Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-30T01:02:44+02:00

Assembler, I see where you are coming from but like others said, this is not a society with full-time citizens. At the moment you are trying to create a solution to a problem that doesn't exist and might not even exist. Thus let nature take its course on this one, mate.

I have tried creating a similar thing in Minecraft - a country with laws, army, an economy, etc. Then I quickly realized that while the game would allow me to do that via various sets of perms, the fact that I am trying to make a country inside of a game which people can join and leave at will not work since during a heated battle someone might be called for dinner, someone for lunch, someone will have a date to attend or will have friends coming over and thus has to spend time with them and then suddenly the heated battle loses a good half of its fighters to uncontrollable reasons.

To do what you are trying to do we'd have to make a Matrix just like one described in the 1999 movie by the same name and hook everyone in FAF up to it so that the game becomes reality. That's not gonna happen, will it?

Statistics: Posted by Lieutenant Lich — 30 Dec 2017, 01:02

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T16:04:30+02:00

I see you're going to respond to any actual reason for why this would never work with: "well my system would have a way to stop it, it would be flexible, details aren't 100% set."

You're trying to create a system that requires 5000 people for 50 people. It won't work end of story.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 29 Dec 2017, 16:04

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T15:05:24+02:00

Some relevant hierarchy and command structures could be cool at a later point but I definetly think that GW should be kept simple at the beginning.
Having the game grow over time seems like a good approach to keep it interesting and attractive to me.
Besides, I don't think the old gw was chaotic or static, but I didnt play that much.

Statistics: Posted by Golol — 29 Dec 2017, 15:05

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T06:02:22+02:00

speed2 wrote:
and believe me it's not a rocket science. As it was pretty clear what planets to conquest to get where we wanted, quick chat solved it.

I understand, but I'd like to go back to this (edited) line in my OP:

Assembler wrote:
When you have large groups, the result is aggregated. So not much losses, and not much gains.

The result is a war with many raging battles but which doesn't really go anywhere.

This line too:

Assembler wrote:
It's not really in the vein of the strategic maneuvers I mentioned in the quote below, isn't it?
Assembler wrote:The strategic options are pretty limited.

By the way, do you have a link to all the rules and mechanics of GW? I'd like to examine it further.

Let me just put my previous post up again. The quote directly above is from this post.

I described the opening up of strategy in the meta-game and the need for formal leadership.

Assembler wrote:
speed2 wrote:Decide what planets will be attacked.

There was faction chat, it wasn't that hard to start coordinating stuff, couple of messages and done.

But, if I'm describing GW accurately, choosing to attack a planet is just choosing to play some RTS battles to determine the win/lose ratio.

It's not really in the vein of the strategic maneuvers I mentioned in the quote below, isn't it?

Also, I think it doesn't really represent a troop surge, or an invasion, into a region of the galaxy.

An invasion would be pouring troops into a region to overwhelm the limited number of defenders.

Assembler wrote:
How much could they do though?

Sorry, I'm not too familiar with GW, the last time it was actually executed was aeons ago?

So, back to how much they can do:

And the RISK player decides where to send his troops. "I wanna move them from this territory to that territory."

Galactic War isn't like RISK. The strategic options are pretty limited.

But imagine if it was like RISK. A troop surge in one region could be undertaken. An invasion could be launched into another region. Or a region could be heavily fortified with more troops.

It opens up a whole new strategic ballgame. The war is no longer largely aggregate. Suddenly, there's direction, and drama.

Another idea is that the number of RISK pieces should not be directly proportional to the number of human players, they should be independent of each other.

Let's say both teams have 100 human players each, and 1000 RISK pieces on the board each.

As the war progresses, Team A has expanded to 1500 pieces, while Team B has dropped to 700 pieces.

But both teams still have 100 human players each participating.

The difference is that Team A has more power to affect the war on the board, because they have more manpower, or pieces, on the board.

Lastly, and this is my most important point:

Assembler wrote:
It opens up a whole new strategic ballgame. The war is no longer largely aggregate. Suddenly, there's direction, and drama.

But... Who will make decisions on the troop movements?

Obviously, we'll need a leader to make the important decisions.

So, in order to open things up strategically, in order to add direction to the war, the need for a leader is inescapable.

Otherwise, you'll be fighting in an infinite war. But what good is a game that cannot be won?

