Farsun wrote:Its funny that this argument comes up so often but never materializes because players do not want it to materialize. The players who often want to implement it, don't want the consequences of realizing that their nation might not be the powerhouse that they have role-played it to be. It's why when I was in Dorvik it took me so long to even project my forces throughout the world and I had raise my defense budget realistically to do that.
+1
Farsun wrote:The problem with all of this is that it doesn't have force of power behind it because moderation, at least in it's previous role, would never state that nations were weaker than one another unless it was drastic such as Hulstria versus Vorona.
I tried to base my Macro-Economics spreadsheet's "Subjective Remarks" column on the Economic Protocols. EEL is helping me to revise them (I have exams, so limited time). I'll have it reviewed by Moderation, who I've already spoken with on the issue. The things aren't even that drastic, just small 2-3 word comments on comparisons between nations. Is it really hard for PaleRider's ego to give up Zardugal's claimed status of "high educational standards" when it has the state burdened with responsibilities for education, while having one of the lowest-funded Education/Culture Ministries in the world? Is it really that drastic for a nation with super-high Internal Affairs spending to be considered a Police State, or a nation with super-high Defence spending to be considered a militaristic state?
EEL pointed out the main problem in my subjective remarks: dichotomy. Everything was black or white. He helped me to construct a few grey areas, so instead of Good or Bad - we have Excellent, Very Good, Good, Above Average, Average, Below Average, Bad, Very Bad, Terrible (not exactly in these words, but we try to have a wider span than just Good/Bad).
The point is that the spreadsheets are only suggesting what type of society each nation should have, based on budgets. EEL's expenditure calculator will try to weight budgets against laws. It's not even saying which nations are powers and which nations aren't. I brought it up mainly to criticize the Development Index, because power is subjective and a spreadsheet can't calculate power.
The type of society would say what type of laws are appropriate, and what resolutions (really what I like to consider as local RP) could be about.
EEL's spreadsheet makes suggestions in the opposite direction, i.e. where my spreadsheet (like Economic Protocols) makes suggestions of what society should be RP'd based on the budget, EEL's Expenditure calculator will make suggestions for your budget based on what laws you have. Either way, the intention is to get laws and the budget matching RP. The Subjective Remarks translates the numbers into loose RP guidelines, I guess.
Farsun wrote:Realistically, the best bet is to gather a group of players in a variety of nations and have them RP together and only together until more tack on and become involved in realistic RP. It's a fanciful notion but we did it a few times and it managed to work out.
Agreed. We could just avoid RP with the egotistic anti-realists.
Farsun wrote:I know everyone is against guides and rules but honestly, in my 8+ years RPing and managing RP, sometimes rules and guides are necessary to ensure that things get done fairly and properly. People laugh but an RP Team is the games best bet, you all think I'm an asshole yet I was the one who has always pushed for RP reform and the fact that nations need variation.
+1
Farsun wrote:Fundamentally the game lacks strong central rogue states such as those akin to North Korea, Iran, the Russian Federation, Syria and a basis for countries to actually cause problems. There is only so much one can do internally before it becomes boring and monotonous. I mean, do not get me wrong civil wars, rebellions, revolts, mutinies, bombings, terrorism, elections and economics are all fun but when they mean little in the wider scope of things, what really is the point behind them? I'm not advocating that we take real-world states and bring them into the game, trust me I am far from that but I am saying that International RP is what is going to help establish an order of powerful states and not just economically and militarily, because that is going to change with the player base, but politically where nations have the pull with other nations.
Agreed. Blandness is not only local. We have a bland international scene as well. I think Jaguar did a good job with Jakania, and Polites always does good jobs (so Deltaria was once cool too). Lodamun's laws are ridiculous, but we manage to maintain international recognition for the Nationalist regime.
Farsun wrote:Without launching attacks at players or nations, there are nations right now which are RPd as powers when they never were and are unrealistically just doing as they please when people don't look at the wider scope of things.
One question I raised about PaleRider's Power Index was Lodamun's high ranking, and Luthori's low ranking. Lodamun shouldn't be (in my opinion) branded as a power anymore. If Luthori fell, I think we can fall too because we have less reason to remain high up than Luthori does.