Nation Game

the forums


You are not connected. Please login or register

End/modify NG3? Quickly begin NG4 with better rules? VOTE

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

wat do?

53% 53% [ 9 ]
0% 0% [ 0 ]
41% 41% [ 7 ]
6% 6% [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 17

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 3 of 4]

That's a pretty good idea too. Bit biased against war though.
I wish there were some way to make the Actions system better at supporting a slow militarisation ... *ponder*

View user profile
Well, obviously the best way to support a slow militarisation is to have Army numbers carry over from turn to turn, right?

A player should be granted {n} Action points. I'll set it at 10 for purposes of the mathcraft.

A nation will have a level of "Militarisation" - from 0% to 50%, in 10% increments.
It costs 1 action point to support 10% military, and 6 action points to increase militarisation by 10%. It does not cost any action points to lower militarisation.
Action points can be spent on non-war expansion (3ap per territory), or war expansion (2ap per territory).
Action points cannot be stockpiled and any unused action points are wasted.

The nation also has access to (Their Militarisation %)/10 * (Their number of lands) armies to allocate as they see fit, to fight an enemy, to defend themselves, or to assist another player on the map, for no action point penalty.
(Presumably, the action point penalty is included in the army's support cost).

---

There. No economy bogging shit down, and winning a war is possible without being utterly turtled, and war is as viable as expansion. Everyone wins!



Last edited by Chinese R-3 on Tue May 04, 2010 8:29 pm; edited 3 times in total

View user profile

Syrnn

avatar
Moderator
Proposed Rules for Nation Game 4:

Unless otherwise specified, all rules implemented in NG2 are in effect! Consider this an amendment rather than a brand new rules set! Any changes are noted in red text.

In summation, the holdovers from NG2 are that: A nation is given four military actions during the course of a 24-hour turn, to begin every day at 12:00pm EST (GMT -5). The actions are divided into two varieties: colonization and conquest. Colonization is a simple six-sided dice roll of 4 or better to gain the new territory. Conquest is to be further described in "Warfare", below.

Warfare:
1. You must publicly declare war before rolling any conquest dice, stating both a reason and terms of surrender on part of the defending nation. Both of these are required.*
2. Defender may either accept attacker's terms or go to war.
3a. Attackers then declare an adjacent territory for each action being spent on conquest, and roll any amount of dice, up to the amount of territories of their nation, and one for each who is aiding them, and for every milestone. The total is then multiplied by resource modifiers (if any). Should an attacker be in a war with multiple nations, it must divide their attack/defense dice as well as resources between each war front.
3b. Defender then rolls one dice for each territory they own, one dice for every ally who is aiding them, and for every milestone. The total is then multiplied by resource modifiers (if any).
3c. Allies in a war of their own cannot provide aid.**
3d. Territories gained through war cannot be added to your total until the war is over.
4. If attacker wins, he gains attacked territory. If defender wins, he gains one of his territories back, or, if he still owns them all, gains one of the attacker's territories. The first year of the war, an attacker may not lose territories for failed war attempts, due to the need to establish the fighting line on part of the defender.
5. War ends when the two nations come to a formal agreement, one nation gains all of the other nation's land, or when either party gives in to terms set by the other.
6. Allies now provide aid dice proportional to how many colonies they own, as explained below:

1-10 Colonies = +1
10-20 Colonies = +2
20-30 Colonies = +3
30-40 Colonies = +4
40-50 Colonies = +5
... and so on in this fashion.

There will be scattered throughout the map clusters of resources in adjacent territories. Each resource of a type is capable of providing a +.1x multiplier to a single war front. These may be traded to adjacent nations passively by agreement between two nations for whatever terms agreed between them, often for resources, but for other services or territory as well. Trade is considered to be ongoing unless a limit of turns is set in place by the trade agreement, and requires only a single one of the agreeing nations to state intention to end the trade, and that very turn, the resources traded are considered unavailable to the other players as per their agreements. Note: In the event of a series of trades requiring a continued chain of trade between multiple players (such as trading a resource received from another player), it is possible to break the chain of trade between all players by cutting off the resource from the original source.

