoids long before they could come into melee range if they are sighted.
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on January 04, 2018, 09:42:08 am
Just because of a piece of fiction (depicts) something, such as technology to be evil, or say, robot to follow a predetermined path of creation doesn't mean it is true for all variants of fiction or in the real world. I would imagine that the hive race would have a little bit of a problem dealing with the robotics relative power ceiling, however, it could possibly be balanced with space magic/psionics/etc, or maybe even some nitty-gritty numbers game.
Determining what an entire factions technological/strategic name based on its name is kind of shallow don't you think? I think that it would mainly focus on which players would join which side.
I am 90% sure that in planetary scale environment, robotic machines would be able to gun down swarminoids long before they could come into melee range if they are sighted.
Well there is always conflict between the average depiction of something versus the unexpected, but ehhh it can conflict with other sources . In essence yes I can understand the idea that the robots are going for a higher quality route against the Swarm, to provide distinction between the two factions, but it doesn't mean that with future designs for example that the Swarm gets out-swarmed with just nano-robots, their are future possibilities in a sense. There are many routes each side to go, but it certainly would be ironic if the side with numbers gets rekt by a strategy based around numbers
As for the names of the factions, they are supposed to give you a first impression of the what the faction is supposed to be, it's rather not shallow but instead focused on quick-glances so that players understand the values of each side with just their title. Even than it doesn't provide too much of a penalty and my titles were really simple, I mean "Robotic Legion" and Hive Swarm is as simple as it gets for a title.
Thirdly, yes the robots have definite advantages over the the Swarm long-term, but I'd imagine it's intentional as the the Swarm is trying to out-rush the robots before they get chances to develop their new powerful advancements?, power ceiling for them is practically limitless. Also genetic manipulation and mastery can get you to places, so they aren't that much capped by power ceiling.
Post by: Draignean on January 04, 2018, 10:41:23 am
I mean their are some things that are very good but their are some logic that kinda conflicts with what happens, the initial phase of the Robots is that they are supposed be quality against quantity, but that doesn't really make sense. In most depictions of robots and them as a enemy, usually they have a numerical superiority, whether it's against boring ol' humans whether they are advanced or not; or against a organic swarm. Once a robots get their factories online and can start mass-producing themselves, than a hive swarm no matter how fast they produce with their numbers (okay the Tyranids, are the exception) will just find out they are getting blitz out with their own strategy, numerical superiority. I mean early on the robotics have a initial penalty to their quantity, but it is very easy with self-fabrication and whatnot methods the robots could deploy to just out-swarm the Zerg. I mean they could just utilize nano-robots for instance, and make them the type that harvests resource and allow the Grey Goo problem to ensue :P.
My two-bits here.
Remember that a human, and any biological organism, is just a robot made out of biological materials. Remember that the base materials of bio-molecules are absurdly abundant. As in, the first and sixth most abundant elements in the universe. Traditional inorganic robotics, however, makes use of materials that are, by comparison, absurdly rare.
To illustrate this point, I give you the ogre-faced spider (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinopis). It's a spider with fantastically good night vision and motion tracking. The night vision itself is better than that of an owl, and they're web throwers- so they've also got great reaction times and agility. Most importantly, they've got the computational wet-ware to (on their own) track and identify targets, defend themselves, gather food, reproduce themselves. Our most expensive machines can't manage all that shit. Heck, we can't even manage a machine that's as agile as an ogre-faced spider, let alone have the optics. I dearly hope that our AI software has advanced to a point where we can match 'spider' (not sure, need to conduct more interviews with spiders), but we certainly haven't it done it at the same scale.
Right, I forgot the most important part. What's it take to make an ogre-faced spider? Fucking nothing. A couple bugs. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, trace minerals. It's depressing, and that design was not made by some great spider-engineer looking to the future and thinking: 'Hmm, what would be the most effective way to X', it was done by spiders fucking until they drifted towards it gradually via selective breeding and mutation. The ability to engineer something with forethought means you can traverse local minima when looking for an effective solution to a problem, and it means that instead of being concerned with 'is it sustainable?', you can concern yourself with 'is it effective?'.
For example, lets take bacteria. Wonders of biology that mother nature was working with well before nanites were cool. We've got bacteria that do every damn thing. We've got bacteria that eat plastic (https://phys.org/news/2016-03-newly-bacteria-plastic-bottles.html), we've got bacteria that eat metal (https://www.seeker.com/titanic-being-eaten-by-destructive-bacteria-discovery-news-1766492771.html), bacteria that utilize uranium (http://www.iflscience.com/environment/scientists-find-bacteria-thrive-uranium/), bacteria that make ice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudomonas_syringae#cite_note-BBC25May2011-6) (and may even be able to make it snow (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-13523502)), bacteria that make the kind of glue you'd use to stick a tractor to the ceiling with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caulobacter_crescentus), bacteria that are straight magnetic (https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Magnetospirillum_magneticum), and so many goddamn more. All of this through random feckin' chance. Through drift, through generations of bacteria that 'sorta' did it, because they couldn't jump to an optimal state.
Self-replicating robotics, particularly at the nano-scale level, is a vast problem of sensors, materials, and processing capability that is absurdly daunting in its scope. What is the nanite made of? How does it move? How does it obtain energy? How is it controlled? How does it differentiate between itself, its peers, and the resources its set to mine? Nanobots capable of consuming anything and everything, the hypothetical planet devouring grey goo, are are much more difficult than 'just make some really tiny robots'. Increase the size to something more akin to a cell is much doable, but that too has its limits- and as mentioned above, biological organisms are really good at operating on that level.
The advantage of the conventional machine is the strength of material, but the numbers, the sheer resources, will always favor the organic. A spacebourne organism, capable of designing with intelligence, will drown you in slime.
EDIT: My apologies for all the swearing. Mother nature is a right smug bitch, and I am envious.
Post by: FallacyofUrist on January 04, 2018, 01:17:59 pm
The only Arms Race to take place over millions of years!
Post by: RAM on January 04, 2018, 03:41:18 pm
It is also a matter of energy rather than time. Fruit-flies can reach maturity in 7 days, a robot can be built in 1, maybe. But either way you have parallel production, lots of eggs and production lines, it is ultimately about how many of them you can run at once. Machines have much higher energy requirement for production, especially in the materials-processing stage which occurs before they even start manufacture, and factories aren't all that great at assembling things that are very large(like whales, mostly due to issues of inertia and structural stresses of the developing project and the large devices required to manipulate it) or very small(like bacteria, it is very difficult to get lots of tools into a small place to work in parallel, and building a bacteria one piece at a time is sloooooow, not to mention the difficulty of getting the tools to stop moving at that scale).
I would say that both sides are swarmers at present. These are obviously cheap robots which seem to have spent 90% of their budget on guns. I would also argue that robots are very frequently depicted as a single monster. Like The Terminator Movies or The Day The Earth Stood Still. Even Cybermen usually demonstrate extremely good kill/death ratios outside of special circumstances and are frequently a dying race with few total members remaining.
Also, Nanites seem like a pretty terrible weapon. They have no armour, which means fire ought to just end them, even if it misses. They have precious little surface-area for solar energy, and most materials are low-energy, while flight requires high energy. Far more likely than a cloud is a horde of fleas, and a helicopter with some napalm ought to be able to deal with it with near-impunity. Finally, they are going to be too small for complex programming, they will not be able to improvise thir design much, so the materials will be quite specific, or at least have quite specific bottle-necks, so they won't be stripping a city to its foundations and converting it all into nanites.
Using nanites as materials for larger robots is interesting, butit still suffers from the lack of armour, so your enemy can be cheap with its weaponry, and nanites are not fast-moving, so it won't be the instant-repairs that you dream of and will be pretty terrible at handling the stresses of its own heavy-weapons. You could go for a hybrid design, but then it has critical components, especially armour which is likely to suffer high attrition. So you are likely to have something that is actually very bad at fighting, but can get back up again several minutes to hours later if it isn't subject to thermal, radiation, or pressure bombardment.
Post by: Draignean on January 05, 2018, 10:32:22 am
I really enjoy making cards. I think I have a problem.
Rules and play Sequence
Unlike other arms race games, there really is no set amount of time that each turn represents. As this Arms Race is cast as a card game, there's really no need to conceptualize it beyond that.
In the beginning of the 'game' stage, each team draws seven cards at random from their deck. If a team does not like their starting hand, they may elect to take a mulligan and draw a new hand. The first such mulligan is without price, but each mulligan without price decreases the initial hand size by one. Thus, seven cards are drawn initially, seven for the first mulligan, six for the second, five for the third, and so on.
After both sides are happy with their starting hands, a coin is flipped to determine who goes first. The coin flip decides which team starts in the research stage, and which team starts in the play phase.
During the Play Phase teams decide how to deal with any attacks declared by the other team last turn, play lands and reset cards tapped last round, and then decides what to do with their main phase. During main, any number of creature, strategy, tactic, or reaction cards may be played, as long as the team has energy to support it. As a final step in the main phase, the team declares what creatures they intend to attack with, and any tactics or strategies they intend to play after the combat step.
During the Research Phase teams decide what to add to their decks going forwards. This can be changing an existing card, adding a new effect, or creating entirely new cards. Only one thing can be done at each research phase, so be wary.
Teams will alternate between research and play phases, responding to one another's actions in the play phases, and creating new cards to tilt the game in their favor during the research phase. This alternates until one team runs out of life as a result of actions in the main phase. When a team is killed, the opposing team gets a point, and the game cycle begins at start.
Importantly, before play begins, each team gets five special phases of pure research, during which they can do two things per turn instead of one.
Expanded Rules - Play Phase
So, this game is modeled (roughly) off MtG played in EDH format. If you have know idea what that is, I'll explain. Each team starts the game with 20 life, a hero, and a deck of cards containing creatures, effect cards, and the energy pay for the previous two. At the end of the day, your objective is to either reduce your opponent to <=0 life, or to run your opponent entirely out of cards. You do this by building up energy, throwing out more powerful critters, and countering your opponent and putting them off balance using effect cards.
Your Cards and You
Let's begin with a crash course in Magic, albeit modified for this game. The first thing to consider are the cards not in play. The hand, the graveyard, and the deck. Despite not being active yet (or not being active any more, in the case of the graveyard), these sets are still important.
The hand is the set of cards that you have ready to play. Normally, the opposing team cannot see your hand, but this rule is not inviolate. During your main phase, any number of cards from your hand can be played, assuming you have enough energy to cover the costs. Energy cards are the exception to this rule, as you can only play one energy card per play phase, and you play it immediately after drawing. A hand, to the friendly party, looks like...
Spoiler: Example Hand (click to show/hide)
The graveyard is not only home to friendly creatures destroyed in combat, it's also where spent effect cards (Strategies, Tactics, and reactions) go after they've been played- unless noted otherwise. The graveyard is of note for occasions when you have effect cards that pull from the graveyard, or when effects depend on cards in the graveyard. The graveyard is not a hidden set of cards, and either side is free to peruse its contents. Take an example graveyard,
Spoiler: Example Graveyard (click to show/hide)
The deck has the most mystique, and is hidden to all players. It's a set of 100 cards, which are drawn from without replacement during the start of the game, and at the beginning of each play phase. If it runs out, that player loses. The following is an example deck,
Spoiler: Example Deck (click to show/hide)
Now, for cards in play, three are also (nicely) three major sets to contend with. The sideboard, the resource pool, and the active creatures and effects. All of these sets are publicly visible at all times. There are no secrets once a card is in play.
The sideboard, for EDH, is a solitary place. Primarily, it's for keeping your commander, a special creature card which defines your deck, when that card is not active. It's also used for storing exiled cards. Which are cards that aren't in play, but haven't been destroyed, and thus exist in bizarre limbo.
Spoiler: Example Sideboard (click to show/hide)
The resource pool is the set of all resource cards you have available to you. Its sole job is to tell you how much of what you have available at any one time. As such, I don't really include the graphics for each card, since that just makes bookkeeping a bother.
Spoiler: Example Resource Pool (click to show/hide)
The active creatures and effects is the set of all creatures that are actively in play, all of the effects currently attached to those creatures, and any other cards with lasting effects. If a creature card is depicted small, that means that it is currently tapped, and cannot block or attack. Cards untap at the beginning of your turn, right after you would play a resource card.
Spoiler: Example Active Card (click to show/hide)
What to Do When It's Your Turn
Short version, for reference.
- Resolve Enemy Attacks
- Draw a Card
- Untap all cards, unless specified otherwise
- Play an additional land
- Play effect cards
- Plan reactions and attack
When your turn comes up, there's one thing you need to take care of before you get to actually enter your main phase, and that's resolving the opposing team's attacks. Your opponent will likely have finished their turn by attacking you with one or more creatures, and thus you will need to use your own creatures or reaction cards to defend yourself. It's important to remember that this phase is still your opponent's turn, so you can't use strategies or tactics, only reactions and creatures already in play (unless the creature's text says otherwise). Every creature you control can block only one enemy creature (unless specified otherwise on the card's text), but multiple creatures can block the same attacker. Using a creature to block does not cause it to tap. I'll discuss the nitty gritty of combat in a bit, but any unblocked creature will go on to deal damage equal to its power directly to your health.
After that's dealt with, and you're still alive, the real fun starts. A new card will have been added to your hand, all your tapped cards (resources and creatures) will be untapped, and you're free to plan the assault of your own.
The last bit is the important part, and it's the biggest change from MtG. In Magic, instant cards can be used on a rapid basis as players react to situations emerging, and the effects of sorceries can be resolved one by one. Not so here. If you play tactics, they will activate in the order you declare, but you won't be able to tell, in real time, exactly what they do. Likewise, if you think it likely the enemy will use a certain tactic and want to counter it with a reaction, you can't do that as the card is played. Instead, you have to plan your turn as a block, laying in a sequence of actions and reactions for your turn.
Most every non-energy card has an associated cost, shown in the upper right. That cost is the number of resource cards you have to tap in order to bring that card into play. A colored dot indicates that a specific kind of energy is required, and multiple colored dots indicate that multiple specific energies must be tapped. A grey circle with a number inside just denotes an energy cost to pay that can be drawn from any kind of energy. So, from the above example of a sideboard, Aki takes one white, one black, and two of any energy in order to be brought into play. Energy cards that are tapped will remain tapped and unusable until the beginning of your next turn.
A special caveat to creatures brought into play: Unless a creature's text says otherwise, or another card gives them haste, a creature cannot attack immediately after being brought in. They can defend against the next attack, but they have to wait a turn to attack.
Again, differing from standard MtG, you cannot designate non-instant (non-reaction) effect cards to resolve after combat. This is limiting, but primarily in place to prevent turn planning from becoming a complete and utter mess, since the resolution of combat is done on the opposing team's turn. Thus, the last event of any given turn will be attacking with creatures.
In order to attack at all, you need at least one untapped creature card. For our example, we're going to have the two active card boards below.
Spoiler: Friendly Active Cards (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Enemy Active Cards (click to show/hide)
We have three creatures, nicely untapped, to our enemy's two- with one tapped. We can choose to attack with any number of them, but it's important to understand how damage and toughness works. When two creatures engage, they deal damage to one another equal to their power (the first number on their X/Y in the lower right) simultaneously, unless dictated otherwise by their card. If damage would reduce a card's toughness to 0 or below, that card is destroyed. Thus, we attack with our police lieutenant (2/2), the enemy can block with their brawler (3/1), and both cards will be destroyed. Unless we're trying to force a trade, it's smarter to attack with the Hired Thugs (1/1), which are much less valuable troops, but can still kill the brawler. Of course, the enemy can simply opt not to block, choosing to tank the measly one damage in exchange for keeping their front line alive. As explained below in keywords, the Slick modifier basically replaces flying from MtG, and means that the creature can't be blocked except by other creatures with slick- so we can attack with impunity with our police sniper, since the Freelancer is tapped and the Brawler isn't Slick.
After each card attacks, it's moved to the graveyard if destroyed, or tapped if it survived combat. Tapped cards cannot be used for your next blocking phase, which makes attacking a careful decision. An all-out assault leaves you vulnerable, but failing to pressure your foe enough gives them time to gather their forces. For example, if we choose to attack with our hired thugs and our police sniper, we can potentially deal 4 damage, if the enemy chooses not to block. However, then next round the enemy can attack with both the Freelancer (which can't be blocked since our sniper will be tapped), and the Brawler. That either forces us to block with the Lieutenant (losing a good card) and take 2 damage, or preserve the lieutenant and take five damage instead. Either way, the trade is ambiguous, which is why you should endeavor to use your reaction cards to put contingencies in place. For example, you can use the Gun Scan card to either safely use the Lieutenant as a blocker, or to attack with her and not fear destruction.
Expanded Rules - Play Phase
The research phase has two important components, making/modifying cards, and hot-swapping those cards into your deck.
Making and modifying cards works almost like a normal arms race. Making a new card is a simple as coming up with a name (and giving me an image if you're feeling nice), and brainstorming what you want it to do. In general, you can be pretty specific about what you want- except for cost and rarity. Cost and rarity are my control factors, so you can't really specify those directly when making a new card.
Spoiler: Example New Cards (click to show/hide)
If you're strictly modifying cards, then all you have to do is give them the same name as an existing card, and you can be a bit more vague about what you want the modification to do. You can even try for things like cheaper and less rare, though cheapening will always by very difficult to do unless you reduce the card in some way- or unless it was a shitty card to begin with. If you increase the power/effect of a card, or an add an ability to a creature, you will likely incur at least a cost bump, if not a rarity bump. Because of this, there a certain rules for when you can and cannot modify a card.
- You CANNOT modify a card that is in play
- You CANNOT modify a card that is in exile
- You CAN modify a card that is in your graveyard, BUT it will be the unmodified version if it is raised from your graveyard.
- You CAN modify a card that is in your hand
Now, this ties in somewhat with the second big part of the research phase. Hot-swapping. Each research phase, you can make one one-to-many swap into your deck. That is, you can take one name of card, and replace any number of existing cards in your deck with that card as long as you don't exceed the new card's rarity limit. There is a limitation to this, however. Only unknown cards can be replaced. If you have peeked at the top X cards of your deck, none of the cards you know about can be replaced in this manner.
Rolling, whether for a modification or a new card, is down using a single normalized d6. Low and High rolls are both fairly rare, and their impact is fairly minor. This is primarily a game about tactics and deck building, not trying to get a couple of OP cards.
Spoiler: Roll Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Definitions
Commander: A deck defining card, kept on the sideboard when not in play. The commander can always be played from the sideboard (for its modified cost), and can always be moved back to the sideboard (though this counts as killing it). Despite being a creature, the commander cannot actually be killed. Destroying the commander merely sends it back to sideboard, and increases its cost by 2 colorless energy.
Strategies: If you've played MtG, strategies are enchantments. Strategies, once played, stay in play and have some kind of effect until canceled by another Tactic or Reaction. Enchantments can not have triggers attached.
Tactics: If you've played MtG, tactics are sorceries. They're one-shot abilities that resolve immediately unless countered by an enemy reaction. Once played, they go into your graveyard. That can get complicated. Like Enchantments, sorceries cannot have triggers attached.
Reactions: If you've played MtG, reactions are sorta-instants. They're one-shots, like sorceries, but have the important caveat that you can set them to play only under certain circumstances. For instance, if X creature would be killed, or if the opposing team plays a damaging sorcery.
Spoiler: General Purpose Conduct Rules and Disclaimers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Blood_Librarian on January 05, 2018, 10:53:11 am
Nanites as a weapon isnt that effective, but im gonna paste a reference from Eclipse Phase as a theortical what if.
Quote from: Fractal
Fractals are advanced bush robots. In their standard form, fractals resemble a strange sort of metallic bush surrounded with an eerie glittering haze. In their center
are a number of metallic branches, linked together with a flexible joint. Each of these branches splits into two or more smaller branches, also with flexible joints. These branches also split, and then split again, and so on down to the molecular scale. The tip of each fractal branch ends in a nanoscale manipulator. Fractals are deceptively potent adversaries, having the capability to dismantle almost anything at the molecular level, much like a disassembler nanoswarm, and also to rebuild anything just like a nanofabricator. Attacking them with projectiles is futile, as they absorb the ammunition, break it down into its constituent atoms or molecules, and then use those as components to build a weapon to use against you.
