Feedback: Natural Resources (including Oil and Gas)

Say your piece, make suggestions and offer feedback to any aspect of the game.

Moderator: RP Committee

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Auditorii » Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:35 pm

As I stated to Axxell in Discord in relation to previous RP:

“The most logical thing to state was that some incredibly low quantities of the resource existed and were mined out of existence. Which is something that has very much happened in real life.“
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Drax » Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:40 pm

When I was in Badara I found in wiki some refences to some resources including gold and cobalt. So I did a little RP about mining them. The cobalt was with Hutori financing.

Also, when I was in Trigunia in RL some cobalt was discovered in Russian Pacific waters so I set up up some mining using their rather unique method.

Do want to say think this can be way to add something good to trading game but should not become massive game changer.
Neue Dundorfische Zentrumspartei (NDZP), Dundorf, Active
Deltarianska Narodna Strana (DNS), Deltaria, Active
Dedicated to the proposition.
User avatar
Drax
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:51 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Doc » Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:43 pm

Doc wrote:Kalistan has long RPed with the following Resources:

Coal (from at least 3999)- http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=97892#p97892
Iron- http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=97761#p97761
Lithium, Magnesium, calcium and potassium as well as limited quantities of gold and zinc- http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=138763#p138763
Bauxite- http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=158981#p158981
Copper (limited Exploitation)- https://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=154306#p154306

And most recently helium which is generated as a by product of fusion reaction, but which is not exploited commercially, and titanium and silicates which are byproducts of our solar and geothermal industries. http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=177523#p177523 and http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=92&p=180495#p180495

I am sure there are additional ones that have been RPed, but I can't think of them now.

I would happy trade Uranium for these ones we are not listed as having. Kalistan has never explored for Uranium deposits, and wouldn't develop it if we had it.


We even did RPs on exploration, discovery and exploitation. Kalistan has has KALNAFERCO for centuries, not with imported iron and coal but with iron and coal from in country. We had a steel war with Indrala a few hundred years ago. And we have been listed as having Uranium, but Kalistan has never explored for uranium, nor would we ever exploited it if we do.

If you were going to make a list, why do it with a random generator? Why not rely on RP the way you do with military equipment? I remember you getting after me saying I couldn't do something because it didn't respect the RP effort you, primarily, but others as well put into developing those weapons. Alright. So I built something else. Because you squashed that. So, I'd like the same theory built into this list. Those who do not have significant RP about minerals can get the RNG. Those who DO have significant RP with development and exploitation of resources should have their RP efforts acknowledged.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby XanderOne » Mon Nov 14, 2022 9:58 pm

I'm against.

Anycase, I'll past here all the suggestion I gave:

thinking to some scientific things I remember I would say: Dundorf should be I think among the most reachest of resources, like the borders areas of Alduria, Mordusia and Rildanor, like the borders areas Baltusia, Walruzia and Tukarali, the areas in the middle of majatra close to lake majatra, the core of vascania and the middle of the largest landmasses of Dovani. In general where lickely there are the particracy equivalent of the cratons, in RL usually found in the middle of large continent and usually very rich of resources.

The underdeveloped nations should have more resources given their economic status as underdeveloped nations, while for western nations we should assume that millennia of tendencially developed industry and economy have reduced a lot their resources. Exception could be done for nations with very few roleplay and for nations that often have been roleplayed with few industrializaton, a agrarian traditions, and so on. And said that, clearly I think that past roleplays, especially roleplays developed between more players, should be taken in account.

Without taking in account the roleplay, with this list if implemented with such random allocations of resources, a lot of roleplay will actually be null and void.

And if this will happen, sorry, but at this point I don't understand anymore when the previous roleplay is like the Gospel, fixed as dogma, and when we can simply ignore roleplay, even if conducted by more than a single player.
XanderOne
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:15 pm

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Auditorii » Mon Nov 14, 2022 11:01 pm

XanderOne wrote:I'm against.

Anycase, I'll past here all the suggestion I gave:

thinking to some scientific things I remember I would say: Dundorf should be I think among the most reachest of resources, like the borders areas of Alduria, Mordusia and Rildanor, like the borders areas Baltusia, Walruzia and Tukarali, the areas in the middle of majatra close to lake majatra, the core of vascania and the middle of the largest landmasses of Dovani. In general where lickely there are the particracy equivalent of the cratons, in RL usually found in the middle of large continent and usually very rich of resources.

The underdeveloped nations should have more resources given their economic status as underdeveloped nations, while for western nations we should assume that millennia of tendencially developed industry and economy have reduced a lot their resources. Exception could be done for nations with very few roleplay and for nations that often have been roleplayed with few industrializaton, a agrarian traditions, and so on. And said that, clearly I think that past roleplays, especially roleplays developed between more players, should be taken in account.

Without taking in account the roleplay, with this list if implemented with such random allocations of resources, a lot of roleplay will actually be null and void.

And if this will happen, sorry, but at this point I don't understand anymore when the previous roleplay is like the Gospel, fixed as dogma, and when we can simply ignore roleplay, even if conducted by more than a single player.


My response to you was quite simple on Discord involving this: in relation to using "real world" sciences to apply to Particracy presents some difficulty. This issue is two-fold, the inconsistency with Terra's maps and landmasses (heighmaps, etc.) and the fact that somethings exist that simply shouldn't exist.

RP was never going to be discounted, however, nations simply won't have all the resources on the list "...because I roleplayed them once or twice."
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Auditorii » Mon Nov 14, 2022 11:38 pm

I'd like to note after conversations with Doc, perhaps it needs to be more plainly stated: if a nation has developed significant RP regarding specific resources (those listed here) then those resources can absolutely replace the ones on the list. The issue I have is should you have a bunch on the list already (randomly generated) and then stated "...in addition I want these because of XYZ RP." That, I think is an issue and will absolutely not happen. If a nation has a history of XYZ and has RPd that or has been involved in RP with it, I think then it can absolutely be addressed and either swapped or added, etc. The notion that a single nation have complete access to all of these in addition to others seems very power-playing to me.

For those questioning the "regulation". I will say this: when it was discussed about developing a list of nations regarding oil/gas production and abilities, it was damned immediately. Particracy players has had this unfortunate desire to be completely self-sufficient and everything can be done in every nation without anything from the outside. I find this to be incredibly damaging to the state of the game as it is today. Let's face it, the smaller community has made the game less important and the RP far more important. PT Classic has easily had some of the best RPers I've ever written with and with that comes being inter-connected with our nations. This list, the purpose behind it, will be to foster RP and develop inter-connected relationships with other nations/players as has been done with oil/gas and has been, in my opinion, moderately successful.

I appreciate the responses regarding the list and will continue to listen to feedback.
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Autokrator15 » Mon Nov 14, 2022 11:52 pm

Auditorii wrote:Historically the availability of nuclear power plants has never been an "issue" per se, the introduction of certain countries with uranium and those without it might present some interesting RP scenarios. My theory on the development of peaceful nuclear technologies (i.e. nuclear power plants) has always generally been allowing countries to do so as long as its realistic (i.e. pairing up with a nation that has them already, having a historical background in nuclear power generation, contracting with a known nuclear power corporation to develop them (this is tied with number 1/2), etc.)


Drax wrote:For those players actually interested in trade, this can be a good departure point.

If we start seriously looking at whether we have stuff beyond ones that have been and are controlled, we could say what we are putting on market (if withhold then holding back economy) and what on market could be available to everyone. We could still have exclusive deals to insure supply.


I fully agree with both statements. This index can create interesting RP to further push for international trade, diplomacy and creating unique nations with unique economies that differ from eachother. We need some rules and limits to not make a gazillion China's.

Doc wrote:
I would happy trade Uranium for these ones we are not listed as having. Kalistan has never explored for Uranium deposits, and wouldn't develop it if we had it.

We even did RPs on exploration, discovery and exploitation. Kalistan has has KALNAFERCO for centuries, not with imported iron and coal but with iron and coal from in country. We had a steel war with Indrala a few hundred years ago. And we have been listed as having Uranium, but Kalistan has never explored for uranium, nor would we ever exploited it if we do.

If you were going to make a list, why do it with a random generator? Why not rely on RP the way you do with military equipment? I remember you getting after me saying I couldn't do something because it didn't respect the RP effort you, primarily, but others as well put into developing those weapons. Alright. So I built something else. Because you squashed that. So, I'd like the same theory built into this list. Those who do not have significant RP about minerals can get the RNG. Those who DO have significant RP with development and exploitation of resources should have their RP efforts acknowledged.


I think everyone is in favour of having some of their RP respected and making adjustments to the list, we can surely swap some here and there, downgrade some to tier II or tier I to still make the nation as having had the deposits but having dwindeld over time or just acknowledging the resources mentioned. But this cant mean we cant retcon a few things, that is just inevitable. Secondly we cannot nuke this very good proposal just because of some old RP. This prevents ridiculous claims and can make world economy RP and unique economy RP's more common.
Image
User avatar
Autokrator15
 
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 4:35 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Doc » Tue Nov 15, 2022 12:09 am

Auditorii wrote:I'd like to note after conversations with Doc, perhaps it needs to be more plainly stated: if a nation has developed significant RP regarding specific resources (those listed here) then those resources can absolutely replace the ones on the list. The issue I have is should you have a bunch on the list already (randomly generated) and then stated "...in addition I want these because of XYZ RP." That, I think is an issue and will absolutely not happen. If a nation has a history of XYZ and has RPd that or has been involved in RP with it, I think then it can absolutely be addressed and either swapped or added, etc. The notion that a single nation have complete access to all of these in addition to others seems very power-playing to me…

I appreciate the responses regarding the list and will continue to listen to feedback.


This addresses Kalistan’s concern.

Our intention was not to claim these resources AND the ones we RPd. Just the ones we have put significant time and RP into developing. In short, my goal was more to avoid a retcon rather than claim additional things.

I’d support the list with this caveat, and would encourage active players to go back through their papers and start finding high quality RP arcs which talk about your development of those resources (more than a post which says somethjng like “we have gold now and in other news.”) the resource should have been developed conscientiously and deliberately to justify its substitution. Then countries that can’t do that, which is most of the countries in Terra I’m sure) or ones that are not actively played in, get them random list. It will save Farsun from having to redo the whole thing, will allow you to make a case if you feel strongly about it, and will encourage in game trade.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 1962
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby XanderOne » Tue Nov 15, 2022 12:36 am

given the development, I would like say that I'm satisfied about Istalia. I always assumed that many resources where imported in Istalia and it is for this reason that I developed the roleplay with Rogue, to increase imports of resources and to secure an important source of valuable resources.
XanderOne
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:15 pm

Re: Feedback: Natural Resources

Postby Auditorii » Tue Nov 15, 2022 8:28 pm

Updated the lists with three colors: Green (Indicating Tier III: high, near infinite reserves (for PT standards) and the ability to market them internationally), Yellow (Indicating Tier II: moderate reserves and the ability to market them regionally and some ability to market them internationally) and finally Red (Indicating Tier I: low reserves with the ability to market them locally and perhaps regionally).

In addition, in reference to comments made by Rogue for North Dovani and Doc by Kalistan, I've tweaked their resources generally replacing what they had gotten randomly generated with their proscribed, RP-related resources. You can review the list.
Image Dorvik | Image Zardugal | Image Ostland (FBC)
Moderator
-- Particracy Game Rules
-- Moderation Requests
-- Game Information
-- Particracy Discord
Auditorii
 
Posts: 6279
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 am

PreviousNext

Return to Feedback

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests