NationStates Jolt Archive

I know that I said that I'd take a break from II for a week... but, as Scott McCloud might say "I can't stop thinking." I wanted to put this idea up for everyone and see if there are any takers.

A lot of people were not happy with how the TPF Claims Great Britain RP turned out, myself included. We had some good RPers in there, but things went bad. Still, the potential for an epic conflict is there, if people are interested and if we put some effort into organization ahead of time.

For the record, if we do go ahead with this RP idea, I would like to see the actual RP start sometime in May. This will give most of us time to think about it, organize our info (see below), and should carry us past most real-life disturbances, such as tax-time for those of us who work, and exams for those of us in university; giving us all a free summer to cut loose.

The Scenario

Nova Europa is poised on the brink of a major war. The last pieces of unclaimed land have been occupied, the sides have been drawn. Now, the storm breaks.

Doomingsland, I know you've been wanting a chance for a big war here, so this might be your chance for it. We can either have the scenario being Doomingsland actually carrying out an invasion of Nova Europa, with Nova Europan nations (either as the NEA or as a coalition of nations, WW1 or WW2-style) defending, or with you on the defensive, as the Nova Europan nations seek to kick you out of the area. Personally, I think the former scenario makes more sense; but that's ultimately up to those who participate.

How I want this organized

First, I want committed players. So for starters there will be a signup phase. People can decide if they want to be a part of this, but I would like to see an even division of forces (not necessarily an even division of players, as some command perfectly huge armies). We can use this thread for signups, and I can create a roster post to track who is in and on which side.

However: to prevent what happened last time, understand that if you sign up, you're in this for the long haul. This RP will likely take a long time to conclude, maybe as much as 1 real-life year. Take this into account before making your decision. If at some point you sign up and you want to leave, arrange it beforehand, make sure everyone is aware and cool with your decision, and RP your departure!

Second, we will be having multiple threads to keep things in order:

1. This thread, for OOC signups and general discussion. This thread will mostly be used to make sure people are familiar with the rules before we begin; if things work well, we will not need this thread once we begin the RP.
2. A Central Index Thread This thread is for the benefit of everyone, be they participant or spectator, and its first post will have a description of the background, and links to all threads pertinent to the RP, which would be all threads in this list. New threads being opened up should be announced here, so that they can be added to the first post.
3. Reference Thread Here will contain links to all factbooks of the participating nations, as well as TO&E lists (required) and ORBATs (not exactly necessary, as these will change as war theatres change). Other reference material, like maps, should also be posted here. Maps are required!
4. Secret OOC Strategy Threads One will exist for each "faction" in the war. This is where you discuss your war strategy with your allies, without cluttering up OOC discussion or IC threads. By RP etiquette, each faction's strategy is "invisible" to the other. You can still post a SIC "strategy session" post where the results of your strategy threads are listed as a single scene, complete with dialogue between the various allied generals and admirals.
5. IC Theatre Threads. Generally there will be one Theatre Thread for each nation if there is conflict in that nation. Threads open when the conflict starts (and usually you will list your ORBAT for the specific theatre at the start), and end when mutually-agreed victory conditions for one side or the other are met. e.g. The "Nowhereia" Thread would have victory condition A "Nowhereia is conquered by Invader A" or condition B "Nowhereia successfully drives out Invader A". Either condition will end the theatre and close that thread, and which condition wins out will likely determine where the next war theatre occurs.

Ideally, I'd like to see only one theatre thread open at a time, two at the very most. Transitions between theatres are the best points for nations to enter or leave the war RP without causing problems.

The Theatre threads will also contain War Maps, showing the positions of frontlines and bases for all to see. Think of those historical maps showing the movements of troops in WW2.

