Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) /me facepalm Back on a consensus godmod so I don't screw up again? xD edit-in: I'll make any changes you request in a while, it'll be a nice update. Edited October 15, 2008 by Sargun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerreyRough Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) Why is everyone so uptight about numbers? Is numbers now everything? I mean, we should still link to the game of course; but we should have some flexability; as long as that person stays resonable. EG: I use weapons that do not exist in real life, but are like/treated as their counterparts. My tank is really just a glorified version of the Siege Tank in Warcraft 3. People should not be restrained by "100x, or 250x"; as long as they stay resonable. Another example: lets say my IG population is 10,000 civilians. I could go with 1,000,000; 2,500,000; or [with the 1000x] 10,000,000. But, lets say I wanted 2/3 of my population to live in slums; this seems negative, but is an easy excuse to have more people, conscription, etc. So then instead of 1,000,000 [with 100x], I could have 3,000,000 people. Just making things interesting. Edited October 15, 2008 by JerreyRough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerreyRough Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) Basicly what I mean is this: Neither, just roleplay your own citizens as long as it isn't ridiculous and there's a reason. OOC: I should find some of you guy's that I RP with on Facebook... Edited October 15, 2008 by JerreyRough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 This is an OOC thread, just so you know. I think the best way to use numbers would just be to take tech and apply it as a restriction to what you can use (no napalm at .1 tech) and just use your nation to determine who wins a war, and HAVE FUN D:< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Why is everyone so uptight about numbers? Is numbers now everything?I mean, we should still link to the game of course; but we should have some flexability; as long as that person stays resonable. EG: I use weapons that do not exist in real life, but are like/treated as their counterparts. My tank is really just a glorified version of the Siege Tank in Warcraft 3. People should not be restrained by "100x, or 250x"; as long as they stay resonable. Another example: lets say my IG population is 10,000 civilians. I could go with 1,000,000; 2,500,000; or [with the 1000x] 10,000,000. But, lets say I wanted 2/3 of my population to live in slums; this seems negative, but is an easy excuse to have more people, conscription, etc. So then instead of 1,000,000 [with 100x], I could have 3,000,000 people. Just making things interesting. Ah, so I could have a population of nearly 80 million? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 After thinking over the population multiplier, I noticed that we rarely have any economic indicators in our RPs. Here is my suggestion on how to connected the Population Multiplier with GDP. Population Multiplier: x200n (if mulitpler is below 150, n = 0.75) Average GDP: (Avg. Gross Income Per Individual Per Day) x 250/n To explain, I'll use my nation and Imperial Wellington as an example. If we suppose that I use x1000 as my multiplier and LVN uses x100, then the result will be: Kyokujitsu Teikoku Population: 12,026,000 Average GDP: $5654.50 Imperial Wellington Population: 8,874,500 Average GDP: Estimated over $60,000 Comments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) ...didn't you make exactly the same post in another thread? Edited October 15, 2008 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Yeah, but then I pointed out that this thread was here and he decided to use it. That's what this is for, you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I say we RP w/e we want within reason and if enough people ignore your RPs for it then you have to change it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shan Revan Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I say we RP w/e we want within reason and if enough people ignore your RPs for it then you have to change it. That's my general approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) WHy the hell are people being so stupid about Civilians. Memo: They do not matter in wars. I can understand limiting Soldiers to a multiplier but Civilians do not matter just be reasonable and look at the land you control. Edited October 15, 2008 by Centurius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) WHy the hell are people being so stupid about Civilians. Memo: They do not matter in wars. I can understand limiting Soldiers to a multiplier but Civilians do not matter just be reasonable and look at the land you control. Ah, so I could RP a population of approximately 70 million, as in RL Turkey? (Either that, or approximately 80 million if I use the 1000x multiplier?) Or should I stick to the 100x multiplier? Edited October 15, 2008 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Ah, so I could RP a population of approximately 70 million, as in RL Turkey? (Either that, or approximately 80 million if I use the 1000x multiplier?) Or should I stick to the 100x multiplier? I personally really do not care. You can rp over 100 million if it was up to me. Civilians are just nice numbers who really do not matter in RP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) I personally really do not care. You can rp over 100 million if it was up to me. Civilians are just nice numbers who really do not matter in RP. Hm, I might RP a population of 80 million, then. 8 million, in my opinion, is simply too small. Why, the city of Istanbul in RL has more civilians than that, heh. Edited October 15, 2008 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I personally really do not care. You can rp over 100 million if it was up to me. Civilians are just nice numbers who really do not matter in RP. The thing is, civilians an also participate in wars. Guerilla tactics, suvtle sabotages, quiet resistance. And in the case of World War 2, the reason the US didn't even try to send its troops into Japan in a full-out invasion? The estimated casualties would have been in the millions, becase the civilian population would have ac tively opposed them. So are we really going to say population doesn't matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 The thing is, civilians an also participate in wars. Guerilla tactics, suvtle sabotages, quiet resistance. And in the case of World War 2, the reason the US didn't even try to send its troops into Japan in a full-out invasion? The estimated casualties would have been in the millions, becase the civilian population would have ac tively opposed them.So are we really going to say population doesn't matter? In RP it doesn't as wars are based here on ingame stats if you rp a Civilian population of a billion and another of a million but way higher stats he/she will win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Civilians are an important part of war. See: the $%&@ of Belgium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 In RP it doesn't as wars are based here on ingame stats if you rp a Civilian population of a billion and another of a million but way higher stats he/she will win. I notice how you didn't mention anything about how civilians often participate in wars... Another good example of that is the movie "Red Dawn," a theoretical take on a World War 3 situation before the collapse of the Soviet Union, where the Soviets invade America. The main characters are a guerilla band composed of high-schoolers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 The main characters are a guerilla band composed of high-schoolers. -facepalm- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 -facepalm- What? It's perfectly plausible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 What? It's perfectly plausible. Yes, perfectly plausible for Soviets to sneak into Colorado. From there, I leave the rest of the movie up to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 (edited) Yes, perfectly plausible for Soviets to sneak into Colorado.From there, I leave the rest of the movie up to you. I think he's trying to make the point that citizens can and does participate in wars... Edited October 15, 2008 by JEDCJT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Yes, perfectly plausible for Soviets to sneak into Colorado.From there, I leave the rest of the movie up to you. They were paratroopers, not basic infantry, FYI. I think he's trying to make the point that citizens can and does participate in wars... Exactly. I'm not really after trying to convince anyone of the plausibility of any fictional example. it merely shows that citizens often can and will participate in wars, hence the need for a reasonable multiplier for population counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted October 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know civilians can participate in wars, but Red Dawn is the last example I would have chosen.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted October 16, 2008 Report Share Posted October 16, 2008 I know civilians can participate in wars, but Red Dawn is the last example I would have chosen.. Why? Have you actually seen it? I take it you don't like the movie... 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.