Cataclysm Mechanics Draft

[Tamur]

94 posts? on a Saturday? good heavens you people are lunatics (meaning, of course, that you post by the light of the moon, not that you belong in an asylum. Never that.)

err, so, anyone care to give a summary of the current state of The Draft for those of us with football-playing sons and swimming daughters?

[Northnovas]

94 posts? on a Saturday? good heavens you people are lunatics (meaning, of course, that you post by the light of the moon, not that you belong in an asylum. Never that.)

err, so, anyone care to give a summary of the current state of The Draft for those of us with football-playing sons and swimming daughters?

I was actually amazed at the amount for one day. It must be an important thread to the PBEM. Draft!? I don't read the fine legal print I will just hang on for the ride.

[TinCow]

Draft!? I don't read the fine legal print I will just hang on for the ride.

It is my intention that people won't ever need to read anything except the SPOILER section under their character's name. The rest of this is a simple explanation of the mechanics I will use to figure out how to implement peoples' decisions. It's more for my benefit than anyone else's. All you guys need to do is tell me what you want to do. I will use these mechanics (and some other stuff) to figure out whether you are successful and what happens.

[econ21]

I've been thinking a bit more about the economic model in the cataclysm.

It may be a bit parsimonious. I tallied up cities with players and most have 0 or 1. (Outremer has 3 players and no cities). With one city, you get one unit of militia per turn. That may be enough if we let the AI bumble along. But if we set up multiple Apollonia style battles, we will have to rely on the gamesmaster topping up armies. That's not such a bad thing, but it just means that the incentives for players to hold on to settlements is very low - one militia per turn probably does not warrant the garrison required to hold the city. Perhaps one point per castle and two per city?

I still think the rewards to scrapping buildings are too high. In the normal game, if you scrap a leather tanner you get 200 gold - enough to buy one militia. Under the cataclysm mechanics, you get 3 militia (takes three turns). It will also be a pain to implement as buildings that exist don't show you how long they take to build (if you scrap a market, you'd have to go to the browser to see how long it takes to build as you won't get the option to rebuild one - you need a grain exhange first). I would suggest a flat 1 point per building scrapped.

Personally, I think the best thing would be for TinCow to play it by ear, rather than feel too constrained by mechanics. It's only when he sees the armies the AI brings (which he may have to spawn) that he will be able to judge how much resources we should have.

[TinCow]

Part of the reason I wanted to make the destruction of buildings more profitable was because it would encourage people to do it. One of the reasons we decided to create the cataclysm in the first place was to set the HRE back a significant amount, and thus provide more of a challenge through to the end of the game. I figured that if we had to rebuild lots of structures, that would help.

I agree on the flexibility though. Maybe I'll make some places generate more income than others, or perhaps some people with nice financial traits will find themselves with more wealth. Also, I highly encourage people to think of different ways to recruit that do not involve money. Take a look at your traits and try to think of IC ways you could assemble armies without paying for them. As long as they are logical, I will allow them.

DO NOT PLAY THIS BY ANY STRICT RULES. USE YOUR IMAGINATION AND I WILL IMPLEMENT IT AS BEST AS I CAN.