6. Spy vs. Spy. For you budding James Bonds and Napoleon Solos, this thread is where we deal with espionage and counter-espionage actions between the various nations. Note this is not spec-ops stuff. If you want spies to be able to view secret IC actions by another player, here is where your spy or spies must be declared. Participation in this thread is optional, and if you like, you may get other players to roleplay your spies for you. If you do so, make sure everyone knows that's what you're doing!

7. Home Fronts. Place all your propoganda posters, fight songs, tales of "life back home" here. Optional.

8. The Soundproof Room. I think this thread is necessary because some of the heated arguments and venting that occured in the TPF claims Great Britain RP. Essentially, this thread will be for players to be able to vent, whine, scream, curse, etc. Just a few rules for this thread however:
- What is said in the Soundproof Room, stays in the Soundproof Room.
- Over-the-top, Monty-Pythonesqe insults are encouraged. I want people, even those who are on the business end of your vents, to be able to laugh and relax, not take up arms against you.
- Remember that Jolt Rules All. There are specific lines you should not cross when venting. Know what those are and stay inside them.

A few other things.

We will need a game-master. This person will be responsible for opening the IC Theatre threads, managing the index and reference threads, and will handle arbitration if it is absolutely necessary. His/her word is law and his/her decisions are final. I would prefer that a senior player that all or most of us can respect, and not directly involved in the war step up to fill this position.

We will also need a map-master; someone who can update the war maps on a regular basis. Again, someone neutral and well-respected. This person will not create the initial maps as that will be the responsibility of the players themselves.

That should cover the basics of what I want to do. I have some specific ideas on how to handle battles, to help promote the RP end of things and to keep things running smooth, but my lunch break is ending so I'll have to post those ideas up later today. But this should be enough for people to decide whether or not they want to give this a go.

This is open primarily to those who were in the TPF claims Great Britain thread - those players will have first pick for signups. Remember, the actual RP will not begin until May.

*Raises hand* Interested! Count me in.

After all, I never did actually get to try out my navy against a much, much larger nation's...

Oh, this is great. I am definitely interested.

I do have a couple of questions, however. I would like to be in this, though I cannot decide on decisively being on one side or another; I would actually prefer to maintain my position I've had so far, fairly neutral, but more active. Perhaps I would have a lot of spy work going on too.

Also, historically, I have done a lot of map work; your map-master thing thus appealed to me, though it being someone who is relatively uninvolved otherwise would count me out of that role.

Additionally, with the many roles that this thread should play, both OOC and IC, it may get unnecessarily cluttered and difficult. You may wish to further divide these roles.

Still, great idea.

Good questions Errikland.

Nova Europa has a *lot* of nations with claims that don't RP, or even post in some cases. So the general rule of thumb I'm operating under is: If a nation doesn't declare that they are participating, they are neutral. They can't be attacked, nor can they attack.

Active nations like yours that prefer to be neutral can also exist; when we set up the final roster and rules thread (probably in March), we'll have a list of neutral nations posted as well.

Any neutral nation, active or not, may enter the war if they so desire, but they cannot enter any existing theatre (this is to prevent potential dogpiles). A new theatre can be opened if that nation wishes, either by attacking an enemy nation, or letting themselves be invaded by an enemy nation.

Now, concerning maps: if you want the position of mapmaster, I'll put you down for it. Generally each nation will be responsible for providing their nation maps; your job will just be to track and update positions when you can. If you feel you need help (especially if we get more than one theatre going at a time), see if you can get some people who are good with maps to help you. Direct them this way and maybe we can get a small map-tracking team set up.

Now on to battles. Here's my thoughts on how we should handle combat in this RP:

Strategic

Strategic-level combat involves the placement and movement of forces, construction of fortifications and bases, lines of supply. It will be conducted in a turn/phase-based format, where all players in a theatre of war will move their units (at this level, most likely divisions, brigades, battalions or regiments), in the movement phase, and then conduct battles, skirmishes, or raids in the combat phase, depending on certain conditions. A turn consists of two phases, one movement, one combat, and is equivilent to a timespan of one week in-game.