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 29 Dec 2017, 06:02

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T08:17:36+02:00

FtXCommando wrote:
This is FAF. Your army is going to = like 5 people that are on at that time. When you have a strong player not present because he really doesn't care, all your attempted plans go into the trash. You aren't going to be planning out these fancy motions because they require days if not weeks of planning ahead and all it takes is one cog in your machine breaking for it all to go to shit. There's a reason a "military hierarchy" is total fantasy here and it's because you can't force people to devote their life to the game.

Your democratic means will do nothing. You will have 1000-tier players trying to understand what their betters are trying to achieve and then after a 30 minute explanation they will go do the opposite. What will REALLY happen in this democratic system you're creating is that it will create an extreme level of apathy and things will just degrade into the chaos you are trying to stop as no one is listening to anyone else.

What will happen in your system is that people will argue and toy along for 2 days. Then they will either stop playing galactic war or just flat out ignore everything about it and create their own organic forms of communication.

As I mentioned earlier, the devil is in the details, and such outcomes you mentioned I believe I can avoid, with the right set rules, and gameplay mechanics for the galactic meta-game.

Would you like me to spell it all out in greater detail?

And please bear this in mind, like I told Endranii, nothing's set in stone, it's all fluid suggestions.

FtXCommando wrote:
Stop trying to force some sort of pseudo government on this.

I'm not trying to force anything. It's all just suggestions at this point, they can be changed anytime.

Note that possessing power does give some people a hard-on, and they'll be interested. For the rest, they'll find elections a source of interest IMHO.

It's a war we're having. I've got ideas for the galactic meta-game to create an atmosphere of intense competition. Both sides racing to destroy each other. When you're being attacked ferociously, or attacking ferociously, it gives the intense feeling that will keep people interested in the war.

Also, when they see the progression of the war, the ups and the downs, that'll be pretty interesting, to watch it play out over an extended period of time, rather than a stagnant war which just fluctuates a little bit.

I'm not gonna make it such that one cog can make it all go to shit. There must be a pretty high-level of dysfunction for it to happen.

It sucks big time for the group when things go awry, but don't forget, that'll be tremendously exhilarating for players of the opposing side.

This is war, with all the drama of being on the winning or losing side.

FtXCommando wrote:
Your "star bigwigs" getting into fights with one another wouldn't happen. There's like 30 players that could ever be considered "star bigwigs" and they all know each other. They wouldn't fight with one another over petty crap because of that.

Well, yes and no. A GW meta-game without organizations will have very different mechanics from one with organizations. Without organizations, the meta-game's strategic options are much more limited.

FtXCommando wrote:
Letting better players organically take control is simply far superior because the community is small and everyone at the top can work with one another.

It's apples and oranges. When two types of meta-games have different mechanics,for the organizations one, it requires leadership from the start.

Assembler wrote:
FtXCommando wrote:Skill level will decide leadership naturally.

It's actually a two-layer war, the galactic meta-layer and the SupCom RTS layer.

So a leader would have to be really good at the meta-game too, whose details and mechanics would obviously be different from the old one.

A good leader would need good people skills to organize the gang. It requires considerable effort to organize and them mobilize all the players for key points during the campaign.

Intelligence is key as well. You must protect your plans from spies and conduct espionage to retrieve the enemy's plans. If it really happened, I think we would see a lot of innovation in the secrecy and security department.

I have another idea: Play it in the original GW style, let some emerge, then hold elections, and then switch up the game after organization is done.

We're working from a small community, which is much easier to organize, and if you say they can all work together at the top then that's a boon.

It's definitely very unusual, as with many new ideas, but I would like to develop it more, I wouldn't want it to be stamped out before the minutiae are even discussed.

I'm hearing you out as well, I take your feedback seriously, and we're just starting out. I hold my hopes, because I do feel that I'm on to something, and it's not because I have a very high opinion of myself.

FtXCommando wrote:
I get what this looks like in your mind. A cohesive political structure with checks and balances that works like a normal society. But this isn't a society. It's a game.

How about a gaming society?

FtXCommando wrote:
It's a game and chances are people will organize themselves via what time they are on rather than some 9000 dimensional basket weaving backgammon strategy.

I don't think it's gonna be that tedious, 9000 dimensional basket weaving and all. There'll be room for flexibility. And it all depends on the mechanics of the meta-game, which I have preliminary ideas on at this point.

And I stress this (edited) line in my OP:

Assembler wrote:
When you have large groups, the result is aggregated. So not much losses, and not much gains.

The result is a war with many raging battles but which doesn't really go anywhere.

I understand the misgivings you have about this, we come from different places, metaphorically speaking.

(Also, criticize my ideas, but, chill, man)

But I'm optimistic and I'm gonna work it out, if you have the time and you wanna critique, I'd really appreciate that. If not, it's fine too, I'll hope to find others. Thanks.

EDIT: I wanna add that, if this plan was ever implemented, I would not run for the position of top dog myself.

Not that I couldn't care less, but, it's just not my thing.

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 29 Dec 2017, 05:46

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T02:37:00+02:00

In the last GW I was highest sera rank and also pretty much the highest rated players playing sera (if you dont count luxy who played only counple of games)
and believe me it's not a rocket science. As it was pretty clear what planets to conquest to get where we wanted, quick chat solved it. There were other like 15 very active players I met there, so setting the plan was not a problem and then just deciding who's gonna defend what.

Statistics: Posted by speed2 — 29 Dec 2017, 02:37

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T02:28:28+02:00

This is FAF. Your army is going to = like 5 people that are on at that time. When you have a strong player not present because he really doesn't care, all your attempted plans go into the trash. You aren't going to be planning out these fancy motions because they require days if not weeks of planning ahead and all it takes is one cog in your machine breaking for it all to go to shit. There's a reason a "military hierarchy" is total fantasy here and it's because you can't force people to devote their life to the game.

Your democratic means will do nothing. You will have 1000-tier players trying to understand what their betters are trying to achieve and then after a 30 minute explanation they will go do the opposite. What will REALLY happen in this democratic system you're creating is that it will create an extreme level of apathy and things will just degrade into the chaos you are trying to stop as no one is listening to anyone else.

Your "star bigwigs" getting into fights with one another wouldn't happen. There's like 30 players that could ever be considered "star bigwigs" and they all know each other. They wouldn't fight with one another over petty crap because of that. The problem comes when you introduce the unknown variable of trying to convince the people that have no idea what they're doing. Letting better players organically take control is simply far superior because the community is small and everyone at the top can work with one another.

I get what this looks like in your mind. A cohesive political structure with checks and balances that works like a normal society. But this isn't a society. It's a game.

Let me put it this way: running a clan war is so much easier than what you are trying to do. The groups are already made, there is already a hierarchy of authority, and people already have the common bonds from knowing one another in their clan. And yet running a clan war is practically impossible because everyone just doesn't care enough.

What will happen in your system is that people will argue and toy along for 2 days. Then they will either stop playing galactic war or just flat out ignore everything about it and create their own organic forms of communication. Stop trying to force some sort of pseudo government on this. It's a game and chances are people will organize themselves via what time they are on rather than some 9000 dimensional basket weaving backgammon strategy.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 29 Dec 2017, 02:28

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-29T08:03:07+02:00

FtXCommando wrote:
What are you gonna do with your epic German pseudo blitzkrieg when the 1800 that was supposed to be doing it decides to go drink beer with his friends instead.

A blitzkrieg's not just one guy. It's a whole army.

Plus, the details man. We need details to discuss in-depth.

Vague outlines first, then more detailed queries, then more detailed discussion about the details. Lol

I replied to speed2 about representation of human players on the "RISK board".

FtXCommando wrote:
You are really overestimating people's willingness to commit to the game

Scott Wallin, senior director of online games at the former Cavedog Entertainment, April 2000, wrote:
it's not every day that you can capture a planet, save the universe, and mock your friends all in one day.

Scott Wallin spoke of peoples' desire to feel like they're a part of something bigger when he spoke about Galactic War back in 2000.

When you play a single player game, you might get a little bit of that feeling. When it goes up to the scale of a Galactic War, with the whole community involved, the feeling gets stronger, more convincing. Then, when you're part of an organization, it feels good knowing you're part of something bigger that is working on the monumental task of winning a galaxy-wide war.

As I mentioned in my OP, being subordinate and taking orders might sound unpleasant, but the reward behind it could be an order and a direction to the war. Instead of a stagnant war, they might be able to feel the momentum of it. The call to action and the beat of the drums.

It's a good feeling and I hope to be able to create it with this plan.

It's a war we're having. I've got ideas for the galactic meta-game to create an atmosphere of intense competition. Both sides racing to destroy each other. When you're being attacked ferociously, or attacking ferociously, it gives the intense feeling that will keep people interested in the war.

But don't worry, I've considered all our various human failings. Our selfishness and greed, pride and envy, sloth and wrath.

As it's a power structure, I must include ideas on reward and punishment, typical carrot and stick.

I also have ideas on balancing top-down authority and democratic means; trying to reach a Goldilocks sweet spot.

FtXCommando wrote:
You are really overestimating... the capability of a bunch of strangers to work together

I believe that the systems should be disclosed 100%, so that everyone who chooses to take part knows what they're getting into.

It can be a hierarchy of various ranks, each working together in groups not too large to be unmanageable, and each focused on their respective areas.

speed2 spoke of the ease of co-ordination, and both and he and Endranii mentioned the capability of good players to rally men around them.

In fact, imagine several star bigwigs trying to call the shots, but without a formal structure, they just end up in bitter infighting.

Now, I fully anticipate those fuckers who may ruin things, so the systems of the lines of communication need to foster resolution, not worsen.

I've mentioned that I've got so many bunches of ideas, so feel free to ask me about them in greater detail,

FtXCommando wrote:
You are really overestimating... the actual strategic possibilities that are open to people in such a scenario.

That would depend on the specific mechanics of the Galactic meta-game.

FtXCommando wrote:
You can't even get clans of friends to coordinate without babysitting 24/7, good luck getting a bunch of people that don't care about one another to work together.

Well, we humans formed societies because the benefits outweigh the costs. There are good and bad people in this world. Same with FA players.

It's a chance to make some comrades in this great galactic war. And, that's where the hierarchy and leadership provides a steadying hand against squabbling. They will not be able to stamp out conflict by force, but they may be able to prevent it from escalating to an awful point of no return.

FtXCommando wrote:
Also election idea is bad anyway. What are you planning on doing? Electing some dude that says he read The Art of War (kappa)

As mentioned before, its all in the details. Not absolute power to a dictator, but a distribution of it, but not the to the point of gridlock.

It all sounds like a very complex political structure, which it is, but, it's the chance to do something big and effective. And awesome too.

I'll provide all the details and you can pick it apart one by one.

Candidates can do what they want to convince voters. Some might choose to upload a video of their physical selves. That would make people trust them more.

I would probably not use a First-past-the-post system. Lots of issues with that one.

FtXCommando wrote:
Skill level will decide leadership naturally.

It's actually a two-layer war, the galactic meta-layer and the SupCom RTS layer.

So a leader would have to be really good at the meta-game too, whose details and mechanics would obviously be different from the old one.

A good leader would need good people skills to organize the gang. It requires considerable effort to organize and them mobilize all the players for key points during the campaign.

Intelligence is key as well. You must protect your plans from spies and conduct espionage to retrieve the enemy's plans. If it really happened, I think we would see a lot of innovation in the secrecy and security department.

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 28 Dec 2017, 23:22

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T22:54:29+02:00

Endranii wrote:
Can we first wait for it to go live?

That's still quite far away, besides, I'm just putting forth some suggestions. No rush.

Endranii wrote:
Also this kind of people who will lead will appear anyway. There is no need for some elections or other nonsense.

I've put quite a lot of thought into it, it's not some quick nonsense that I pulled off the top of my head.

Plus, the devil's in the details, one needs the details to assess the merits.

I can provide more details, plus, nothing's set in stone, it's all fluid suggestions.

I elaborated more in my replies to speed2.

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 28 Dec 2017, 22:54

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T22:41:19+02:00

C'mon, lighten up man. I'm just suggesting, not trying to attack anyone. It's all chill, no need to turn up the heat.

Think of it as an exchange of ideas around a dinner table after a good smoke.

Of course, feel free to criticize me, but I'm sensing this anger.

FtXCommando wrote:
What are you gonna do with your epic German pseudo blitzkrieg when the 1800 that was supposed to be doing it decides to go drink beer with his friends instead. You are really overestimating people's willingness to commit to the game, the capability of a bunch of strangers to work together, and the actual strategic possibilities that are open to people in such a scenario.