Fractals can be equipped with any type of gear the gamemaster desires—if they don’t have something, they can make it. Fractals are also able to nanofabricate items much more quickly than transhuman nanofabricators; reduce all times by half (half an hour per Cost category). Fractals are difficult to damage, as their “bodies” are actually airy assemblages of fractal branches. Any damaged branches that are broken off are caught and absorbed by others. Reduce damage from all standard non-area effect or spray attacks to the minimum possible damage. Area effect and spray weapons do half damage. Fractals are self-repairing, regenerating damage at the rate of 1d10 points per half hour and repairing wounds at the rate of 1 per hour after all damage is healed.
Skills: Beam Weapons 50, Climbing 60, Fray 40, Free Fall 40, Freerunning 50, Infiltration 70, Infosec 65, Interfacing 45, Intimidation 50, Kinetic Weapons 60, Perception 50, Programming: Nanofabrication 80, Research 40, Spray Weapons 45, Unarmed Combat 55
Notes: Any implants, gear, weapons, or enhancements the gamemaster desires
Although not strictly aa cloud of nanomachines, this is definitely a nano-warfare weapon. ((The numbers essentially mean that the higher it is the better you are. 80 means PHD/cutting edge int erms of knowledge.)
These horrifying adversaries are absurdly lethal, as well as durable. With how advanced they are, the flavor text that comes with it states that a Fractal could come back to life if less 95~ of the components is destroyed. They are also able to fabricate pieces to directly counter any hostile it has previously experienced, and it can make the blueprints basically on the spot with how well skilled it is. Bring a Helicopter? Swarm leaves come back with a rocket launcher that fires a steering projectile. Try and burn it out? It comes back with a sniper rifle. An adversary that can on-the-fly come up with its own weapons for the situation at hand is far more effective (assuming the computer and energy problems are solved.)
Yes, they may not have good armor, but if an extremely advanced self-fabricating nano-weapon is realized, I have no doubts that its body count would far surpass its own losses.
as to your gram of nanomachines example to a kilogram of flamethrower, if a spurt of nanomachines lands on the flamethrower and they have direction by a nearby (<.5 light seconds maybe?) entity, they could easily crawl into the weapon and disassemble critical parts of the weapon, or cause a leak in the tank and then ignite it. While they are much more resource intensive pound per pound then a clump of bacteria, they come with the proportional direct controllability.
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 10:59:46 am
snipI'd really like to try this. I think the biggest conflict in each team would be picking their deck theme though.
Post by: Draignean on January 05, 2018, 11:01:48 am
snipI'd really like to try this. I think the biggest conflict in each team would be picking their deck theme though.
Well, I'm going to be doling out the commanders, which control the deck colors, at the beginning. It'll probably stay in the Cyberpunk Authority vs Resistance theme.
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 11:17:10 am
Post by: Draignean on January 05, 2018, 11:18:47 am
EDIT: Although, you could end up with some truly screwy themes going on. Magic Girls vs Grimdark Spehss marines or Delicatessens vs. Philosophers. Still, I might be okay with it.
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 11:24:03 am
Frankly I feel like the potential for whackyness makes the game all the better.
Post by: Talion on January 05, 2018, 11:47:24 am
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 12:08:36 pm
An idea would be to havd the players vote in the main thread every time one side wins to decide whether to change the themes, and then have each team vote in their own thread for their new theme.
Post by: Draignean on January 05, 2018, 12:11:45 pm
True, but that's not really the point. You can do pretty much ANY two themes in a card based Arms Race.
An idea would be to havd the players vote in the main thread every time one side wins to decide whether to change the themes, and then have each team vote in their own thread for their new theme.
Er, the idea was that the decks would be kept between matches- until there was a tennis lead and the entire race was won by one side. Thus, each new game would be fought with the units progressively enhanced in the last game.
I can see why one would want to do a redesign every match, but that seems like a lot of work.
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 12:13:14 pm
Post by: frostgiant on January 05, 2018, 12:19:01 pm
This hits two things that I love, card games and Arms race games.
Post by: RAM on January 05, 2018, 02:59:55 pm
And those fractal things wouldn't work. Well, they might, but the technology involved would mean that they would be facing things that render them ineffective. Obviously to function they need some sort of defensive energy field to deal with inertia(which will still ruin their day, just not fatally. They WILL need to equalise velocities in order to use NANOmanipulators of all things and actually retain any of the material) which mean that you can just turn on a bigger field to keep them at a safe distance, and crush them into a solid block while you are at it. And then there is the issue of actually touching incoming projectiles. It sounds as though tracer rounds could mission-kill them without difficulty.
As for beating flame-throwers? Nanites are extremely slow. Best mobility they are going to get is insane tech(which means the opposition gets lava armour and E.M.P. bullets) or jumping, which is nice and all but requires an inordinate amount of prep-time and from a nanite still means very little distance covered. Not to mention that disassembling something on a molecular scale is extremely energy intensive, and nanites don't have any space for energy acquisition, so a splotch on a flamethrower will still leave you with hours, if not days of flame-throwing at its friends, by which time the battle is long-over and everyone is back in decontamination...
They would, though, be a good terror weapon, what with the whole invisibility thing, and also good over large undefended areas. They would be a good choice for ecological destruction if you aren't in any hurry...
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 03:34:47 pm
Post by: Draignean on January 05, 2018, 04:23:50 pm
Post by: Failbird105 on January 05, 2018, 05:51:44 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on January 05, 2018, 06:07:18 pm
Currently Toskesh (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168912.0) is behind on players and could use a few more engineers to help their dreams become a reality.
Join today!
Post by: Draignean on January 06, 2018, 12:16:17 pm
Yeah, and I'm going to need that help since I have minimal familiarity with MtG.
I'm afraid I may have to retract my offer.
Against good interest, I launched Insurrection (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169013.0).
Post by: Failbird105 on January 06, 2018, 12:27:52 pm
Well I mean, the idea was kinda to wait until after you had launched your game anyway. Y'know, so I have an example to work with.Yeah, and I'm going to need that help since I have minimal familiarity with MtG.
I'm afraid I may have to retract my offer.
Against good interest, I launched Insurrection (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169013.0).
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on February 24, 2018, 11:36:00 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on February 28, 2018, 08:29:14 am
As I am a masochist, I have been thinking about a free-for-all style arms race, and how to run it in such a way that the GM doesn't immediately burn out. This originated from my observation of various arms races and how some people get very, very passionate in their discussions about what the best course of action is. The general premise would be each player running their own nation, Arms Race style. Designing new weapons and reaping the rewards. However, this could very quickly turn into a swamp for the GM, who would have to process at least one design per player every turn, and multiple fronts per player. As the number of players go up, their workload increases exponentially and it will quickly become a herculean task to manage.
Hence I'm coming to you all for suggestions on how to design this game in such a way that the GM doesn't want to top himself before Year 3. Here are my current thoughts:
Instead of being the classic "nations with an eternal enmity matched only by their manpower" game style, instead the players manage mercenary companies in some alternate universe where national militaries are banned. Each turn, the players' companies are hired to duke it out across a pre-defined battlefield, and they must prepare by designing equipment for the situation and then fielding units. The two sides will then hire the players in such a way that they are as miraculously equal as possible, and then the companies duke it out like any other Arms Race battle. This means only one battle has to be processed each turn, but there's no satisfying conclusion involving one nation annihilating all opposition.
The other option would have each player managing a city-state of sorts, and they'd all be brawling with the other players until only one is left standing. This has the issues mentioned above, but I've put some thought into how to handle it. If the players choose their production (like in Cinder Spires or Planetary arms Race) then he would also not have to think about expense levels or which equipment the armies use. Players could also be tasked with choosing which fronts to push, which will reduce the number of battles the GM will have to process, it would also allow players to follow cease-fires, or work together against common enemies. Finally, claiming a city-state's capital could give the player additional design dice, production, manpower, attacks or other such "resources" to help facilitate their conquest.
So, do you guys have any suggestions on how to make this less of a burn-fest?
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on February 28, 2018, 09:10:50 am
As for the mercenary company game, it reminds of another Arms Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=167850.0), on ehich the players played as weapon designer company in trying to sell their equipment. I’d imagine if you go route #1, you should have player decided on turn 0, and not having them switch sides as a possibility, so multiple mercenary companies per the two factions, but they can’t interchange
Post by: Doomblade187 on February 28, 2018, 09:15:02 am
Name: Big Fly
Category: Plane
Differences from current tech: Has a pinwheel on the front
New Tech Details: Polka Dots
This way if you use a difficulty system it's easier to interpret.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on February 28, 2018, 10:36:31 am
Quote
Instead of being the classic "nations with an eternal enmity matched only by their manpower" game style, instead the players manage mercenary companies in some alternate universe where national militaries are banned. Each turn, the players' companies are hired to duke it out across a pre-defined battlefield, and they must prepare by designing equipment for the situation and then fielding units. The two sides will then hire the players in such a way that they are as miraculously equal as possible, and then the companies duke it out like any other Arms Race battle. This means only one battle has to be processed each turn, but there's no satisfying conclusion involving one nation annihilating all opposition.
I don't really see how this would result in a workload reduction. Unlike traditional arms races, the fact that you're reshuffling the compagnies every turn is that every turn you need reconsider every single bit of equipment. For example, one turn Player A's machine gun could be cooperating with Player B's helicopter, and the next it could be trying to fight it.
Post by: Happerry on February 28, 2018, 06:07:56 pm
Post by: RoseHeart on March 16, 2018, 07:25:52 pm
DK Industries vs Wily Labs
Post by: Tack on March 16, 2018, 09:22:46 pm
In other news: I'm beginning to think that 'tiered tech' arms races need some kind of side-counter in order to force tech allocation to up-tiering.
For instance each side having a passive research gain (non-dice-based) which they can allocate towards tiering up their tech and unlocking better stuff.
Might give a better sense of progression whilst also making the 'safe choice' racers still get some forward progress.
Post by: Draignean on March 16, 2018, 11:07:27 pm
Wanted to post a thing but got distracted by Draignean's ode to the ogre faced spider.
Wait, the thing I posted back in January?
In other news: I'm beginning to think that 'tiered tech' arms races need some kind of side-counter in order to force tech allocation to up-tiering.
For instance each side having a passive research gain (non-dice-based) which they can allocate towards tiering up their tech and unlocking better stuff.
It would work better in games where the tech tiers are more or less known before they happen, such as the games centered in a fictional historical setting without any large alteration to science or convention. However, in other cases, where the tech tree blooms more less at the player's discretion, I think it's a lot harder to label tiers to technology.
Although, on the subject of research gain, I was thinking about a similarly named system for poor dice rolls. They say that science is built on failure, not success, and so each roll gives 6-X points of [SCIENCE!]*, which you can spend back on +1s at a 5:1 rate. Probably have to put some caps on it to prevent it from being hoarded and used for impossible projects, but it was a fun idea that pinged around my head briefly.
*[SCIENCE!] Is not the final name of the product.
Post by: RAM on March 17, 2018, 12:09:50 am
*[SCIENCE!] Is not the final name of the product.Well obviously! You missed out the second exclamation mark...
Post by: NAV on March 17, 2018, 12:35:20 pm
Post by: Tack on March 17, 2018, 12:49:28 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on March 17, 2018, 01:05:27 pm
Post by: Failbird105 on March 17, 2018, 02:16:16 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 17, 2018, 02:33:29 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on March 17, 2018, 03:30:22 pm
Having no rolls at all removes all the randomness based fun.
Post by: Rockeater on March 29, 2018, 02:13:40 am
Post by: evictedSaint on March 29, 2018, 02:43:32 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 29, 2018, 02:47:18 am
Post by: evictedSaint on March 29, 2018, 03:25:16 am
Post by: RAM on March 29, 2018, 03:39:32 am
I've considered that system. Honestly it might be one of the fairer systems out there - even with perfect dice distributions, one side may get better rolls right off the bat, leading to more resources, leading to an early-game advantage that becomes very tough to beat.Without naming names...
Even then, if both teams roll high, one went ambitious and one didm't, the ambitious one will win. And the inverse can happen... It is still largely up to chance unless both sides are scared to take risks. It might be better to just let them choose from identical pools. At least then they can choose to try rushing resources early or saving good rolls for counters and high-tech designs while burning their bad trolls on pure experience projects and delaying tactics... Might not be as exciting, but at least there is something to think over and there are enough different games of chess without any dice involved...
Or every second result could be the inversion of the previous roll. So you if you randomly roll a 2 and know that the next roll will be a certain 5, then the next is random again... This'd be a mix of mystery and strategy and guaranteed averages. But I guess that wouldn't work. A guaranteed six is worth a lot more than a mystery six, and is much more significant than a guaranteed 4 or 1... But it still gets the G.M. off of most hooks! They can just point to the perfectly average totals and scream that it is totes fair!
I am a bit concerned over different scales in projects. A ship typically has multiple different guns, armour, engines, propellers... A wheeled A.T. gun has a gun, and wheels, and maybe some braces and sights if you want to get technical... If you build a battleship, the guns, engine, armour... It'll all be unique, and it is impractical to have a separate design for each component, but if you let them just build it, then they might decide to port the 320mm guns to their field artillery, the 320mm armour to their pillboxes, and the house-sized engines to their trains, each as a revision, on the grounds of porting existing technology rather than creating new. The alternative is to either force them to build all of the parts prior to the battleship, have the battleship be a storm of bugs even on a perfect roll, or arbitrarily declare that big projects are special and their parts can't be regarded as separate.
Post by: Kashyyk on March 29, 2018, 03:58:37 am
I imagine the Easy/Medium/Hard mechanic could be applied here, and I believe that's part of the logic behind the "progress" requirement in Cinder Spires.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on March 29, 2018, 03:59:09 am
I am a bit concerned over different scales in projects. A ship typically has multiple different guns, armour, engines, propellers... A wheeled A.T. gun has a gun, and wheels, and maybe some braces and sights if you want to get technical... If you build a battleship, the guns, engine, armour... It'll all be unique, and it is impractical to have a separate design for each component, but if you let them just build it, then they might decide to port the 320mm guns to their field artillery, the 320mm armour to their pillboxes, and the house-sized engines to their trains, each as a revision, on the grounds of porting existing technology rather than creating new. The alternative is to either force them to build all of the parts prior to the battleship, have the battleship be a storm of bugs even on a perfect roll, or arbitrarily declare that big projects are special and their parts can't be regarded as separate.The actual solution to that problem, RAM, is Draignean's system in Spires Race. Where not all projects take the same amount of time to complete, meaning a simple gun might take only a turn or two, where an entire battleship would take more like 6 (or somesuch)*. It is, to be sure, a more complex system, but it works reasonably well.
*Draignean also uses variable progress based on spendable dice, so it's more like the simple gun costs (on average) 3 progress dice and the battleship (on average) 18.
Post by: Draignean on March 29, 2018, 06:37:31 am
Spoiler: Designs (click to show/hide)
Edit: Short version of the changes. Basically it's so that any project takes between 1 and 10 dice worth of progress to complete on average. If you're running the 5 dice per turn system that was designed on, that means even more difficult projects can be reasonably finished in 2 or 3 turns, and an emergency rush can give you enough dice to complete even very large projects very quickly with only a chance of bugging everything up.
The ability to manufacture expensive prototypes also means there's much less of a harsh penalty for bad rolls knocking you short of project completion- instead the object in question is just overly expensive until you get things squared away.
Post by: Blood_Librarian on March 29, 2018, 01:00:49 pm
A one-sided arms race in which the designers have to engineer ships, weapons, and other interstellar equipment and for the purpose of defending against a first contact turned into a war of extermination.
The Designers species would control around 100-150 colonized worlds of varying development, and would start off with basic patrol ships and doctrine developed around the suppression of local populace rebellions, with fast acting ship fleets, autonomous drones and other support systems developed towards beating frigate sized hit and run fleets.
The Determined Exterminators could field with around eight to nine times the amount of raw tonnage then the Designers, but most of it is not deployed due to unknown reasons.
FTL speeds would be the only thing limiting engagements, as although the Designers have a different method of FTL that is much faster, it will still take weeks or even months between each battle, but the Designers can bring out their hardware much faster then the Exterminators.
There will also be the tactical side; Worlds will have to be chosen to be protected or to let fall, as well as certain doctrines will be proposed to the designers or something along those lines.
One thing that I might need more development on is on the subject of what kind of numbers both sides has; How those numbers get to the fight and the flow of the battle field.
In short, a Arms Race based around a campaign that could be described as a little bit similar to Halos Arch, but without the Forerunners.
Post by: RAM on March 29, 2018, 03:16:41 pm
But then the battleship costs six times as much as the gun, so it needs to have six times as much impact on the war. If your battleship is flying and your targets are vertical spires sticking into the air, and there is almost nothing on the ground or sea, then a battleship being that important is not so difficult. Intercontinental though has battleships that, in theory, only affect the sea and shore, while much of the fighting doesn't involve them at all. There is an argument to be made that the sea is the most important front, but still, extending the production time out to six times will almost always be a net loss unless they somehow can't improve anything else significantly...force them to build all of the parts prior to the battleshipthe simple gun costs (on average) 3 progress dice and the battleship (on average) 18.
Post by: andrea on March 29, 2018, 03:19:21 pm
Post by: Draignean on March 29, 2018, 03:42:42 pm
But then the battleship costs six times as much as the gun, so it needs to have six times as much impact on the war. If your battleship is flying and your targets are vertical spires sticking into the air, and there is almost nothing on the ground or sea, then a battleship being that important is not so difficult. Intercontinental though has battleships that, in theory, only affect the sea and shore, while much of the fighting doesn't involve them at all. There is an argument to be made that the sea is the most important front, but still, extending the production time out to six times will almost always be a net loss unless they somehow can't improve anything else significantly...force them to build all of the parts prior to the battleshipthe simple gun costs (on average) 3 progress dice and the battleship (on average) 18.
Counterpoint 1: I believe the point you made earlier was that the typical system of rolling allows the battleship to be created and then all of its parts farmed off via revision- which rather makes the efficacy argument moot. If you wanted the 18 progress dice to represent the effort of creating this nice battleship with all of its battleship parts properly integrated into a non-buggy mess, then your 18 progress isn't just a ship. It's the gun, it's the armor, it's the generator, it's the ECW suite, it's whatever the players tacked on that they can then revise away as you earlier put it. Thus, 18 dice gets you the three dice gun, the two dice armor, the four dice generator+propulsion, the actual battleship hull that's competently and cohesively designed to put it together, etc.
Counterpoint 2: You can tailor those numbers as you see fit, one of my favorite parts of the system. Scale it to where you think things are comfortable, or give people more dice and let them pursue parallel development.
Post by: RAM on March 29, 2018, 06:14:30 pm
Post by: Man of Paper on April 28, 2018, 07:48:11 pm
Note I've been working on it for a bit now, so if you have questions about how it'd play just feel free to ask, it's mostly polished by this point.
Post by: Draignean on May 08, 2018, 04:24:04 pm
Galactic Race
General Play Loop
These rules are adapted from a couple different arms race games, with enough new twists that they're worth reading again even if you've played all the arms race games.
This arms race plays out over 3 phases: The design and project maintenance phase, the revision phase, and the production, deployment and tactics phase. In the absence of other modifiers, each team gains 5 dice to use at the start of every year. Every year, each team will cycle through the three phases in order, spending dice and resources to capture worlds and advance their cause.
At the start of each year designs and project maintenance is handled. Members of each team may propose designs. Everyone is allowed to vote for a design. During this same time, players of each team propose resource allocation plans for various pre-existing projects. These are voted on in the same way as designs. You can vote for any number of projects so long as there are enough dice for everything you're voting for to be done simultaneously. You cannot vote for the same design or spending more than once. It is not possible to directly vote against a design, but it is possible to vote for meta-goals such as 'no design' or 'only 1 design'. The design (if any) with the most votes gets rendered into a new project and the progress for the funded existing projects moves ahead at the end of this stage. Any created prototypes or finished projects are described.
