The Back Room

[Nero]

My new comp (should arrive before next weekend): http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229223

 

:D

 

Also got this: http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826104178

 

Yum.

[Resistance]

Earth, if I was to call you I would say: "Earth, [Question here]" and then through out the question names are never used. If it is obvious that there are only two people to talk to just ommit the name (like in the story). If I was next to somebody and knew that it was clear to ask for something then I'd ask, ommiting the name.

 

I feel that the story above has ZERO description, I mean WTF's a portal, what does it look like? You have to explain what the portal looks like because its a new thing.

 

I'm trying hard not to be rude here but the names are ridiculous, I mean Shadow or Emerald are just stupid. A best selling book wouldn't have names like these, they would just have generic names. If you want to use a name that it rare don't use one like Shadow (correlation with character) or Emerald (Green eyes: correlation), come up with something like 'Scout Finch' if you must come up with a stupid name.

And despite popular beliefs eyes don't show anything, hands and mouth do. Looking at eyes maintains eye contact and thats it. Describing what the eyes look like is a bit ridiculous, they are a feature that most of us don't care about (what colour is your Maths teachers eyes, what colour is your Maths teachers hair).

 

I think Rocco can say things that I could never say but he is 100% right.

 

Also, this plot is nothing but a big, steamy pile of cliche. Explore a little bit, get creative.

[Nero]

Dusty, are you currently in college? (curious)

Next year I will be. Been working and saving up (though buying a new computer probably wouldn't make it seem like it haha).

[Resistance]

Are hegemonys always this inactive. I bet if you made the resest time 12 hours then it would be way more active!

[Nexaduro]

That's a really bad idea. Hegemony is essentially a dead horse at this point, we need to look in new directions. Delta V might work, if Space dies and Archi gets the stuff for it back.

[Resistance]

That's a really bad idea. Hegemony is essentially a dead horse at this point, we need to look in new directions. Delta V might work, if Space dies and Archi gets the stuff for it back.

I might come up with a thread about new directions, I was actually discussing this with Mather quite recently, I suggested: clickable map, defined cultures, culture bonuses, advanced diplomacy Etc. and we have been discussing combat systems.

 

What is Delta V?

 

Edit: Oh, when is it starting?

[Nexaduro]

Don't bother, you'll know it if you see it.

[Nexaduro]

^ Exactly. We need to stop thinking of it as Hegemony, though, and just try to make as good of a game as we can. Hegemony is fond memories at this point, we need to stop beating it to death before we begin to loathe the word.

[Resistance]

On the subject of hegemony I would be very interested in starting one up in the near future, of course I will wait for Seven Kingdoms to finish and maybe play a couple more games first. My concept will build upon the simple concept that is hegemony and make it more User-Centric and Battle-Centric. at the moment it seems that the only things you can do is research and attack, I'm sure that being the King or President of a country entails more then this! I would add internal problems to hegemony thus giving you more things to think about; Threats to power, Rebellions, Natual Disasters, Religon.

I would like to make Hegemony much more user-centric, in the real world all nations play a different role. Compare Switzerland to North Korea! I think you should be given bonuses based on your culture; with countrys like North Korea gaining stability problems and Switzerland getting Economic stability. The way you play will influence the bonuses you get.

I would also be more interested in making Hegemony more Battle-Centric, at the moment in Seven Kingdoms all I can do I give battle plans, I'm not fighting a real opponent. My plan is to give each player a couple of turns (maybe five) so that they can battle a live opponent.

 

 

North Korea sends in two hundred and fifty tanks.

Moderator PM's what the scouts see to the Swiss: (About three hundred tanks are entering! From the west.)

The Swiss turns the Anti-Tank laser on the west side of the country.

Mod Explain to Korea whats happening: (A giant red laser beam is destroying tanks, you have 193 tanks left)

North Korea commands people to evacuate tanks (secretly through the bottom) but leave them moving forward, set self destruct to 20 minutes

Mod explains that no discernable action is taking place to Swiss, Later Mod explains to the swiss that all of the tanks have exploded taking out a powerstation and the left side of the city.

Mod explains situation to Koreans

North Korea tells former tank commanders to open fire and take over the west side of of North Korea.

Period of wait.

After Action Report posted in official thread.

 

The world map would be clickable and work on a constantly changing grid system, rebellions would spread from square to square spreading chaos and destruction.

If you had an idea I would draw it and label it in detail making it look official and the reset would be every day.

 

I will be hoping to get some experience modding through PM and then enter the world of modding with a very good game.

 

I've been asking for help from Mather and he's been extremely helpful and will be handpicking individuals who I think would benefit this project. Don't expect the game coming any time soon but some time soon you might recieve a PM asking for help due to your awesome attributes.

[The_Mather1]

I just helped him figgure out a more realistic battle calculator, though it is still only in the theoretical stage.

[archimage_a]

Really...What needs to be done is someone come up with a game, not get bored and try to 'spice things up' and have a research system that is fair, without being dull.

 

Ultimately the person running it needs to be respected...and respectful...enough that they can be unreasonable without fearing people are gonna stalk off because you rejected their silly idea. Or because their 1 man army died against a 2 man army.

At the same time, not nerfing people to create balance, or making it innevitable for someone to win...

 

Just need someone with the time, effort and above qualities...Which boils down to me and Dusty.

 

 

Alternatively, we could just play EU3.

[Nero]

Just need someone with the time, effort and above qualities...Which boils down to me and Dusty.

Pretty much. Though considering I've spent the past two months in and out of the hospital and I'm sure your plate is full with life & moderating Space, soooo.

 

Let's just play EU3. It gives us everything that we've thrown around at potential ideas for spicing up hegemony, but we're playing on a concrete system rather that a moderator's sayso, so there's really no "BUT WHY DID MY ARMY DIE THERE!" shiite.

 

I think the EU3 game will go pretty well barring any connection issues or installing issues (with people that have pirated versions... -.-)

[archimage_a]

Though the game occassionally screws you over in some new and interesting way...Like Overextension modifer.

Or countries that won't declare a white peace until war exaustion reachs 9...when they will happily give up 40% of their empire.

 

 

Like Hegemony, only the flaws aren't fixable.

[Nero]

It's a lot better than having one moderator that's responsible for keeping track of everything, doing all the battle reports, balancing the game, and making sure nobody is just trying to screw up everything.

 

EU3 sort of gives us a carte blanche to do whatever the hell we want, and its up to other players to make sure nobody gets too out of control powerful.

[Grim_]

Another option (other than just play EU3 [which sounds rather fun to be honest]) would be as I said before, familiarize yourself with a system of war game and then play a completely battle based campaign (possibly on a risk esque map?) where you get a certain number of reinforcements based upon how well you did in the battle (with the option of trying to disengage and retreat). But yeah, EU3 would be much more easy to implement.

 

On a semi related note, the damned AC adapter for my laptop still hasn't arrived (I rehabilitated an old desktop instead) after close to two weeks. [bleep]ing toshiba.

[archimage_a]

Yeah, the battle games seem like the other alternative, along with random event cards or something.

But we have never agreed on a single rule set to date, and Empire, which was basically Hegemony with ever concievable doodad figured out, failed because someone wanted sentance X to mean something else, so played a different game and complained their game didn't match everyone elses.

 

 

 

And yeah, EU3 is a ready made scenario, so there is nothing to invent, which seems to be 1/3rd the fun of playing Hegemony, 1/3rd arguing about the inventions and 1/3rd playing the game. :thumbsup:

[Grim_]

Well we could use a rule set like one along the lines of the war hammer games or something along those lines (I would prefer fantasy because from what I've heard it is slightly more balanced but the core rules for 8th edition are a [bleep] to find). It would make the game alot less taxing on the mod because there would be no battles to calculate (just to possibly observe). Hell for such a campaign you could fluff the lack of NPCs as that they are complacent peasants or a utopian/anarchistic/true communistic society so the DM would only have to worry about possibly playing as a faction and or random events.

[Resistance]

Really...What needs to be done is someone come up with a game, not get bored and try to 'spice things up' and have a research system that is fair, without being dull.

 

Ultimately the person running it needs to be respected...and respectful...enough that they can be unreasonable without fearing people are gonna stalk off because you rejected their silly idea. Or because their 1 man army died against a 2 man army.

At the same time, not nerfing people to create balance, or making it innevitable for someone to win...

 

Just need someone with the time, effort and above qualities...Which boils down to me and Dusty.

 

When you say 'spice things up' are you reffering to A_bert releasing monsters from beyond the wall, then I completely agree with you but I think sometimes some 'mild' spicing up (dissent, false information) could add a bit of fun for all. The difference is that A_bert just stressed people out saying gigantic demons were going to kill everyone randomly, if you add a bit of mild spicing up then you won't stress people out but you'll create fun. I know that Silent Hill III does this well by making lamposts appear as monsters and it keeps people on there toes but it doesn't kill them.

 

Although I agree that being respectful is an important factor I don't believe that how much respect a person can command is a necessary factor in moderating a game. You are basically saying that the more respect a moderator commands the more they can get away with being a bad moderator. A moderator does need to put his foot down, regardless of the respect he recieves people are obliged to listen to the moderator.

 

I disagree with what you were saying, if a person is winning why should you stop them winning.

 

You have some good points written above but I think the formula resides in the actual game and systems instead of the moderator, for example if I was to use the battle system that me and Mather have been talking about you wouldn't need a good moderator to work out battles, infact it would be impossible to make mistakes during the battle.

 

Well we could use a rule set like one along the lines of the war hammer games or something along those lines (I would prefer fantasy because from what I've heard it is slightly more balanced but the core rules for 8th edition are a [bleep] to find). It would make the game alot less taxing on the mod because there would be no battles to calculate (just to possibly observe). Hell for such a campaign you could fluff the lack of NPCs as that they are complacent peasants or a utopian/anarchistic/true communistic society so the DM would only have to worry about possibly playing as a faction and or random events.

This is essentially what Mather's script is. Its removes the need for moderators to make any battle calculations but remains simple and allows for 'luck', just as if a human was calculating it. All units are assigned values and can easily be expanded to include tactics and such. All I would need to do is enter the unit value and number and then calculate, I would change the end result if I feel the results aren't fair due to tactics or will put the battle into different steps.

 

And yeah, EU3 is a ready made scenario, so there is nothing to invent

Awwwwww, but I like inventing!

 

[hide=open]

 

Inventing allows a lot of new tactics to be added to the game.[/hide]

[Retech]

Moderators keep interest. If you don't have someone that you can trust and respect to assign values to your units, then you can't feel that the game is fair.

[Nexaduro]

100% approval, Res. :lol:

[Nexaduro]

100% approval, Res. :lol:

[Nexaduro]

100% approval, Res. :lol:

[Resistance]

Moderators keep interest. If you don't have someone that you can trust and respect to assign values to your units, then you can't feel that the game is fair.

I'm sure I can do that :P

 

 

100% approval' date=' Res. [/quote']

:D :D :D :D :D :D

[Retech]

I never suggested that you couldn't. :)

[Resistance]

I never suggested that you couldn't. :)

No of course not, and I almost certaintly wasn't implying that at all and would never imply that sort of thing However Archi was claiming that only himself and Nero are the only ones that are actually capable of becoming moderators.