Recommended additional rules:

-No nation is allowed to start within 7 provinces of any other nation.
-Overseas colonization is restricted to a distance set in pixels depending on the map, typically a distance being the mean average length or width (whichever is greater) of the provinces on the map, or whatever is reasonable. Overseas expansion beyond this distance is strictly prohibited.
-A nation must declare a capitol which gains a bonus +.5x defense multiplier, but if captured, allow the conqueror of the capitol to demand the surrender of three provinces of the conqueror's choice.
-A third action apart from Colonization or Conquest called Taxes or Tithes, in which a player collects 1 gold from every territory they own, as well as 3 from any possessed capitols. This passive resource benefits no bonus, but may be traded to denote a "debt" to another player for resources or other terms, such as military aid for a number of turns and so on.

*Author's Note: In life, warfare is very rarely an act of genocide, and usually a resource dispute, or one of territory, politics, or some other means by which compromise can still be achieved! To this end, I find it necessary to prohibit the game from becoming too war-oriented by making terms of surrender a necessity.
**Author's Note: While there is nothing to prohibit it, and it can be incredibly wise in some situations, it is typically poor form to, rather than support an ally, go to war yourself to divide the dice of a nation and weaken it. Hopefully, with the Terms of War clause, it will prohibit this from becoming a problem in NG4, but I want each player to be conscious of this issue.

View user profile
Syrnn wrote:
-No nation is allowed to start within 7 provinces of any other nation.
I.e. maximum of one nation every 80 tiles. That won't work. Set it to "within 2" and the map still gets crowded.

View user profile

Syrnn

avatar
Moderator
No, maximum of one nation every... seven. I fail to see how that translates to 80. If you start, you just cannot begin within 7 of a nation. It is a proposed rule for a reason - this is to be adjusted according to map size.

View user profile
Syrnn wrote:No, maximum of one nation every... seven. I fail to see how that translates to 80. If you start, you just cannot begin within 7 of a nation. It is a proposed rule for a reason - this is to be adjusted according to map size.

China is a mathamancer, I have no idea what he did but it probably makes sense.

I don't like the rule either, it seems to reduce the number of possible nations at the beginning. Most of them leave within a few turns anyway, there's no point putting a soft cap on how many can join at the start.

Oh, and don't use the word "year" in your rules, since the amount of time a turn represents should vary based on setting (i.e. this turn it was one month).

View user profile
Syrnn wrote:No, maximum of one nation every... seven. I fail to see how that translates to 80. If you start, you just cannot begin within 7 of a nation. It is a proposed rule for a reason - this is to be adjusted according to map size.
You're right. 80 is wrong.
In fact, if you can't start within 7 of a nation, that means each nation reserves 231 tiles for itself.

Start within 2, and the nation still reserves 41 tiles for itself, severely hampering play on a 420-tile map.

At best, you can say "No nations adjacent" if you want to avoid screwing your map utterly.

Btw: I think your system makes war a bit too profitable, with the addition of the milestones and resources - a bigger nation has more resources, and more milestones, resulting in exponential increase, and if you reach a capitol, you can grab up to 7 lands every turn (3 from capitol) until your enemy is gone - 3.5 times peaceful expansion. If you're fine with steamrollers that's cool, but you've made war way too profitable. I know I'll be Montying my ass off, that's for sure. Smile

View user profile

Syrnn

avatar
Moderator
I understand what it is you are trying to get at here, but no one is reserving a 7 province bubble. The restriction is starting distance, and by no means stops a player from advancing directly towards the neighboring nation, eating up that 7 tile distance in half as much time as it takes to tell of it.

Moreover, you seem to be too caught up in the mechanical nonsense to try to actually pose any kind of suggestion to a suggested rule to begin with, being that the spirit of it is that no nation would start in immediate risk of warfare. I apologize if it seems I am being short, but to be frank, you seem keen to challenge absolutely anything I have to say, and I am not fond of feeling antagonized. The rules as suggested are what they are - either augment them or leave them, but criticism towards no end but to criticize simply is not welcome from me.

View user profile
Syrnn wrote:I apologize if it seems I am being short, but to be frank, you seem keen to challenge absolutely anything I have to say, and I am not fond of feeling antagonized.
Well, if you're going to make it so a 420 tile map can only support a maximum of 5 players, I'm going to antagonise you. Smile
There's no way of reducing the risk of early warfare if you have 20 nations on a 400-tile map. someone will be within 2 tiles of someone.

I don't care about the spirit of the rules if the mechanics used to implement it aren't working. Here, you've made a system that makes war incredibly profitable when it happens, and for even the nations with the most optimum packing and spacing you'd need a 1,500 tile map to hold 20 of them. Chances are you'd need 3,000 if players choose where they land.