After designs and projects have been worked out, then the players move on to revisions. Revision are cheap, but best suited to address problems with improvements to existing desings. For example, if you finished a ship based beam laser last round, you can try a revision to make a pulsed version or to fix an overheating issue. However, one could not immediately turn around and revise infantry laser weapons from a ship based beam laser. Do not make the mistake of thinking that smaller is less complex. Revisions to improve a technology beyond the original design will face diminishing returns quickly, but correcting bugs in the original design does not count against that soft limit.
Any dice not spent on revisions/designs/projects are saved back for the next round. Each team can bank a total of 5 dice, giving them a maximum of 10 dice to spend at any one time.
After revisions comes the production, deployment, and tactics phase. During deployment you can set and modify standing movement orders to your ships, sending them to various locations to do ship things. A ship's range is determined by its engines, but its movement will be halted by enemy activity. Ships can be ordered to only engage under certain conditions, but Captains may have imperfect information depending on sensors and a variety of other factors. In the event of engagement, ships will do their best to carry out whatever tactic they have assigned. For soldiers on the ground, orders are of three major flavors: Advance, hold the line, and retreat. Advance tactics attempt to take ground, but are liable to be costly. Holding the line is better to keep from losing ground against a stronger attack force, but will never gain territory. Retreating voluntarily gives up ground, attempting to spare lives and equipment for the defenders when possible. The last part, construction orders, is about allocating production points and/or resources to actually build new weapons/ships/regiments. Each player gets a single vote for each of these three types of commands, with the same rules as voting for revisions and designs applying.
Once that's finished, I put out the battle report into the main thread, and the turn cycles back around to the main phase. Certain actions, such as fleet movements, colonization and construction, will not be posted into the main thread, and will remain localized to each Empire's thread.
Combat in Space
Combat in space will not be realistic. Realistic space combat is... a pain. If you've played SoTS or Starsector, that's more the feel I'm aiming for. If you haven't, think more of Star Trek naval combat, though with the distances being a bit longer. At the start of the game, each ship can be outfitted with a single tactic, and command ships can have an additional tactic. In ship-to-ship combat, vessels will attempt to carry out their assigned tactic to the best of their ability- with one exception. If the tactic in the command ship's bonus slot would be better than what the fleet member is currently using, they can switch to that one freely. For instance, if a fleet vessel's primary tactic is to attempt to hit-and-run enemy vessels, but the enemy suddenly presents a faster and more maneuverable ship, their tactic breaks down. However, if the command vessel has a defensive tactic in reserve, the day may yet be saved. Superior officers, discipline, communication, and training, will still pay off and improve any tactic- and you may be able to expand the number of tactics that a ship can hold or that a command vessel can hotswap.
One important note, if the command vessel is destroyed, the ability to hotswap tactics is naturally lost.
Unless given instruction otherwise, combat vessels will attempt to engage until they face a clear defeat, at which point they'll prime emergency FTL and attempt to bug out. This will, however, damage the power systems of the surviving vessels, and potentially cause cascading failures and even the destruction damaged ships. Non-Combat vessels, massively outclassed combat vessels, or vessels ordered not to engage, will attempt to create distance at sublight speed before making an FTL jump when forced into a combat encounter.
After a battle, if there are any ships capable of towing, derelicts from destroyed vessels can be hauled back by whichever side gained area control. Such derelicts can be scrapped for resources and a look at the operational parameters of surviving equipment.
Planetary Combat
Planetary combat is split into two parts, planetary bombardment and landings.
Planetary bombardment serves two purposes. First, it can allow attackers to 'soften up' strategic ground targets in order for later landing forces to have an easier time actually invading. Second, it can be used to inflict quick economic damage on an adversary without actually needing to spend the resources on a full-on invasion fleet of transports. At start, you have two flavors of bombardment: soft target bombardment and hard target bombardment. Hard target bombardment attempts to hit military installations and defensive infrastructure, reducing their efficacy, and potentially reducing the army value of a planet. If there are no defensive armies and a planet's defense grid is destroyed, the resistance to capture the world will be minimal- assuming that the other nation hasn't done hijinx to the contrary.
While that sounds nice, Hard targets, true to their name, are usually hardened against bombardment. In some cases you may find yourself in a position where you don't have time, resources, or firepower to start hammering down defenses so you can send in an invasion force. Still, if you can manage to get a fleet around an enemy planet, you want to try and deal damage. That's where soft-target bombardment is helpful. True to its name, it attempts to hit soft targets of your opponent's economic infrastructure- farms, research labs, mines, etc. Destroying these not only reduces the amount of resources they get per turn, but forces them to spend money rebuilding. Of course, in an ideal world you'd like to capture a planet with most of the soft targets intact so you don't have to rebuild them yourself (see Planets and Planetary infrastructure), but war doesn't always allow for ideal worlds.
You may be able to spend designs and revisions to improve the efficacy of or prioritize certain targets with orbital bombardment.
Planetary landings require transports filled with troops. Landing regiments then face pushback against defense forces, directly engaging ground forces in a bid to conquer strategic reasons. Importantly, basic ground troops do not inflict damage to infrastructure. They target enemy troops and attempt to capture strategic areas to control the planet, and thus any surviving infrastructure is turned over to attackers. Ground attacks do not utilize tactics. Regiments of troops are assumed to include a mix of infantry and transports. However, more advanced or specialized units, such has high-power mecha, artillery cannons elite psychic infantry, air support, or unspeakable eldritch horrors the size of small mountains, may be manufactured and added as attachments to basic regiments. Basically, if it's expensive to build/train, it'll be its own special attachment, not part of a standard invasion regiment.
If the attackers are doing well and overwhelming the defenders, they'll begin to gain dominion over the planet. Dominion is represented as x/10, and represents how close you are to being able to control the important parts of the planet. 10/10 Dominion doesn't necessarily mean that you own and actively patrol every inch of territory, it just means that you're free to rain fire and death on anyone who wants to question whether you own any particular piece of territory. Depending on how well matched opposing forces are, dominion will be gained/lost at a rate of 1-4 per turn. A gain of 1 point of dominion indicates that any edge over the enemy is a slim one that could be turned aside easily, and may be wholly dependent on the fickle whim of fate. If forces are evenly matched, a coin will be flipped to see which side gains 1 dominion. A gain of 2 dominion indicates that there is a definite advantage over the enemy, but that the enemy is still able to put up a strong resistance, or that the advantage cannot be easily leveraged to control territory. A gain of 3 dominion indicates clear advantage over the enemy, where the majority of encounters end in retreat and the enemy is only able to mount a significant resistance at critical points. A gain of 4 dominion indicates that the enemy is being routed in every engagement, and that attacking forces have only to find their enemy to destroy them.
It should be noted that while certain special units, such as a massive abomination or a temporally unstable supersoldier may be able to devastate armies on their own, there's nothing like thousands of boots to actually take ground and root out the enemy.
Definitions and Resources
Spoiler: How Rolling Will Work (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Designs, Projects, and Revisions (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Combat Essentials (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Resources, Planets, and Infrastructure (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Faster Than Light Travel (click to show/hide)
Setting Modifiers
Soft-Serve Science: You want your reactor to run off the power of a forsaken psionic child channeling the energy of a dark star God? Sounds great, just give me a write-up. This isn't a hard science game- this is a game where one could conceivably get away with SPEHSS MAHRENS and SPEHSS MAGICKS, not one where I'm going to nag you over perfectly reasonable details of science and 'but reality doesn't do that'. I'm not going to make you write a paper on the exact physics that justify a waveforce shield or a mantra powered Buddhism laser- but you do need to beware the golden rule of the universe: 'Shit ain't Free'. Everything, no matter how advanced, has a price. Actions have Consequences.
Begin at your Beginnings: This game will have a special opening phase, seven turns in length. During this period, the final phase of each turn is skipped- so there is no production, deployment and tactics. Instead, you are given ten dice per turn, and you will be asked to create the designs for most of your starting tech.
Everybody in Space Sciences English: Everybody has the same FTL drive technology, the Bore Drive. You can dick with it as you will, justify it however you want, and re-flavor how you generate the bore as you wish. Mechanically, however, everyone starts on the same FTL playing field.
Post by: Draignean on May 08, 2018, 04:24:30 pm
The Sides
For this Arms Race, there are three empires. As should be well evidenced by the fact that there are three threads with the creative names of Empire 1, Empire 2, and Empire 3, the players for each empire will be able to pick their empire's name and, more importantly, race. This game has aspects loosely based around the Sword of the Stars universe, and that includes the races. When you join a faction, post a vote for not only your Empire's name, but also one of the five* available races.
Empire 1 Thread
Empire 2 Thread
Empire 3 Thread
Terran
Advantage: Bore-Savants: When working with and innovating using bore drives, Terran empires are more effective.
Drawback: Lastborn of the Stars: Rush dice have a 75% chance to degrade performance.
Details: Bipedal primates, usually between 150 and 200cm in height and weighing between 60 and 80kg. They are dual gendered, and display only limited sexual dimorphism. Adept and aggressive tool users, humans are characterized by their integration of tools (simple or otherwise) into their lives. It is uncommon in the extreme for a human in public to not be covered nearly head to toe in various garments (tools to deal with heat and cold) or to be without various technological tools to provide entertainment when bored, facilitate social connection, and provide enhanced awareness of the world.
Liir
Advantage: Biomastery: When manipulating biology, genetics, or living organisms, Liir empires are more effective.
Drawback: Ecological Sensitivity: All Liir regiments have increased cost.
Details: Closely resembling the cetaceans of Earth, albeit with greater variability in color and marking, the Liir are highly intelligent creatures who were once very gentle and peaceful. Natively, they never developed beyond the bronze age in terms of construction, using their native telekinetic abilities to shape their world as a place of a balance between great and small. Unfortunately, however, this peace was shattered by a race known as the Suul'Ka (The Enemy. Not an enemy, but The Enemy.) which enslaved the Liir and basically force marched their technological understanding forwards. The Liir rebelled with a tailored bio-weapon made in one of the very labs they served in as slaves, an act so successful that the Suul'Ka have not been seen since. Still, the event shaped the Liir, and those of the current age are harder and more unforgiving that their ancestors.
Tarka
Advantage: Brothers of Battle: When working to improve infantry, through training, superior weapons, or vehicles, Tarka empires are more effective.
Drawback: Honorbound: Overmatched Tarka take more damage when retreating.
Details: Somewhat similar to humans, Tarka resemble scaled apes. A three gendered species, they consist of females, inactive males, and active males. Females are slightly larger than humans, and are generally kept far from the gaze of outsiders. However, their role in culture is central, as though they are forbidden from government, they are the only ones allowed to own land or decide inheritance. Inactive males are characterized by lithe bodies, obedient personalities, and quick intellects. Human sized or slightly smaller, these creatures form the bulk of the male population, and thus are the stock for government positions and ground forces both. Active males are roughly twice the height and four to eight times the mass of a human, their physical form and senses heightened dramatically- though their intelligence suffers somewhat from the hormonal cocktail raging through them. Their cultural, though strict and ordered, is warlike by nature- requiring that failure be repaid by sacrifice, and disobedience remedied with death.
Hiver
Advantage: The Swarm: When working with tactics, or pushing against the command limit, Hiver empires are more effective.
Drawback: Distributed Intelligence: All project durations are slightly longer.
Details: The Hiver share many similarities with the insects of Earth, but are rather distinct entities. They have an endo-skeletal structure, and their external chitin is often cut and ornamented heavily. Hiver 'gender' is complex, with Drones, Warriors, Princes, Princesses, and Queens all being distinct forces. Drones are small, exceedingly common, affable, and unintelligent- receiving psychic instruction from their princess and then running mostly on routine. Warriors are similar, but their forms are of thick armor, strong musculature, and natural weaponry- with their minds bred to little more than biological combat computers. Princes are similar in form to small, lightly built warriors, but are vastly more intelligent. Princes are needed to remain near a princess in order to fertilize her offspring, but they are capable of independent thought are often used to supervise important affairs in science or military matters. Princes, however, can only extend limited psionic control over their peers. Princesses are the governors large planetary regions, and (given the assistance of a prince) are capable of birthing hundreds of thousands of drones and warriors. Queens are far rarer still, and can command hundreds of princesses across interstellar distances. Culturally, the Hiver behave somewhat like an unusually effective system feudal lords- with Queen at the top of the chain and the princesses of various links working below.
Morrigi
Advantage: Firstborn of Heaven: Dice spent to advance projects get +1.
Drawback: Decadence: When building planetary infrastructure and other buildings whose cost is dependent on size, the planet is counted as being 1 size larger.
Details: Morrigi are both large and ancient, described as 'feathered dragons' when they visited ancient human cultures, and are thought to be the origin for the Quetzalcoatl myths of the Aztec people. They live long and breed slowly, which resulted in strong breeding restrictions enforced by their government. Strong proponents of automation, Morrigi drones and robotics were once the most advanced within known space. Cultural decline, however, did what no enemy ever could. Their society decadent and cumbersome, generations of Morrigi grew up barely aware of how the technology around them worked- until that technology began to fail. The Morrigi now are the result of a cultural revolution, the destruction of the millenia old system of government that had stalled nearly all progress in favor of maintaining order. Though they have lost nearly all that they were in the long, dark years of the decline, Morrigi seek to reclaim the old world and forge a new empire in the stars.
*There are no Zuul. I don't feel like dealing with Zuul right now.
This post will be used from here forward to contain any amendments made to the rules after the game begins, as well as any potentially relevant clarifications.
Post by: RAM on May 08, 2018, 05:27:52 pm
Post by: Draignean on May 08, 2018, 05:41:13 pm
Issue: There is no indicators for the different empires. Someone may want a specific race or theme and they will have no way of knowing which way their empire will lean until they have joined the thread. If someone wanted to go all-out robotics, for example, and they landed in a team that leaned heavily towards biomodding, then they might have a bad time...
Solution: Batreps will be in the core thread (no way in hell am I re-writing them potentially three times), and the Empire 1/2/3 will be updated with the Empire name, race, and (after the first event) a brief cultural description.
EDIT: I think, however, I may also allow people to look through the different threads up until they either post in one OR the Empire has decided its Name and Race.
Post by: Rockeater on May 08, 2018, 10:31:34 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on May 08, 2018, 11:02:38 pm
You're very....brave, doing three factions.
If you want someone to draw you up a pretty map for your game, hit me up.
Post by: RAM on May 09, 2018, 12:28:56 am
Maybe each emprie could be given some sort of nondescript flavour piece to differentiate them without committing to anything?
Something like this?
Empire 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw)
Empire 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw)
Empire 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY)
Post by: evictedSaint on May 09, 2018, 12:40:36 am
I also favour Hivers and Morrigi...
Maybe each emprie could be given some sort of nondescript flavour piece to differentiate them without committing to anything?
Something like this?
Empire 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw)
Empire 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw)
Empire 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY)
I was thinking something more like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bzWSJG93P8) for the Empire
Post by: Draignean on May 09, 2018, 01:00:07 am
I also favour Hivers and Morrigi...
Maybe each emprie could be given some sort of nondescript flavour piece to differentiate them without committing to anything?
Something like this?
Empire 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw)
Empire 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX-JeV37Uqw)
Empire 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_dUOhkygY)
I worry I'd give too much shape though, in that case. I like seeing the ideas people come up with and, while song is a nicely abstract way of flavoring something, I'd rather have the players ascribe meaning to the factions. Still, I'll consider it.
Empire 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tac71micVyQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tac71micVyQ)
Empire 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6hmUv06tg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6hmUv06tg)
Empire 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_9kEOmTdDs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_9kEOmTdDs)
(The above suggestions are not serious)
This looks awesome. I'd love to play in that AR - especially if I can swing a group to be the Hivers (or at least the Morrigi).
You're very....brave, doing three factions.
If you want someone to draw you up a pretty map for your game, hit me up.
My bravery is second only to my foolhardiness.
Also, I may take you up on that map. I have a preliminary that I knocked up, but I'm always grateful for assistance.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on May 09, 2018, 01:03:34 am
Stuff like that.
Just something for players to latch onto and say “I like this tiny bit of flavor more, so I choose this side.”
Post by: Blood_Librarian on May 09, 2018, 06:00:27 am
I mean, at least the concept (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Riftborn.jpg) art (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Vodyani%20Domination.jpg) is (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20United%20Empire%20Supremacy.jpg) amazing (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Cravers%20Attack.jpg)
Post by: Draignean on May 09, 2018, 07:11:44 pm
Personally, I prefer the great bastards of Earth, but I'm curious if you've seen the factions of Endlss Space 2, because I find them a little bit more interesting then SoTS races, but that might because I only played a couple hours on SotS and slightly more then a hundred on Endless Space.
I mean, at least the concept (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Riftborn.jpg) art (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Vodyani%20Domination.jpg) is (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20United%20Empire%20Supremacy.jpg) amazing (https://wiki.endless-space.com/core/assets/gallery/Artwork/Endless%20Space%202%20-%20Cravers%20Attack.jpg)
I've seen them, but there didn't actually seem to be that much written on them. There's a truly surprising amount of information written about the physiology, history, and culture of each of SotS races. Of course, these may be because I only have a couple of hours in Endless Space and more than a hundred in SotS :P.
Also, RAM, I think I will actually do the music thing- mainly because you got me thinking about it for too long and I ended up picking out three songs anyway. Still, I'm going to have to stress they're inspiration only, and should not be taken as any form of mandate.
Who knows, I might launch this sooner than I thought. It would be insane, but I'm an insane person.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on May 09, 2018, 07:19:31 pm
Dewit now.
I require more Arms Race to sustain myself.
Post by: Draignean on May 09, 2018, 07:31:32 pm
Do it.
Dewit now.
I require more Arms Race to sustain myself.
eS is kindly helping me with the map, so it'll be after then.
Post by: Failbird105 on May 09, 2018, 07:40:59 pm
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on May 09, 2018, 07:45:04 pm
Post by: NAV on May 11, 2018, 07:32:37 am
Post by: Draignean on May 11, 2018, 12:32:42 pm
Please Draig, no!! Cinder Spires is already the most complicated forum game I know on this forum, running another one would be suicide!
[Mad Science Laugh]
That's exactly why I must! By running this, the relative complexity of Cinder Spires will be greatly diminished! It's logic, LOGIC I SAY!
Post by: Rockeater on May 11, 2018, 12:47:12 pm
You still need to write turns for both of those, but as long as your masochism don't hurt anyone, I am fine.Please Draig, no!! Cinder Spires is already the most complicated forum game I know on this forum, running another one would be suicide!
[Mad Science Laugh]
That's exactly why I must! By running this, the relative complexity of Cinder Spires will be greatly diminished! It's logic, LOGIC I SAY!
Post by: Blood_Librarian on May 11, 2018, 01:01:50 pm
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on May 11, 2018, 01:02:46 pm
Post by: Draignean on May 11, 2018, 02:07:10 pm
what are the space birbs again?
These (https://orig00.deviantart.net/0087/f/2011/250/2/7/morrigi_by_cicakkia-d495czp.jpg) are (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e1/08/0a/e1080aa5177a92109bcebad8610a3ead.jpg) the (https://pre00.deviantart.net/6a1e/th/pre/f/2013/063/d/2/d280d3fd48baec503f7298bc0de54225-d5wy3tp.jpg) Morrigi (https://orig00.deviantart.net/9cec/f/2012/176/c/0/example_morrigi_trader_by_ludomercier-d54u1lk.jpg).
Post by: Parsely on May 24, 2018, 02:57:50 pm
I'm not sure what the reward would be. Maybe if you decide to obsolete a piece of equipment you can apply a bonus to a design or a revision roll? I don't think players should be punished for having too much gear or that hard caps should be put on gear, just that a mechanic should be put in place to allow useless equipment to naturally become extinct or to recycle a bad design into the next turn as a comeback (or a last resort) mechanic when one side is having really bad luck so that a losing side doesn't lose a ton of momentum when they critically fail.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on May 24, 2018, 05:50:21 pm
What if you could formally and permanently make equipment obsolete as a free action during the design or revision phase? What that does is make it so that equipment is no longer used for combat turns but is still available as research. I see this mainly as a way to help GMs with upkeep and players with not having too much junk to keep track of, it also makes sense that a military would retire equipment instead of having a constantly growing list of types of weapons that would begin to strain logistics.
