Inquiry: Interest in an interactive AAR (details inside)

**Jolt** · 04-08-2008, 18:57

Originally Posted by woad&fangs

I'll join but I won't be real active at first.

When will FM start being distributed?

**mini** · 04-08-2008, 19:39

that depends.

Since people seemly want the game to start when Rome is a bit more powerful, FM distribution will start more rapidly then I originally had in mind.

It also depends on participants/Fm ratio

I don't want 3-4 guys out of 30 to be the lucky ones with a Fm as that wouldn't be fair.

**PersianFire** · 04-08-2008, 20:16

Originally Posted by Reality=Chaos

It's rather turbulent in this period as well I think. Rome is trying to control Italy, but is beset by enemies, also the new latin tribes need to be integrated into the republic and that causes tensions. Also there's the tension Of whom to attack. Imagine a grecophile faction, or one that wants to stay friends with the tyrant of Syrakousai. There's plenty of things to get worked up about roleplaying wise. There's also the question of Carthage and what to do with her.

"Concur."

Originally Posted by mini

that depends.

Since people seemly want the game to start when Rome is a bit more powerful, FM distribution will start more rapidly then I originally had in mind.

It also depends on participants/Fm ratio

I don't want 3-4 guys out of 30 to be the lucky ones with a Fm as that wouldn't be fair.

"Why not? Based on Reality=Chaos' comments, we have a very nice situation to start in right from the beginning. Fair enough, as you say there will only be 4 FM's, but to start the AAR and to test the waters, have 4 FM's with the rest as Senators? Let those persons who wish to roleplay one of the few FM's put their case forwards. (beneficial for those well versed in speech and rhetoric) and let there be a vote from the org community on who would be the initial FM's. After that and in-game, voting would only be from the 'senators' who have signed up.

**SaberHRE** · 04-08-2008, 22:15

Originally Posted by PersianFire

"Concur."

"Why not? Based on Reality=Chaos' comments, we have a very nice situation to start in right from the beginning. Fair enough, as you say there will only be 4 FM's, but to start the AAR and to test the waters, have 4 FM's with the rest as Senators? Let those persons who wish to roleplay one of the few FM's put their case forwards. (beneficial for those well versed in speech and rhetoric) and let there be a vote from the org community on who would be the initial FM's. After that and in-game, voting would only be from the 'senators' who have signed up.

I agree, this interactive game doesn't have to be so strictly EB campaign based. All we actually need is the Campaign map and the units.

Mini, you could be the GM and control everything on your game.(Which will prevent in-game hickups, when certain people will be absent to perform in their offices).

Everyone would form the Senate. The actual FM's could also be RP, and people would just make their own "fictional" FM's. So let's say Player X plays Cassius Longinus in the game, and is elected consul for this year. In his term the senate orders him to march against the Ligurians(segestica). All we need then is too take a random family member and an army and attack.

This system has it's disadvantages like:

-Players will have too much independence in the formation of their characters, so that in-game traits won't affect the RP.
-Prestige and Command "stars" can't be taken into account.

But with gradual expansion more family members will be produced and therefore "adopted" by the players.

This should work as not all players will want and have the time to lead armies to battle and play per se. Some will only be interested in political in-fighting, passing laws and oratory battles in manners of Cicero.(Yes, expect me to be the Senate's troublemaker mwahahahha

)

**We shall fwee...Wodewick** · 04-09-2008, 00:05

I like the idea of fighting for a limited number of places at the start, because those who want to lead can bring out bucket loads of rhetoric and charm....*stops and admires the metaphorical image*....to win a character, but also those who don't to control the 3-4 FM directly can do so from the Cvria, in a more powerful way, as they decide what the FM can do!

**PersianFire** · 04-09-2008, 00:43

@ mini

What game and campaign difficulty will you be playing on? It is possible that you and a majority willl decide on a Medium for battle and Hard for campaign. I however, prefer Hard/Hard.

Since you're basing this on being as realistic then surely the battles should be as well in terms of losses? I think it is too easy on Medium, even though you would fighting on a par with the AI. The human player has an advantage with initiative and more often than not common sense which the AI lacks at times. I don't mind a battle which results in thousands of men on either side but you annihilating the enemy for a loss of 53 men on your side. Once in a while is OK, but it can get rather tiresome when this could happen 3-4 times on the trot. It makes the fun and the looking-forward-to-a-battle, actually thinking about strategy and double guessing your decisions with more discussion and (heated) debate in the Curia. It will ensure make sure that senators will not pick consuls/praetors who have failed to live up to expectations on the battlefield. Players will also be wary of not having tehir FM being killed off either.

My reason for the above is that despite the off-the-battlefield-debate/politics, we would not lose a battle as most of us here can easily beat a medium-difficulty-level army when at least on a level pegging with units. Reasding some of the AAR's just reinforces that, with massive victories and hardly any losses.

Anyway, it's your AAR, but just my thoughts.

**woad&fangs** · 04-09-2008, 01:47

I second the Hard/Hard idea. We need to lose at least a few battles.

I believe we should do this in 1.1 if that's okay with people.

Concerning FMs: I don't really care how FMs get distributed. If we are able to adopt a person than we should do so since the Romans don't get new family members for a long time. Players should attempt to roleplay based on the ingame traits as much as possible.

Check out "King of the Romans" for a good example of roleplaying characters.

**mini** · 04-09-2008, 10:46

[QUOTE=PersianFire
Anyway, it's your AAR, but just my thoughts.[/QUOTE]

It's actually not MY aar perse :)

Just view me as the instigator of it all.
Basically, once started this thing runs itself :)

As mentioned, it only takes one GM to hover above it as an eagle, but as long as things run properly, i can sit back ,relax and let u do the hard work ;)

Some useful suggestions so far, and ideas i've never thought of.

And interest is growing, nice.