NG3: Stepping down

I hereby relinquish any responsibilities to keep this game running as the unofficial "game master."

Between Honolulu, Syrnn, Cherdenko, China R3, and many others, I'm confident there are enough knowledgeable, levelheaded, and dedicated players to keep this game running and thriving.

The combination of recently increased real-life responsibilities, and lack of interest in the current game, created a situation in which I simply commit to keep dedicating 2+ hours a day to this game.

I feel like the rules this time have made the game worse, not better. The rule-bloat has detracted from roleplaying and fluff, and keeping track of all the different things is far too difficult. I think for Nation Game 4, we should greatly simplify the rules once again and focus on improving the fluff rather than the complexity of the rules. That isn't to say this game isn't fun, it's just my opinion that it's not as fun as NG2 was.

I should still be able to hop on for 10-20 minutes a night, but there is just no way I could keep track of the whole game in that amount of time.

I'm just happy our community is at a point where I am not so much needed anymore. Thanks for listening!

Interwebz>IRL...Stare into the hypno eye and you shall see the truth

Hehe, anyhow, I wasn't around for your GMing of nationgame 1 and 2 but i'm sure you were great and we're losing a great GMer with you but I will try not to implode the forum too much in your absence

I like the direction of the new rules, but I do agree that they are a bit over-complicated.
We should simplify them without returning to the last system entirely; I think it was Minotaur who mentioned the problem with steamrolling.

Thanks for your work on the previous 2 nation games, you really did a great job of holding things together. I figure we'll get the perfect set of rules one of these days. Probably in time for the heat death of the universe

Your were truly a great opponet. Monty sends you his love.

Pope John XVi still hates you... tho after what happnd its only fare... haha

I'll still be here, just less frequently posting.

kobo1d wrote:Honolulu, Syrnn,

AFK, AFK.

Cherdenko, China R3,

Can do, Can do - but can we get someone from outside the Comintern? Not saying I'm a filthy dirty cheater, but I -am- a communist.

I think for Nation Game 4, we should greatly simplify the rules once again

Well d'uh. I suggest doing away with Gold Carried between turns, doing away with Trading of all kinds, and have a nation's military effectiveness equal to some proportion of its territory size, meaning the only info to be carried over between turns is who owns what.
Also, can we have non-adjacent-expansion fuck right off? The map already looks ugly because of it.

guess im not level headed enough.

MONTY WWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Chinese R-3 wrote:

Well d'uh. I suggest doing away with Gold Carried between turns, doing away with Trading of all kinds, and have a nation's military effectiveness equal to some proportion of its territory size, meaning the only info to be carried over between turns is who owns what.
Also, can we have non-adjacent-expansion fuck right off? The map already looks ugly because of it.

So...NG2 rules. Gotcha.

Chinese R-3 wrote:
Well d'uh. I suggest doing away with Gold Carried between turns, doing away with Trading of all kinds, and have a nation's military effectiveness equal to some proportion of its territory size, meaning the only info to be carried over between turns is who owns what.
Also, can we have non-adjacent-expansion fuck right off? The map already looks ugly because of it.

Already did that bro.
And non-adjacent expansion is only a problem this game because of rivers.
Dem rivers, man.
Dem rivers.

Aye. Rivers should totally piss right off in ng4.

Chinese R-3 wrote:Aye. Rivers should totally piss right off in ng4.

We didn't have them before now because we've been using actual maps.
kobo1d, did you make this one yourself or dig it up somewhere?

It's not an issue of the rules being too complicated, it's an issue of them being too ill-defined with no GM around to resolve resulting disputes. That said, rules being complicated is a bad thing, and the current ones split landgrab into 2 phases for lawd's sake.

Premier Cherdenko wrote:

Chinese R-3 wrote:Aye. Rivers should totally piss right off in ng4.

We didn't have them before now because we've been using actual maps.
kobo1d, did you make this one yourself or dig it up somewhere?

Combination. They were present but not used much in NG2. I am ok with disallowing expansion by river next game.

I would like to note that I'm not AFK, no one simply ever cares to PM me for anything. Moreover, I am a mod only of Diplomacy, an attempted game that, after several threads (here and on /tg/) failing to bring a single member beyond Cherdenko, I have chalked up as a failed attempt. I will continue to squat over the forum should the need ever arise, and I will heartily accept my position as a dedicated "veteran" of this board, so put, but a full-on mod I am not, given only my little island to oversee.

I am also going to go on record saying that the rules for this game have, in my view, cheapened the fun of the experience, and the creativity of the players. While NG1&2 was not necessarily balanced, some further rules, particularly in the management of ones colonies, was all that was really needed. NG3 was, in my eyes, an experiment, which from the very beginning I knew I could not dedicate myself as a full time player. In that regard, while I made an honest attempt to make my presence as the only Non-national entity, only two players ever contacted me in the entirety of the game's existence, for which I cannot then invest myself, particularly when it moves at an unprecedented rate.

I also find that the spirit in which the game is conducted by nearly all of the new players is not in that of world building, nor in the art of diplomacy, but in rules management and warmongering. The rules have no small part to blame for this, but it does not require an unreasonable amount of restraint to not awkwardly seek reasons for war for gain in terms of mechanics. Yes, the goal is to "win", but what consummates victory has never been stated in a NationGame, and I think that's part of the beauty of it, for it means it can end in any number of ways.

I find that if we use a degree of finesse in altering the old rules of NationGame, rather than re-creating a system, we can have a much greater success in starting a NG4 for which I would be willing to fully invest myself. For what it's worth, this forum was a great surprise for me, and I am glad to try to see to its health in any fashion possible to further stimulate good gaming and community here.

Whether any chance of Diplomacy actually starting off, or whether by a new NationGame, I do hope this works out, but I think that the players involved need to remember: This is not meant to be Risk, nor is it meant to be wholly competitive. Roleplaying, I feel, is the most important factor, beyond all others, to maintain the value of these games, to immerse and invest the players, and to truly foster a creative environment from which good gaming will flow. Obviously rules are important, but if NG2 was any indication, even the loosest form of rules, with a great environment, will gain a life of its own, and often very different codes of conduct will arise for which will make uncodified rules in which the game progresses, and in a fashion, these "natural rules" are the best kind of rules, because how else does law, particularly international law, seem to arise but from precedents and interaction?

Here's hoping someone plowed through all of this and found a value in what it is I have to offer. Regardless of what happens with NG3, I'm going to attempt to stick around and make what I can of this board, like it or not.