I'm not sure what the reward would be. Maybe if you decide to obsolete a piece of equipment you can apply a bonus to a design or a revision roll? I don't think players should be punished for having too much gear or that hard caps should be put on gear, just that a mechanic should be put in place to allow useless equipment to naturally become extinct or to recycle a bad design into the next turn as a comeback (or a last resort) mechanic when one side is having really bad luck so that a losing side doesn't lose a ton of momentum when they critically fail.
GMs tend to do that already when things are truly supplanted. There's just that many different roles to play.
Post by: Parsely on May 24, 2018, 06:02:37 pm
GMs tend to do that already when things are truly supplanted. There's just that many different roles to play.Eh? Is there an Arms Race where this is an explicitly mechanic and not just something GMs do because they've gone over the word count on a post? If there is I wasn't aware and I retract what I said.
Otherwise:
I'm not sure if you understood my suggestion? I know that GMs already push older designs into a "legacy" or "obsolete" category when they interpret them to be overshadowed by another weapon, but they do that to save space in equipment posts and because they can't write about every single weapon in battle reports, it's not an action the players make and no one is rewarded for it, that's just bookkeeping. I'm saying to put the responsibility on the players to decide when something is obsolete and reward that action with a bonus to a design or revision roll.
Post by: NAV on May 24, 2018, 06:27:56 pm
I do agree that a (very small) reward for eliminating things from armoury is a good idea.
Post by: Doomblade187 on May 24, 2018, 06:53:34 pm
Except for Draignean, he just makes a several page long google doc for each team instead.Agreed. Maybe cost reduction?
I do agree that a (very small) reward for eliminating things from armoury is a good idea.
Post by: Man of Paper on June 26, 2018, 02:19:50 am
The amount of rolls are arranged in order of total - 2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10/11/12, and would be categorized as Failure(2), Buggy(3), Poor(4), Below Average(5), Average(6,7,8), Above Average(9), Excellent(10), Superior(11), Unexpected Boon(12).
Next to the individual rolls I total the combined Low, Average, and High rolls, which makes it easier to see how things line up.
50:3/3/6/5/7/10/3/4/4/2/3 Lo:17 Avg:20 Hi:13
100:9/7/9/8/12/21/10/8/7/4/5 Lo:33 Avg:43 Hi:24
150:9/9/14/10/22/35/21/11/8/6/5 Lo:42 Avg:78 Hi:30
200:10/13/18/14/34/41/25/15/10/6/7 Lo:55 Avg:100 Hi:38
250:13/15/20/19/44/48/32/25/15/10/9 Lo:67 Avg:124 Hi:59
300:14/18/23/28/53/54/37/28/22/13/10 Lo:83 Avg:144 Hi:73
350:14/21/26/35/57/61/48/33/26/16/13 Lo:96 Avg:166 Hi:88
400:15/22/31/43/70/70/51/35/28/19/16 Lo:111 Avg:191 Hi:98
450:15/25/31/53/82/79/58/43/36/22/16 Lo:124 Avg:219 Hi:117
500:17/27/35/56/95/87/65/49/37/23/19 Lo:135 Avg:247 Hi:128
In my opinion a near-50% chance to get an Average roll with a 25% chance of going either way isn't bad. I'd like to get some other opinions on the matter, but I think it's worth a spin.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 26, 2018, 02:58:55 am
Post by: Man of Paper on June 26, 2018, 03:20:46 am
EDIT: To clarify what I mean, I'm sure we all have felt at some point that how things should go and how they actually go aren't quite the same. I wanted to see for myself that this wouldn't need an insane sample size to become true, like how you'll rarely actually flip an even number of heads and tails in 10 flips.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 26, 2018, 04:19:55 am
Which is what you were trying to investigate by actually rolling the dice, right? Well, I mean, look at your results. In both 50 and 100 rolls, a hypothetical side got 33% more low rolls than high rolls. That side is going to do considerably worse than a side that gets the opposite results. Once you get up to 500 rolls it smooths out pretty well, but ain't nobody running an AR lasting 250 turns.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 26, 2018, 04:42:22 am
Post by: Chiefwaffles on June 26, 2018, 04:56:23 am
It's not horrible, but I just found that I hated that feeling of impending doom, when you feel like you've "wasted" a good roll on a sub-par design. It may technically be average in the long run, but I think it results in a worse sense of gameplay for the players, which is what really matters with the dice system used.
Post by: Man of Paper on June 26, 2018, 05:04:03 am
Don't get me wrong though, I see what you're saying and appreciate the feedback.
Ninja'd, to elaborate on the card system- eS didn't seem to be the big a fan of how it turned out: while it did make things even overall, it led to card counting. eS was actually the person I spoke to about various methods of running ARs since Iron Behemoths was one of my favorites, and that part of the exchange is specifically what led me to check into doing something else.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 26, 2018, 06:49:28 am
Post by: Doomblade187 on June 26, 2018, 09:22:59 am
Whilst the card counting and "wasted" cards are a drawback, I personally feel it to be a lesser issue than a run of one side rolling better than the other.Well, that could also be counteracted by a simple tracker to ensure that the GM know the roll averages of both teams, and if one team starts to fall behind by more than like 0.5, then they can either quietly adjust the rolls or add bonuses to the design team. Spire race had averages that were between 0.3 of each other, last we checked.
Post by: Man of Paper on June 26, 2018, 11:49:10 am
After Iron Behemoths came to an end I read through the Toskeshi thread to see if my despair throughout the game was warranted: it was not. Players are going to perceive low rolls as devastating and often disregard how the enemy may be doing in comparison. I swore some of the secret projects they had throughout the game were just things they needed multiple turns to build on when in fact it was them trying to revise low roll designs. Near the end though they had someone counting cards and they knew to push for something ambitious because, if I recall, they only had a 2, 5, or 6 to pull. That kind of knowledge should not be in player's hands. It takes away from the excitement of actually getting that high roll, and makes the GM feel powerless. With die rolls players can figure out their average and know generally what they can expect, but it's still unknown, and can go either way: that's war, baby.
When I take the average rolls of the first three sets of 50 I get 6.68, 6.52, and 6.64. If you assigned any set of 50 to a team then ultimately it'd come down to effectiveness of designs and counterplay. Obviously that's in a perfect world where the high and low rolls are split evenly between teams, but as previously stated, GM-intervention can help tip the scales back into balance if need be.
Post by: Kashyyk on June 26, 2018, 11:54:16 am
I'm disinclined towards the GM "leaning on the scales" like that. If you want random dice rolls you ought to accept the risk of having crap results. Don't expect the GM to make up for your gambling.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 26, 2018, 12:00:39 pm
I have considered a 'karma' system, where low rolls move you along a track towards a +1 (or somesuch), whilst high rolls move you backwards towards a -1. Like, in the 2d4 system, a 2 might move you 2 spaces forwards, a 3 1 space, a 7 1 space backwards, and an 8 two spaces back, with, say, 5 spaces needed to get a +1/-1 to the next roll.
Post by: evictedSaint on June 26, 2018, 01:23:25 pm
Another idea I heard a while back was both sides share the same dice rolls - they get the same value for designs, revisions, etc. Neither side gets a roll advantage, but I suppose there could be the same issue of players complaining that they try all their hard projects when the other side did easy projects and vice versa.
What about a moving probability system? At the start every value has a 1/6 chance, but each time it gets rolled that chance is cut in half and the other 5 values get a probability bump accordingly. It would lead to rolls being biased towards even distributions without deterministic outcomes.
I guess it would still lead to players posting probability charts and arguing whether their next project should be ambitious or conservative...really, the biggest problems with any balanced roll system is the players. Those guys suck.
Post by: Cnidaros on June 26, 2018, 02:01:47 pm
Whilst the card counting and "wasted" cards are a drawback, I personally feel it to be a lesser issue than a run of one side rolling better than the other.Well, that could also be counteracted by a simple tracker to ensure that the GM know the roll averages of both teams, and if one team starts to fall behind by more than like 0.5, then they can either quietly adjust the rolls or add bonuses to the design team. Spire race had averages that were between 0.3 of each other, last we checked.
I feel like this crosses the line into outright GM bias. Rolls are meant to be truly random, and if the players did cotton on to the fact that they were being manipulated, even in favor of the losing team, would probably cause a great deal of salt.
My two cents regarding Spires arms race was that the averages were closer together simply because many more dice were rolled per turn than a correspondingly simpler arms race like Intercontinental arms race. Five per turn, as compared to two. With a larger set size, the probability of highly divergent averages should decrease, no?
Also, I feel like having separate rolls for effectiveness/cost/bugs does help to alleviate the effect of bad luck, as it means that you might get some utility out of a 'failed' design, instead of outright wasting the entire turn if each turn was only a single roll. On my part, I don't consider a 1 to be a complete waste, even if you don't get a design out of it, your side has gained experience in what not to do, which would translate into more lenient threshold for success/failure if you choose to attempt the same thing in following turns.
Post by: Parsely on June 26, 2018, 11:09:56 pm
With die rolls players can figure out their average and know generally what they can expect, but it's still unknown, and can go either way: that's war, baby.Previous results of die rolls don't affect future results. Your reasoning is an example of the gambler's fallacy.
---
If you want the players to own up to their decisions you need to give them some more control over the outcome of the game.
To this end, deckbuilding sounds like a good solution, you could draft cards that represent results by having the group vote for packs of card results at the start of the game. Add mechanics that penalize future turns by letting them draw extra cards when they really need that one design to come out right.
If you really shake up the design results system and tweak the strategy layer somehow to make it more interesting, I think that would make for a worthy Arms Race sequel.
Post by: Doomblade187 on June 26, 2018, 11:16:28 pm
Post by: Parsely on June 27, 2018, 12:13:03 am
As for drawing extra cards, I was thinking you just draw extra cards for a chance at a better result but at a penalty. Not sure what the players would sacrifice for this benefit though, it would depend on the details of the system.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 27, 2018, 12:52:15 am
And, like, with stuff like 2d4 and that weird (d4+2d2-2) or whatever it is, people have improved that aspect, making extreme luck less likely. I don't think a complex card drafting system is needed.
The idea of pulling multiple cards sounds like what you can do in Draignean's system, where you have multiple dice per turn, and can either do multiple projects, or spend extra dice on a single project to get better odds.
Post by: Doomblade187 on June 27, 2018, 03:13:13 am
On that note, do you think using a 1-turn design system with, say, 5 dice, where 3 are needed to run a project but only 1 dice is needed per revision would be viable, while maintaining the ability to double-roll an efficacy of cost roll?
Post by: Draignean on June 27, 2018, 03:31:49 am
Um. ARs are not RTDs, except in the sense that monopoly is an RTD. People complain because the game is meant to be about coming up with clever designs, with an element of uncertainty, not simply seeing who can roll higher.
And, like, with stuff like 2d4 and that weird (d4+2d2-2) or whatever it is, people have improved that aspect, making extreme luck less likely. I don't think a complex card drafting system is needed.
The idea of pulling multiple cards sounds like what you can do in Draignean's system, where you have multiple dice per turn, and can either do multiple projects, or spend extra dice on a single project to get better odds.
It's the trickiest bit of an arms race, to be honest. Batreps suck (I say as I'm currently avoiding finishing mine), but this is always the part that makes me worry the most. Too much chance and you step on the toes of the part of the game that should matter most, the thoughtful design of new equipment, too little and the game degenerates into whichever side has a better encyclopedic knowledge of warfare in [INSERT TIMELINE]- at which point you can open a private salt mine whenever your interpretation differs from your player's desires. There's a buncha methods for trying to deal with the issue, but they've all got their issues.
In the deck system, the problems relate to the period and predictability of the deck. By period, I refer to the number of cards it drawn before the average is guaranteed to occur (so, for a d6 system, period 6 would indicate that the deck is composed of sequences of [1 2 3 4 5 6] with randomized internal order). Short periods make the average more consistent, but then the luck factor comes down to the predictability. Even though the average is guaranteed, the two sides may end up with drastically different abilities to predict their die roles. Lets say we're using a period six system, and empire 1 gets {[3 1 2 6 4 5] [4 3 1 2 5 6] [ 1 6 2 3 4 5]} and empire 2 gets {[6 1 5 4 2 3] [5 3 4 2 6 1] [ 5 2 6 1 4 3]}. Both sides have the exact same final average, and keep a close running average throughout each segment of the first eighteen turns. Empire 1, however, is distinctly advantaged in that it gets lucky in being able to call high rolls consistently in its the latter sections of its period, which is a rather powerful ability indeed. The deck system fixes the issue of one side getting a potentially higher average roll, but replaces it with the entirely new problem of one side being able to potentially call their rolls more easily. This problem is capable of being ameliorated via absurd complexity.*
In the bell curve system, which strives to force the average by making extreme rolls more unlikely (by using some version of multiple dice, 2d4, 2d3+1d2-2, 1d4+2d2-2, whatever) you don't actually fix the problem, you just make it more unlikely. While this is a nice balm statistically speaking, you run the risk of exaggerating extreme points when they inevitably occur. If a six is rare, and one empire happens to roll one on a really important piece of tech, it's going to be even more difficult to counter for the opposing side to drum up a counter. While the rolls are more likely to be averaged, using a bell curve means that a side who gets lucky in just the right place at just the right time can keep an advantage longer than in a uniform distribution system since it's unlikely for someone else to make a similar breakthrough.
In the lock step system, where both sides get the exact same rolls, the issues are a bit more technical. From a statistical standpoint, it is guaranteed to be ideal- both sides will always have equivalent averages, and there is no ability for one side to predict rolls with greater accuracy. It does however mean that you've got to accept some tricky situations. Research credits, for instance, would have be outside the system of random numbers- truly random elements in an otherwise harmonious system. It's also only functional for standard AR games in which both sides roll equivalent numbers of dice, but in that genre it's (in my opinion) probably your gold standard for preserving the randomness that generates anticipation and fosters dopamine and still preventing one side another from receiving an unfair boon or bitch-stick from the fickle hand of fate.
* Create a set composed of all the sets of rolls you think you're going to need. If you think you need a 1000 rolls for your arms race to end, and you're using a period 6 deck,you'll have 167 sets comprising 1-6 in random order. Form a linear array from these sets. Iterate through this array with a step size equal to the deck's period. At each iteration, generate a random integer n between 0 and period/2. Randomly interchange the values within n steps forward and n steps back, repeat until you reach the end of the array.
So,
{[6 1 5 4 2 3] [5 3 4 2 6 1] [ 5 2 6 1 4 3]}
With 1,2, as its random values becomes
{[6 1 5 4 2 5] [3 3 4 2 1 2] [ 6 5 6 1 4 3]}
Since the interchanged blocks cannot become larger than the system's period, you're still guaranteed to stay VERY close to a perfect average within a period of 9. It's important to note that this system does not make it impossible to predict what rolls come next, just harder. To make it impossible, you need a have a random integer with a max value > period/2. Each additional step in that direction, however, erodes the deck system's ability to force an average over time and brings the array closer to a random state.
No, I haven't thought about this too much, why do you ask? (I am, however, absolutely procrastinating on the Spire Race turn by writing this)
Post by: Parsely on June 27, 2018, 12:47:18 pm
The idea of pulling multiple cards sounds like what you can do in Draignean's system, where you have multiple dice per turn, and can either do multiple projects, or spend extra dice on a single project to get better odds.That's interesting. I'm still interested in trying it since if you have a deck of cards the probabilities are built into the deck and if you had a run of bad results that just means you're more likely to pull your good cards and be able to make a comeback, and the players who don't care about counting cards still get to make the decision of which designs get the worse results.
Post by: Doomblade187 on June 27, 2018, 03:04:39 pm
Regarding card counting. Iron behemoths used the deck method. Honestly, the card counting didn't ruin the game, but it did clearly show that had Tokesh not counted cards, we would have been at disadvantage.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 27, 2018, 03:17:19 pm
Honestly, the card counting didn't ruin the game, but it did clearly show that had Tokesh not counted cards, we would have been at disadvantage.In that case, it gave you an advantage, since Nogrania didn't really count cards much. At least, I don't remember anyone saying we should or shouldn't do a design due to what cards were left.
Post by: Man of Paper on June 27, 2018, 04:21:59 pm
I'm glad we're having this discussion. What would the more experienced AR GMs think about a system like 1d6 or 2d6 with Draigs Cost/Efficacy/Bugs rolls, where the three rolls are shared between the teams, (ex. 2/4/5) but they're distributed to the three areas randomly (via 1d3 then 1d2)?
As with every one of these systems there are going to be issues, but at a glance it looks like an easy way to maintain randomness while also keeping the rolls averaged.
Post by: Draignean on June 27, 2018, 04:35:24 pm
Indeed the Nogranians are nobler beasts.
I'm glad we're having this discussion. What would the more experienced AR GMs think about a system like 1d6 or 2d6 with Draigs Cost/Efficacy/Bugs rolls, where the three rolls are shared between the teams, (ex. 2/4/5) but they're distributed to the three areas randomly (via 1d3 then 1d2)?
As with every one of these systems there are going to be issues, but at a glance it looks like an easy way to maintain randomness while also keeping the rolls averaged.
I would actually advise against doing Cost/Efficacy/Bugs. After trying the single die system in GalactiRace, I prefer it immensely.
Post by: evictedSaint on June 27, 2018, 05:03:04 pm
Post by: Cnidaros on June 27, 2018, 06:22:08 pm
Having done both 3 dice in wands race and a single die in iron behemoths, I agree with draig.
Out of curiosity, why do the both of you prefer the single die system?
Post by: Jerick on June 27, 2018, 06:52:21 pm
Post by: Nirur Torir on June 27, 2018, 07:15:49 pm
I just had the idea of using the 3-dice system, and having each side, on game start, pick one area where they don't get failures (3-6 or 4-6 instead of 1-6). So each side would basically be making cheap and disposable equipment, or standardized stable gear, or high-end but buggy and expensive devices. Probably not a great idea, but I like the thought of it.
Post by: Screech9791 on June 27, 2018, 07:27:42 pm
Post by: Khang36 on June 27, 2018, 08:11:21 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on June 27, 2018, 08:54:20 pm
Still, as a GM, I hated having the reason for the flaw taken out of my hands. It's better to use a single die and GM discretion to assign bugs, effectiveness, and most importantly cost
Post by: Man of Paper on June 27, 2018, 09:06:08 pm
Ugh I'm going off on a tangent. Dice rolls, dice rolls, dice rolls.
Ultimately I think the roll method used depends largely on how it balances out with the other mechanics out in place. If there's frequent credit handouts then a more random system is perfectly fine. The biggest issue with any roll system is perceived unfairness, which can only really be fully negated by removing rolls altogether.
Ninjad
To add my opinion on what eS said, I can see a single roll allowing better means of balance through the GM. For some reason players want minimal GM intervention, but if, say, one nation is having issues with resources, a low roll design can still be made cheap, allowing at least some staying power for that side.
Why arms race GMs are viewed differently than any other GM is beyond me, and is a bit interesting to me.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on June 28, 2018, 02:08:13 am
Can someone give me a basic ruleset for an Arms Race game?Most ARs have the basic rules in their core thread OP. If you're looking for a template, most people won't mind if you copy their rules and edit them to your liking, provided you mention your sources.
Post by: Draignean on June 28, 2018, 05:29:03 pm
Can someone give me a basic ruleset for an Arms Race game?
AR Quickstart
Gameplay is in 2-3 Major phases
Phase 1: Both sides write designs and vote on them in some manner. The DM then comments on the results of the designs at the end of this phase.
Phase 1.5: (Optional) Both sides write revisions and vote on them in some manner. The DM then comments on the results of the revisions at the end of this phase.
Phase 2: DM then comments on the outcomes of any combat encounters between the various sides. Go to phase 1.
That's really it. What kind of dice, how many rolls, combat deployments, all that is just bolted on. The above is the primary loop of all AR games. Like Nuke said, if you want specific examples you can go to the directory (page 1 of this thread) and look at the first post of any core game thread.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 02, 2018, 10:57:05 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on July 02, 2018, 11:14:14 pm
Both sides competing for the same contracts, with a budget and design team. Maybe...what, three contracts pop up per turn? Two cheap and easy ones, and one tougher and pricier one. You bid on the contracts, then you have to fulfill it. The goal is to drive the other side out of business.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 03, 2018, 12:16:38 am
Also multiple general symbol and SG style interventions that bring new units into Fold (their gear though, dependent of choice, role, and research)
Land combat, wet work, and fleet battles.
Post by: Parsely on July 03, 2018, 10:51:27 am
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 03, 2018, 11:12:45 am
1: Want to look better than other team for more sweet bragging rights, cash, and jobs.
2: The said enemies are way, way different from each other. So a really hard time trying to think of something for them as a whole. So become specialists in slaying certain ones.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 03, 2018, 12:14:57 pm
The Legions- Space Marines.
Hands of the Lord- Religionous fighters.
Gaias Shield: Imperial Guard
Vulcans Hammer: Tech priests.
Also 7 or 8 enemies all themed.
Also starts off as a suggestion game in adding fluff to said empire.
Bonus stuff shows up and based on team answer is results.
Edit:
Also thinking fictional ww2 setting ( players agree to which side their on and well rival design teams working for said side.) 3 sides in that game.
Or something akin to Wands Race, just well dealing with more stuff.
( Got design team names for that. Named after supernatural beasties.)
Also in wand race inspired one, one enemy is land locked neighbor, the other is over seas.
Also the npc will be generals using said toys. If they fail in their rolls, get replaced and “your” team elects next guy.
Final note: The npc enemy/it’s in this game? They develop their own stuff too with time to shake things up. ( they are bond by die rules like anyone else.)
Post by: Parsely on July 03, 2018, 02:51:37 pm
2: The said enemies are way, way different from each other. So a really hard time trying to think of something for them as a whole. So become specialists in slaying certain ones.I might even go so far as to just say forget simulating the enemy, running two teams is already too much work and now you don't have a stable of players who are feeding the enemy new designs. Make the enemy vague and just say they always are keeping up with your gear in some way. Instead of trying to define the enemy's entire arsenal just identify a particular challenge that needs to be overcome and put a turn limit on it.
Post by: Sensei on July 03, 2018, 03:10:20 pm
If you wanted to do something like that, a Monopoly-style game might be the way to go.I've seen a couple games like that, I did one (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125343.msg4192428#msg4192428) taht was sci-fi themed and I've seen at least one that was based around manufacturing weapons in a modern setting. Mine collapsed and so did the other one I've seen, you really need to figure out your math and rules well beforehand, it tolerates less "winging it" than some other systems because you've got to account for all the, well, accounting.
Both sides competing for the same contracts, with a budget and design team. Maybe...what, three contracts pop up per turn? Two cheap and easy ones, and one tougher and pricier one. You bid on the contracts, then you have to fulfill it. The goal is to drive the other side out of business.
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 03, 2018, 03:18:20 pm
That works.
And yes Stellar Lefioons the original I mercy killed because despite getting four arms races done at a time, one player asked for resources. Which caused me to go berserk.
There will be no real resource/points stuff. Just units rewarded (that I wrote up already) and well the design team gear defines the rest.
As for accounting, have you seen Orbiter? I keep track of population/ resources of four PC tribes each turn, notable npcs, and about to have a generation thing so more people/stuff.
That does not bother me. It is lack of people that usually kills my stuff.
Currently blessed in current projects.
That and I play my YouTube mix tape to inspire/rise to the occasion.
So yeah I could have done it if no berserk. As now I do the number crunch.
But number crunch only in Pangaea games ( as you run lives of peoples/cultures)
My Arms Race is just people killing people with unlimited resources. So no crunch. The deal is if you mess up, high command gives you less.
( I mean 40k. You got countless worlds and countless people. That’s not a issue noir it should be.)
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 04, 2018, 10:46:46 am
1: Renaming Dragon Legion.
2: The Resources In said 40k game are limitless unless lose ton of worlds, and “speciality” stuff will come into play. Plus suggestion game choices make new units (each faction starts off with units, depends on said one.) Naval/space ships, a size chart, design your own ships. And I decided the only “materials worth accounting” are speciality/gift stuff. Say exotic metals for crafting and such.
3: Will only do die rolls to decide what enemies exist, in original I rolled for almost everything, it was out of synch in Having magic powered ships while grunts had plain ole bullets.
Also not actually starting this until have my zip disc file place. Left it at my girlfriends home and visiting her in August. (Due to college stuff.$
Post by: Parsely on July 05, 2018, 03:16:41 pm
Post by: Rockeater on July 05, 2018, 03:34:35 pm
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 05, 2018, 03:58:36 pm
Post by: Parsely on July 05, 2018, 04:16:05 pm
Post by: RAM on July 05, 2018, 05:14:58 pm
I would consider just ignoring votes that occur within, say, 12 hours of an update, or completely segregate design proposal and selection into two different phases, but that would also slow things down...
another option would be to do it all simultaneously. This could result in some confusion, but if you simultaneously proposed designs for future turns(and potentially obsoleted designs to keep the list small), voted to implement designs in the current turn, proposed revisions to already implemented designs, and voted on revision proposals from previous turns... well, then everything could happen all at once... It also seems like it would be an interesting bit of predictive effort. Participants would need to come up with proposals to suit the tattlefield of the future, rather than getting to go from situation to implementation immediately. Perhaps there could be a limited number of failed proposals persisting, so they would be culled based upon low votes or something, in an attempt to prevent proposal spam?
Post by: evictedSaint on July 05, 2018, 07:00:54 pm
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on July 05, 2018, 07:05:07 pm
Post by: RAM on July 06, 2018, 01:06:58 am
The question is what are you trying to accomplish by locking votes?An increase in discussion. If people can't vote then they can either wait or talk, and talking is interesting? Many designs can be improved with a little critique...
Post by: Man of Paper on July 06, 2018, 01:35:50 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 06, 2018, 01:46:36 am
Post by: evictedSaint on July 06, 2018, 02:13:18 am
Resources and TC. How should it be handled?
Personally I was never a fan of the TC aspect of AR's, and the snowball effect of holding land is hard to overcome for the disadvantaged side. Is there a better way to do the expense aspect of an AR?
Post by: Happerry on July 06, 2018, 02:47:02 am
Resources and alternatives to them are a hard one though, at least if you don't want to go into Spire Race level book-keeping.
Post by: Talion on July 06, 2018, 03:46:58 am
Post by: NUKE9.13 on July 06, 2018, 04:11:17 am
As for territory providing resources being a snowballing feature, yeah, it does seem like it would lead to that. In practice, it tends to work out, though? I can't really think of a time when one side was at a major disadvantage due to a lack of resources, except towards the very end of Sensei's two ARs- in which case it's sort of justified, and a good thing, since you don't want the game to drag on forever. And you do want to provide some sort of incentive for taking territory.
Post by: Man of Paper on July 06, 2018, 04:19:18 am
Post by: Tyrant Leviathan on July 06, 2018, 09:27:00 am
1: Pangaea: Small community scale of no war but survival. It is very small scale of communities so the numbers are small, on purpose except for one I am designing. Instead of micro manage would be Macro manage (basically instead of tiny resources to combine, Have big, butnsimple numbers to follow.(
2: WH40k version where the only resources you manage/show are small traces of exotic research and units themselves. Arms Race factors are whipping said units, and assigning them missions. Certain SG/Contest stuff opens new units. And two kinds. Navy (space ship) and ground forces.
3: In my first war games, there was no arms Race factor of inventing new gear/units. Instead it’s a massive tech tree with branches in multiple fields.
Tech/magic is arming forces.
Society is how commoners feel about war effort and mind set.
Tactics is how smart they fight.
And a logistics branch. In that if you want said resource advantages/new ones. Got to invest in it.
Post by: Parsely on July 06, 2018, 01:21:24 pm
- Transport craft (in the context of the region's terrain)
- Communications
- General ability to defend transports (maybe ignore this part to keep things simple)
And just assign whichever side has superior logistics a Logistics Advantage on a region by region basis? Maybe it has an effect on battle reports.
An idea I'm mulling over is having resource "nodes" that unlock at 1,2, and 4 turns of control of a sector with the controlling team voting on what resource to exploit from that point, with the ability to design installations or processes to exploit the resource further. The resources would remain unlocked permanently regardless of who winds up in control of the sector. This would let a team trailing behind still have the opportunity to field more expensive equipment while still providing the winning side with the ability to build upon a wider variety of resources.Maybe when you gain control of a resource node you don't get all the resources at once but instead you add a single point of the resource every turn until your resource potential is equal to your actual production, and it would work the same way if you lose a node. Since it takes time to exploit territories, if a territory keeps changing hands over and over no one has time to exploit it. If you have a logistics advantage in a territory you just took then you can exploit the resources faster and when you lose the territory and you're falling back you bleed the production more slowly.
You could measure Logistical Strain with a maximum limit. Taking more land and deploying certain designs increases Strain. Trucks and trains and so on work to immediately or gradually decrease Strain. You could also allow things like landing strips that reduces Strain for aircraft. Different lanes might have different Strain values, so defending the capital lets people deploy all the toys while attacking the enemy's capital leaves the other side overstretched and more limited in what they can bring.This seems like an interesting idea as well.
Post by: Talion on September 27, 2018, 11:40:30 am
Arms Race: War of the Rune
An arms race game inspired by a number of others, from Wands Race to War of the Cinder Spire.
Every fifty years, the goddess Eristria calls the faithful to do battle. To the victors she grants a place at her side; the defeated she bids her angels scatter to the four winds that they might regrow stronger and more worthy. There have been nine wars of the goddess. The next is due in ten years. The strongest nation; the Glorious Star, desiring a victory without contest have already exiled the Iqua and the Loji nations, using their superior martial strength. Their nations people forced aboard the vast wooden ships and escorted by warships armed with the strange fire magic metal cylinders known as cannons.
The island they find themselves on is simply not large enough to rebuild their armies and hope to displace the Star, at least not while their rivals share the land.
The Defiant Iqua
The Pious Loji
The Magic System
The magic system makes use of objects known as Runes. Each Rune is composed of a Meaning component that describes vaguely the intent of the Rune and an Element component that impacts the elemental theme of the magic cast using the Rune. This will generally be written in the form Meaning(Element). There is a fixed set of Meanings and Elements from which all the various magical effects available to design around are formed. Charging these Runes with Mana is a long and difficult process and is described using Mana costs in a design. Activating the Runes to do magic is a cheap process that can be done in battlefield time. These costs are not represented in designs but can limit the number of times each mage is considered able to cast a spell during battle.
Rules
The rules are inspired by many other Arms Race games of which Sensei’s Intercontinental Arms Race (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=163937.0) is a good reference.
This game plays out on a turn by turn basis. Each turn represents a season and is roughly three months in length. Each turn is broken up into four phases as explained below.
Spoiler: Phases (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Heroes (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Resources (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Expense (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Map (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rockeater on September 27, 2018, 12:18:06 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on September 27, 2018, 12:51:46 pm
Post by: Talion on September 27, 2018, 01:12:16 pm
Post by: Shadowclaw777 on September 27, 2018, 01:25:34 pm
Nukes 2d4, Adding Projects to the Designs which means they aren’t instantaneous and based on your wording you want design to be applied immediately so the 2d4 is a good fit.
Map is obvious, could say just basic descriptions of lands such as “Steppes”, “Savannah”, “Mountain Range”, I mean you could do more and use a graphic tool like hex-maps or paint art like pirate joe lol
Post by: Talion on September 27, 2018, 01:47:06 pm
All magic races had started with a “Bucket” system where they get to choose what initial magic they can further explore and make both side differing from the start, so one that starts with a blank canvas *could* be I tersting , but the more important thing here is the “semblance” of a map where the theatres of war are fought, and the rolling system.There is a bucket system, each side gets to select a starting element (but it is probably less restrictive than previous bucket systems).
Nukes 2d4, Adding Projects to the Designs which means they aren’t instantaneous and based on your wording you want design to be applied immediately so the 2d4 is a good fit.
Map is obvious, could say just basic descriptions of lands such as “Steppes”, “Savannah”, “Mountain Range”, I mean you could do more and use a graphic tool like hex-maps or paint art like pirate joe lol
I would say the map is the part I'm most unsure about. I played around with Azgaar's Fantasy Map, but it was pushing me towards making an already experimental game more complicated. My current plan is to use a simple wands race-ish approach.
Post by: Rockeater on September 27, 2018, 02:55:31 pm
It isn't unusual for this thread. See GalactiRace (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156417.msg7755716#msg7755716) for example.Sorry, I misunderstood something, nvm
Post by: Aseaheru on September 27, 2018, 03:49:19 pm
Post by: evictedSaint on September 27, 2018, 05:15:14 pm
a simple wands race-ish approach.:'(
Post by: Talion on September 27, 2018, 05:54:42 pm
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 10, 2018, 09:19:15 pm
Deathworld: A PVE player faction vs planet 4x game
Core concept: A factorio-style logistical pipedream where you build the military industrial complex with a design element and a movement and combat element. I want to simulate everything from raw material collection, industrial processes to military design and colony management.
You are colonists from the evil Weyland Yutani corporation. You are sent on a very long voyage across the stars to set up shop and exploit a virgin world.
Addenum: The flavour is near-future space exploration. All the tech we have today is scaled up within foreseeable limits. Rockets are cheaper and bigger and can take our mining equipment up. Cyrogenics are working better to facilitate long distance space flight. Inter-stellar ion engines have also been scaled up and produced more cheaply. Power-suits are more practical and more common.
21st Century earth doesn't even have a practical working theory for FTL much less prototypes, so we don't get that. But everything else exists within the boundaries of existing tech and is scaled up a bit.
To do:
Costs for every item
Some intermediary processes: Ore sorting. Component making.
Game setup: Pick several starting materiel and personnel: Weight is listed because logistics. And we're sending these heavy gear into space, rocketing them for years across the stars, landing them and making them set up shop on an alien planet.
Colonists:
Technicians - blue collar workers that do the bulk of the infrastructure building. The can also be easily repurposed to crew vehicles and operating almost any machine.
Security men - Armed with old surplus AR-15s, Glock sidearms and a kevlar vest. They are barely 1 step up from unarmed mall cops. Their equipment is mostly effective against other humans, and they are mostly trained to watch buildings or cover public spaces and events. While there are some veterans who get these kinds of security jobs, their training will not have much effect on the larger pool of rent-a-armed-cops.
Horticulturalists - workers who specialize in crop production. they run greenhouses and hydroponics setups on new worlds.
Prospectors - Geologists and mining exploration specialists who look for minerals and decide on where and how to set up a mine.
All other forms of specialized labour will be abstracted into the "technicians" class of people.
Heavy Equipment:
The Bucket Wheel Excavator - Used for open pit strip mining. They consist of a series of rotating scoops attached to a superstructure. The largest weigh about 15,000 tons and can move 250,000 cubic meters a day. The amount of common ores yielded from such a method is about 0.2%, while rarer minerals are extracted at a yield of about 1 to 5 ppm.
1 cubic meter of soil weighs about 1.6 tons
Cost: 15,000 tons Steel
Rotary Drills - Drills have 2 major applications - taking samples before an open pit mine is built, and possibly for underground mining. A large drill that goes down about 100 meters at a time weighs 100 tons.
Crushers and Rockbreakers - Crushers for heavy mining use either a jaw or a gyratory wheel. The biggest industrial plants handle about 15,000 tons/h. Modern automated facilities can work with minimum stoppages. Packed up, a large semi-mobile plant should also weigh about 15,000 tons. The plants are usually semi-mobile because they are located in the mine and the ores are crushed before they are transported by truck.
Transport Crawlers: A huge tracked machine used to move machines. Your BWE stripminer and the semi-mobile crushing facilities are usually broken up and moved in 1000 ton chunks by a 1000 ton machine
Mining Trucks - Giant Ore carrying trucks weighing about 250 tons that carry up to 400 tons with a 4000hp engine
Static Facilities:
Bulk Ore Sorter: Processes raw ores into common ores and rare materials
Size: 50,000 tons, Capacity, 5000 tons/h
Greenhouse, 1 Hectare:
Yield: Potatoes
Yield: Polystyrene grade Sugarcane: 7,151 kg per hectare per year, 137 kg per earth week
Yield: Soybeans: 2,384 kg per hectare per year, 45.8 kg per week, 1173 Kcal per kg, 53,723 KCal per Week
Cost: ~ 200 tons/steel
Ammonia Plant:
Size 50,000 tons
Capacity: 500 tons/day
Advanced Electronics
Capacity: 2000 silicon wafers/day
Industrial Processes:
Extractive Metallurgy:
We will abstract ores into "rare" and "common".
Pyrometallurgy: We will abstract smelting to just modern induction furnaces that melt down the ores and sends the refined products straight to the casting machines. The bulk of our steel for heavy machines will come from Pyrometallurgy. This is a weight losing process with an efficiency as high as 60-70%.
Capacity: 100 tons/hour , 10,000 ton facility weight, 50MW power consumption.
Hydrometallurgy/Electrometallurgy: Leaching is done to extract rarer metals and minerals. Ores are placed in a leaching solution and electrolytic processes are used to extract them. Aircraft aluminum and metals used in aircraft alloys are extracted this way. Raw uranium is also separated from its impurities this way before it is enriched.
Efficiency is about 30%.
Capacity: 3 tons/day (to make 1 ton of metal), 10,000 ton facility weight, 50 MW power consumption
Non-metals:
Polymers don't neccessary come from oil. Cellulose can be used in their place. Sugarcane is used to produce polyethyene, which is used to make ballistic fabrics. We will abstract plastic production and consider all thermoplastics to be more or less equal. (Polycarbonates are still largely produced from oil and gas because they rely on acetone production, but fuck it, any hydrocarbon will do.)
Explosives:
Smokeless powder is basically organic materials dissolved in nitric acid. We can abstract the hydrocarbons, but will probably simulate nitric acid production from ammonia.
The main primary explosive today is lead azide, which is lead dissolved in sodium azide. Sodium azide comes from sodium dissolved in ammonia.
Ammonia is key. Ammonia gives us nitric acid which produces all secondary explosives. Ammonia gives us sodium azide to make lead azide to make primers and detonators.
Lead is common enough to come from "common" ore.
I will run the numbers for industrial plastic and explosive production later. I might also add uranium enrichment processes if it doesn't over-complicate things.
Light Equipment:
The humble forklift: Used for carrying pallets of miscellaneous goods and foodstuff.
Industrial Powersuits: About as strong as a forklift, but has better dexterity from grasping hands, and generally better bipedal mobility. Used by technicians in the same manner as a forklift.
Light Buggies/ATVs and Rovers: Light framed cars for moving people about.
Manufacturing:
Machine-tooling - We take it for granted that your average technician with a workbench can take a lump of steel (or other requisite materials) and turn it into a rifle, just like that.
Heavy Fabrication - The player faction has to build a facility with an assembly line to automate a fabrication processing that involves all the cutting and bending and welding of the huge chunks of metal. For adhoc work, a bunch of technicians in powersuits wielding the machines could also do the job.
Game phases after setup:
Game map: The game will use a coordinate system with 0,0 being the players' landing site. Coordinates can go in all quadrants, including negative numbers. Each grid square represents 1 kilometer by 1 kilometer. Vector maths will be used to calculate distances.
Movement: Resource Exploration - The players scout a grid point and can choose to use a prospector person and a drill to make an exploratory excavation for resources.
Movement: Military and Logistical - The players can make the decision to start excavating a point, assign forces the guard or patrol a point or route, and set up supply routes between mines and facilities. The set up of more industrial facilities and production decisions also takes place here.
Pre-Design: Requirement Analysis - Based on experiences in the field, the players (perhaps acting as cushy executives or a team of scientists) decide on what problems need to be prioritized, and what new pieces of tech must be designed.
Design: Conceptualization - Like in other arms race games, design characteristics are listed.
