I'm not sure about the Pirates. I'd tend to either just do NPCs or just do players for the first iteration. How does combat work? Some rock-paper scissors type thing?
-Aris On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 6:22 AM ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hm, I see what you're saying. > > I think the problem is that recently I have been thinking a lot about > real-life board games, which generally require some amount of complexity > to be interesting. (Of course, there are those games every now and then > that manage to pull off something genius with a tiny rulebook, but those > are rare.) > > What you've helped me realize here is that Agora is not about that. > Agora, as we all know, is a game about changing the rules, not > necessarily adding a ton of them at once. If a new system is added, in > order for it to be successful, it probably needs to start small, and > become larger as the community, not a single player, chips in and makes > it the best it can be. (I'm writing this more as a reminder to myself > than anything.) > > Again, I'm still not super invested in this idea. I'd like it to work, > but if it's not going to, then there's no sense in moving on to making > an actual proposal. So, here's my attempt at creating a one-paragraph > summary, as simple as possible: > > Every player has a spaceship, with which to fly around space and fight > space battles. Players also have Fame levels; defeating most players > lowers Fame, and defeating NPC "Pirates" and very infamous players > raises fame. Becoming either famous or infamous can bring rewards > (potentially even winning), but staying neutral does not. > > I think that captures the main things I wanted from this. I hesitate if > this might even still be too much, but I can't see how to reduce it any > more. Maybe I'm overthinking it. > > I will say though that I was hesitant to include the "Pirates" thing. > Having NPC ships does seem like another layer of complexity; however, I > couldn't see how fame would be a viable option otherwise. Maybe fame is > simply attacking *any* infamous player, and infamy is simply attacking > *any* famous player, sort of making two teams? > > On 10/8/2018 11:40 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > Please forgive me, but, well... This still suffers from the problems of > > complexity and and lack of focus that the current system does. > > > > I think the problem is that you’re trying too hard to be intresting. In > > short, you’re enjoying the rules and ideas you’re coming up with. That > > means that you want to come up with more of them, because it’s fun. I've > > done that multiple times in the past. It doesn't work very well. Look, for > > instance, at my first contract system. A very flexible and detailed system > > that was also so complicated that no one wanted to figure out how it worked. > > > > I can't promise that this will work, but what you might try doing is to > > start with a very simple idea and then add just enough so it's not actively > > boring. So, basically, pick a paragraph of your current plan (and, for the > > love of the light, please, not the one you marked as arguable), and make > > that your new plan. See if you can do it all in ~three rules, about two > > reasonably sized paragraphs each. Remember that brevity is a virtue. > > Designing a large system that fits well together and that is also simple > > and focused is extremely hard. I still can't do it myself without a lot of > > help, although I'm getting better after a ton of practice and mistakes. A > > small focused system that can be expanded later is probably a better idea. > > > > When I say that you should be able to come up with a reasonable summary > > (that is, one that gives people enough background to understand what's > > going on) that's a paragraph long, I meant it. Examples: > > 1. There are politicians and political parties. Players, through normal > > game activities, gain favors which they can use to gain power and influence > > more politicians, eventually allowing the player to win. Politicians also > > have special powers which the players who control the build up political > > power. > > 2. There's a currency called stems with no intrinsic utility. Players have > > one of three roles, which they can only change rarely, and which allow them > > to bid with stems for one of three more specialized currencies that help > > with gameplay. One currency controls proposals, another provides extra > > votes, and a third removes judicial punishments. Various officers have the > > power to set economic policy for each currency, setting the amount at > > auction and the taxation rate. > > > > I'm not trying to shoot down your ideas; I just want to help you come up > > with a strong proposal. The fact that it's supposed to coexist with > > Politics makes the need for simplicity even greater, but most of this is > > generally applicable. I hope that I've helped. > > > > -Aris > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 6:00 PM ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> After some feedback on my last message and some time outside earlier > >> today, I've refined my Putting Agora in Space idea. The biggest > >> "complaint" on that was that it was too broad and too much like the land > >> system which is likely about to be repealed. So, I've thought about it a > >> bit, and here is the new idea. > >> > >> This system will be largely its own system, but will be interlinked with > >> the Politics system (assuming that passes). Its main focus will be on > >> space battles. This was something that I hesitated to have in the > >> original idea; however, when Aris suggested narrowing down the idea to > >> one main system, that was what e mentioned. I don't think e was > >> specifically suggesting that and instead using it more as a suggestion, > >> but I actually thought it could work. E also suggested having several > >> smaller economic systems linked together as opposed to one main one, so > >> I decided to make this work along those lines. > >> > >> Planets will likely still be a thing, however they won't be nearly as > >> influential and important as they were going to be originally. Instead > >> of being owned directly by players, planets are owned by political > >> parties. Players can gain Favours with parties by defending the party's > >> planets from invaders. There will probably be a fixed number of planets. > >> > >> (This part is debatable) There may be a select few planets owned by > >> Agora instead of a party which are where players must travel to perform > >> certain game actions, such as voting, making proposals, etc. This could > >> create an interesting dynamic, but could also be annoying and too much > >> of a hassle. > >> > >> Each player has a Spaceship. This is what allows em to travel around the > >> galaxy, and is used to fight space battles. Upgrades can be bought for > >> Spaceships to increase things like their fuel capacity, speed, attack > >> strength, etc. There may be a limit to how many upgrades a Spaceship can > >> have, causing players to either specialize in a particular thing, or > >> have more of a "jack of all trades" Spaceship. > >> > >> There are also some non-player controlled Spaceships that will roam > >> around the galaxy. There are friendly ships called Merchants; players > >> can trade with these to sell unneeded things and potentially buy things > >> at a lower price than normal, or even buy special things only available > >> through Merchants. On the other end of the spectrum, there are Pirates > >> which will try to attack Merchants, players, and Planets. > >> > >> Every player has a Fame switch. When a player's Fame is above a > >> particular threshold, e is considered Famous; when eir Fame is below a > >> particular negative threshold, e is considered Infamous. Fame is > >> increased by doing good deeds such as trading with Merchants, helping > >> players by giving them things or helping repair their ships, defeating > >> Pirates, or even defeating Infamous players. Fame is decreased mainly by > >> attacking Merchants and other players. Both fame and infamy can have > >> rewards, so players can choose either path. > >> > >> I haven't actually thought much about how space battles will actually > >> work. I imagine it will be some sort of turn-based thing, where once a > >> player engages in a battle, e and the other ship will take turns > >> attacking (or defending) until one is defeated or retreats. > >> > >> Another thing I'm unsure about is how one will actually encounter other > >> ships. Some battles will take place near a planet, but I imagine most > >> will occur in interplanetary space. I'm not really too thrilled about > >> having a big space map, as we just got done with having a map. Of > >> course, it would be very different then that was, but I feel like > >> there's some better way. > >> > >> I think this is the main bulk of the idea at the moment. One other idea > >> I had is political parties giving players "side-quests" that they can > >> perform, such as transporting goods between planets. This could give > >> players another thing to specialize in. > >> > >> Again, as always, thoughts greatly appreciated. I think I'm liking the > >> direction this is heading, though. > >>