By "in game", I mean that there is no direct connection between time in the RP and time in real life. Depending on how many players are active at a given time, we might have as low as one turn per real-life week, or as high as ten turns per real life day. More realistically, I expect we'll see 2 turns per real-life week, partly because this is an RP, and I expect people will want to colour their moves with vignettes from their various troops or write a narrative. Fine by me, so long as all players in a theatre are given a chance to move. However, to prevent an RP from stalling should one or more players be tardy with their moves, we will put a one real-week limit on placing your moves for a turn. At the end of that week, if your moves are not in, it will be assumed that your last set of orders will still be followed, or your troops have been told to hold their position.

The kinds of orders that can be issued are:

Advance a set distance: The unit ordered will move a specific distance within that week. Keep in mind, the greater the distance, the faster your troops will have to move, which will have consequences on your maintenance and readiness level of your troops.

E.G. I order 1st Light Rifles Battalion to advance 300 km in one turn (week). If they're in trucks, they can probably reach that distance easily, and if they meet an enemy, they'll likely be in good defensive positions and well-rested. If they're on foot, they probably have to march almost all day and all night, and will be dog-tired and useless to fight if they meet an enemy at the end of that trek.

Advance to an objective (be it a city, base, some strategic resource - fuel depots, mines, supply caches - or a rally point). Unless cancelled, this order continues until the ordered unit reaches the objective, or is destroyed in combat before it can do so. Depending on distance, this might take multiple turns. Great if you don't mind leaving units to their own devices.

Please note, if there is no enemy force present at the objective when the ordered unit reaches the objective, the ordered unit takes the objective intact! Defenders take heed!

Hold position: The ordered unit essentially sets up camp and waits. Usually they'll patrol the perimeter of their encampment, and set up defensive positions. The longer they're left alone, the more entrenched their position becomes, but not as effectively as the "fortify" command below.

Reinforce: With this command, you're telling the ordered unit - or part of the unit - to hook up with another unit. Acts like an Advance to objective command - the part being sent as reinforcements keeps going until it reaches the friendly unit or is destroyed en route.

Fortify: Here you're instructing the ordered unit to dig in and brace for impact. Troops start building fortifications, patrols are tighter, state of readiness is higher. Great if you suspect your unit is going to be attacked that turn or the turn after.

Build / Repair: For combat-engineering units. The ordered unit starts to build a base, or repair a captured base for friendly use. Essential if you're on the attack, and need better lines of supply.

Deploy: Bring in additional units from home. These guys get shipped to either your beachhead point or to a friendly base you specify. Note that this takes time.

Retreat or disband: Retreat can be used if you know a force is outmatched, but can escape. Disband can be used if a unit is so depleted and likely so far away from friendly forces that it cannot be reinforced before it's destroyed.

E.G. 120th Regiment has been whittled down from 50 to 3 tanks, maybe all in one battle. Those three tank crews will likely assume that it's no good, trash their tanks, and try to escape on foot.

Combat can take one of three forms. "Skirmishes" are mostly behind-the-scenes stuff; reconnaisance units and patrols finding and shooting each other. Usually losses here are decided OOCly and maybe an IC post to dramatize one or more of these skirmishes would be employed. The rule is that this can occur if two enemy forces are near each other, but either not big enough or close enough to justify a full-fledged battle. Skirmishes will alert each side to the presence of the other, so they may usually be followed by battles.

As for battles themselves that moves us into...

Tactical

Tactical combat is the nitty-gritty shoot-em-up stuff. Again, a turn-based approach is used here, although no set time is given to a specific turn, nor is there a time limit, like there is with the strategic. This is the kind of combat we're familiar with, with a few twists.

Two kinds of battles can occur: Objective battles, or Timed Battles.