Detailed design is simulated, probably by dice roll, after the conceptualization phase. At the end of which, you will have a working prototype that either performs better or worse than expected and is ready for fabrication. You will however need to build specialized fabrication facilities for each type of vehicle or machine in the logistical phase.
Rest phase: Civilian life simulation: Civil affairs of the colony are described here. Laws and social issues are brought up (but generally have no direct impact on the raw industrial and military numbers), you might describe the consumption and preferences for luxuries here and how luxuries and entertainment are distributed among the workers. We will not be number crunching in this phase.
Then it cycles back to resource scouting and then to action. The "revision phase" in the arms race games will be part of the pre-design and design phases. You might have multiple projects and multiple improvements on projects running at once. I might want to plan on how to impose limits on that.
Post by: Kashyyk on October 12, 2018, 02:27:27 pm
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 13, 2018, 03:38:01 am
Abstract all materials into just 3 types:
Common Metals
Rare Metals
Organic Produce
Then forget the components, just make the damn tonk out of the materials.
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 13, 2018, 09:32:27 pm
Deathworld: A PVE player faction vs planet 4x game
A campaign of resource exploitation with combat and R&D in an escalating conflict against a virgin planet.
You are colonists from the evil Weyland Yutani corporation. You are sent on a very long voyage across the stars to set up shop and exploit a virgin world.
Tech Level: The flavour is near-future space exploration. All the tech we have today is scaled up within foreseeable limits. Rockets are cheaper and bigger and can take our mining equipment up. Cyrogenics are working better to facilitate long distance space flight. Inter-stellar ion engines have also been scaled up and produced more cheaply. Power-suits are more practical and more common.
21st Century earth doesn't even have a practical working theory for FTL much less prototypes, so we don't get that. But everything else exists within the boundaries of existing tech and is scaled up a bit.
Resources:
Steel/Common Metals: Steel is used for the bulk of our heavy machinery. Other common metals include copper, lead and tin.
Rare Metals & Minerals: Almost every other metal and mineral can be extracted in some quantity from stripmining.
Organic Produce: Our greenhouses grow staple crops in a controlled environment that is safe from the planet outside.
Mining Logistics Summary:
Strip mining BWEs -> 400,000 tons of Raw Rocks
- >
->
-> pyrometallurgy -> 240-280 tons of common metal
-> Hydro/Electric Metallurgy -> 0.12 tons of rare material
Crew Requirements::
Crew needs are per shift. Your average technician works for 8 hours every 24 without performance drops. To staff a vehicle or facility for continuous operation, triple the crew needs are required.
Non Combatants:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Mining yields: Mines will have a richness that is multiplied again a base number of 0.1% for common metal ores and 1 ppm for rare materials. A mine with 200% richness can yield 0.2% common metal ores, etc.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Light Equipment:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Combatants
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Game phases after setup:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Player Roles
Anyone jumps in:
Designers
Logistical Planners
Specialized roles:
Chef: In charge of detailed design of food rations
Heroes: Takes charge of a single military character to perform feats of heroism.
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 13, 2018, 09:55:25 pm
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 13, 2018, 10:17:43 pm
Turn 1: Exploration phase
Scout for resources at coordinates (1, 1) (distance 1.412 km)
Dispatch 1 land crawler towing a drill.
Results: Exploratory excavations suggest that the rocks here have an average yield of 48% Total Rock to be Excavated is estimated at 20 million tons.
Turn 2: Deploy mine at (1, 1)
Dispatch all available land crawlers towing 2 BWE stripminers and other semi-static processing facilities.
Set up 1 ore sorters for common ore!
Set p 1 ore sorter for rare materials
Results:
Common ore production is estimated at 180 tons a day
Rare ore production is estimated at 0.2 tons a day
Combat:
Wild animals are spotted in the woods, it is unknown how hostile or dangerous they are. Exploratory missions should be sent.
Turn 3:
Design Phase Need Analysis:
We propose a hunting rifle be designed or an existing one be designated. The existing 5.56 Nato has poor performance against large animals.
Turn 4:
Design Phase: Conceptualization:
The not-reinventing the M14:
A magazine fed semi-automatic gas-operated rotating bolt battle rifle. Chambered for 7.62x51 Nato. Barrel Length 22 Inches, etc...
Dice rolls ensue, etc...
Post by: Aigre Excalibur on October 14, 2018, 02:00:34 am
I see combat modelling as a split between quantifiable and non-quantifiable dimensions.
Theoretical firepower is quantifiable. As is things like standardized testing of fire-arm proficiency and fitness
Non-quantifiable aspects are things like morale, cohesion and other aspects of "training"
Theoretical firepower can also be matched against staying power. And staying power is often modeled as the elusive "hitpoints" quality or as a probability of incapacitation...
Post by: Man of Paper on October 17, 2018, 05:42:35 pm
Symmetrical: Both corporations are responsible for creating and fielding these monsters to cause fear in the public which nets the teams resources depending on who controls the sector and the level of fear. To counter fear, teams also deploy security forces to neutralize opposing biohorrors, or their own should a situation require it.
Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.
I have no preference either way, so I leave it to the public to decide which ruleset to focus on.
Post by: dgr11897 on October 17, 2018, 05:44:50 pm
Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.Personally, I like the asymmetrical version,
Post by: Failbird105 on October 17, 2018, 06:26:35 pm
For an arms race revolving around biohorrors in the same vein as resident evil which of the following does the public prefer?I'd be okay with either, but Asymmetrical would make the two teams arsenals unique from eachother by its very nature.
Symmetrical: Both corporations are responsible for creating and fielding these monsters to cause fear in the public which nets the teams resources depending on who controls the sector and the level of fear. To counter fear, teams also deploy security forces to neutralize opposing biohorrors, or their own should a situation require it.
Asymmetrical: One side takes up creating and deploying biohorrors in an attempt to destabilize governments across the globe, netting Biomass for their actions. The other side is responsible for combating these horrors and tracking down and eliminating the lab. This would run similarly to an XCom arms race.
I have no preference either way, so I leave it to the public to decide which ruleset to focus on.
Either way though I'd be tossing out Infectonator zombies.
Post by: Rockeater on October 17, 2018, 11:48:24 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on October 18, 2018, 04:06:48 am
I prefer symmetric
Me too.
Post by: Failbird105 on October 18, 2018, 02:26:43 pm
Post by: Man of Paper on October 18, 2018, 09:28:13 pm
Post by: FallacyofUrist on October 18, 2018, 11:08:00 pm
Post by: Man of Paper on October 18, 2018, 11:42:09 pm
Post by: Kashyyk on October 19, 2018, 01:40:02 am
Post by: RoseHeart on May 15, 2019, 02:16:38 pm
Post by: NUKE9.13 on May 15, 2019, 02:27:11 pm
What is a good source material to reference (with details on how to run an arms race)?I mean, if you want to run an AR, I'd recommend participating in a bunch first, to build experience with the genre.
Post by: RoseHeart on May 15, 2019, 02:35:03 pm
I just want see that material.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on May 15, 2019, 02:49:13 pm
I mean, it would be hard to make a guide for how to run an AR, since there are so many variations.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on May 15, 2019, 03:29:12 pm
For the ultimate most "Classic"-like rules, just look at the OP of Intercontinental Arms Race. For anything else, just take a look at the rules in the OP of any Arms Race you like.
Post by: RoseHeart on May 21, 2019, 08:22:36 am
A battle could be as simple as one roll that favors whom ever is more specialized, or as intricate as 10s of rolls for each unit interaction with each other.
Post by: Chiefwaffles on May 21, 2019, 08:42:59 am
I believe most ARs just have a variant of a system where the GM compares the two side’s units in every avenue of battle in a given theatre. They figure out what side has the advantages in specific areas (side 1’s artillery is doing better in this terrain, weather, and complementing designs that side 2’s artillery). Then they tally up all the distinct advantages and see what side is doing the best overall.
Some arms races have tried using programs to determine battle outcomes, to fairly disastrous results as far as I’m aware. Some use dice to varying degrees for an element of randomness, and some don’t to keep the battles deterministic hard on the dragons. Etc. etc.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on May 21, 2019, 09:02:58 am
...and why do you want this information, anyway?
Post by: RoseHeart on May 21, 2019, 09:06:03 am
Post by: Man of Paper on May 21, 2019, 09:10:38 am
Post by: ConscriptFive on May 21, 2019, 09:31:07 am
Thus, there's essentially no quantitative way to handle the broad combined arms warfare you get in an Arms Race.
Qualitative parity analysis is the only way to go. The best you can do is try to identify each side's comparative strengths and shortcomings capabilities-wise, then try to write that into how battle would occur at each specific front. Here's a 2 year old player-written spreadsheet from ICAR, showing one way to do it: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G-dT3NDrJ6WWIl8XEfWmYnM3Oxq-KX97br4ftrYc4EY/edit#gid=0
Arms Race players want to see a compelling interactive narrative, and getting all wrapped up trying to write equations for combat is a largely unappreciated tangent a GM will get burnt out trying to do.
Post by: NUKE9.13 on May 21, 2019, 11:45:43 am
How does a "sample combat log" imply the assumption they all do it the same way? Also Nuke I have played a few and observed several. The only thing you've added to this conversation is gatekeeping. Not helpful.Uh... sorry? It was not my intention to gatekeep in any way. On the contrary, I encouraged you to participate in ARs.
I did misinterpret you regarding you thinking all combat systems are the same- my bad. So, to provide a more suitable answer: I, at least, didn't really have a hidden combat log- wysiwyg. How I came up with the results was by manually (in my mind) considering the effects of the various elements present in a battle, and figuring how they would interact. I think ConscriptFive has provided the closest thing you're going to get to what you're asking for, and that wasn't something the GM of that game created. The reason I misinterpreted you was due to the fact that even if someone provided you with the exact thing you're imagining, that would in no way be representative of how ARs in general are run.
I'd still like to know why you want this information. Not in a "how dare you ask for this whilst not being an established member of the AR playerbase" sense, but rather a "I don't understand why you're asking for this and I'm curious" sense.
Post by: RoseHeart on May 21, 2019, 03:26:49 pm
Team 1
2 × A
3 × B
Team 2
4 × C
1 × D
And the advantages are matched. Would you just kill half of each teams units? Favoring more plentiful units?
Post by: Chiefwaffles on May 21, 2019, 04:21:14 pm
In any of my previous games, I wouldn't even get to the situation of comparing units just in "A" and "B". To me, it's more like logical narrative-building rather than just distilling and comparing numbers. When two sides clash, I write it as a battle based on the placement, numbers, and equipment of both sides, rather than just calculate a winner and results then write a narrative after the fact.
What I'd do would depend on the exact advantages each side has, and see how they would factor into the battle. The equipment and designs of each side would determine the end result.
For example, in one of my older and now-99.9%-dead ARs, Planetary Arms Race, a scenario would crop up in which one side was entrenched with notably better longer-ranged weapons than the other side. But the other side had better close range weapons. Rather than just say "advantages cancel out, 50% casualties to both sides" I wrote the narrative of suicide charges in which the commanders of the close-range side would force a charge past the killing field and into a scenario where their weapons would be useful, and based the results like that.
Arms Races are, in my opinion, more like a mechanically-assisted narrative rather than the other way around.
Post by: Draignean on May 21, 2019, 06:10:26 pm
Chief's description is basically the standard, adjusted in exact flavor by individual DMs. For me, I write up a cheatsheet of the advantages and disadvantages each side has in a conflict. Given that, I can write a skeleton of how those advantages and disadvantages between sides interact that defines the scope of the battle. Given that skeleton, I can then put more flesh on the bones as needed for narrative and descriptive purpose.
In the example you've given, it's really crucially important to note that most AR games are not scoped at that level. Most ARs take the position that a front is big enough, reinforcements are good enough, and enough battles take place that every battlefield situation will occur simultaneously. Two evenly matched sides do not get halved at the end of the day, they skirmish back and forth over ground, the turn of chance creating vicious defeats and hard-won victories on both sides. In the end it's net zero, no territory lost or gained, but it's a much more bitter net zero than just burying everyone with odd numbered both years.
Now, there are some ARs that do use finite numbers of units fighting finite numbers of units. I'd strongly advise against using the GalactiRace system for doing so unless you're dead certain, have meditated long on the issue, and have struck a deal with one of the dead Godflesh aggregates who wait within the dreamveil and whose names structure the void between voids. I'd strongly advise against the spires system of infantry combat, period.
In GR ground combat, you can have roughly the situation you described above. However, in most cases, units will never be lost. It's important to remember that war is NOT a competition to kill the most people, it is a conquest to take the most
In GR space combat, things are much different. The numbers of units are small, and you can get into exactly the situation you described above. Teams make tactical decision on what to do with their units, but at the end of the day it's loadout pitched against loadout, but even then you have to consider what the units actually are. Two perfectly matched forces butting heads generally won't end up with 50% mutual losses. If they're individual humans with the ability to retreat, then you might have minimal or no losses. They value their own lives, and without the opportunity for a decisive victory will not just slug it out to X point and then politely agree to stop. Tanks, however, in the same situation may inflict heavy mutual casualties, beyond 50%, as the game is very much who gets to shoot who first. If the two sides aren't allowed retreat, then consider the fact that evenly matched forces will turn into a meatgrinder. It's not 50% losses you're looking at, but a no survivors or wounded only scenario.
The boildown of this is you just can't boil down the fighting with a few simple axioms. It depends on what kind of mechanics you're using (finite units, infinite fronts, or a combination), what units are actually involved in combat, and the base nature of the game.
Post by: Aseaheru on May 21, 2019, 06:19:17 pm
Post by: RoseHeart on May 21, 2019, 07:44:35 pm
Quote from: Chief
For example, in one of my older and now-99.9%-dead ARs, Planetary Arms Race, a scenario would crop up in which one side was entrenched with notably better longer-ranged weapons than the other side. But the other side had better close range weapons. Rather than just say "advantages cancel out, 50% casualties to both sides" I wrote the narrative of suicide charges in which the commanders of the close-range side would force a charge past the killing field and into a scenario where their weapons would be useful, and based the results like that.So would the few close range troops that survived the charge kill all the long rangers?
Arms Races are, in my opinion, more like a mechanically-assisted narrative rather than the other way around.
Quote from: Draignean
In GR ground combat, you can have roughly the situation you described above. However, in most cases, units will never be lost. It's important to remember that war is NOT a competition to kill the most people, it is a conquest to take the most COWS ground from your enemy. Your main goal, as with most ARs, is to gain territory.The longest running ones I played (xcom, gladiators) focused on individual units. Thanks for pointing that option out.
In GR space combat, things are much different. The numbers of units are small, and you can get into exactly the situation you described above. Teams make tactical decision on what to do with their units, but at the end of the day it's loadout pitched against loadout, but even then you have to consider what the units actually are.
Quote from: Nuke
I'd still like to know why you want this information. Not in a "how dare you ask for this whilst not being an established member of the AR playerbase" sense, but rather a "I don't understand why you're asking for this and I'm curious" sense.Do YOU have any UNANNOUNCED projects? I may just be curious myself, even if I don't plan to make one.
Post by: Madman198237 on May 21, 2019, 08:00:59 pm
QuoteFor example, in one of my older and now-99.9%-dead ARs, Planetary Arms Race, a scenario would crop up in which one side was entrenched with notably better longer-ranged weapons than the other side. But the other side had better close range weapons. Rather than just say "advantages cancel out, 50% casualties to both sides" I wrote the narrative of suicide charges in which the commanders of the close-range side would force a charge past the killing field and into a scenario where their weapons would be useful, and based the results like that.So would the few close range troops that survived the charge kill all the long rangers?
Arms Races are, in my opinion, more like a mechanically-assisted narrative rather than the other way around.
In that case, no, but neither did the snipers kill the entire force of troops equipped better for close combat. It turned out roughly to be a bloody tie in the favor of the longer-ranged side for various reasons, IIRC. But you'd have to, as a GM, decide things like that. Nobody can give you a guide to answer every question flawlessly, you just have to do your best to analyze EVERY situation that might occur and give the fairest result you can think of.
Post by: RoseHeart on May 21, 2019, 09:40:25 pm
Post by: Madman198237 on June 09, 2019, 09:13:46 pm
Let's say, further, that said hypothetical player was possibly going to stop being lazy and consider actually doing something towards getting such an Arms Race done, and that, just possibly, they were going to ask the AR community what sort of game they'd like to see from said hypothetical wannabe GM.
So, what sort of AR game/genre/mechanics/feel/scenario/setting/factions/technologies would people like to see? I make no guarantees of any kind save that somebody is going to be disappointed with the end result.
Post by: Man of Paper on June 09, 2019, 09:16:15 pm
Really, anything that seems like it's run by a capable "human being" is fine by me, so long as it isn't some weeb animu horseass.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 09, 2019, 09:19:11 pm
I'd prefer it be in a setting the salt machine is most familiar with, like a mine or evaporated sea floor.This seems to be sound advice. Salt mine Arms Race here we go! :P
Really, anything that seems like it's run by a capable "human being" is fine by me, so long as it isn't some weeb animu horseass.Define... "capable".
Anyway I should probably mention that I'm not really an anime sort of person. At all.
Post by: Aseaheru on June 09, 2019, 09:35:21 pm
By these criteria, as a GM of about 6 games thusfar, I am only mostly capable.
Post by: Madman198237 on June 09, 2019, 09:41:36 pm
I would, of course, be doing my absolute best to run the game and won't actually start it if I feel that I won't be able to complete it. Or, rather, I'll start it if I can delude myself into believing that I'll finish it :P
Post by: ConscriptFive on June 14, 2019, 03:03:17 pm
I'm introducing some fresh mechanics and trying stay in an interesting-yet-grounded setting I feel I can write well. I assure you, the rules are mostly just over-explained, and not nearly as intimidating as the word count suggests. I'll probably back pocket some of this text on release to not spook those new to the genre. The Wildcard mechanic was written specifically as a lottery to entice new players to the genre.
Basic Setting:
NATO paramilitaries vs. Warsaw Pact paramilitaries in post-nuclear continental Europe.
-Ten years after nuclear exchange in late 1980's
-CIA "Gladio," leading multi-national NATO-aligned forces out of the Pyrenees Mountains
-KGB "Fifth Column," leading multi-national WP-aligned forces out of the Balkan Mountains
-Infantry-based MilSim focus
-Focus on refurbishing 20th Century arms
***FULL THEME/SETTING WRITE-UP PENDING***
Basic Gameplay Loop:
1. GM issues Battle Report (BR) describing the last two months of combat and announces any Special Events or their results.
2. Players immediately begin Armory (Traditional Design/Revision) Phase, where they propose and elect hardware to issue to their forces.
3. Upon identifying a consensus, GM rolls the elected proposal and formally writes up the results for the players, ending Armory Phase.
4. Players immediately begin War College Phase, where they propose and elect MOS to issue to their forces.
5. Upon identifying a consensus, GM rolls the elected proposal and formally writes up the results for the players, ending War College Phase.
6. GM opens Organization Phase by formally identifying any bookkeeping decisions players need to make (such as retiring redundant/obsolete systems and updating wildcard decks. GM provides a default plan for the players to review. GM also reminds players this is their last opportunity to claim any GM errors since last Organization Phase if they want any hard corrections.
7. Players say their part in Organization phase, voting on bookkeeping plans and/or claiming any GM errors.
8. Upon identifying a consensus, GM locks in the bookkeeping plan and formally answers any claimed errors, ending Organization Phase.
9. GM opens Strategy Phase, stating what regiments they have available and what their deployments were last turn. GM also reminds them this is their last chance to contribute for any Special Events before the turn ends.
10. Players discuss and vote for troop deployments, while wrapping up any event issues, ending Strategy Phase.
Force Structure (Order of Battle):
Each side's forces are initially structured as a single independent infantry regiment. Every six months (three turns) another independent regiment is formed. As the war drags on, long term attrition and strained logistics will eventually cap the total number of regiments, and ultimately even decrease them.
Troop Echelon List
Regiment, ~1600 men commanded by a General
Battalion, ~500 men commanded by a Colonel
Company, ~160 men commanded by a Captain
Platoon, ~50 men commanded by a Lieutenant
Squad, ~15 men commanded by a Sergeant
Fire Team, 4 men commanded by a Corporal
Troop formations are universally "triangular" in structure. A regiment consists of a General Officer's command element (his staff and direct attachments), and then three line battalions. A line battalion consists of a Colonel's command element (his staff and direct attachments), and then three line companies. A line company consists of a Captain's command element (his staff and direct attachments), and then three line platoons. A line platoon consists of a Lieutenant's command element (his assistants and direct attachments), and then three line squads. A line squad consists of a Sergeant's command element (possibly one or two assistants and most squad hardware gets distributed down to a fire team), and then three fire teams. A fire team consists of a Corporal and then three individual soldiers (any team level hardware is typically distributed/substituted within the team itself.)
Resources (or lack thereof) and Costs:
This Arms Races eschews the traditional terrain-based resources and transport capacity (TC) system.
Based on the assessed difficulty to acquire, train, supply, and repair a hardware system, it is assigned as a possible single attachment to a minimum echelon, ranging from individual (standard issue) up to National (single prototype only) level. For example, a standard issue rifle could be available to everyone in your army, however a single battalion level artillery gun could only be found within a Battalion Colonel or General Officer's command element.
Of course just because it can be issued, doesn't mean it'll be used in combat. If the opposing force, battlefield conditions, or general ineffectiveness somehow disfavors a piece of hardware, it may not be a widely-used as its cost would suggest.
In assessing hardware costs, players are to note the setting and theme. In post-nuclear Europe, it's safe to assume the entire military-industrial complex was at the top of the targeting list. The power grid was probably second. The global oil industry made the top five easy. Few chemicals, including fuels and batteries, have a shelf life beyond five to ten years. Telecommunications hubs, airports, seaports, and railheads were most likely all hit as well, so international trade is essentially non-existant. Furthermore, EMP from high altitude nuclear detonations fried most circuits, and it's literally impossible to repair microscopic faults in an integrated circuit. Surely local tinkerers will arise to fulfill that demand for electricity and petrochemicals, but at what cost and volume? Safe to say, humanity won't be operating jet turbines any time soon.
On the upside, you'd be surprised how much endured. While subsistence farming is the new norm in Europe, the salvage, refurbishment, and trade of durable "pre-nuke" goods is a large and lucrative business. As of late, vehicle alternators converted to bicycle generators are a must-have item for the well-to-do. If one good thing came out of the nuclear holocaust, nature is now in resurgence throughout Europe, aiding hunter/trappers who rediscovered pre-industrial animal products such as tanned hides, furs, candles, and glue. Forestry itself is also in high-demand, providing much needed firewood for cooking and warmth. Of particular note, small arms rounds from as far back as WWI are still surprisingly functional, and niche handloading businesses are eager to refill anyone's brass for the right price.
Military Occupational Specialties (MOS's) draw from personnel, and thus have their own independent cost calculations (see War College Phase Details). MOS costs are calculated by assessing acceptable candidates to specialize from general recruiting, and then how arduous the MOS training itself is. Post-nuclear Europe a hodge-podge of varying ethnic and lingual communities that haven't really had public education, public healthcare, optometry, or even mass media for at least a decade. If you're expecting all your men to be fully fluent and literate in your lingua fraca, physically fit, better than 20/20 eye-sight, mentally and emotionally sound, non-criminal, idealogically motivated and loyal, courageous yet not reckless, or to simply have the will and intellectual capacity to learn anything they put their mind to... you're in for a disappointment. Your army takes what recruits it can get, and the vast majority of them won't be astronaut material. Just like Armory Phase hardware, that MOS is assigned as a possible single attachment to a minimum echelon, ranging from standard issue personnel up to National level.
Again, just because a certain MOS can be trained, doesn't mean he or she will be. Easy MOS's that lack Armory synergy, would overcrowd tight lower echelons, or are generally irrelevant won't be as prolific as their cost would suggest.
Armory Phase Details:
The Design Phase and Revision Phase are fundamental core of a traditional Arms Race. This Arms Race combines those two traditional phases into the Armory Phase.
For those new to the Arms Race genre, players post and debate military hardware proposals, ultimately voting to elect a single proposal that phase. The GM then rolls dice against the elected proposal. Taking into account the dice roll and the difficulty of the proposal (see Dice Rolls), the GM then writes up the resulting hardware, ending the Armory Phase.
Acceptable military hardware includes, but is not limited to: weapons, munitions, vehicles, clothing, commo/signal equipment, medical supplies, utility gear, and engineering obstacles. Civilian "infrastructure" proposals are expressly forbidden for both roleplay and game mechanics reasons. Forbidden infrastructure includes, but is not limited to: factories, refineries, universities, labs, or farms.
In writing Armory hardware proposals, players are strongly reminded to keep in mind the limitations of the setting. Rather than a formal nation-state, you are a paramilitary survivalist group that "collects taxes" from communities they "serve and protect." Rather than inventing from scratch, your armorers primarily refurbish and improve salvaged pre-nuke hardware and civilian goods. Why re-invent the wheel when you can yank one off an abandoned car in a bombed out parking garage? Your armorers also exist in a world largely without aerospace, shipyards, petrochemicals (especially fuels), or heavy industry in general. Electricity is a luxury and any functioning electronics probably had to be rebuilt with non-faulty solid-state components. Salvageable vehicles aren't uncommon, but the fuel to operate them is. Therefore, warfare is a gritty infantry-centric affair and Armory hardware should be designed with that in mind.
Speaking of infantry, by default all your recruits are generalists, and you also start with a basic combat rifleman MOS. Barring further War College actions, that means that any non-frontline infantry hardware is going to get handled by generalists. Generalists are adequate and describe any trained operators mentioned in your Armory rolls, but if you want better effects in the Battle Report, players should aim for hardware and MOS synergy when possible. Also, due to fierce political rivalry, the Armory and the War College do not collaborate whatsoever. This means that their tech advancements are independent as well. For example, if the War College had already rolled an aviator MOS (bad idea), and the Armory had just elected their first aircraft design (terrible idea), the aviator MOS has NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT on judging the difficulty modifier for the aircraft design. (Game mechanics-wise, this prevents a sort of "chicken or egg" question in trying to synchronize two independent elections, as well as trying to debate which should be elected first.)
Two additional game mechanics should also be noted when writing Armory hardware proposals: Wildcards and Logistics Channels. Easier hardware proposals are great for triggering Wildcard draws and are required to stock the Wildcard Deck (see Wildcard Rules). Logistics Channels are a cap on the number of active Armory hardware systems. Roleplay-wise, there are only so many specific hardware systems an army can acquire, train on, operate, re-supply, and repair. At a certain point an army just has to identify systems that aren't worth keeping online anymore. Game mechanics-wise, this mitigates the infinitely broad weapon list problem a successfully long running Arms Race can establish ("Hey GM, I didn't see a weapon system the enemy built six IRL months ago in the last two battle reports. Is it still relevant?"), instead focusing the game on what's actually being used and forcing players to confront their own otherwise forgotten systems. Logistics Channels can effectively stretched by exploiting Variant Models, allowing up to three similar hardware systems to occupy a single Logistics Channel (see Variant Model rules). Additional Logistics Channels may or may not be opened via Special Events or other game progression.
Variant Model Rules:
Variant Models allow for up to three different versions of an Armory hardware-system to be stocked via a single Logistics Channel. You may already notice a Variant or two in your starting equipment. Here are two quick theoretical (and completely off-theme) examples to illustrate. Each Variant can be fielded with modified capabilities and/or different costs, so long as they reasonably share the same core components.
[Light Helicopter] Mosquito Recon Helo
The Mosquito Recon Helo is a two seater single engine light helicopter. It mounts a standard RADAR and is armed with two 7.62mm minigun pods. (Echelon: Company)
[Mosquito Variant 1] Mosquito "Anopheles" Attack Helo
The "Anopheles" variant of the Mosquito Recon Helo features an upgraded RADAR and is armed with two 3 inch, 7 round rocket pods. (Echelon: Battalion)
[Mosquito Variant 2] Mosquito "Tipulidae" Utility Helo
The "Tipulidae" variant is a stripped down Mosquito Recon Helo, intended for light utility duties. As such, the RADAR and gun pods have been removed. Stretcher have been mounted on the weapon pylons for the evacuation of casualties or movement of light cargo. (Echelon: Platoon)
[Destroyer] Archer Surface Warfare Destroyer
The Archer is a 2500 ton, 375 ft destroyer. Its main armament are 5 x 5 in guns in single turrets with a secondary armament of 10 x 21 in torpedo tubes. It includes four .50 cal quadmount stations as AA defense and a depth charge rack for ASW. RADAR and SONAR are standard. (Echelon: Platoon)
[Archer Variant 1] Archer ASW Destroyer
The ASW variant of the Archer Destroyer reduces the Archer's surface warfare weaponry to focus on ASW capabilities. The main guns have been reduced to 3 x 5 in, with only 6 x 21 in torpedo tubes. The freed deck space has been filled with two hedgehog-style depth-charge throwers, as well as adding a second conventional depth-charge rack. The SONAR has been upgraded and includes a towed array. (Echelon: Platoon)
[Archer Variant 2] Archer AA Picket Destroyer
The AA Picket Variant of the Archer Destroyer alters the Archer's weaponry to focus on AA duties. The main guns have been reduced to 3 x 5 in, but stocked with additional airburst rounds. The .50 cal AA quadmounts have been dramatically upgraded to 40mm twinmounts. The torpedo tubes have been removed, to allow larger magazine for the increase in AA munitions. The freed deck space has been filled with a standalone airsearch RADAR. (Echelon: Platoon)
War College Phase Details:
Just because you have a man with a fancy rifle, doesn't mean you have an infantryman. Even then, any army is much more than just its grunts. Thoughout history, many an attempted conquerer have failed due to "all tooth, no tail." The War College is where you prevent yourself from joining those inauspicious ranks.
If Armory Phase is about "hardware," War College Phase is about "software." As per traditional Arms Race rules, hardware grants capabilities. But does this really make sense for high skill professions? It's practically a universal coming of age story to learn that a pair of fancy athletic shoes won't turn us into pro athletes. Similary, if all a STEM career took was buying a good PC for MATLAB, we all could've saved some serious time and money. The War College phase fixes this by training Military Occupational Specialties (MOS's). Just like Armory Phase, players post and debate MOS proposals, ultimately voting to elect a single proposal that phase. The GM then rolls dice against the elected proposal. Taking into account the dice roll and the difficulty of the proposal (see Dice Rolls), the GM then writes up the resulting MOS, ending War College Phase.
A MOS is essentially a character class, defining the Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA's) of a certain type of soldier in your army. In general, they describe his or her general attributes, hardware preferences, and special capabilities. Acceptable MOS's include, but are not limited to: infantry, artillery, scout/reconaissance, military police, military intelligence, signal/commo, supply/quartermaster, maintainence, transportation, PSYOP, medical, combat engineering, EOD, JAG, and Inspector General (IG). For obvious game mechanics reasons, "civilian infrastructure-like" MOS's are forbidden, such as recruiters, drill instructors, acquisitions, public affairs, and civil affairs. Furthermore, an MOS cannot directly modify your leadership (OICs/NCOIC's): you can create new kinds of staff officer MOS's, but not some kind of improved commanding officer. In other words, designing a "Bullshit Magic Air General" is expressly forbidden.
As mentioned earlier, the Armory and War College refuse to collaborate whatsoever. However, the War College does have a small petty equipment allowance to fulfill rudimentary MOS requirements (typically for signature clothing or token tools of their trade). Game mechanics-wise, if the issued equipment is primarily aesthetic and/or too petty to be tracked on an Armory Logistics Channel, it's allowed. Want to give your aviator MOS (again, bad idea) flight coveralls and cool sunglasses? That's doable. Add a leather bomber jacket and a flight helmet? Probably one but not both, as either is relatively expensive and has substantial functional elements despite its strong aesthetics. Parachute? Nope, definite Armory-level hardware that should either be shoved in an equipment loadout with the helmet and jacket, or tied to your aircraft.
The War College also uses the same Wilcard mechanic as Armory Phase, again incentivizing players to keep several easier proposals on the backburner. Also like Armory hardware, the number of active MOS's are capped under Training Courses. Roleplay-wise, this cap represents that there are only so many total high-potential recruits and at a certain point MOS's would be literally poaching recruits from each other. Furthermore, your training infrastructure can only support so many simultaneous training programs (field training sites, weapons ranges, killhouses, classrooms, instructors and training texts). Note that MOS's do not use Armory-style Variant Models, but have a higher cap to balance this. Additional Training Courses may or may not be opened via Special Events or other game progression.
Dice Rolls:
Armory (Traditional Design/Revision) and War College rolls are done on a 2d4, resulting in rolls of 2 to 8. This gives a bit of a bell curve probablity, as opposed to the relatively common critical rolls from a traditional Arms Race 1d6.
Roll (Un-modified Probability): Result
2 (1/16): Critical failure. Outcome resembles nothing you intended (in a really bad kind of way).
3 (2/16): Fiasco. Outcome kinda works, but lacks many requested specifications. Outcome is deeply flawed in terms of cost, performance, and/or reliability.
4 (3/16): Disappointment. Outcome mostly works, but has significant shortcomings. Outcome is flawed in terms of cost, performance, and/or reliability.
5 (4/16): Mediocre. Outcome works well enough, but corners were cut. Outcome is slightly flawed in terms of cost, performance, and/or reliability.
6 (3/16): Good job. Outcome works as designed (WAD).
7 (2/16): Eureka! Outcome not only WAD, but finished early enough to squeeze a Wildcard design in. (See Wildcard Rules)
8 (1/16): Critical Hit! Outcome not only hits the Eureka wildcard, but adds a second wildcard design. (See Wildcard Rules)
Every Armory and War College action is assessed a difficulty. Difficulties assign a (+/-) modifier to the final result, however rolls are still capped at 2 and 8. This means that voting for modest "revisions" are a reliable way to farm Eurekas, completing two to three "revision" designs a phase. (See Wildcard Rules) The following are rough guidelines for assessing difficulty.
Trivial (+3): A minor "revision" of an existing system/MOS. Ideally, an obvious modification that could be performed by a layman without specialized infrastructure.
Very Easy (+2): A moderate "revision" of an existing system/MOS. Ideally, a modification that would likely require some technical skills (like a mechanic or mid-range military officer/NCO) and/or some specialized infrastructure (like a garage with power tools or a library with reference texts and a typewriter).
Easy (+1): An advanced "revision" of an existing system/MOS, or a minor new system/MOS. Ideally, a clever modification that definitely requires technical skills and specialized infrastructure. Likely involves a new tech concept or combines two to three smaller modifications. Could also be a new system that does the same, or is simply fairly easy to obtain via trade/forage means.
Medium (0): A moderate new system/MOS. A new system/MOS that substantially involves new technology or can be obtained via trade/forage means. May involve an alternate variant model. (See Variant Model Rules)
Hard (-1): An advanced new system/MOS. A new system/MOS that absolutely requires new technology or can be obtained with difficulty via trade/forage means. May involve one or two alternate variant models. (See Variant Model Rules)
Very Hard (-2): A very advanced new system/MOS. A new system/MOS that absolutely requires new technology you lack a knowledge base in, or otherwise requires several technological advancements. Might be obtainable via trade/forage means with great difficulty. May involve one or two alternate variant models. (See Variant Model Rules)
Moon Shot (-3): An incredible new system/MOS. A new system/MOS so reliant upon one or more technological leaps, it'd be almost miraculous to complete in such a short span of time. May involve one or two alternate variant models. (See Variant Model Rules)
Wildcard Rules:
A modified roll outcome of seven or higher triggers the Wildcard system.
Roleplay-wise, perhaps the desired action was too easy (or they just got lucky), but the Armory/War College ultimately finished their work early. Being the diligent patriots they are, they used the extra time to complete one (on a seven roll) or two (on an eight roll) side-projects on their own initiative. Being side-projects, these wildcards are previously mentioned proposals that ended up being the same or lesser difficulty than the elected proposal that finished early. Since the project lead (individual player) for the elected proposal was busy this phase, these side-projects must be the work of other personnel (individual players or NPCs). As these side-projects were mostly done in parallel to the elected proposal by side personnel, they don't benefit from the elected proposal's tech progress this phase.
Mechanically, good modified rolls grant one to two free similar difficulty actions that are then independently rolled for. These Wildcard modified rolls are then capped at six, to prevent potentially endless crit chains. Wildcards are drawn from a "deck" of proposed but unelected hardware/MOSs from that phase and two prior. To introduce creative chaos and promote underdog players, the currently elected player's work is excluded from the Wildcard Deck this phase. The first Wildcard of a phase will then be randomly drawn from non-redundant proposals the GM secretly assesses as the same difficulty as the elected proposal. If a second Wildcard is required this phase (rolled eight), this Wildcard will then be randomly drawn from non-redundant proposals the GM secretly assesses as one step easier than the elected proposal (unless it's already a Trivial, in which case a Trivial-level Wildcard will still be drawn.) Important note, if Wildcards of the appropriate difficulty and player ownership criteria can't be found, GM will search easier tiers. If ultimately no usable Wildcards can be found, the Wildcard action has been wasted. A team should thus encourage its various players to keep its potential Wildcard Deck full with a spread of proposals each turn. During the Organization Phase, GM will post the current Armory and War College Wildcard Decks, especially noting proposals that were culled due to redundancies to elected proposals or general obsolescence.
Wildcard Probability List
Trivial: (13/16) Wildcard chance (10/16) for two Wildcards
Very Easy: (10/16) Wildcard chance (6/16) for two Wildcards
Easy: (6/16) Wildcard chance (3/16) for two Wildcards
Medium: (3/16) Wildcard chance (1/16) for two Wildcards
Hard: (1/16) Wildcard chance (0) for two Wildcards
Very Hard and Moon Shot: (0) Chance for any Wildcards
Organization Phase Details:
While this Arms Race does its best to keep the burden of math and tedious minutae off players' shoulders, GM concedes some players may want some agency here. Wildcard decks should have some transparency before the GM ends up writing up a drawn Wildcard the players insist shouldn't be there. Necessary mid-to-late game hardware/MOS retirements could get contentious.
As stated previously, the GM will post each Organization Phase the updated two Wildcard Decks. Players may object to any Wildcard if they think the GM should have already removed it (for redundancy to an elected proposal or general obsolescence). Furthermore, an individual player may freely withdraw any of their own Wildcards during Organization Phase. Otherwise valid Wildcards CANNOT be removed from the deck prior to their expiration date (even by popular vote). Barring any player comments on the Wildcard Decks, GM will proceed.
Simultaneously, GM will also announce if any hardware or MOS retirements are required and suggest a default system/MOS to retire. Barring player consensus on an alternate retiree, GM will proceed.
Furthermore, this phase is where players should explicitly state any errors they think the GM made since the last Organization phase. Major book keeping, technology issues, strong disagreements with something specific in the battle report, or anything else the player thinks needs serious correction, now's the time to call it out before it gets too entrenched. GM will provide an official answer this phase on it.
Once the Wildcard Decks, retirements, and player grievances are settled, GM will advance to Strategy Phase.
Strategy Phase Details:
Strategy Phase is where the players vote where on the map to deploy their regiment(s).
As stated earlier, a new regiment is fielded every six months (three turns), on January 1st and July 1st. Game progression will eventually cap, and then ultimately decrease the number of regiments. One regiment may be assigned per territory, and a maximum of two regiments total maybe be ordered on offensive per turn.
***CONQUEST DETAILS PENDING MAP***
***MAP PENDING***
***STARTING HARDWARE/MOS PENDING***
Post by: Aseaheru on June 15, 2019, 01:19:36 pm
Post by: ConscriptFive on September 20, 2019, 01:23:28 pm
"Listen here! Now maybe Ocean's Ten shouldn't have taken that contract to rob the Weland-Yutani "Life Sciences" Lab on Paramour. But you know what? Maybe Graywater Solutions should've chilled the frak out with all that gorram HE they fired, amirite? At the end of the day, with containment on a bio-weapon ruptured, ain't nobody getting through quarantine before the mothership's next FTL jump. Dead or alive, their interstellar adventuring days are over folks."
