Hegemony Argument Thread

[paul191600]

Hegemony can't be hegemony without Dusty.

Over and out :thumbup:

[The Dark Lord]

To be honest, we all should just play some sort of Civ-like game (so long as it lets us connect to a private Tip.it server and lets us customize some things).

[archimage_a]

Rocco, what do you want us to do?

Hegemony 2 was a ramshackle system, which rattled along because no one payed the blindest bit of attention to anyone else...as soon as people started taking an interest in anyone else the whole system fell apart.

Also people don't care. Retech did his big 'Repopulation to the high heavens' no one cared, Mather did his stupid budget, no one cared, I stole technology from everyone, only grim cared. Even the Urk-Orz invasion, most people ignored it... In the last game, Retech builds a massive navy out of nothing, no one cares, I conquer half of Africa, only Dusty cares, Dusty Conquers Easten Europe, only I care. Grim Conquers France, only I care. I try to conquer Europe, only Dusty cares, Retech tries to conquer Indonesia, Singapore, Korea and Oman, no one cares. Sere conqures Britian, no one cares. Doom conquers South America, no one cares.

The game doesn't work because nobody cares about anything that doesn't affect their narrow band of interests.

 

So the idea that we can self moderate is a complete farse.

 

Furthermore the budgets in the last two games were complete nightmares, people would post figures which bore no relation to reality or even a game-like reality....How many games do you know that doubles your money every 10 years? Can you imagine playing Sim City or Total War...or Civilisation with that sort of a budget?

'My lord, we have build 5,000,000 axemen AND have doubled our economy.'

The game would be terrible, it is impossible to lose.

 

So the idea that we can be reasonable and responsible is also a complete farse.

 

So either we have a system of wikis and tech trees and other things which give the game some grounding, or we forget the whole thing and come back in a month or so and see if people have mellowed out.

[Retech]

Rocco, what do you want us to do?

Hegemony 2 was a ramshackle system, which rattled along because no one payed the blindest bit of attention to anyone else...as soon as people started taking an interest in anyone else the whole system fell apart.

Also people don't care. Retech did his big 'Repopulation to the high heavens' no one cared, Mather did his stupid budget, no one cared, I stole technology from everyone, only grim cared. Even the Urk-Orz invasion, most people ignored it... In the last game, Retech builds a massive navy out of nothing, no one cares, I conquer half of Africa, only Dusty cares, Dusty Conquers Easten Europe, only I care. Grim Conquers France, only I care. I try to conquer Europe, only Dusty cares, Retech tries to conquer Indonesia, Singapore, Korea and Oman, no one cares. Sere conqures Britian, no one cares. Doom conquers South America, no one cares.

The game doesn't work because nobody cares about anything that doesn't affect their narrow band of interests.

 

So the idea that we can self moderate is a complete farse.

 

Furthermore the budgets in the last two games were complete nightmares, people would post figures which bore no relation to reality or even a game-like reality....How many games do you know that doubles your money every 10 years? Can you imagine playing Sim City or Total War...or Civilisation with that sort of a budget?

'My lord, we have build 5,000,000 axemen AND have doubled our economy.'

The game would be terrible, it is impossible to lose.

 

So the idea that we can be reasonable and responsible is also a complete farse.

 

So either we have a system of wikis and tech trees and other things which give the game some grounding, or we forget the whole thing and come back in a month or so and see if people have mellowed out.

 

For the Africa thing, I cared once it started affecting my South African interests. (They threw me out!) :P

[Nero]

Rocco, what do you want us to do?

Hegemony 2 was a ramshackle system, which rattled along because no one payed the blindest bit of attention to anyone else...as soon as people started taking an interest in anyone else the whole system fell apart.

Also people don't care. Retech did his big 'Repopulation to the high heavens' no one cared, Mather did his stupid budget, no one cared, I stole technology from everyone, only grim cared. Even the Urk-Orz invasion, most people ignored it... In the last game, Retech builds a massive navy out of nothing, no one cares, I conquer half of Africa, only Dusty cares, Dusty Conquers Easten Europe, only I care. Grim Conquers France, only I care. I try to conquer Europe, only Dusty cares, Retech tries to conquer Indonesia, Singapore, Korea and Oman, no one cares. Sere conqures Britian, no one cares. Doom conquers South America, no one cares.

The game doesn't work because nobody cares about anything that doesn't affect their narrow band of interests.

 

So the idea that we can self moderate is a complete farse.

 

Furthermore the budgets in the last two games were complete nightmares, people would post figures which bore no relation to reality or even a game-like reality....How many games do you know that doubles your money every 10 years? Can you imagine playing Sim City or Total War...or Civilisation with that sort of a budget?

'My lord, we have build 5,000,000 axemen AND have doubled our economy.'

The game would be terrible, it is impossible to lose.

 

So the idea that we can be reasonable and responsible is also a complete farse.

 

So either we have a system of wikis and tech trees and other things which give the game some grounding, or we forget the whole thing and come back in a month or so and see if people have mellowed out.

Because everyone was building up the power bases to support the late game mega-wars we always have? Everyone took an interest in events that happened near them and would directly effect them (India[Roccos] starting RFA to counter Japan's expansion into Asia, Switzerland challenging Germany over its annexation of France, The SR challenging Switzerland over the closing of the Suez canal, etc, etc), you just got upset because nobody was letting you do everything you wanted to, while you were also trying to prevent people from doing what they wanted to. It's the conflict that makes the game interesting. What it seems to me like you want to do, is remove all the player vs player conflict, regulate technology (so we all have some boring tech tree we all plough through), and then replace all the conflict with some silly NPC invasions that everyone will just band together and defeat in a couple years so they can continue going on being forced to ignore everyone else because people challenging one another makes people mad/quit.

 

Big [bleep]ing deal if people get mad. The game is called Hegemony for Christ's sake.

 

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fuller

*Cough*

I suppose it was changed alongside 'irony' because so many idiots kept using it improperly that it evolved into a bastardized version of the original. Oh well. I'm old school.

[archimage_a]

It was the lack of conflict that made the game boring...

 

Brazil conquers an entire subcontinent and no one bats an eyelid. South Africa just happens to become a degenerate African state which Japan heroically saves. Singapore gives up decades of independance to be absorbed into the greater Japanese Empire.

There was no challange to the game...unless you were trying to conquer a country someone else was trying to conquer, it didn't matter.

 

I got annoyed because I was trying to play seriously and realistically(In the beginning at least), while people like you just went around annexing stuff on a fairly baseless pretext...Like the Ukraine.

Then we saw Ross get shafted because he didn't think the 5 year rule was realistic, and set a 50 year target...what happens Retech swans in, says 5 years, 3 years later annexes the same place and ignores Ross entirely, then decides he is the victim. Its stuff like that which are not Ironic or Funny, but just wrong...stuff that just jumps up and goes 'This is completely unjust and just stop'

 

The god awful thing in Somalia. Japan tries to conquer it, Switzerland and Russia stop it and then Romania invades. Rather than anything remotely realistic happening, Russia and Switzerland are condemed by the UN and the UN launches worldwide sanctions against Switzerland. Then Japan steals Switzerland research project.

That was, in some respects, funny...Someone goes charging in and gets caught in a trap. There is some irony in it... But what should have happened is the UN sends in peacekeepers in an announced visit(not under cover of nightfall by a freelance operator) and threatened, not instantly inflicted, sanction. Its like a practical joke which leaves someone disfigured, there was a line which was crossed...and it turned, like the Australia thing, into this abhorrant mess which just inspired disgust.

 

Those sorts of things are what ruined Hegemony, because they made the game about screwing your opponant as hard as you could. Fine in gameplay, but when the same people are defining the rules...I mean you yourself accuse me of bias and such...Then people, like Retech, see it as an open excuse to ignore the rules. The game is then not a game but a screwing contest, how much can you screw up the game rules.

Both Ross and Retech said they were only interested in destroying the other. I had decided that trying to play the game was completely pointless, so was going to build a rocket and go to Mars, get a headstart there...though I had multiple plans to screw everyone else and make myself top dog...sun shade, pollution, cancer guns, virus bombs...All operations I had, working away so that I could destroy a country if it annoyed me.

The game was no longer fun, and I think everyone could see that.