For what it's worth, NG3's system is damn near perfect for balancing war and peace for 1v1. To balance it for 2v1, you'd need neutral expansion to cost 3, and war expansion to cost 2. To be honest I think that will happen anyway, so I'll edit my ruleset to make it so.



Last edited by Chinese R-3 on Tue May 04, 2010 8:17 pm; edited 1 time in total

View user profile
Maybe we should do a large map o' da world? and split that into alot of territroies

View user profile
Large map of world works for me, but if possible I'd like to keep the # of territories at a level such that the map is fully filled by turn 10. :-)

Updated my journal ruleset:
Each nation has 10 action points to use during the course of their turn.

A nation has a level of "Militarisation" - from 0% to 50%, in 10% increments.
It costs 1 action point to support 10% military, and 6 action points to increase militarisation by 10%. It does not cost any action points to lower militarisation.
Action points can be spent on non-war expansion (3ap per territory), or war expansion (2ap per territory).
EDIT: ADJACENT EXPANSION ONLY.
Action points cannot be stockpiled and any unused action points are wasted.

The nation also has access to (Their Militarisation %)/10 * (Their number of lands) armies to allocate as they see fit, to fight an enemy, to defend themselves, or to assist another player on the map, for no action point penalty.
(Presumably, the action point penalty is included in the army's support cost).

Armies assisting a player and armies defending will automatically spread themselves evenly between any wars the nation they are assisting/defending is engaged in. Players which do not give their armies orders are assumed to have ordered their armies to Defend their controlling player.

To determine the victor of a 2-sided battle (since we're using larger number of armies here than in NG3), do the following:
Sum up all the armies on one side of the conflict. Call the sum x.
Sum up all the armies on the other side of the conflict. Call the sum y.
Roll a random integer between 1 and (x^2 + y^2), inclusive.
If that number is between 1 and x^2 (inclusive), x wins!
If that number is above x^2, y wins!
Here's some examples of probabilities for winning a war:
3v1, the 3 has a 9/10 chance to win. The 1 has a 1/10.
2v1, the 2 has a 4/5 chance to win. the 1 has a 1/5.
3v2, the 3 has a 9/13 chance to win. the 2 has a 4/13.
1v1 has each player have a 1/2 chance to win.

Trading I don't know yet, but presumably will involve collecting sets of resources for a +something bonus to army numbers that turn for holding the whole set.

---

There. No economy bogging shit down, and winning a war is possible without being utterly turtled, and war is as viable as expansion. Everyone wins!
Note: My rules do not have a 'spirit'. Anything mechanically possible is an equally valid way to play. Saves bitching about the 'spirit' of the rules from people who can't be arsed to properly develop and implement the mechanics.



Last edited by Chinese R-3 on Tue May 04, 2010 8:43 pm; edited 3 times in total

View user profile
Yes, yes... all acording to plan...

View user profile
Just start NG4, i'm getting bored sluddging out of this one...

View user profile
Premier Cherdenko wrote:
Military Power is equal to one-half the number of territories you have. You must choose how much Military Power to allocate to a target. One-half your Military Power is always available for defense; this does not count against your limit for taht turn. So if you are attacking Player A with all your Military Power, one-half of it can still be used to defend against Player B. You may spend your regular Military Power to increase this value on a per-player basis, up to your Military Power. So if you have an MP of 12 and you are attacked, you may increase your defense from 6 up to 12. This will leave you with 6 MP left for the turn.

Each player gets 4 Standard actions, which can be used for any of the following actions:
Declare War - A formal declaration of war. Fluff is not optional. This will automatically end your Trade with the target nation. You may not use territories claimed during war to boost your military power until the war is over, and you may not declare war less than two turns before ending a war.

Attack - Costs 2 standard actions. You may neither Expand nor Colonize on the same turn you Attack, but you may still Plan Expedition. Normally, you can take 1 territory. If you spend three action points, you may take three territories. If you spend four, you may take four. You may not use this action more than once per turn.

Trade - Establish a trade route with target nation. Spending two Standard actions will allow you to establish a trade route with up to three nations, and spending four will allow you to establish routes with up to five. Trade routes confer no direct bonuses to the owner, but the target receives a (as-of-yet unspecified) modifier on military die rolls. Presumably, this will be used reciprocally by all nations involved in the trade agreement. Trade deals can only be canceled by expending a Standard action on the Embargo action, and will not end until such time or until a Blockade action is used on the target nation. Trade represents a way to support a nation in conflict without actually taking sides; you can't provide ally support to both sides of a conflict, but you can trade with both.

