Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Entry Prohibited - Discussion Thread

Nihilistic_Impact

Nihilistic_Impact

Brigadista
Supporter
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Bare Bones Fact, Arc, Broom and myself have decided to try and hash out a system by which we, and others, can create our own societies/nations and then set them loose upon one another.

The basic idea is that each individual will start with a set amount of points. Now there are two types of points, Influence and Military. Each of these types of points can then be invested into a sub category.

Influence gets divided up between Infrastructure and Expansion. Infrastructure determines how well a limited territory is built up defensively/economically while Expansion provides an individual with more territory.

There is some work that needs to be made to this; but that's the basic idea. Discussion is welcome on this topic.

Military gets divided up between melee, armour and range. Between the three categories there will be a rock/paper/scissors effect. Melee beats Armour, Armour beats Range and Range beats Melee.

Again this is open to discussion.

And that's it for now, so come one, come all and tell us how we can improve upon this system while keeping it simple enough.
 
So, turn to turn gains?

I mean say we start out with.. five baronies. We start off with 10 Influence points.

Say, progressive growth rate for "Exploration" which puts an artificial cap on exploration? Or using an actual map. So first explored is one point, next is two, after that is four, 16, etc?

Infrastructure should be a multi-turn thing I think. Say, Economic expansion. Spend 2 points over three turns get you a small township which provides something like one Military and one Influence per turn. Spend another 3 points over three turns to get a Minor City for 2 Military and 3 Influence. 7 points over three turns for a Major City which gets you 3 Military and 3 Influence.

Have defensive infrastructure be different from Economic. So building up a heavily fortified, walled, castled, major city should be a huge investment and a backbone of your nation.
 
Yeah we can do something like that, though we want to keep thing simple.

A map will be required though, probably just a simple hexagonal map would work.

I think such differences between fortification and economics could be handled more IC with rping; but if others want a further subdivision of points that works for me.

Any idea on how frequently people should receive points?
 
Sounds like a fun project.

First thing that comes to mind is determining how much land a player starts with, as well with units of measure. Seeing as this is going to have some math behind the pretty words, having units of measure will help assign other points and such.

I think having a nation/land creation method could assist in various aspects later on. The player could have a start of say 300 points to make their base nation/land. Having a list of landscapes, environments, and such things with point prices attached would allow the player to create a basic nation/land without being too powerful from the get go. The point value I suggested was just something to use as an example.

Once the land is created, the unit of measure for the land itself would be able to determine more factors. Having different types of zoning for each piece of land would be helpful to figure the amount of populace you have. So something like Commercial, Residential, Military(Government?), Agriculture, and Wilderness. Each type of zoning would determine what kind of people, places, and things you can assign to them. Military would only be able to harbor war-like weapons and/or political buildings, Agriculture would determine how many people you can feed (and so if you don't have a certain amount of Agriculture lands, you can't support parts of your populace after a certain amount of time), and the rest seems sorta self explanatory there.

So at this point, you would know the environment, the size, and the basic zoning for your nation. With that, the points and terms you mentioned would fit along side it with the background math. Not sure if you would need a culture generator or a culture creation system, but that's another idea to be shared if desired. :)
 
That's all very well and good, and reasonably justified; but we do need to try and keep the system from becoming bloated.

Some things will need to just rely upon the honour system for.

Though I do like the idea of getting a number of points to design a starting landmass. It's just all the subdivision into providing lots of different benefits which worries me.
 
Well, while I was responding, you then mentioned about keeping it simple. And I'm no good at that. XD

But if I see something I can offer that *IS* simplistic, I'll offer what I can.
 
Oh don't let me hold you back. Right now we're just in the planning stages.

So toss whatever you have in mind out there, we'll just have to weed through it to make a system that actually works reasonably well.

I suspect most of it will be trial and error any ways.
 
Hmm. I think that's a bit complex, might drive away some people. I"m not necessarily opposed to it....

... BUT. It makes me think of something.

Exploration/Expansion terrain. Would be interesting, to me, if the first player to explore/claim a territory got to rig what terrain is there. Could have a few different types which provide bonuses and such. Say river valleys which give bonuses to production but are harder to defend.
 
Or we could dice roll things, except we don't have any on here and it might not make any geographical sense.

There's lots of different ways to do this.

I think one thing that needs to be stated is that this can be realistic, fantasy or science fiction. So figures like population might not matter so much in regards to food production if your nation is made up mostly of robot labourers or zombie hordes.
 
A hex would be a simple way of keeping track of territory, but I think simplicity is getting kinda lost on this one.

Infrastructure and Expansion could be considered the same thing, in order to safely expand it would be assumed you'd need a better infrastructure to do just that. So wrap them both up into one and call it Culture, you need better culture to expand your empire, to spread your word and your technology.

Depending on the size of your city you get points every turn, the bigger your city, you have more culture which gives you more points.

Military should be where all your units and defensive structures will go, a heavily militarized city would likely get less points per turn compared to normal cities so not everyone has increasingly massive castles and forts everywhere.
 
Drex Unity, bitches. Robot race designed to serve all the needs of their Drexari masters. Which they took to meaning in part aggressively expanding to make sure that no Drexari is put to the sword. Food? Just the small bit to feed the Drexari.
 
I was thinking something similar.

With the idea of robots and undead, maybe having certain traits for certain kinds of people/creatures assigned from culture/populace creation would allow for ways to make certain lands more desirable to certain people.

So with a robot idea, your populace is classified as Mechanical/Clockwork/Insert desired term. That trait gives your populace the ability to not have Agriculture/Food Production land spaces, but that would require them to spend more currency on equipping other lands with some form of energy creation method like Solar or Steam (from geothermal maybe?). That would make a robotic populace's lands more expensive, but it would allow them to escape the need to a certain amount of energy producing lands.

Could work well with undead as well, but instead of having farm land, they would have to actively hunt living populaces for people farms. Whether for blood production or flesh production, etc.
 
Guess we got a few different ways up, depending on what the Boss here wants. More ideas?


ComPot Density for military units. Idea is, to have a large (Functional, combat able) force, you need to have a commander skilled enough in it.

So lets say we have a few different ranks of unit types.

Low units that might be costing 5 points with something like 4 Offense, 4 Toughness (Take that much damage it's destroyed). Mid units might be 7 points, get a 7/7. High units might be 10 points for a 8/8. Maybe a limit per year on those just to reflect the need for some exceptional efforts to make one. Have it so something like a low unit might be able to form up with only 3 other units (So a Low Ranged unit commanding 3 Low Melee), a mid commands 5 units (So you could have a Mid Armor commanding 3 Mid Melee and 2 Low Ranged). And a High can command 10 others.

If you have more forces than you can't command? Suck it, they're reserves/casualty replacements between turns. Maybe open up multiple battlefields in the same area to split forces, etc.
 
The original system already took into consideration different ranks of units.

You could invest 5 points into a unit for player one. Player two could invest 10 points in a similar unit.
 
Yes, but my idea has the benefit of breaking up Superstacks, which is what happens in these sorts of games. You just stack all your armies into one hex/space and thus can't lose that area and go hunting any smaller player. Any larger army would have to superstack against you, you'd see it coming, and you just do a game of dancing around avoiding larger superstacks. Limiting army sizes like mine does ensures you can't superstack up meaning you get more combat, multiple theaters of operation, etc.
 
Hmm, perhaps what we do in that case is make it so a hex can only support so many points.

It'd be a way to represent supply lines.
 
Otherway would be have a chain of so many unbroken hexes to your nearest base/outpost that's connected to your capital.

So say something like units could only be up to 5 hexes away from any outpost to still be "in supply", and that outpost has to have a chain of outposts no more than 5 hexes from each other to the capital to be part of that supply grid. Give reasons a player has to develop his land instead of just amassing a large military and running wild over everyone.
 
Right, that'd be another way to do it.

We'll probably need a moderator of sorts to make sure things run smoothly and to handle any potential disputes.
 
Should be cut and dry. No variables so far to possibly really require a moderator.

I do like the Supply Chain thing as well as it removes Blitzkrieg as an option. Gotta consolidate territory after the initial impetus. More time, more RPing side opportunities.
 
I think we can manage blitzkriegs.

You just allow an army to forage for one turn beyond their supply range; but if next turn they don't return within range they start losing points.
 
Still not really a huge "Blitz". No one will be able to rush from capital to capital. Which is what I'd like to see not happen. Make the war be a real slobberknocker.
 
Which is the way it should be.

Though I wonder somewhat, what if someone has a unit of dragons or other flying beasts/constructs?
 
Still needs supplies. Gotta land sometime, gotta eat, replace equipment, concubines for the riders, etc, etc, etc.
 
Right.

What will we do for range?

Foot sloggers can't travel as far as horses and airships can certainly go farther.
 
Strategic vs. Tactical Movement answer. Units which could move fast, air units, cavalry, etc... Say, if they have bases in supply of each other in a single turn they can move between however many of them they want, long as they start and end on one. Reason why? They get replacement horses and such for keeping them quickly moving, allowing them to go as fast as they can as long as they have these outposts to keep quick replenished. Foot soldiers can't do this. Give them the same movement range without that special strategic movement. Maybe have a few special units that can move a little further normally, like raider types and such if you decide to have it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom