StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The tweak to the nation generation rules would be trivial, but I for one would prefer not to do it.

I rather like the scope of the game as-is; it lends itself more to a sense of ambitious space opera, and to nations which have been established long enough to have deep roots in their own right. I don't think that the scale of the game played any critical role in the problems we've had.

One thing that weighs most on my mind is that I'd rather grant people more latitude, rather than less. If I say "nations contain one system per sector" or even "nations contain one system," I'm limiting people more than by saying "nations contain many systems, several per sector."

I don't think a reboot is inevitable at this point, because the votes are split very close to evenly between "4.5" and "5." At this point I think the most likely course is to attempt a map redraw, play for a while on that basis, and see what happens. That ties into what I said about choosing the option that causes the least disruption. Rebooting at once would be harder on the people who don't want a reboot than not rebooting at once would be on the people that do.

The tweak in size was more to address those who were objecting to a reboot on the grounds that something should change for it to be worth it rather than to address the problems in the game as is. But whatever as far as I'm concerned a retcon and redraw is fine as well. I'll wait for the map to be redrawn then tweak the stuff i'm unhappy with in the Hierarchy and return to posting.

Just my $0.02 on the matter: I think we should try the tweaking before the reboot, while focusing on trying to infuse some new blood into the game. At this point, all the old players are still going to be participating, while with a reboot we've had several confirm that they're just going to drop out entirely instead of going along with it, while the revision would allow for us to open up some space (HAR HAR HAR) for any new players who want to join up but never had an opportunity. We can open up a thread in Testingstan or something announcing the new opening and maybe PM some of the people who were in the interest thread and participation thread that they have a chance to join up and put their nations in with just some backstory as to why they had minimal interactions in the past year or whatever. We can even shelve the rules tweaks for right now and see if simply rearranging the map and getting a few new players is all we need to boost character and story creation. If not, we can always go back to a reboot, whereas if we go to the reboot first, the tweaking of SDNW4 is much, much more difficult.

I'm not sure what to do as regards recruitment- we might want to bring in some fresh blood, but one thing we've learned in SDNW4 is that there are people we don't want in the game- idiots with delusions of grandeur, petulant children, and of course the infamous ADHD Lemming.

I'm not sure how to strike a balance between the two. One thing I'd hope for is that we can get people to vouch for new arrivals- that's not an assurance they won't be ADHD cases, but it at least offers some assurance they won't be obnoxious morons.

Darkevilme wrote:The tweak in size was more to address those who were objecting to a reboot on the grounds that something should change for it to be worth it rather than to address the problems in the game as is. But whatever as far as I'm concerned a retcon and redraw is fine as well.

Ryan and Shinn have a point there, I suppose- but it seems to me that the space setting is on average more popular than the modern-day setting was. SDNW1 and 2 were brilliantly successful, but continuing the series of games does require a setting that people who weren't in those two will still want to play in- and this being SDN, it's a lot easier to recruit interested players for a space game.

Subject to that constraint, there's more room for flexibility if the setting is... large, shall we say? We might reduce the level of autarky and create an in-game mechanic that forced interdependence by using a smaller scale, but there'd be a price. We'd have to construct an economic system for the game ('outer system' versus 'inner system' polities, 'fringe' versus 'core,' or whatever), and people would be largely restricted to interacting with each other on those terms. Because if there's something about the nature of the map that means your civilization can't be autonomous, then that limits your artistic freedom.

One thing I might adjust for the space rules, mind you, is to be deliberately ambiguous about the number of inhabited systems per sector. As long as no one tries something stupid and munchkinesque like CN, with "one system per sector and a warp gate per system! I will be INVEENCIBLE!" I don't really care whether there is one, three, five, or seven systems per sector. If someone does try something like that, I'll have to drop a hammer on them, but then I keep a set of hammers of graded sizes and clonkiness for just such an emergency anyway.

I'll wait for the map to be redrawn then tweak the stuff i'm unhappy with in the Hierarchy and return to posting.

If you want to test out your rethought Hierarchy to some extent after a map redraw, it will hardly be the biggest thing that changes- what do you have in mind?

Simon_Jester wrote:

I'll wait for the map to be redrawn then tweak the stuff i'm unhappy with in the Hierarchy and return to posting.

If you want to test out your rethought Hierarchy to some extent after a map redraw, it will hardly be the biggest thing that changes- what do you have in mind?