Objective battle occur when two enemy forces meet at an objective. Each post from a player signals one turn, and includes both move and attack orders. Unlike strategic combat, move and attack orders do not have to be specified - the usual way we've employed RPing battles should be sufficient. Battle continues until one or the other force is destroyed or retreats. How many posts or turns it takes determines if the objective is captured intact (1 post - attacker arrives and finds no defenders) or how damaged the objective is when it is captured or defended. We'll assume that after ten posts per side (20 posts total), the objective - unless it's a city - is effectively levelled and hence useless to the victor. It is also possible for one side or the other to actively seek to destroy the objective, if they find they cannot take or hold it. This might work depending on the weapons they bring to the fight. In which case, battle ends when the objective is destroyed; the side that does the active destroying automatically retreats thereafter.

Timed battles:

Essentially when two units meet on the field of battle, but no objectives are present. Again 1 post = 1 turn, and there is a limit of 10 posts per side. Basic attrition warfare here. If both sides are still evenly matched at the end of the battle, both sides retreat out of range.

At any time during a battle, one side or the other can choose to withdraw, surrender, or offer a truce, depending on circumstances.

Logistics, Base, Morale

All armies march on their stomach, and good lines of supply are important to any campaign. I suppose there are a number of ways to handle this, but I think the simplest way is to treat a military base as the primary "unit" for storing and distributing the needed supplies for your army. As you build (or capture) more bases, you can support a larger force. But, the farther away your forces are from a base, the longer it takes for supplies to get to them, and this will be reflected by reduced ability to fight. I think a good rule of thumb is that a force that is operating more then 500 kilometers from the nearest base is subject to supply problems, and those will get worse the more forces you have past this limit and the longer they're out.

This is one reason why I suggest the "build/repair" option at the strategic level; it gives a chance for forces to reinforce their logistics position.

The only exception is an intial invasion force; these guys have no nearby base, most likely, but they're carrying supplies never used right to the point the landing boats hit the beaches.

Now cities with airports or harbours can also serve as "bases", but having soldiers in a city for extended periods of time won't do wonders for the civilian population, especially if it wasn't your city to begin with ^_^. Supply and morale problems may be bigger for a force operating from a city than from a base.

Building or repairing bases takes time, and I would recommend we use the strategic "turn=week" as the unit of time involved. Depending on how big a base needs to be, but 2-4 turns/weeks should be sufficient for most bases... assuming the construction site is not attacked. Building bases will also take money; which should be subtracted from your annual defense budget. The more units your base is supposed to supply (see below), the more time and money it will take to build.

Bases will all be different sizes, of course, as our militaries are all different. My personal system to determine how many units a base supplies is to take the total number of units and divide them among the total number of bases I have built, and assume that I have enough logistics to supply troops at each base comfortably so long as the number of bases and the number of troops does not change. In my case, I have 200 brigade groups and 15 ground bases. That translates to 13 brigades per base.

Losing bases means that your remaining bases now have to handle the excess, and that means supply problems and reduced morale (bases get crowded). How this should be handled is an open question.

Of course, there may be flaws with this system, and I'll welcome improvements, but we do need, I believe, a better system for waging war on II than what has been present already. With consistent rules and a consistent internal timeframe, we should be able to get the war moving smoother, and even allow for more involved strategies than "point your army at the enemy and march".

im in... this is interesting, i'll sign up:p

I'm interested. I'll join Nova Europa then, shall I.




Aha, there's a password. Umm, how do I join? Or do I need to make myself known as an RPer first?

To be honest with you Triv I think you're putting too many rules on what is really suppose to be a free-form RP, the things I am especially looking at are the bases bases, morale, logistics and the like which are normally roleplayed by the player. Doomingsland, myself, Novacom, and etc are all experienced enough role players to include these things without having to resort arbitrary rules. Hell, the rules you are suggesting seem more like a text-based take-a-turn game rather than roleplay. Remember that the II forums are suppose to be free-formed. Otherwise we'd have an official ruleset an the mods could slam the banhammer if you failed to follow set rules. Just my 2 cents.

This looks like something I'd definitely be interested in.

I understand your concerns, TPF. This is indeed a dramatic change from the way wars are RPed ordinarily.

However, what I'm trying to do is add turn-based gameplay to the war RP, rather than substitute turn-based for RP. Many of the disputes we had in the last RP stemmed from:

Lack of consistent timeframe.
Lack of committed players.
Lack of understanding of weapons.

Not your fault, I understand. Still, they were problems because of no common reference, no common understanding.

What I want to do, more than anything here, is to nail down points of reference we can use. The strategic turn system would - I believe, bear in mind this is all just theory so far - allow us to track how much time passes in the RP, no matter how much time it takes for a "turn" to end. Among other things, keeping track of time allows us to work on things like resupply, fortification, production, and even research of new weapons. It allows us to plan ahead, and I hope, to be able to develop better tactics.

That said, these rules are not set in stone. I would like input in how to make this work - keeping consistent gameplay with good RPing, developing a fair way to wage war in II for both beginner and veteran, and minimizing "no you can't-yes I can" arguments.

And if the proposed RP is not the right venue for this, I'd be interested in alternatives.

Princes Garden, Lost Hills, I'll put you two down as "interested" but we're still a long way away from this RP taking flight. But keep an eye on this thread for developments.

I'd like to be put down for "interested" as well, but I'll stick a little input in: wars don't run on a turn-based system. I know NS/II runs somewhat turn-based, but not completely - many events are also running simultaneously, and all sorts of different actions, apart from the ones you mentioned, can occur. I understand what you're getting at in trying to restore some stability and constants - I've run three Earths, I realize how inactivity and disputes can destroy RPing - but like TPF, I think flexibility is also a good thing. I do realize this RP is still in the developmental and planning stage, so these and other things may be good issues to think about while planning this out in the time to come pre-RP.

Another option would be to slim down the rules so they specifically deal with your 3 concerns, rather than including building bases which subtract from your defense budget and the like.

I suppose one can simulate too much. Still, the supply issue is one that has to be modeled somehow; otherwise the only way for a defender to cut off an attacker's route of supply is to start nuking enemy cities :/

At the very least we should employ:

Consistent internal time (the turn-based system, but perhaps losing the tactical aspect?)
References on each participating nation and their militaries/weapons. TO&E lists, ORBATs, maps (including physical features) and perhaps weapon specs for "nation-unique" weapons. Links to existing TO&E, ORBAT, or factbook threads would be great for this.

The reason why I want have seperate theatre threads is partly to give entry and exit points for players; while we're looking for signups at the start, some players may need more time than others to get organized. That way, some players ready and eager can start right away, while others hold off until they're ready.

While I fully understand the need for a bit more agreed upon structure, I think that the turn-based model may be too much structure, a bit too much lacking in the flexibility which is often one of the better traits of these RPs. That is not to say we abandon the idea, just scale it back a bit, allow a bit more flexibility in terms of time.

hello i would like to join this in call the axis (or the side thats not on Nova Europa side)

What you may want to do to encourage understanding between the players is mandate a "mini-factbook" for each player about his civilization (and specifically, the military) for this story's purpose. That'll put everything into one concise thread per player, and you can link 'em all on the front page of the OOC thread or however you see fit to best organize it.

About the turn-base...I think you have to go more in-depth than just a general, flat-out "turn-base" or "real-time." Some aspects, sure, can work on a turn-based systems, but things such as deployment strategies don't work like that at all. However, if you lay down a sort of "time" format, where, ie, one RL day would equal a prearranged set of time, you can avoid complications where one dude would RP a month of travel in a day, for instance, allowing people to catch up easily by RPing the given time in a certain post and allowing the more enthusiastic to RP every minute detail of their deployment, if they so choose.

In spite of the criticisms listed in the posts above, I am totally for the ideas set out in your first two posts, Trivalvia. The last thread broke down because the ground rules weren't set down before the roleplay started, the concept of a 'fair-fight' mattered quite a lot to several participants, myself included, and we felt hard done by with the way things turned out.

I think a distinct format and set of rules might help to eliminate the chances of something like that happening here, the concept is also an interesting one to try out, if people don't like the idea of turn based actions then they can simply explore the rest of II.

Put me down as 'interested'; May is a pretty bad month for me with AS exams to contend with but I could enter a theatre that opens later on.

EDIT: However, if you lay down a sort of "time" format, where, ie, one RL day would equal a prearranged set of time, you can avoid complications where one dude would RP a month of travel in a day, for instance, allowing people to catch up easily by RPing the given time in a certain post and allowing the more enthusiastic to RP every minute detail of their deployment, if they so choose.

I agree with Amazonian Beasts here, a set time per post would be a good way to go.

Nova Europa is poised on the brink of a major war. The last pieces of unclaimed land have been occupied, the sides have been drawn. Now, the storm breaks.

How, and by whom?

How, and by whom?

Well things would appear to have cooled a bit, given the time that has passed OOCly, but the pre-existing tensions, left over from (and in fact exacerbated by) the end of that last war, should still be about, and should then be the basis for this conflict.

Amazonian Beasts: if I understand you right, you're suggesting that we link real time to game time (1 RL day = x IC days). While I understand this, this has the problem of not allowing players a chance to "get their moves in".

For example, let's imagine a scenario where we have two sides, A and B let us cleverly call them, each with five players. Now for some reason Side B suddenly loses 3 of the 5 players for a week because of various reasons (computer troubles, sudden influx of work, etc), while Side A is unaffected. Result: Side A can still employ five players for that week while Side B is severely undermanned.

My proposal of 1 "turn" = 1 IC week while the turn itself is relatively flexible in real time, gives all players at least the chance of making their moves. The upper limit of 1 real week for a turn helps to prevent procrastination. It's not perfect, but I believe it is the best compromise.

And of course, for those who may not be comfy with a turn-based system, please keep in mind that the standard "narrative" style of RPing still goes on; it just now has a time frame.

Naasha: I wasn't aware of the exams in May, my mistake. Perhaps June or July might be a good time to kick this off for everyone?

TWSP, I see that the issue of who owns what is still going to be a problem (of course, that can also provide as much of a reason for the war as anything :) ). Still, perhaps you can outline your reasons for not recognizing the claims, both IC and OOC. I would truly like to know the reasons, so that we might be able to come to some agreement or compromise.

EDIT: Of course, the nations on the "other side", namely Doomingsland and Novacom (possibly AMF) have yet to respond to this idea... So if it comes that the TPF/Great Britain thing does get retconned, this RP might be a nonstarter. Ah well, I'm sure we can think of something...

It's been noticed but all this rigid structure seems a tad too stiffling, it all sounds good in theory but application is that it'll be almost unworkable, with people going through all the trouble of doing a post 5 a4 pages long and then get told that it doesn't fit in the system, or it'll take a lot of the suprise out of posts and cut down on people doing the unexpected, which personally cramps my style as I ICly have a good chunk of my tactics revolving around keeping an enemy off balance at all points.

As for the designs I have no issue with that except for the tech period hasn't been made clear, I.E. MT v PMT, as the few designs I've tried statting up are exclusive PMT, while in the last war I was using heavily de-enriched variants which I haven't statted up, and I'd rather be toying with ideas of what to do ICly and come up with interesting posts than doing pages of write ups about designs that I may or may not deploy, and then run them through draftroom and go through the entire process.

I'll go through the points you put in your first post though.

2. A Central Index Thread This thread is for the benefit of everyone, be they participant or spectator, and its first post will have a description of the background, and links to all threads pertinent to the RP, which would be all threads in this list. New threads being opened up should be announced here, so that they can be added to the first post.

Index threads are commin practise for RP's like this so no problems.

3. Reference Thread Here will contain links to all factbooks of the participating nations, as well as TO&E lists (required) and ORBATs (not exactly necessary, as these will change as war theatres change). Other reference material, like maps, should also be posted here. Maps are required!

I have a very personal gripes about this, as a few people around here will vouch, you can count the number of non-novans who have visited my home-isles for seven millenia on both hands and feet, and I operate sat jammers which prevent maps being made and any aircraft attempting to breach my airspace are chased away or shot down while unidentified Subs are sunk without question.

Yes that sounds extreme, yet there are IC reasons, I have been at war for the best part of nearly an IC century with a revellion now formed own Nation, Admiral Kukonois and Zeon, which operates a very large sub fleet. Also the last invasion they launched was very destructive so paranoia to homeland defence is very proactive.

Factbooks are subjective, a mini factbook wouldn't go amiss, but some people are still working on full versions.

4. Secret OOC Strategy Threads One will exist for each "faction" in the war. This is where you discuss your war strategy with your allies, without cluttering up OOC discussion or IC threads. By RP etiquette, each faction's strategy is "invisible" to the other. You can still post a SIC "strategy session" post where the results of your strategy threads are listed as a single scene, complete with dialogue between the various allied generals and admirals.

Very bad idea, as a good chunk of the outsider faction co-ordinate via IRC so all it would do is potentially disadvantage your side, as we keep our plannings out of sight, while your plannings would be visible, yet while etiquette would be obeyed as is proper, but it would give an insight onto your thoughts and also your generals and co IC thinking, which in a fair few cases is invaluable info, which is difficult by it's nature to ICly gather.

5. IC Theatre Threads. Generally there will be one Theatre Thread for each nation if there is conflict in that nation. Threads open when the conflict starts (and usually you will list your ORBAT for the specific theatre at the start), and end when mutually-agreed victory conditions for one side or the other are met. e.g. The "Nowhereia" Thread would have victory condition A "Nowhereia is conquered by Invader A" or condition B "Nowhereia successfully drives out Invader A". Either condition will end the theatre and close that thread, and which condition wins out will likely determine where the next war theatre occurs.

What you do need to remember is nothing is so straightforwards, off shoots and side wars can develop, and how can you say when something has truly ended, things are never what they appear, seperate threads are a good idea, but putting time frames on them is bad, seperate threads for seperate wars can be paced at different rates which links to your time frame issue.

Ideally, I'd like to see only one theatre thread open at a time, two at the very most. Transitions between theatres are the best points for nations to enter or leave the war RP without causing problems.

so you would bundle in Espionage, and the like into the same threads causing very cluttered threads, as what starts as a sea war coud become a ground war while commerce raiding is going on and a sea war, commando raids, Tech discoveries, Pertinent Politics and the like. Not Doable.

The Theatre threads will also contain War Maps, showing the positions of frontlines and bases for all to see. Think of those historical maps showing the movements of troops in WW2.

Interesting idea, but thats kinda difficult to pull off, as remember that map I did of where we though Naasha's fleet was, which nobody had a problem with, something like 2 weeks later and about 10-20 pages later he noticed it and it turned out interpretation was incorrect throwing a fair few people off balance, and caused a fair few rguments as it didn't match up as I'd been able to check with Questers as to where his fleet was but not with Naasha so the dimensions ended up off.

6. Spy vs. Spy. For you budding James Bonds and Napoleon Solos, this thread is where we deal with espionage and counter-espionage actions between the various nations. Note this is not spec-ops stuff. If you want spies to be able to view secret IC actions by another player, here is where your spy or spies must be declared. Participation in this thread is optional, and if you like, you may get other players to roleplay your spies for you. If you do so, make sure everyone knows that's what you're doing!


