On Efficiency

[SpacingOutMan]

Then what about a counter-proposal (because I do agree to some extents).

When I fought my war with EM in Africa, I had more than 10 times his tech, yet I made sure that it was not one-sided. Hell, if I had really wanted to be a stat Nazi, I could have claimed I steam rolled over everything given the tech efficiency. With that said, though, there needs to be something said when it comes to tech discrepancy between first world nations, but perhaps toned down.

Tactics and what not aside, putting two first world nations up against each other, how else can you have discrepancy between the two? There should be some passive system in place that prevents God-modding by taking into account tech in some way, but maybe not as drastic as it is now. Without any tech efficiency of any sort, I could use a WW1 tank and make it so that it could take on the French Leclerc or the American Abrams. That makes no sense whatsoever. As much as I would say it needs to be placed in the responsibility of the RPers, it has been seen time and time again that no matter what system is implemented, someone will abuse it; it's unavoidable.

The fact is that there is still discrepancy between first world nations and technology should play some role in at least determining a technological advantage. This is, again, tactics aside because as we have seen time and time again during history, just because you aren't on par technologically doesn't mean you automatically lose (Vietnam, WW2, Falklands, etc.). We all agree that the tech efficiency isn't the best system, but there still needs to be discrepancy.

[Zoot Zoot]

I disagree SOM, as someone stated earlier, we have GM's and mods to stop the abuse, all you do is call shens on it.
Not to mention the fine art of common sense and sensible RP, I cant think of anyone in CNRP currently who would abuse the system intentionally, perhaps misunderstand something, but not go out of their way to abuse the RPing.

[iamthey]

Sometimes the rules of a system cannot fully balance or exclude abuse. The current TE system is a good example. If fear of abuse wasn't present among the community and everyone had that much faith, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Sargun II]

Just a point here that we never needed the efficiency scale in the first place.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' date='31 May 2010 - 05:11 PM' timestamp='1275340274' post='2318106']
I disagree SOM, as someone stated earlier, we have GM's and mods to stop the abuse, all you do is call shens on it.
Not to mention the fine art of common sense and sensible RP, I cant think of anyone in CNRP currently who would abuse the system intentionally, perhaps misunderstand something, but not go out of their way to abuse the RPing.
[/quote]

I'm sorry, but being sensible and CNRP are two entirely different things. Being sensible would include RPing an economy, dissenting citizens, corruption, etc. We have none of that; CNRP is bereft of any of the mundane recourse in everyday (real) society.

Likewise, if I have 10k tech and another person as 1.6k tech, how does it make any sense that the second person has just as effective munitions? This is excluding tactics and what not of course, but I find that to be a tad unbalanced.

[quote name='Sargun' date='31 May 2010 - 05:23 PM' timestamp='1275340994' post='2318119']
Just a point here that we never needed the efficiency scale in the first place.
[/quote]

Very much this.

[Triyun]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' date='31 May 2010 - 10:11 PM' timestamp='1275340274' post='2318106']
I disagree SOM, as someone stated earlier, we have GM's and mods to stop the abuse, all you do is call shens on it.
Not to mention the fine art of common sense and sensible RP, I cant think of anyone in CNRP currently who would abuse the system intentionally, perhaps misunderstand something, but not go out of their way to abuse the RPing.
[/quote]

We may not always have fair GMs. Remember the Tech Efficiency system was invented by a [i]GM[/i] in order to make himself the most powerful. Rules need to be there to protect the community from a rogue GM.

[SpacingOutMan]

[quote name='Triyun' date='31 May 2010 - 06:20 PM' timestamp='1275344407' post='2318181']
We may not always have fair GMs. Remember the Tech Efficiency system was invented by a [i]GM[/i] in order to make himself the most powerful. Rules need to be there to protect the community from a rogue GM.
[/quote]

Oh LVN... him and his 1000 km automatic rail gun systems. But yea, very much this. We just need a balance is all.

[Subtleknifewielder]

OK, some people are making incorrect assumptions about Tech Efficiency. Let's set the record straight before we make any abrupt changes or decisions.

First thing. Tech efficiency doesn't vary widely...in fact, not at all, for Third World and Modern nations. Any third world nation, from 0 tech to 499, will have the same efficiency. Likewise, any Modern nation will have the same efficiency as any other Modern Nation. It's only with First World nations that thetech efficiency begins to differ.

Second. Tech Efficiency is not the ultimate deciding factor in RP as it is. It does state in its description that if you RP poorly, despite tech effiicency, you lose. The Efficiency is there only for between RP'ers of equal skill, for example...the two RP a head-to-head battle.

Please do not take those as support of the system. Likewise, please do not take THAT statement to be support of removing it. But one cannot make an educated decision if one does not have all the facts.

[iamthey]

nb4 :plannedwar: > :unplannedwar:

[Kaede Alexeivich]

[quote name='iamthey' date='31 May 2010 - 07:02 PM' timestamp='1275354123' post='2318343']
nb4 :plannedwar: > :unplannedwar:
[/quote]
I agree.

[Executive Minister]

While I agree RP and RPer decisions should come before any arbitrary 'efficiency' system, I concede that if I were to fight someone like Lynneth on an open plain, I would be slaughtered. There must be something to address this. Whether its a 'defender bonus' or some other attacking/defending rule, there must be something.