--Overheard gossip at Twenty Forward Lounge on Mothership Leviathan
In the wake of this annihilation, how will the two premier mercenary companies of the 'verse recover and rebuild? Will they hold to their traditions, or blaze a new trail? Can they forget this catastrophe, or are they destined to fight to the death?
Welcome to...
Space Cowboys for Hire (A PvE AR-like)
In Space Cowboys for Hire, a single team of players guide the actions of "Ocean's Ten," an interstellar mercenary crew, on a PvE campaign to avoid bankruptcy and potential bioterrorism charges. The crew will find physical and legal refuge on the Mothership Leviathan, humanity's only interstellar ship, as it follows its three year circular route through humanity's interstellar domain. Core gameplay will resemble a mission-oriented Arms Race, like Deniable Assets, but with a strong narrative focus and deliberately less micromanagement. Missions will take place on four heavily terraformed planetary systems, with settings ranging from Firefly-esque frontier worlds to dystopian cities straight out of Altered Carbon.
GM Comments: Real talk guys and girls. I originally envisioned this as a PvP mission-oriented high opsec AR with heavy PvE content like MoP's SCP Race or Robo's Twilight Cults, but I'm not entirely convinced those work particularly well on Bay 12 anymore. They require a lot of investment, both from players and the GM, and we're kinda saturated on AR's right now. All it takes is for that one player who writes all the plans to take a break, and that team goes inactive. One side to goes inactive, momentum gets lost, and the game dies. So I'm going to shove the entire playerbase into one team, and see how that goes. I can rally one team of six players better than two teams of three. But wait, how do I gamify and RNG missions without an opposing mission plan? Keep reading; there's a mechanic for that. I'm also toying with writing in default choices, both to anchor theme and force the game forward if the community isn't engaging with that phase well.
Basic Game Cycle:
Contact Phase. After being briefed a summary of the current planetary system, players are presented with a list of contacts and what kind of work they're hiring for. Players must now vote on which contacts to pursue. Contacts may ignore the players if they're associating with an opposing contact, forcing the players to pick sides in certain conflicts.
Contract Phase. Interested contacts will now send the players what detailed missions they want done that month/turn and their pay. Players must now write a quick pitch (one paragraph) to the contact to get hired for the missions they want. The voted pitchs are then either accepted or rejected by the contacts, along with appropriate written feedback as to why, or other suggestions.
Hardware Phase. A traditional AR design phase. Represents a fixed budgetary amount being spent to buy, craft, and eventually maintain, a specific quantity and quality of equipment. Rolled on a 2d4 modified by the difficulty of the design.
Specialist Training Phase. A traditional AR design phase, but for skills. Take a single operator and make him into something interesting. Rolled on a 2d4 modified by the difficulty of the design.
Operations Phase. Players now write how they're going to attempt their missions this turn. The voted mission plans are executed. A 2d4 modified by the difficulty of the plan is rolled for its execution. Another 2d4 is rolled for mission difficulty. And a third 2d4 is rolled for improvisation: situations not covered by the written plan, such as traps, ambushes, loss of key equipment/personnel. The GM interprets all of this into a battle report.
After eight months/turns in system, rent is due. If the players can make rent, they spend the next month/turn in FTL, before arriving in the next system. Failure to make rent will result in eviction from the Mothership Leviathan, and effectively Game Over. It should also be noted that casualties are only replaced during the FTL turn.
Setting and Deep Lore:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
GM Comments: And that's how the intro post is going to go. I don't want the game to look too intimidating upfront, so I'm going to hold back additional explanations until the relevant phases happen. I'm not sure how much people will read the deep lore, but this is going to be a narrative heavy game, so I figured that's a pretty necessary intro. The TI Med lore is actually a work around to handle casualties. Permadeath of a unique specialist would be too punishing, and plot armor is too hokey. So instead, everyone comes back to life at the end of a system campaign. This also allows for a climatic bloodbath mission for the end of each planetary campaign. Anyhow, let me know what you guys think. I still have to formally write up a lot of campaign material, but I wanted to get the rules out there for some feedback.
Post by: ConscriptFive on September 22, 2019, 02:27:59 pm
Space Cowboys for Hire (Turn 0)
*ring* *ring*
"Mrs. Ocean."
"Neil McCauley? Do you know what time it is?!?"
"I'm sorry ma'am, but we need to meet in the briefing room urgently."
"Fine. First thing in the morning, 9 sharp."
"I'm sorry ma'am, but that won't do. Sam Goldman is already here too."
"Gorramit, I'm on my way. This better be really good, or really bad Neil."
***
It's just after 4am as you enter the room in a bit of a huff. Neil grimaces awkwardly and is about to say something before Sam cuts him off. "Now I'd like to remind everyone that as legal counsel to Ocean PMC, everything discussed in this meeting is protected by attorney-client privilege..."
Neil interjects, "Ma'am, I'm sorry, but your husband is dead. He insisted on a HALO insert to try and rescue our guys. I tried to stop him, but CoFor now has the whole planet locked down."
Before you're even able to ask what a 'HALO insert' is, Sam continues, "Upon review of the articles of incorporation, all ownership and control of Ocean LLC reverts to you. I know you've prefered to be a silent partner in this business, but we're going to need some quick executive decisions from you right now. Do you understand Mrs. Ocean?"
"Sam, don't you think you're being a bit too hard on her?"
"Neil, we've got 72 hours to FTL. We don't have time to sugar coat this. We lost Daniel and all ten field operators down on Paramour. There's chatter that the Coalition is floating terrorism charges against us."
You chuckle, "Good, the sooner we're out of here, the better. They were all due for a reju-regen anyways."
Neil sighs, "Two problems, we can't recover their TI implants from Paramour and we don't have the rent for this upcoming FTL."
"WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T HAVE THE RENT!" you shout. "I am certainly not getting evicted from this ship, to live like some public domain refugee!"
"Calm down Mrs. Ocean, we're all in this together. If any of us lose our status with the Mothership, we'll likely face felony prosecution from the Coalition."
"Gorramit Sam, was that supposed to be soothing?"
"Neil, as your legal counsel, it's my duty-"
"WHERE THE FRAK IS THE RENT!" you interrupt.
"Ma'am, we had a rough couple months and we were banking on this last op to cover it. But it's okay ma'ma, Sam and me have a plan to get through this. We just need your approval."
They both stare you down pleadingly, knowing that despite their wishes, you're the one calling the shots now. After a long pregnant pause, you oblige, "Fine. It's not like I have a choice do I? As long as somebody tells me what the frak a HALO insert is."
***
"As you surely know Ma'am, every nine months, 500k rent is due. Now paying survivor benefits as well as onboarding ten new operators is going wipe out our entire savings. The only way forward is to empty the armory. I'm talking full firesale."
"We're going back to basics. Obviously we'll keep the shuttle and the handsfree comms. 12 ga pumps, .357 revolvers, and Gerber multitools are the bare essentials, but everything else can go. It's only the Thiel planetary system afterall. If we stick to frontier operations, we shouldn't need too fancy tech. We probably can afford to hold onto about four more hardware systems though."
"Attached I've provided a quick inventory, minus what we lost on Paramour. I wish I could provide more detail or answer questions, but I've only got about 48 hours to sell everything. I've designated the four systems that I, as Chief of Operations, recommend we retain. However, you're ultimately the boss Ma'am, so let me know if you'd prefer four other systems for some reason. Keep in mind that at least one of them should probably be a set of wheels. They don't have Uber in the frontier."
--Signed, Chief of Operations, Neil McCauley
Quote from: Inventory Retention Plan
Weapons
(0) Walther PPK .380 Pocket Pistol
(0) SIG Sauer P226 9mm Service Pistol
(0) IMI Micro Uzi 9mm SMG
(0) FN P90 5.7mm PDW
(0) Izhmash Saiga 12 ga Tactical Shotgun
(1) AS Val SP-6 Sound Suppressed Carbine: Ops Chief
(0) AK-74M 5.45mm Assault Rifle
(0) RPK-74M 5.45mm Light Machine Gun
(0) HK MSG90 7.62mm Sniper Rifle
(0) Barrett Model 82A1 .50 BMG AMR
(0) RPG-7 Rocket Launcher
(0) M67 Fragmentation Grenade
(0) TASER Less-Than-Lethal Gun
(0) OC Pepper Spray
Vehicles
(0) Volkswagon Transporter Panel Van
(1) Landrover Defender SUV: Ops Chief
(0) MINI Cooper S Compact Car
(0) Kawasaki Ninja Dual Sport Motorcycle
Equipment
(0) Low Profile Ballistic Vest
(0) Semtex 1kg Explosives Block
(0) Facial Disguise Prosthetics Kit
(1) Mechanical Lockpick Set: Ops Chief
(0) Radio Scanner
(0) Wireless Spy Cam Set
(0) IR Tripwire Kit
(1) FLIR Binoculars: Ops Chief
(0) Hobbyist Quadcopter Drone
(0) Climbing/Rappelling Ropes Kit
(0) Hydraulic Saw
(0) Stinger Anti-Vehicle Spike Strip
(0) Handheld Biometric ID Scanner
(0) Long Range Directional Microphone
(0) Ghillie Suit
GM Comment: To make sure people actually get on theme and relevant gear, it's going to be a list pick. Having a relatively exhaustive list also anchors the tech going forward, which is otherwise hard to do in a non-canonical sci-fi setting. Can also be used to seed hardware designs going forward if the players get writer's block. ...and it includes a pre-built votebox. Imagine that!
***
Just as you're about to Google what the hell half those weapons are, you see you have an incoming call from Sam Goldman, "Mrs. Ocean, some distinguished luminaries in New Monaco have heard of the recent tragedy upon their shipmates and have arranged a memorial service for both us and Greywater Solutions."
"I never thought anyone in New Monaco particularly cared for us. Well that's not exactly something we can refuse can we?"
"Likely someone thinking it's a good humanitarian PR stunt, but no, we need any sympathy we can get. The catch is that Greywater's President, Nick Clay, will be giving a eulogy. Accordingly, you, as Chief Executive of Ocean PMC, should do so as well. I understand that as a grieving widow, you may not be ready for this. Neil and myself will put something together if you like. But with all due respect Mrs. Ocean, I think this could be a great debut if you wanted to pursue a more active role in our business."
"Thanks for the heads up Sam. Who doesn't love public speaking engagements?"
Quote from: OOC: Writing Contest
Describe or write an appropriate eulogy to be delivered by Mrs. Ocean, Neil, or Sam. GM will choose the best and grant a reward appropriate to the spoken eulogy. Suggested topics include: your husband, the ten Ocean operators, the mission on Paramour, your relationship with Greywater, your relationship with Weyland-Yutani, your plans for the future, etc. Accuse, apologize, joke, keep it professional, or try a bit of everything; welcome to the world of public speaking. For the sake of brevity, it doesn't need to be word-for-word, just enough for us to understand the content and tone of the presentation.
If no submissions are received, Sam or Neil will speak instead... which may or may not be a good thing.
GM Comment: Turn 0 is going to be considered an FTL turn, so narratively everything is going to be about shipboard stuff. The Memorial Service is a way to introduce shipside politics, as well as the obvious campaign antagonist, Greywater. I've also kept Mrs. Ocean, her deceased husband, and the men of Ocean PMC as a blank slate, so this is the players' opportunity to suggest quite a bit of backstory if they wanted. Reputation mechanics are going to be introduced in response to how the Memorial Service goes.
Anyhow, let me know via forums or Discord what you guys are thinking. I'm steadily working on the campaign content.
Post by: UristMcRiley on October 15, 2019, 08:24:17 pm
Post by: Tack on April 15, 2020, 10:34:09 am
It's the trickiest bit of an arms race, to be honest. Batreps suck (I say as I'm currently avoiding finishing mine), but this is always the part that makes me worry the most. Too much chance and you step on the toes of the part of the game that should matter most, the thoughtful design of new equipment, too little and the game degenerates into whichever side has a better encyclopedic knowledge of warfare in [INSERT TIMELINE]- at which point you can open a private salt mine whenever your interpretation differs from your player's desires. There's a buncha methods for trying to deal with the issue, but they've all got their issues.
It was essentially the exact issues I had come across. There were people who knew not-enough lore and tried to make some very improbable things happen, whilst others knew way too much lore and tried to pidgeonhole certain designs into working certain ways.
Also I had one side choose their faction at the start of the game and then three turns in half of the members go 'oh wait, we actually want this one', and failing a full reset just resolve to use designs in order to switch their faction instead of leaning into the one they had, which was slowly putting them behind.
(This on top of my having no idea how to balance game mechanics.)
It has me a bit anxious about whether a reboot would fall into similar pitfalls.
Currently my main idea is a pseudo-linear "Upgrade stream" which would affect the basic time period and quality of equipment people would have access to.
Say if it was a primitive AR, there would be Bronze> Iron> Steel, and on a separate tree, Horticulture, Agriculture, Domestication. Each "Level" would take five or ten turns and you would choose between them.
Which means that a side which chose to upgrade their weapons would have more interesting designs based on iron or steel weaponry, whereas those who took food-based upgrades could be pouring their efforts into population increase- and still have both sides be relatively even on a macro scale.
Post by: ConscriptFive on April 15, 2020, 02:03:44 pm
Assuming it's a popular franchise, you'll get lots of players. However, the problem is that you're no longer *the* expert in the lore of your own game. You slip up on lore, and somebody can Google up Wookiepedia showing GM has no clue about his own game. The Star Wars Expanded Universe, Star Trek, WH40K, TES, and some major D&D settings are so overdeveloped that it's impossible to fully master, and a malicious player will always be able to pester you about something on it. It's less of a problem IRL, because it's easier to manage players IRL, but online you're going to get some general salt and possible trolling.
It's something you just have to accept when working with established universes. (Hence why I prefer to GM homebrew derivatives online.)
As for your "upgrade stream" idea, I'd have to see it better developed to say if it'll work or not. The main player action in an AR is freeform "wishing" for designs. Trying to add too much structure could get confusing and/or straight kill creativity. You want enough guidance for designs that people understand the theme of the game (see most successful ARs), but not so little that they have no idea what to even imagine (see Virgin Island.)
Post by: TricMagic on April 15, 2020, 02:27:40 pm
You want enough guidance for designs that people understand the theme of the game (see most successful ARs), but not so little that they have no idea what to even imagine (see Virgin Island.)
Waves as they PTW.
Post by: RoseHeart on February 28, 2021, 01:46:03 am
Post by: ConscriptFive on February 28, 2021, 10:23:19 am
Long answer...
If you want to get historical, "weapon design bureaus" started in Spring 2013 with "The People's Weapon Design Bureau" and "The Revolutionary Design Bureau:"
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125269.0
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125538.0
10ebbor10 made a lot of really high effort games back then, among them was "The Glorious Design Bureau of the People" in Fall 2013:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131248.0
10ebbor10 then kept that genre alive in Fall 2014 with "Imperial Military Design Bureau:"
www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=144578.0
But most like most forum games, the GM tended to move on to another project after a month or two. Now this guy, Sensei, had been kicking around the forums since 2009. He played some of these games and GM'd a few other higher effort things. Then in Summer 2015, he released "Arms Race." He made it PvP and more importantly, kept the game running until completion (July to November IRL).
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152099.0
Post by: ConscriptFive on July 09, 2021, 09:44:33 pm
For the benefit of posterity, here's a short compilation of advice that MoP put together:
HERE'S A COMPILED AND SORTED DOCUMENT CONTAINING ALL THE ADVICE YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN. HAVE FUN WITH IT.
On Legacy Fleets and Early Rolls:
have players design stuff that both sides then get. Downside is obviously that both sides start with identical tech, but then I assume the intent is to replace legacy gear ASAP
make them share the first set of rolls/Rerolling 1's & Failures/Sharing rolls between sides/Not telling the players what you're doing behind the scenes and cheesing your own rules to make sure they get something alright
On Setting:
if you’re a gm you also have the power to just tell the players if what they’re doing is on-brand for the setting
It’s nice to have an in universe reason for shit, but yes players will always try to subvert things. See: the entirety of embral. However, as a gm it’s totally within your rights to veto shit
(You:I'm fully prepared for then to give me some completely bullshit reason to get steel in aether and give me two pages of science backing it up to which I'll reply with "sure, that will take at least a year") Reply with no/If you give the slightest indication that it is possible, players will do it.
On Scale:
the scale of individual ship projects and production vs...50 different areas to fight over (is bad)
The game will crawl and with so much area to cover ships actually crossing one another and engaging will be uncommon at best
On Mechanical Balance/Maintaining GM Sanity:
concepts of range, fuel limitations, and interception end up trailing into a section of bookkeeping and detail that should be avoided at all costs
if you give a lore reason for a game mechanic, it becomes really hard to argue with the players when they make something that obviates that reason. If you DO end up in such a situation, crush the hovertank with excessive force.
If you don't want to track individual units, or allow players a strategy phase "push here" vote, you need lanes
If you can describe something as (x) with more steps, you can probably just settle for (x)
Madman's game points out some inherent flaws with the individual unit/fleet thing in general when they're linked to some sort of resource system, which is what happens when you retire ships to open up resources or capacity for others? You either wind up with PJ's mess of people cheesing immediate returns and mothballing their aircraft in whichever air one that was, or madman's where the game slows because you have to wait a turn to utilize the points that got free'd up
Is there any sort of cap on what can be fielded? Because if not then it's going to be a real pain in the ass to keep track of ships after a few turns
(Post-upkeep change) now you need to figure out what happens when people decide to clear up IC space for newer shit
What would you have you do/And what do you think you're capable of maintaining for an undefined amount of time/And what is going to keep you interested"
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 10:56:57 am
Post by: Iris on April 01, 2022, 11:58:23 am
Also, you asked the same question not a page ago.
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 12:05:20 pm
...at risk of pestering, I'll dare to ask,
Did Design Bureau.. start.. here? On Bay12forums?
Post by: Iris on April 01, 2022, 12:08:47 pm
Post by: Iris on April 01, 2022, 12:10:18 pm
Thank you.
...at risk of pestering, I'll dare to ask,
Did Design Bureau.. start.. here? On Bay12forums?
I am not entirely sure, but I remember that Kingfisher's game - the one that Sensei cited as his inspiration - was a game on these forums.
Whoops, I clicked "quote" instead of edit, sorry for double post.
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 12:21:48 pm
If you're looking for a "canonical" arms race, then there is no such animal; the genre as it exists is mostly just a series of conventions. If you plan on running your own, might I suggest looking at examples of arms races with similar mechanics? I would suggest shying away from Draignean's races, as they are very mechanically complex and not ideal for a beginner, but there are plenty of examples of what works and what doesn't.
I was wondering for different reasons, initially for an art project. But now out of curiosity. The hub mural (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164469.0) I used a Fire Emblem king since Haspen made both Fire Emblem on Forums and SPAMKINDOM, so it seemed fitting. Then I started wondering about the creator of Arms Race if it might inform the art, sounds like not...so I also just was curious to know.
Although, if there is an art style or artist that makes a lot of AR maps or flags I might want to get in touch with them.
Post by: Iris on April 01, 2022, 12:25:53 pm
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 12:27:50 pm
Thanks for the lead!Thank you.
...at risk of pestering, I'll dare to ask,
Did Design Bureau.. start.. here? On Bay12forums?
I am not entirely sure, but I remember that Kingfisher's game - the one that Sensei cited as his inspiration - was a game on these forums.
Whoops, I clicked "quote" instead of edit, sorry for double post.
Post by: Iris on April 01, 2022, 12:30:58 pm
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 12:43:32 pm
I would... not recommend bothering someone who is very likely gone from the forums altogether.Why?
How is a PM asking someone if they created a genre or where hey got it from, any real inconvenience? It has been my experience people are usually flattered or happy.
Post by: RoseHeart on April 01, 2022, 02:23:19 pm
Also, you asked the same question not a page ago.It was a good response too. I don't mind seeing if I get different answers, but I forgot I already ask. I guess because the truth is murky, I was left feeling unresolved. I am very grateful for the answers from you both.