[Nero]

It was the lack of conflict that made the game boring...

There was plenty of conflict. But, like I said, most people were building the power bases to support the late-game cluster[bleep]s we always end up getting into.

 

Brazil conquers an entire subcontinent and no one bats an eyelid. South Africa just happens to become a degenerate African state which Japan heroically saves. Singapore gives up decades of independance to be absorbed into the greater Japanese Empire.

Nobody cared about South America, and Doom has proven herself to be quite the isolationist, so nobody really felt threatened by the move. If I had been Brazil and done the same thing, people would have been up in arms, and rightly so, since I'm a totalitarian Machiavellian.

 

There was no challange to the game...unless you were trying to conquer a country someone else was trying to conquer, it didn't matter.

The game had just started. Of course there was no challenge, because there were vast amounts of NPC territory that were being absorbed before everyone turned their eyes on other player's land.

 

I got annoyed because I was trying to play seriously and realistically(In the beginning at least), while people like you just went around annexing stuff on a fairly baseless pretext...Like the Ukraine.

Then we saw Ross get shafted because he didn't think the 5 year rule was realistic, and set a 50 year target...what happens Retech swans in, says 5 years, 3 years later annexes the same place and ignores Ross entirely, then decides he is the victim. Its stuff like that which are not Ironic or Funny, but just wrong...stuff that just jumps up and goes 'This is completely unjust and just stop'

I annexed Ukraine because:

Ukraine's modern history began with the East Slavs. From at least the 9th century, Ukraine was a center of the medieval living area of the East Slavs.

I was the God damn Slavic Republic. That and Russia wanted it. Oh, look at that. Setup for a future conflict. Oh but no, there was no conflict...

Ross getting shafted because he decided to handicap himself was his own fault. Retech was playing by the established rules.

 

The god awful thing in Somalia. Japan tries to conquer it, Switzerland and Russia stop it and then Romania invades. Rather than anything remotely realistic happening, Russia and Switzerland are condemed by the UN and the UN launches worldwide sanctions against Switzerland. Then Japan steals Switzerland research project.

That was, in some respects, funny...Someone goes charging in and gets caught in a trap. There is some irony in it... But what should have happened is the UN sends in peacekeepers in an announced visit(not under cover of nightfall by a freelance operator) and threatened, not instantly inflicted, sanction. Its like a practical joke which leaves someone disfigured, there was a line which was crossed...and it turned, like the Australia thing, into this abhorrant mess which just inspired disgust.

You tried to damn the [bleep]ing Suez canal, which was my major trading route to the East. Of course I was going to do something about it. But, then again:

It was the lack of conflict that made the game boring...

Right. No conflict at all.

I suppose what you meant was, 'no conflict that directly benefited me'.

The UN operating as the UN IRL was obviously something that was never going to happen. IRL Russia doesn't have cordial relations to the US, and Japan and Romania aren't quasi-allies, and Brazil doesn't have a permanent seat on the security council. The only way I was going to be able to protect my interests was to take action on my own.

Let's keep in mind here that my 'invasion' force consisted of 900 peacekeepers, of which only 300 had actual firearms, that didn't even give a single person a bruise, and occupied an area of around 1 square kilometer, and that were virus bombed to death. And then you act all incredulous when the UN gets mad that you essentially murdered 900 peacekeepers in cold blood.

 

Those sorts of things are what ruined Hegemony, because they made the game about screwing your opponant as hard as you could. Fine in gameplay, but when the same people are defining the rules...I mean you yourself accuse me of bias and such...Then people, like Retech, see it as an open excuse to ignore the rules. The game is then not a game but a screwing contest, how much can you screw up the game rules.

Both Ross and Retech said they were only interested in destroying the other.

Hegemony (Greek: ἡγεμονία hēgemonía, English: [uK] /hɨˈɡɛməni/, [uS]: pronounced /hɨˈdʒɛməni/; "leadership" or "hegemon" for "leader") [1] is the political, economic, ideological or cultural power exerted by a dominant group over other groups, regardless of the explicit consent of the latter.

Of course the game is about screwing over other people. The point of the game is to be the dominant power in the world. And people screw around with the rules when they're stupid or being enforced by someone who doesn't follow them at all themselves.

