Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am writing a brand new set of rules for CNRP 2.0 or 3.0, and seeking input, with the following objectives:

 

OBJECTIVE 1: DIFFERENTIATE WARGAMING AND ROLEPLAY

 

- Separate roleplaying from wargaming -

- Render non-collaborative roleplay subjective -

- If roleplay conflicts, both are propaganda -

- Eliminate roleplay rules -

- Establish roleplay as IC -

- Establish wargaming as OOC -

- Establish use of both IC and OOC in concluding conflicts -

- Replace Game Mods with War Mods -

- Allow collaborative players to select alternate third party regulator -

 

OBJECTIVE 2: STRATEGIC REBALANCING

 

- Define strategic force composition/deployment by land, naval and air numerical composition -

- Initial strategic force composition will not be replenished following losses -

- All strategic deployment numbers visible to all players (IC: Media Coverage) -

- Players must specify strategic autonomous warfare or attrition military model -

- Autonomous warfare model grants defensive bonus, attrition, offensive bonus -

- Make strategic deployments sole focus of land occupation claims -

- Strategic deployments penalized by post-battle/invasion cooldown -

- Strategic dice rolling on offense penalized by attrition, influenced by numbers -

- Establish firm wargame timeline -

- Identify wonders, nuclear attacks and spy attacks as limited supporting warfare -

- Supporting warfare outside of NS range is optional recognition -

 

OBJECTIVE 3: TACTICAL WARGAMING

 

- Tactical Wargaming occurs when strategic deployments conflict -

- Defined by red team (aggressor) and blue team (defender) -

- Non-collaborative aggressor must initiate a challenge and submit strategic deployment plan to WM -

- If no response from defender within X time of PM sent, automatic peaceful defensive withdrawal -

- If inactive player forced to make last stand, resolved by WM dice roll -

- Offensive options: dice roll or tactical deployment -

- Dice Roll: Aggressor attrition penalty, percentage of defending force escapes -

- Tactical Deployment: Each side presents OOC arguments as to why they should win, resolved by intermediary -

- Offensive tactical deployment data is visible to all players (IC: Media coverage)

- Offensive tactical deployment data cannot be changed until cooldown is ended -

- Victorious offensive deployment may be reinforced -   

 

 

Any thoughts, contributions, adjustment requests, criticism?

 

This OP will be edited with suggestions.

 

--------------------------------------------FORCE COMPOSITION THREAD--------------------------------------------

 

Participants maintain strategic force composition and deployment force as follows, otherwise not recognized. Sample Force Composition Post:

 

CENTAURI NATION DEPLOYMENT

 

Focus: Offensive (Attrition Model)

 

HOME FORCE COMPOSITION (ITALY)

Land: 40,000/1500 (personnel/tanks)

Air: 200 Generation 4 Aircraft

Sea: 4 Destroyers, 3 Crusers, 5 Corvettes

 

SOUTHERN FRANCE TASK FORCE

OCCUPATION BEGUN: May 15, 2014

IC POST LINK: - LINK -

Land: 10,000/100

Air: 10 Generation 4 Aircraft

Sea: N/A

 

JERUSALEM JOINT TASK FORCE

OCCUPATION BEGUN: Jun 13, 2014

IC POST LINK: - LINK -

 

Land: 500/10

Air: N/A

Sea: 1 Corvette

 

LAST UPDATED: JUN 16, 2014

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am writing a brand new set of rules for CNRP 2.0 or 3.0, and seeking input, with the following objectives:

 

OBJECTIVE 1: DIFFERENTIATE WARGAMING AND ROLEPLAY

 

- Separate roleplaying from wargaming -

- Render non-collaborative roleplay subjective -

- If roleplay conflicts, both are propaganda -

- Eliminate roleplay rules -

- Establish roleplay as IC -

- Establish wargaming as OOC -

- Establish use of both IC and OOC in concluding conflicts -

- Replace Game Mods with War Mods -

- Allow collaborative players to select alternate third party regulator -

 

OBJECTIVE 2: STRATEGIC REBALANCING

 

- Define strategic force composition/deployment by land, naval and air numerical composition -

- All strategic deployment numbers visible to all players (IC: Media Coverage) -

- Players must specify strategic autonomous warfare or attrition military model -

- Autonomous warfare model grants defensive bonus, attrition, offensive bonus -

- Make strategic deployments sole focus of land occupation claims -

- Strategic deployments penalized by post-battle/invasion cooldown -

- Strategic dice rolling on offense penalized by attrition, influenced by numbers -

- Establish firm wargame timeline -

- Identify wonders, nuclear attacks and spy attacks as limited supporting warfare -

- Isolate supporting warfare to nation strength range -

 

OBJECTIVE 3: TACTICAL WARGAMING

 

- Tactical Wargaming occurs when strategic deployments conflict -

- Defined by red team (aggressor) and blue team (defender) -

- Non-collaborative aggressor must initiate a challenge and submit strategic deployment plan to WM -

- If no response from defender within X time of PM sent, automatic peaceful defensive withdrawal -

- If inactive player forced to make last stand, resolved by WM dice roll -

- Offensive options: dice roll or tactical deployment -

- Dice Roll: Aggressor attrition penalty, percentage of defending force escapes -

- Tactical Deployment: Each side presents OOC arguments as to why they should win, resolved by intermediary -

- Offensive tactical deployment data is visible to all players (IC: Media coverage)

- Offensive tactical deployment data cannot be changed until cooldown is ended -

- Victorious offensive deployment may be reinforced -   

 

 

Any thoughts, contributions, adjustment requests, criticism?

 

This OP will be edited with suggestions.

 

I will be assistant director of this and be active in updating the map if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--------------------------------------------FORCE COMPOSITION THREAD POST--------------------------------------------

 

[Participants maintain strategic force composition and deployment force as follows, otherwise not recognized. Sample Force Composition Post below]

 

CENTAURI NATION DEPLOYMENT

 

Focus: Offensive (Attrition Model)

 

HOME FORCE COMPOSITION (ITALY)

Land: 40,000/1500 (personnel/tanks)

Air: 200 Generation 4 Aircraft

Sea: 4 Destroyers, 3 Crusers, 5 Corvettes

 

SOUTHERN FRANCE TASK FORCE

OCCUPATION BEGUN: May 15, 2014

Land: 10,000/100

Air: 10 Generation 4 Aircraft

Sea: N/A

 

JERUSALEM JOINT TASK FORCE

OCCUPATION BEGUN: Jun 13, 2014

Land: 500/10

Air: N/A

Sea: 1 Corvette

 

LAST UPDATED: JUN 16, 2014

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOLBANNED from #CNRP2 for proposing this

[spoiler]09:33 Tywin_Lannister Is there a calculator to simulate CN naval battles
09:34 Tywin_Lannister that could be an easy way of resolving non-cooperative naval battles
09:34 FHIC What? A button-push?
09:35 Biohazard Not gonna lie
09:35 Biohazard i lol'd
09:35 *** Euphaia joined #cnrp2
09:35 +++ ChanServ has given voice to Euphaia
09:35 Tywin_Lannister button pushing under these revisions results in attrition penalties
09:35 Tywin_Lannister i.e. heavier losses
09:35 Lynneth no such thing
09:35 Lynneth because admin didn't give the calcs out
09:36 Tywin_Lannister I am going to make my own formula
09:36 FHIC One which, perhaps, won't take in depth tactics and strategy into account?
09:36 *** JED joined #cnrp2
09:36 +++ ChanServ has given voice to JED
09:36 Tywin_Lannister if you do not have more than 3v1 odds and air superiority offensive losses will be heavy
09:37 Tywin_Lannister 3v1 as a basis for safe offensive operations is used by the Army
09:37 Tywin_Lannister however, an offensive military basis can help mitigate that
09:37 Tywin_Lannister i.e. choosing the soviet style attrition role model
09:38 JED cnrp2.1/3 is esoteric
09:38 JED this is all
09:38 Tywin_Lannister also, all your forces are one time only
09:38 Tywin_Lannister once your nation loses them, they are gone
09:38 Tywin_Lannister if you are crushed absolutely you can reroll
09:39 tidybowlman slaps JED around a bit with a large trout
09:39 Tywin_Lannister this ensures good nation turnover
09:39 JED gets an orgasm
09:39 Rudy[Zzz] Okay, I can now assure you that no one will vote for such a thing
09:39 Rudy[Zzz] Unless they're actively trolling
09:39 Tywin_Lannister why not
09:39 Rudy[Zzz] Because no one wants to reroll
09:40 Tywin_Lannister then dont waste your forces offensively in a foolish manner
09:40 Tywin_Lannister defense has general advantage
09:40 JED you're sounding more like Triyun
09:40 Yerushalayim Multi! Spai!
09:40 Tywin_Lannister my model would still be simpler than CNRP1
09:40 Tywin_Lannister more like risk
09:40 Rudy[Zzz] facepalms
09:41 Yerushalayim We're not playing Risk.
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] This isn't Risk
09:41 JED simpler?
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] This IS RP
09:41 JED Right
09:41 Tywin_Lannister I said more like risk
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] You want Risk, you go to CNRP1
09:41 Tywin_Lannister no more magical roleplay forces
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] You want RP you go here
09:41 JED simple as that
09:41 tidybowlman He's trolling again guys.
09:41 Tywin_Lannister or
09:41 JED ask Triyun for Hawaii if you want some risk
09:41 tidybowlman and this is what you get for taking him off the ban list.
09:41 JED v;
09:41 Tywin_Lannister "trolling" ban opponent
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] I didn't take him off the ban list
09:42 Tywin_Lannister you guys just dont want to lose power
09:42 PresidentDavid Says the one that murdered all of his people and tried to claim they were raptured... Yeah magic is bad.
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] That Lyser apparently if my logs are correct
09:42 tidybowlman put him back on is my suggestion.
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] LOL
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] Okay, you're done
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] Bah Bye
09:42 Tywin_Lannister poaching FTW
09:42 Sargun Who let tywin back in?
09:42 --- Rudy[Zzz] has banned
09:42 *** Tywin_Lannister was kicked by Rudy[Zzz] (Rudy[Zzz])
09:42 !!! You have been kicked from #cnrp2[/spoiler]

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14:41 Tywin_Lannister you guys just dont want to lose power
14:41 PresidentDavid Says the one that murdered all of his people and tried to claim they were raptured... Yeah magic is bad.
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] That Lyser apparently if my logs are correct
14:41 tidybowlman put him back on is my suggestion.
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] LOL
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] Okay, you're done
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] Bah Bye

 

 

Actually you were banned for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14:41 Tywin_Lannister you guys just dont want to lose power
14:41 PresidentDavid Says the one that murdered all of his people and tried to claim they were raptured... Yeah magic is bad.
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] That Lyser apparently if my logs are correct
14:41 tidybowlman put him back on is my suggestion.
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] LOL
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] Okay, you're done
14:41 Rudy[Zzz] Bah Bye

 

 

Actually you were banned for that.

 

The banning talk started after TidyBowlMan claimed I was trolling.

 

[spoiler]09:41 tidybowlman He's trolling again guys.
09:41 Tywin_Lannister or
09:41 JED ask Triyun for Hawaii if you want some risk
09:41 tidybowlman and this is what you get for taking him off the ban list.
09:41 JED v;
09:41 Tywin_Lannister "trolling" ban opponent
09:41 Rudy[Zzz] I didn't take him off the ban list
09:42 Tywin_Lannister you guys just dont want to lose power
09:42 PresidentDavid Says the one that murdered all of his people and tried to claim they were raptured... Yeah magic is bad.
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] That Lyser apparently if my logs are correct
09:42 tidybowlman put him back on is my suggestion.
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] LOL
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] Okay, you're done
09:42 Rudy[Zzz] Bah Bye
09:42 Tywin_Lannister poaching FTW
09:42 Sargun Who let tywin back in?
09:42 --- Rudy[Zzz] has banned
09:42 *** Tywin_Lannister was kicked by Rudy[Zzz] (Rudy[Zzz])
09:42 !!! You have been kicked from #cnrp2[/spoiler]

 

Nice try though.

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks for your help Knights, but I am trying to get rid of roleplay authoritarianism and establish concrete military engagement rules. This wont need directors or powerful mods.

 

Ok then...

Look dude, sorry to tell you this but you need game mods/gm's also to help you in updating the map, etc. The whole game is not about war, and you might want help for when you go on vacation or are busy. That is all i am saying, just a tip of advice.

Edited by Knights111
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ON DICEROLLING

 

"Dicerolling" does not literally have to be decided by dice. A simply formula can determine the outcome of engagements in a stable way. There would be an order of operations for determining force effectiveness before actual conflict takes place. Sample setup:

 

STEP ONE: FORCE STRATEGY

Attrition bonus gives +50% land offensive effectiveness

Autonomous bonus gives +50% land defensive effectiveness

 

STEP TWO: AIR SUPERIORITY

Offensive air superiority gives between +20% to 50% offensive effectiveness*

Defensive air superiority gives +50% defensive effectiveness

*Depends on aircraft generations i.e. tech level

 

STEP THREE: SUPPORT WARFARE

Nuclear attack reduces enemy effectiveness 50%

Spy attack reduces enemy effectiveness 10%

Nukes in-game allows nuclear attack, SDI prohibits nuclear attack

 

COMPOSE ADJUSTED COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS NUMBERS

 

FINAL STEP: ADJUSTED TACTICAL DEPLOYMENT

A) WARGAME

B) "DICEROLL," WITH EMPHASIS ON OFFENSIVE 3v1 PRINCIPLE

 

Numbers subject to discussion.

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe it's a matter of people not wanting to lose power.. more of a matter of that.. if we wanted to do a combat sim, there're millions out there. CN itself is one. The whole point to CNRP is to have those nations interact and not be totally obsessed with combat until it happens and then have mechanics that do not require a calculator and hours to tabulate. Your desires are not in line with the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My obsession is based on the fact that people try to use every dirty trick possible to "force people from the game." At that point it is no longer a collaborative roleplay and concrete rules need to be defined.

 

I searched "force people from the game" on the forums and you seem to be the only one that is saying it. I don't want to tell you what to do, but quoting yourself does not add legitimacy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

09:40 Tywin_Lannister then dont waste your forces offensively in a foolish manner
09:40 Tywin_Lannister defense has general advantage
09:40 JED you're sounding more like Triyun

Yeah, Triyun advocated getting rid of any replenishment ever. Next he'll be the one responsible for global warming and for the fact Santa claus didn't visit you last year or something?

 

Also, these rules are sure as hell not getting you even a handful of people to join.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...