This idea I potentially like, however I can see that running into arguments, as part of my espionage involves highly trained Agents from my Psychic Corps which is originally what they were for after all a spy that could potentially, I emphasis the potential for sake of heading off arguments, alter memories if he were discovered, other aspects involve cyber exspionage which I operate as well in more than one form, I won't go into details but a few of you with a bit of research can add two and two together with regards to Cyberax and co.

7. Home Fronts. Place all your propoganda posters, fight songs, tales of "life back home" here. Optional.

This should be Mandatory :p

8. The Soundproof Room. I think this thread is necessary because some of the heated arguments and venting that occured in the TPF claims Great Britain RP. Essentially, this thread will be for players to be able to vent, whine, scream, curse, etc. Just a few rules for this thread however:
- What is said in the Soundproof Room, stays in the Soundproof Room.
- Over-the-top, Monty-Pythonesqe insults are encouraged. I want people, even those who are on the business end of your vents, to be able to laugh and relax, not take up arms against you.
- Remember that Jolt Rules All. There are specific lines you should not cross when venting. Know what those are and stay inside them.

Recipe for disaster because people can say personal things just out of the need to vent, it sounds funny potnentially but my advice is if you nee to whine scream and curse go take up boxing or a martial art or get something you can hit very hard withot damaging.

We will need a game-master. This person will be responsible for opening the IC Theatre threads, managing the index and reference threads, and will handle arbitration if it is absolutely necessary. His/her word is law and his/her decisions are final. I would prefer that a senior player that all or most of us can respect, and not directly involved in the war step up to fill this position.


PLEASE NO, we can come to agreements without getting someone to come in and arbitrate, I can think of one person who would propably volounteer despite being told politely and in most cases rudely to stay far far away, anyway private joke aside, such a person would not be needed, and it's not desireable as one decision influences what happens later and I wouldn't envy anybody with that weight on their shoulders.

We will also need a map-master; someone who can update the war maps on a regular basis. Again, someone neutral and well-respected. This person will not create the initial maps as that will be the responsibility of the players themselves.

Not a bad idea, but again somebody neutral, not easy to find, and not a desireable position, and while I have no problem mping Nova Ireland or as I call it Vrunzivun Zokirlenaixez, though perhaps mapping my waystation Thrumzivan Harakishoule would be excessive, though as I've said with maps of my homeland, you wouldn't know where to physically attack, and knowing ideal targets to attack impossible, not even my close allies know that, except for a few names like Kaziktra, Valjsguard, Destinus or Pviktarkrellovian in terms of continents, while some of my cities are known like Novesia, and notably Technopolis for it's acheivements.

Yes quite the essay to lay down but hey I like detail.

Though before this is embarked upon even after issues are worked out one very large and important fact needs to be worked out.




The end of the LAST war.



While yes it's regarded to be over, ICly it's not, something needs to be worked out to allow some room for manoever as I for one would be quite mad if all of a sudden Auman came back to reassert his claim, when there were less numbers, and I know a fair few other people would tell him none too politley to go away, as I consider his claim retconned because of his little stunt at the vanishing trick.

I do think we'll need a bit of OOC discussion to summarise events for factbooks and history because right now with people vanishing and whatnot it makes for a fairly patchy incoherent story now.

Well, I have no reason whatsoever to invade Nova Europa so you guys would have to be the ones to start something...and personally I think you're really overcomplicating this with all of these rules, it's called free form RP for a reason you know. But yes, if you guys want to have a proper war, I'm game.

Noted, although now we see a lack of interest on my end of things. Must be that time of year, I guess.

*sigh* To be honest, I got nothing on how to resolve the last war ICly. It's got enough of a bad taste even now that I don't think anyone on my side would touch it with the proverbial ten foot pole.

Admittedly something needs to be done to wrap it up or the entire affair will hang over our heads unresolved without any actual end to it, there does need to be some wrap up to it, even it is just an armistace and the occupations being the status quo.