You can't even get clans of friends to coordinate without babysitting 24/7, good luck getting a bunch of people that don't care about one another to work together.

Also election idea is bad anyway. What are you planning on doing? Electing some dude that says he read The Art of War (kappa)? Skill level will decide leadership naturally.

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 28 Dec 2017, 22:41

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T22:18:27+02:00

This is an online game. What are you gonna do with your epic German pseudo blitzkrieg when the 1800 that was supposed to be doing it decides to go drink beer with his friends instead. You are really overestimating people's willingness to commit to the game, the capability of a bunch of strangers to work together, and the actual strategic possibilities that are open to people in such a scenario.

You can't even get clans of friends to coordinate without babysitting 24/7, good luck getting a bunch of people that don't care about one another to work together.

Also election idea is bad anyway. What are you planning on doing? Electing some dude that says he read The Art of War (kappa)? Skill level will decide leadership naturally.

Statistics: Posted by FtXCommando — 28 Dec 2017, 22:18

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T22:16:30+02:00

Can we first wait for it to go live?
Also this kind of people who will lead will appear anyway. There is no need for some elections or other nonsense.

Statistics: Posted by Endranii — 28 Dec 2017, 22:16

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T22:18:37+02:00

speed2 wrote:
Decide what planets will be attacked.

There was faction chat, it wasn't that hard to start coordinating stuff, couple of messages and done.

But, if I'm describing GW accurately, choosing to attack a planet is just choosing to play some RTS battles to determine the win/lose ratio.

It's not really in the vein of the strategic maneuvers I mentioned in the quote below, isn't it?

Also, I think it doesn't really represent a troop surge, or an invasion, into a region of the galaxy.

An invasion would be pouring troops into a region to overwhelm the limited number of defenders.

Assembler wrote:
How much could they do though?

Sorry, I'm not too familiar with GW, the last time it was actually executed was aeons ago?

So, back to how much they can do:

And the RISK player decides where to send his troops. "I wanna move them from this territory to that territory."

Galactic War isn't like RISK. The strategic options are pretty limited.

But imagine if it was like RISK. A troop surge in one region could be undertaken. An invasion could be launched into another region. Or a region could be heavily fortified with more troops.

It opens up a whole new strategic ballgame. The war is no longer largely aggregate. Suddenly, there's direction, and drama.

Another idea is that the number of RISK pieces should not be directly proportional to the number of human players, they should be independent of each other.

Let's say both teams have 100 human players each, and 1000 RISK pieces on the board each.

As the war progresses, Team A has expanded to 1500 pieces, while Team B has dropped to 700 pieces.

But both teams still have 100 human players each participating.

The difference is that Team A has more power to affect the war on the board, because they have more manpower, or pieces, on the board.

Lastly, and this is my most important point:

Assembler wrote:
It opens up a whole new strategic ballgame. The war is no longer largely aggregate. Suddenly, there's direction, and drama.

But... Who will make decisions on the troop movements?

Obviously, we'll need a leader to make the important decisions.

So, in order to open things up strategically, in order to add direction to the war, the need for a leader is inescapable.

Otherwise, you'll be fighting in an infinite war. But what good is a game that cannot be won?

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 28 Dec 2017, 22:10

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T21:52:42+02:00

moonbearonmeth wrote:
It sounds like you're trying to impose rules to force something that has to occur naturally.

As I mentioned in the OP:

Assembler wrote:
We can have two separate wars, one for the freewheeling, the directionless and those who hate to take orders, and one for those who desire some order, direction, and organization as they don't wish to fight aimlessly.

People don't like to take orders, yet, on a grand scale of war, with so many people involved, order and direction is needed.

When there is chaos, such order and direction will become much more desired.

Plus, with elections, every man will feel that he has a tiny say in the big picture.

Statistics: Posted by Assembler — 28 Dec 2017, 21:52

Re: Suggestion: Galactic Organization for a Galactic War

2017-12-28T21:44:38+02:00

It sounds like you're trying to impose rules to force something that has to occur naturally.
I suggest you just relax and enjoy the ride for what it is and hope good things happen.

Statistics: Posted by moonbearonmeth — 28 Dec 2017, 21:44