Embargo - Cancel trade deals with target nation. Spend two Standard actions to cancel trade deals with up to three nations, and three Standard actions to cancel as many as you want.

Blockade - Cancel everyone's trade deals with target nation. New deals cannot be made for 1 turn. You can spend two Standard actions to make it three turns, and four Standard actions to make it five. This has a cooldown of 2/4/6 turns, depending on how many actions you spend on it.

Militarize - Gain bonus to military potency depending on how many Standard actions you spend. Always lasts two turns (not including the turn you use it), regardless of actions spent. Can only be used once every fifth turn.
1 action - +1 dice
2 actions - +3 dice
4 actions - +5 dice

Ally Support - Up to one-half of your Military Power is subtracted from you and given to one player of your choice. This lasts one turn, but has no cooldown, so you can offer support as long as you are willing to expend an action. You do not need to Declare War to send ally support.

Each player also receives 3 Move actions per turn, which can be spent on any of the following actions:
Expansion - Gain two territories of your choosing. Spend two Move actions to gain three.

Colonization - Costs two Move actions. Roll up to 6d6. Colonize on each 4+. You must specify territories to be taken before rolling. Territories gain priority by the order they are listed (i.e. if you say "Colonizing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6," and then you roll 1, 1, 1, 4, 6, 1, the two successes mean you colonize territories 1 and 2).

Plan Expedition - Gain a +1 bonus to all Colonization rolls next turn. Take a -1 penalty to all Colonization rolls the turn after. This does not apply to the turn it is used, and cannot be used more than once every three turns (so you cannot use it until the turn after the -1 penalty is applied).

Trade Land - Swap territories with one other nation. If the difference in the trade is greater than 1, one extra Move action must be spent by both sides for each additional territory. So if Player A is trading 4 territories and Player B is trading 3, it costs one action. But if Player A is trading 5 territories, both players spend two actions. If Player A is trading 6 territories, both players spend all three actions. Player A may not trade 7 territories, as that would cost 4 actions. At the end of a war, land may be traded between both combatants at no cost, according to the agreements of each party.

Actions do not carry over between turns, however a player that is absent will keep up to one turn in actions backed up. So a player who has been absent for one day will have 8 Standard actions and 6 Move actions, as will a player that is absent for three days.

Rewrite of my old rules. Removed Free Action, made Attack more restrictive. Oh, and I added rules for taking colonies.

Still feels like it needs more actions, so if you guys have any suggestions, let me hear them.

In addition, I would like to express my support for Syrnn's rules, though maybe without the required terms of surrender and definitely without the limit on distance between nations. The more I think about it, the more I realize how much I miss NG2.

View user profile
Yeah, it's a decent idea, no doubt - but war mechanics leave much to be desired.

For starters, defending nations automatically gain +50% military power, and +5 to armies from militarise to counter any initial strike, allowing them the ability to turtle like motherfuckers.

To -start- a war you need to declare war and blockade, and on the turns after that, you can gain 1 territory for 1 ap, for a maximum of 4 per turn.
Meanwhile, your target can use Expansion 4 times to gain 8 lands - twice war expansion, with no start-up time.
War isn't viable until all sides are out of expandable land. Best starting location wins! Neutral

Speaking of expansion, check these numbers:
Spending two Standard actions will allow you to establish a trade route with up to three nations, and spending four will allow you to establish routes with up to five.
In other words, you can spend 2 twice to gain 6, or spend 4 to gain ... five.
Expansion - Gain two territories of your choosing. Spend two Move actions to gain three.
Spend 1 twice to gain 4, or spend 2 to gain ... three.

You can make a fairly decent case for nonwar expansion being too cheap in my system as well, since my system's balanced for 2v1 conflicts and not 1v1, but at least military actions don't run up against being turtled, in terms of the ap budget war is viable (if you win).

View user profile

kobo1d

avatar
Moderator
Sorry for my absence...finals...

Rule discussion is good, I like a some of the suggestions from all of the proposals. Rule Fusion in infancy stages, but not yet imminent.

Brainstorming:

Map ideas
Setting ideas


Syrnn mentioned a Dune-like setting which sounded badass, modern-fantasy-sci-fi crossover or whatever. I am in support of fantasy again, it's my creative best/favorite.

WW2 era will always end up with nationalist dictatorships vs communist dictatorships vs capitalist democracies in a two-or-three-sided world war (which makes sense given it's WW(AR)II. I prefer a setting in which the alliances/end game scenario isn't decided from the point of nation creation. NG2's prominent end-game alliances were:

elven monarchy, wizard republic, tribal nomads, egyptian democracy

VS

undead tomb kings of the desert, ghoulish french republic, celtic monarchy, and fucking vikings.

No one could have predicted that on turn 1. From NG3's inception it was obvious that it was going to be fascists, communists, and capitalists.

Map ideas I have heard mentioned: complete Earth, reuse NG3 map. I feel this has a lot to do with what setting we go with.

View user profile
Oh, right - the map.
Well, I'm cool with whatever. If you're gonna use a 440 tile map like the last one, though, the map will get crowded quickly - the rule system will have to support either early conflict or the ability to pass through another player's land.
Since non-adjacent expansion was a huge wall of dongs, I'd have to say - early conflict.

As for the map, Marsmap is good. It's got some dense territories, and some territories branching over long distances.

View user profile
I would just as soon use the Mars map again, it's pretty neat and didn't really get used to it's best advantage in NG3. And it saves working up a new map, which is kinda a pain.

For a setting how about a classic pulp-scifi type setting. Odd and unusual species, extremely soft science mixed with what might be magic, almost anything can be justified, and the world rewards bold adventure!

Although I think a WWII level tech setting could work, as long as it wasn't WWII background

View user profile
I support the fantasy idea. Motherfuckin mummies in this bitch

View user profile
Field Marshal Uburgen wrote:I support the fantasy idea. Motherfuckin mummies in this bitch

You already did that, though.

View user profile
Premier Cherdenko wrote:
Field Marshal Uburgen wrote:I support the fantasy idea. Motherfuckin mummies in this bitch

You already did that, though.

steampunk or WW1 or SUPER SY-FI or Mid-evil or Roman era or Napoleonic era or stone age or 1800's...

we already did fantasy...

my vote is for the 1800s

View user profile
Retro-futuristic steampunk setting, wars between various 'alien' races.

View user profile

Syrnn

avatar
Moderator
Fantasy is always good, but let me break down Fading Suns for everyone, to be further broken down and/or used as inspiration:

My idea was to model the game something after an old game called Empire of the Fading Suns, Fading Suns being a Dune-inspired setting with much in parallel to Warhammer 40,000, for obvious reasons (also touching somewhat on the Hyperion novels for those familiar). In fact, looking at it, the wiki is both rather concise and in depth at once in its description, so I will cite it here:

"Set in a future medieval-style empire built on the remains of a previous, more sophisticated galaxy-spanning human civilization made possible by ancient "gates", themselves the relics of an even older, not necessarily human civilization. Power is administered by noble houses, guilds and by the monolithic Holy Church. Psionic powers exist but psionicists are often hunted down and killed by the Church (or led back to orthodoxy and enrolled in the Church's ranks). The Church is also capable of producing miracles through Theurgic rites, a kind of divine sorcery. Players take the roles of members of the aristocracy, of the various merchant guilds or of a number of religious sects, and alien characters are also available."

The idea is that rather than nations, players would take on the role of one of the noble Houses, vying for power, and eventually the vacant Imperial throne. Certain players may be allowed to take up the mantle of the Church, able to give boons in the form of combat bonuses to some, penalties to others, while the Merchant Guild would be able to stimulate trade, or write embargoes, giving economic bonuses to some, penalties to others. Alien races would be a dubious option, because the only thing I see working would be to do an Earth map, inspired by such a setting, rather than a Galaxy map as was originally intended.

This would require: Limited armies, fleshed economics, and a degree of politics above and beyond what we saw in NG3. I think this could be a wildly different and fun fashion by which to do it, because we all have belong to the same species, and technically, nation. The idea would be to set forth a basis for your House (that is, pre-established relationships, ethics, etc.), and indulge in the politics and internecine warfare on the prize to be had - Earth itself.

Of course, to end the game, one House must emerge supreme, but by "buying out" the most territories, even in the face of the influence of other houses, being voted into the crownship by all the other Houses and organizations, or simply by conquest - it matters not, for your role is to become supreme ruler of Humanity.

View user profile
So basically Morrowwind?
...
That actually sounds incredibly awesome. Fuck yeah, I'm up for some goddamn Morrowwind house wars!

View user profile
Premier Cherdenko wrote:
Field Marshal Uburgen wrote:I support the fantasy idea. Motherfuckin mummies in this bitch

You already did that, though.
not bein mummies again dont worry just quotin the past.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 4]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum