The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) 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 June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knights111 Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I would also like there to be a Strategic Deployment thread where players maintain a post with their strategic deployment and force composition numbers and locations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) --------------------------------------------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 June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) 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 June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Since this won't see the light of day in CNRP2 we may have to discuss CNRP3 and porting over CNRP2 players. If there are only a few serious people interested, we can begin with a European Map and expand from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) 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 risk09:41 tidybowlman and this is what you get for taking him off the ban list. 09:41 JED v;09:41 Tywin_Lannister "trolling" ban opponent09:41 Rudy[Zzz] I didn't take him off the ban list09:42 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 June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I mean, when you accused Rudy of being power hungry that was the last straw for him. But whatever you say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 I accused them of not wanting to give up power, and they proved it by banning me. If you don't see how shot the credibility of these GMs are, then continue to play under them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Update Updated force composition form to include link to IC deployment post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knights111 Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) 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 June 16, 2014 by Knights111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) 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 June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 Go look at my Mogar logs. Otherwise, please stop derailing and focus on OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted June 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) These arent rules, these are objectives. The idea is to help influence how the rules actually come out. Not every objective must be accomplished. Edited June 16, 2014 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.