You got mad at Retech for building so many ships, and then just went ahead and abolished money and said 'my people produce stuff for free because I'm the god damn moderator and [bleep] you.'

though I had multiple plans to screw everyone else and make myself top dog...sun shade, pollution, cancer guns, virus bombs...All operations I had, working away so that I could destroy a country if it annoyed me.

So...the thing that you were the most upset about the game, with everyone going around trying to screw up things that other people had planned, and people power gaming...your plan to counter that was to screw up everything that other people had planned, and to power game.

 

Brilliant. And you wonder why I don't seem to like your decisions as a game moderator.

[archimage_a]

No.

The thing that annoyed me were that people were purposefully blurring or changing the rules to screw up other people's plans.

 

And the difference between 'I spend half my yearly budget and build 600 capital ships' and 'I abolish money and build 1 plane a year' is plain to see...

The difference between you and me...and Ross and Retech...Is that me and Ross place limits on ourselves which we would place on other people as well, whereas you and Retech just do whatever suits you and expect other people to do the same.

And that difference screws up Hegemony....Us putting rules down and you ignore them.

Who's fault is it? Both of us, if I just did what you did then things would be fine, if you just did what I did things would be fine.

 

Trying to mix the two of us doesn't work and we shouldn't keep trying to make it work, and I think you agree with that.

Two sides of the same coin...each eager to see the back of the other. :smile:

[Grim_]

Eh I am fine with the rules as is though I prefer anarchy (at least in the early stages). On another note archi why do you think that you were the only person prepared to [bleep] with other countries. I had several "stations" set up as well as one of my projects was the weaponization of Ebola among other diseases (to be delivered by hypersonic bombers). Anyways wouldnt the U.N. have something to say about abyssinia? You know the whole bit about somehow steamrolling half of africa in one turn?

[Nero]

No.

The thing that annoyed me were that people were purposefully blurring or changing the rules to screw up other people's plans.

You're referring to yourself?

 

And the difference between 'I spend half my yearly budget and build 600 capital ships' and 'I abolish money and build 1 plane a year' is plain to see...

The difference between you and me...and Ross and Retech...Is that me and Ross place limits on ourselves which we would place on other people as well, whereas you and Retech just do whatever suits you and expect other people to do the same.

And that difference screws up Hegemony....Us putting rules down and you ignore them.

Who's fault is it? Both of us, if I just did what you did then things would be fine, if you just did what I did things would be fine.

More like 'I abolish money and build 1 plane this year, 2 the next, 4 the one after that, and so on...'

Yes, we do whatever suits us and expect the world to react to it, just as we react to what other people are doing. You prefer a stagnant world?

It's also pointless putting down rules and expecting other people to follow them while you do whatever the hell you want to.

 

Trying to mix the two of us doesn't work and we shouldn't keep trying to make it work, and I think you agree with that.

Two sides of the same coin...each eager to see the back of the other. :smile:

I believe that's the whole point of Hegemony? Conflict? Sheesh.

And don't try any of this [cabbage] 'oh let's be nice to each other and it'll solve everything', when you've basically decided to kick me out of the new Hegemony for the sole reason that I don't agree with you. Piss off.

 

Eh I am fine with the rules as is though I prefer anarchy (at least in the early stages). On another note archi why do you think that you were the only person prepared to [bleep] with other countries. I had several "stations" set up as well as one of my projects was the weaponization of Ebola among other diseases (to be delivered by hypersonic bombers). Anyways wouldnt the U.N. have something to say about abyssinia? You know the whole bit about somehow steamrolling half of africa in one turn?

Oh right, but Archi places limits on himself whereas I don't. See, Arch takes over half a continent in half a year, whereas I take around 30 years to take over 1/4 of another one. Don't you see the limitations?

[archimage_a]

Did it come across as that? I meant that we all had ways of doing it because the game had reached that kind of stage...

 

Yes, the UN would have said something about it and I think the should of, but I think they should say something, threaten something and give an ultimatum...something realistic.

 

More like 'I abolish money and build 1 plane this year, 2 the next, 4 the one after that, and so on...'

Care to find a quote about that...I am pretty sure the only time I mentioned it was

http://forum.tip.it/topic/256692-the-hegemony-12th-feb-2018-part-2/page__view__findpost__p__4095843

Which was on the 5th of Febuary, the game started on the 26th of January

http://forum.tip.it/topic/256692-the-hegemony-12th-feb-2018-part-2/page__view__findpost__p__4080946

Finished preliminary research here(on the 27th) started building on the 29th, after a year developing the basic concept, coming to 1 a year. With a grand total of 12.

As stated many times they were flying prototypes, with each prototype being refined. Since they were only supposed to bomb and transport all they had to do was fly in a straightish line, climb, dive and turn occationally.

 

Africawise...I stated that it wasn't permentant. 'Archi invests lots of Gold into getting an army, conquring Africa, getting a tonne of resources, then boosting off to Mars, leaving Africa as collection of countries not prone to being 'helped' by Retech in fi-three-ve or less years, and actually being a challange. ' Those limits we talked about...

Though obvouisly me saying 'I am going to Mars. Weee' sort of defeats the object of the headstart thing.

 

And don't try any of this [cabbage] 'oh let's be nice to each other and it'll solve everything', when you've basically decided to kick me out of the new Hegemony for the sole reason that I don't agree with you. Piss off.

No... We just stay out of each other's way.

I am sick of these pointless arguments and I am sick of you ignoring me, so I am giving you notice that you are going to be ignored entirely in the new version of Hegemony.

I was making light of it because, deep down, I know you are not vindictive or hatefilled because I know that I am not vindictive or hatefilled, though it some times feels like it...and most of the time you are an annoyance on par with a mosquito that won't die when you hit it....But you are probably just as annoyed with me being me.

We can't change that and I am saying lets stop trying to get along.

 

If you want to create another Hegemony, nothing is stopping you. Then you can bar me from joining and ignore moderation all you like, and we can finally end this pointless feud.

[Nero]

Did it come across as that? I meant that we all had ways of doing it because the game had reached that kind of stage...

 

Yes, the UN would have said something about it and I think the should of, but I think they should say something, threaten something and give an ultimatum...something realistic.

 

More like 'I abolish money and build 1 plane this year, 2 the next, 4 the one after that, and so on...'

Care to find a quote about that...I am pretty sure the only time I mentioned it was

http://forum.tip.it/topic/256692-the-hegemony-12th-feb-2018-part-2/page__view__findpost__p__4095843

Which was on the 5th of Febuary, the game started on the 26th of January

http://forum.tip.it/topic/256692-the-hegemony-12th-feb-2018-part-2/page__view__findpost__p__4080946

Finished preliminary research here(on the 27th) started building on the 29th, after a year developing the basic concept, coming to 1 a year. With a grand total of 12.

As stated many times they were flying prototypes, with each prototype being refined. Since they were only supposed to bomb and transport all they had to do was fly in a straightish line, climb, dive and turn occationally.

 

Africawise...I stated that it wasn't permentant. 'Archi invests lots of Gold into getting an army, conquring Africa, getting a tonne of resources, then boosting off to Mars, leaving Africa as collection of countries not prone to being 'helped' by Retech in fi-three-ve or less years, and actually being a challange. ' Those limits we talked about...

Though obvouisly me saying 'I am going to Mars. Weee' sort of defeats the object of the headstart thing.

No, it was the extrapolation of the whole 'I no longer have to pay my people therefore I can build whatever I want'. Letting you get away with doing that just because you're only building 1 of something per year at the moment is stupid. Because I know eventually you'd be building more and then would just say 'Well jeez, you should've brought up this issue when it came up, not 20 game years later, so therefore I'll just ignore you and do what I want'.

And just because you have some sort of end-game plan, doesn't give you the ability to ignore every single rule in place. It was set up so that, if you felt threatened by another country, then you took steps to bring it down a notch. Obviously this sort of fell through when you decided that you were bored and so would destroy the thread. :wall:

 

No... We just stay out of each other's way.

I am sick of these pointless arguments and I am sick of you ignoring me, so I am giving you notice that you are going to be ignored entirely in the new version of Hegemony.

I'm doing the exact same thing you always do. Whenever someone argues with you over something you've done you always throw out some bizarre horse and buggy or other archaic technology comparison then continue doing what you were before, as if it's some sort of total justification. :rolleyes:

I was making light of it because, deep down, I know you are not vindictive or hatefilled because I know that I am not vindictive or hatefilled, though it some times feels like it...and most of the time you are an annoyance on par with a mosquito that won't die when you hit it....But you are probably just as annoyed with me being me.

We can't change that and I am saying lets stop trying to get along.

I didn't realize we had ever tried to get along? Here's the problem:

You're like me. You hate when people exercise authority over you, and hate when people challenge authority that you exercise over them. The only difference here is that your name is green and mine is puke-god-awful-yellow (atm).

 

If you want to create another Hegemony, nothing is stopping you. Then you can bar me from joining and ignore moderation all you like, and we can finally end this pointless feud.

Hah. Like that'll happen. No, everyone seems to be content to grovel at your feet because you bring order sometimes to a chaotic game. I just don't think the trade offs are worth it.

 

Splitting the player base over some silly argument is beyond stupid anyways.

[archimage_a]

I agree, which is why I wouldn't and haven't, started games when someone else started another game.

 

You're like me. You hate when people exercise authority over you, and hate when people challenge authority that you exercise over them. The only difference here is that your name is green and mine is puke-god-awful-yellow (atm).

I agree. Though I am fairly happy to discuss things, as long as they don't go round and round in circles.

 

Because I know eventually you'd be building more and then would just say

I guess so. I didn't plan to, but who knows what would have happened.

 

Whenever someone argues with you over something you've done you always throw out some bizarre horse and buggy or other archaic technology comparison then continue doing what you were before, as if it's some sort of total justification

:rolleyes:

Well of course. Comparision is the easiest way to win an argument because only facts are involved, there is nothing to argue about.

Compare the Numremburg Trials to the Stalinist Purge Trials and tell me that there was a difference? So what is the difference between peace loving democracies and the Soviet Union...If they are both willing to carry out show trial to prove their regime to be right?

Compare horse drawn carts to cars...Carts are around for hundreds of years, and yet within 50 years they have disappeared entirely. So a new technology can easily be a giant step ahead of what came before, which is as valid as the counter argument that technology only advances slowly...which is basically what Retech was saying...

 

The problem with this form of written communication is that you have to assume what the other person is saying...and if you don't have a similar outlook on life that can be difficult.

 

Of course I could have just said:

Tempora mutantur nos et mutamur in illis.

[hide]Times change and we change with them. [/hide]

If I wanted to be particularly indecipherable.

 

No, everyone seems to be content to grovel at your feet

Not sure grovel is the right word...grovelling usually involves actually doing what I say. Not nodding and doing the exact opposite.

 

As for thread destroying...

There were plenty of better ways to destroy the thread...locking it for instance. I wanted to carry on because once we got past the stupidity we might have played a good game, and I was building my Mars base so I would have been ahead.

If the thread was destroyed because a virus ravaged 3/4 of the planet, then it was a pretty weak thread...

[The Dark Lord]

Can't we all just get along?

[archimage_a]

No. Its impractical, implausible and damn near impossible.

[Nero]

I agree, which is why I wouldn't and haven't, started games when someone else started another game.

Right.

 

I agree. Though I am fairly happy to discuss things, as long as they don't go round and round in circles.

And yet you always seem to run things in circles...

 

I guess so. I didn't plan to, but who knows what would have happened.

It's not exactly hard to determine.

 

:rolleyes:

Well of course. Comparision is the easiest way to win an argument because only facts are involved, there is nothing to argue about.

Compare the Numremburg Trials to the Stalinist Purge Trials and tell me that there was a difference? So what is the difference between peace loving democracies and the Soviet Union...If they are both willing to carry out show trial to prove their regime to be right?

Compare horse drawn carts to cars...Carts are around for hundreds of years, and yet within 50 years they have disappeared entirely. So a new technology can easily be a giant step ahead of what came before, which is as valid as the counter argument that technology only advances slowly...which is basically what Retech was saying...

But they're irrelevant comparisons. Someone brings up something about a tech you've researched, and says 'that wouldn't work because x', and you just reply, 'well, obviously there's going to be some animosity towards new technology, look at the people that made buggys, they had to adapt!', which doesn't address the concern at all and just deflects from the issue and sets it into lala land.

 

The problem with this form of written communication is that you have to assume what the other person is saying...and if you don't have a similar outlook on life that can be difficult.

No the problem is that you sometimes have to actually read what people are writing.

 

Of course I could have just said:

Tempora mutantur nos et mutamur in illis.

[hide]Times change and we change with them. [/hide]

If I wanted to be particularly indecipherable.

Which is just a fancier way of putting the exact same statement. The effect is the exact same.

 

Not sure grovel is the right word...grovelling usually involves actually doing what I say. Not nodding and doing the exact opposite.

Well at least nobody seems to openly dispute your decisions aside from me. Which I suppose removing me gives you full control (of sorts).

 

As for thread destroying...

There were plenty of better ways to destroy the thread...locking it for instance. I wanted to carry on because once we got past the stupidity we might have played a good game, and I was building my Mars base so I would have been ahead.

You wanted to carry on, so you decided to destroy the thread?

 

If the thread was destroyed because a virus ravaged 3/4 of the planet, then it was a pretty weak thread...

Let's see, the other options were:

-Become some fragmented US state, while down south there was a monstrous Brazil that could come and steam-roll everyone if Doom so desired. Not very fun.

-Continue to play as your country, with 99.99999999999% of your population gone. So the game essentially becomes a full RP with you controlling 1 person. Um, no, this is hegemony not dungeoneering.

-Quit

 

No. Its impractical, implausible and damn near impossible.

Yup.

 

I think most of the people in this forum think we hate one another Arch :lol:

[The_Mather1]

Let's just come to an agreement:

 

Archi, you're either mod or player, not both.

You may not amplify stuff just to piss people off.

Dusty, no exccessive power playing.

You may not use any sort of growth/production system other than what we agree on.

 

^Fair?

[a_bert]

fyi I wanted to be mod for this not play it, and I certainly won't play with Archi as mod - nothing against Archi as a person, I'm just tired of the moderation style - but maybe I could put up with someone else

 

also i think the tech tree is lame, only so much of the game should be rigid

[The_Mather1]

The tech tree was just supposed to be a guideline, not a rule.

[Retech]

No.

The thing that annoyed me were that people were purposefully blurring or changing the rules to screw up other people's plans.

 

And the difference between 'I spend half my yearly budget and build 600 capital ships' and 'I abolish money and build 1 plane a year' is plain to see...

The difference between you and me...and Ross and Retech...Is that me and Ross place limits on ourselves which we would place on other people as well, whereas you and Retech just do whatever suits you and expect other people to do the same.

And that difference screws up Hegemony....Us putting rules down and you ignore them.

Who's fault is it? Both of us, if I just did what you did then things would be fine, if you just did what I did things would be fine.

 

Trying to mix the two of us doesn't work and we shouldn't keep trying to make it work, and I think you agree with that.

Two sides of the same coin...each eager to see the back of the other. :smile:

 

Well, I don't see much of a difference. I built those 500 capital ships with my entire expendable (1%) budget. Well, at least 80% of that budget, over the course of the entire game. It only looks unfair because Japan was just that much bigger, so of course it could build more ships. Logically, Japan could then build 25 planes a year for free, but I paid for the planes I built using your figures. Also, if you want to base production on population (since as you said, GDP doesn't make any sense), then Japan could've built...70 stratos planes a year for free.

 

---

 

Other random thing about the new-old technology thing. Remember that we eventually adapted to the change? With the invention of the stratos Jets, we pooled our researchers and whatnot together and made our own (not to mention I started developing limited-range stratos Jets a year or two after you announced it). Then, I did the next logical step with new technolgoy. That is, throw lots of money at it to make lots of them, to spam and abuse. That is my reaction because it's much easier than fighting to get your own technology accepted, when either way I would benefit. (Hundreds of overpowered Stratos Jets or no one using Stratos Jets, which would fix my problem. At least, when I didn't know that missles with sub-nuclear warheads, FOAB, were still allowed)

[The_Mather1]

And I made around 20-50 X-304s each year using only the agreed production scores. :thumbsup:

 

...though they didn't help much against the combined forces of Doom, Dusty and Rocco.