[Kaiser Martens]

[quote]The Efficiency is there only for between RP'ers of equal skill, for example...the two RP a head-to-head battle.[/quote]

That doesn't really work nor exist, there's not such a thing as a battle in which both sides have exactly the same capabilities and do exactly the same thing, therefore, TE is not necessary.

Just the fact that the Tech scale alone exist is sufficient to achieve a reasonable balance. But the TE is a problem because it takes the existing, working tech scale and minimizes it to a magic number out of a formula to decide the outcome of every battle. TE is what you get if you would run a war using only the tech scale without using RP. That is, TE is opposed to RP, while the tech scale favors RP.

It's CNRP...our wars should have RP in them too.

In the end, when it comes to balance, even in the very unlikely worst case scenario that technology may not give a MUCH stronger nation as much advantage, it won't really happen, because the nation too has almost in every single case an overwhelming infrastructural superiority, and can field more troops.

[Zoot Zoot]

numbers are nothing.
a platoon can hold a mountain pass against an army if they have the right weapons and tons of ammo.
ignoring air support etc.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Kaiser Martens' date='31 May 2010 - 07:31 PM' timestamp='1275359496' post='2318482']
That doesn't really work nor exist, there's not such a thing as a battle in which both sides have exactly the same capabilities and do exactly the same thing, therefore, TE is not necessary.
[/quote]
You missed my point. I said equal skill. That does not equate to having exactly the same capabilites, but rather each has the same [i]amount[/i] of proficiency in the tactics and weapons they use as the other has with theirs.

[Kaiser Martens]

Oh, I see.

[Lynneth]

The current TE formula is just a guideline to see how strong the forces would be if they were on an open field with neither side having any advantages and both players having the same skill in writing battles, etc.
However, such a thing never happens. There's relatively few really open fields and every side has some kind of advantage or disadvantage somewhere. TE doesn't mean "your tanks can't kill mine", it means [u]"My tanks and their crews are good enough to achieve a 2:1 kill ratio if we always send the same number of tanks into the battle on an open field"[/u].

There's terrain, there's tactics, there's planes and much more; the battlefield is a dynamic place and that can only be reflected via roleplay.

TE is a guideline to show roughly the strength of a player in comparison to others. It doesn't mean I can just send my 1.9 million soldiers into Europe and expect to kill almost 5 million enemy soldiers with them no matter how badly I RP. If another player does his work well, he can do a suprise attack and annihilate hundreds of my men with little to no losses for him.
Again, TE is a tool to measure approximate strength in a straight-on battle. Nothing but an endless plane with X amount of forces on each side.

It does not and will never dictate the outcome of a war just because somebody's TE is higher than that of the guy he attacks.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Lynneth's post actualy explains it best, I think.

[Silhouette]

o/ Lynneth, for he is great and powerful...

[Sargun II]

So, what Lynneth is saying is that efficiency is useless.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Sargun' date='01 June 2010 - 06:10 AM' timestamp='1275397784' post='2319042']
So, what Lynneth is saying is that efficiency is useless.

[img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/smug.gif[/img]
[/quote]
If that's what you want to believe, we'll let you live in your delusions. [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/ehm.gif[/img]

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Sargun' date='01 June 2010 - 08:10 AM' timestamp='1275397784' post='2319042']
So, what Lynneth is saying is that efficiency is useless.


[/quote]
He can still brutalize you with his tech alone, now throw in numbers...

[Kaiser Martens]

Well it still is pretty much pointless I suppose...tells us basically the same thing that tech alone already does.

[iamthey]

I think the problem people were raising with TE was that it doesn't account for say differences in tanks. If a RPer has just rp'd a 'generic' tank, but has 10k tech, and another has RP'd a lot of features and specific abilities for their tank but has 1600 tech, what role does TE play in that?

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='HHAYD' date='30 May 2010 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1275277325' post='2317442']
I have a question, is it possible for a 7,000 tech country to have large amount of Cold-War or even WWII-era tanks instead of smaller amount of modern tanks?

I want to see how would RPing 25,440 WWII Sherman tanks work out in a war instead of 2,544 modern tanks.
[/quote]

It would be the bloodiest route in the history of CNRP for the larger army. Consider the factors of logistical troops, maneuver, and sheer killing power. The Sherman didn't have the ability to defeat a Tiger head on, it certainly wouldn't even come close to being able to hit an Abrams. Further, take into account that to accurately fire the Sherman has to be at a full stop. The Abrams can fire on the move and make accurate hits at a great distance. A distance that far exceeds the Sherman's killing range.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='01 June 2010 - 09:24 PM' timestamp='1275452639' post='2320137']
It would be the bloodiest route in the history of CNRP for the larger army. Consider the factors of logistical troops, maneuver, and sheer killing power. The Sherman didn't have the ability to defeat a Tiger head on, it certainly wouldn't even come close to being able to hit an Abrams. Further, take into account that to accurately fire the Sherman has to be at a full stop. The Abrams can fire on the move and make accurate hits at a great distance. A distance that far exceeds the Sherman's killing range.
[/quote]
Aye, this.

Also, hai, TBM. You gonna post fer us soon?