OOB revamp, NCP unchanged(Partly it's far too standardized for what an actual feudal empire would have, partly I just want to re-imagine ships and tech slightly)
Somehow reduce the number of noble clans with no reduction in overral characters.
Re-emphasize the feudalism part.
Start having a plot index post reset.

In general nothing political would change as far as foreign relations go and I'm gonna make an attempt at making characters more interesting while tightening the political focus of the Hierarchy's higher echelons.

Darkevilme wrote:OOB revamp, NCP unchanged(Partly it's far too standardized for what an actual feudal empire would have, partly I just want to re-imagine ships and tech slightly)

Somehow reduce the number of noble clans with no reduction in overral characters.

Re-emphasize the feudalism part.

Start having a plot index post reset.

In general nothing political would change as far as foreign relations go and I'm gonna make an attempt at making characters more interesting while tightening the political focus of the Hierarchy's higher echelons.

I see no problem.

You have permission to carry out a retcon naval reform (what's the opposite of a reform, a deform?) for the reasons described, as long as the total strength of the fleet remains unchanged. I would advise that you openly post a pre-revamp and post-revamp order of battle. You can start on it now if you like; I should be in a position to do a revised map some time a few days from now.

Mornin', all. I'd like to express an interest in joining up, if you stick with a space setting.

Addendum: So terribly sorry about the thread necromancy. It's entirely accidental... didn't realize it had been weeks since the last post.

In this forum specifically it isn't a real problem. On the other hand it would appear that the game is dead for the short term since we couldn't proceed to actually make changes.

Esquire, you are in no way to be condemned, you have not committed "thread necromancy" in the normal sense, and while I doubt that there's much point in your trying to join SDNW4 (whether we get it going again for a while or not), you are welcome to join SDNW5, should that game be started at a later date. Which I expect it will, one of these days.


Sorchus, I don't know exactly what you mean by "we couldn't proceed to actually make changes." I did draft a modified map to bring people at least a little closer together. It is in the Commentary thread. No one seems to have noticed except White Haven, who I told about it in person.

I consider this to be an illustrative experiment. If I can post something like that and not get so much as a "I don't like it, you went too far" or "I don't like it, you didn't go far enough" out of the people who wanted the map changed in the first place, then the labor of doing it at all seems rather pointless.

If SDNW5 starts, I may express interest in joining, as I want to flesh out the Bastian Star Empire/Dominion better (I haven't decided on the name yet) and my NationStates region hasn't been too active lately. It's iffy, though, since I'm not sure of how much previous stuff I have to read through.

Insofar as it's up to me, if we're starting SDNW5, you will not have to read a blessed thing- except, of course, for the SDNW5 rules and the discussions surrounding that game. Any SDNW4 plots that are 'carried over' into SDNW5 will have to be glossed over as backdrop, or reposted, or we'll link to the specific relevant details of what happened.

The SDNW5 rules will be effectively the same as the SDNW4 rules, but I may tweak some numbers a bit and add an optional thing or two that no one is required to use.

So I don't think nations created in SDNW4 will be "fully compatible," you'd have to redo nation generation, but nation generation is really pretty simple in SDNW4/5 assuming you're not totally, totally allergic to math. If you are, feel free to ask for help.

Nah. I may find it tedious at times but I'll be OK with the math. How much of this is serious and how much is humor?

Er, by "this" do you mean the entire game, or the things I'm saying in this thread?

The things I'm saying in this thread are quite serious. As regards the game, you are free to adopt whatever tone you please. I myself alternate between writing a fairly serious technocratic nation-state and writing the wacky adventures of a bunch of parodic quasi-Greco-Romans in their spacegoing trireme.

Both are legal under the SDNW4 rules. That would not change in SDNW5, not if I have anything to say about it.

I meant the game itself. The idea in my head is of an empire of cat-people who don't have the proper vocal structure to form human words. Oh, and they have a rare mutation that turns those unlucky enough to have it to turn into basically their equivalent of Super Mutants, and every bit as dumb.* Then there's the fact that the only way to differentiate gender is to look under the hood (have fun with all that fur) or have a sensitive enough nose to tell the difference. No non-mammal mammaries here! Then throw in basically talking deathclaws and octospiders from the Rama books into their society, all fairly well integrated but with moderate language issues. That's going to lend to comedy.