[Retech]

Well a simple thing for the ship would be that Dungeonal could come up with some standard form of the battleship, and we could each come up with changes on that. For example, my battleships have so and so weapons instead of so and so weapons, and it uses this kind of plating instead, and it has a bigger crew. Something like that would be really simple.

[archimage_a]

But they're irrelevant comparisons. Someone brings up something about a tech you've researched, and says 'that wouldn't work because x'...which doesn't address the concern at all and just deflects from the issue and sets it into lala land.

Oh its very much the same thing.

'Your plane doesn't work because it can't fly'

'Look at this calculation which says it can'

'Your plane can't fly'

'Look at this document saying it can'

'Your plane can't fly'

'Yes it can, I have proved that it can within some reasonable measure.'

'Your plane can't fly'

 

Its not so much that I don't read posts, its that other people don't put anything in them....If it was simply about addressing some specific point then I can do that, but people just decide it won't work, and if you are against someone saying it won't work because it won't then it doesn't really matter what you say.

 

Dungeonal I really don't mind someone else modding, as long as they don't do what Doom and Sere did and take almost no interest in the game.

 

It only looks unfair because Japan was just that much bigger, so of course it could build more ships.

It looks unfair because 600 or 500 ships is a completely unrealistic figure to have built. America does not build 500-600 ships in one year. Why? Because it is not humanly possible. It would mean assembling 500-600 drydocks and then building ships...The whole nature of it is farsical.

 

 

 

How about we each pick a country, take the 2050 population stats of that country, find the GDP, and then just pretend that country is actually a planet in space?

1. Things that are overpowered will be argued about for 10 pages and then removed, because, [cabbage], that's going to happen anyway so it might as well be a rule.

2. Make things at a reasonable rate.

3. Research things at a reasonable rate.

4. Dungeonal retains final control over [cabbage].

 

One other problem with last game was that someone said battleship and we didn't have a clue what they meant by that. So we need to make some sort of classifications for each type.

 

Replace the world battleship with reasonable and you see the problem.

No one seems to have any idea what it means...to Retech it means spending 1% of your budget, to me it means being realistic(Not steamrolling Africa, but when in Rome...), to Dusty it means doing whatever he feels like.

Either the game is played with rules or we might as well just declare Retech the winner now. Since he is the most capable of talking out of his hat.

[a_bert]

Heres how I see stuff/it.

 

We should all start equal, nobody picks America/Brazil/Japan etc and leaves someone with a [cabbage]ty country (like england HURRRR).

Your economy = your population. i.e. 1 person can do 1 job.

Jobs are: manufacturing, researching, harvesting and foodstuffs.

 

Manufacturing;

A 'standard' battleship takes 25,000 people 1 year to complete.

A 'module' takes 10,000 people 1 year to complete, with an extra 10,000 people per extra square of size the module is.

 

Researching;

To research 'modules' it takes 50,000 people 1 year to complete, with an extra 50,000 people per extra square size the module is.

 

Harvesting;

1 person = 1 resource.

 

Foodstuffs;

1 person = space for 4 additional people. I.e. 20% of your population is involved in foodstuffs for maximum growth (I think?).

 

Dat ships;

 

A 'standard' battleship costs 100,000 of X, 75,000 of Y, 50,000 of N, 25,000 of S.

A 'module' costs 25,000 of X, 20,000 of Y, and 15,000 of N per square of space.

Modules for different things cost different resource types.

 

A 'standard' battleship has module size of 5 by 5.

 

opinions? I don't think it seems that complicated..

[Retech]

Archi, there's a reason that countries don't build planes that fly in the stratosphere. It would be cost prohibitive for even the smallest planes.

 

 

 

Besides, that 1% was completely fair, considering that everyone's notion of 1% is exactly the same, while realism is not the same for everyone. Besides, where did you get the figure that I made 500-600 ships in a year? At the beginning of the game, I believe I made a post about how it wasn't fair that we chose countries in 2009 because of how unequal that would be. Look how that turned out.

 

--

 

Oh Dungeon, I'm pretty sure that in modern times, each farmer can provide for hundreds of people. Maybe we could figure out a way to make that work better?