*The reason they don't screen for it is because the government drafts all of them into their power armored legions. That's also the reason they made abortion illegal for Bastians. Outside of that, it's a relatively nice place to live.

It can range from hilarity, to satire, to outright dickish hilarity... The choices are yours, as are the consequences...

Panzersharkcat wrote:I meant the game itself. The idea in my head is of an empire of cat-people who don't have the proper vocal structure to form human words. Oh, and they have a rare mutation that turns those unlucky enough to have it to turn into basically their equivalent of Super Mutants, and every bit as dumb.* Then there's the fact that the only way to differentiate gender is to look under the hood (have fun with all that fur) or have a sensitive enough nose to tell the difference. No non-mammal mammaries here! Then throw in basically talking deathclaws and octospiders from the Rama books into their society, all fairly well integrated but with moderate language issues. That's going to lend to comedy.

*The reason they don't screen for it is because the government drafts all of them into their power armored legions. That's also the reason they made abortion illegal for Bastians. Outside of that, it's a relatively nice place to live.

Comedy is fine and dandy.

I advise that you talk to Darkevilme about your concept, by the way. Not because you need permission, just because I think the result will be enhanced by the result of that conversation.

Although this can be postponed- whatever the resolution for SDNW4 is, we are not starting SDNW5 in the immediate future.

I PMed him about it. It will be interesting to see the two of them meet, seeing how different they are from what I'm imagining the Bastians to be.

Any idea what the timeframe for starting SDNW5 might be? I've got the beginnings of a nation typed up, but if there's no hurry I'll just keep polishing.

There's no hurry.

Assuming it's me taking the initiative as quasi-moderator for the game, I intend to wait a while on the chance of a surge in SDNW4 interest. I'd start the game... well, honestly I need to make sure my own schedule commitments won't make it impossible for me to moderate effectively. No way I could know that until a few weeks into February at the very earliest, and it would probably be premature for me to make up my mind about whether I can do it until around March 1.

After that, I'd want a fairly extended period to recruit, discuss any minor tweaks to the rules, and piece together a sensible map. I doubt we'd be actually starting the game until well into the spring, and honestly I'd be just as happy to hold off until mid-April or later. A lot of the original playerbase of SDNW games is experiencing burnout, and I want them to have a good chunk of breathing room to recharge their batteries if they choose to come back.

Can I get a roll for a new nation? I'm going to try and build my 'kobold' nation now that some ideas have rattled around enough and I know that there won't be a new game.

Okay. I think SDNW4 is dead and buried at this point. Tis a pity but that's the rub. Resurgence if it was gonna happen would of happened by now. I think just maybe it's time to start thinking about SDNW5.

Uh...yeah.

For myself, I'm going through about two psychotically busy weeks, so if anyone wants me to take point on that, it's going to have to wait a bit. I'd like to- just not right now. No sense rushing it too much; everyone's still going to be here in two weeks, and it might be just as well for start time to be in late spring or summer.

I have some ideas in mind for SDNW4 epilogue pieces, but they are epilogues and I am well aware of this.

Bleh. Sorry everyone. We never got to finish our epic send-off tale complete with a coda to finalize the entire series. My fault.

I'm honestly not in the hunt for any STGODing, but if I may suggest something.... why not a fresh restart? No SDNW5. Just... see who has ideas for an STGOD and go from there?

Well, from my point of view, I think an STGOD using the SDNW4 rules would work. They're good rules, they're flexible. We don't need any specific complicated background story for how it all came to be, we don't need to use countries that were used before, nothing like that.

But the name "SDNW" just means "SDN World(s)." It's a neutral name, a neutral concept, and doesn't have to be about some complicated metaplot continuity between games- although I see no reason to demand that such things not exist, if anyone actually playing wants them to.

If the majority of people would rather use a different ruleset, they're welcome to write one. If they want a STGOD set in some other context, using whatever rules and backstory they desire, that's fine, I'm totally open to suggestions.

But for myself, I like the freeform space STGOD, and I think the SDNW4 rules were good for that- the game did not collapse because of any fundamental defect in the rules.

So I think it's only reasonable to call a freeform space STGOD using those rules "SDNW5." Or at least to seriously open discussion with that suggestion, when the time comes to discuss exactly what the next STGOD is going to be.

See where I'm coming from?