JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Posted BY Kurt88 in the 'Biased Neutrals and True Neutrals' Forum. Moved here with Kurt's permission. "Ok here it is:my long and winding idea for a diplomatic system in SC2. It's based on diplomatic points much like MPP's in SC today (I'll call them DP's). "Lets take the Axis as an example.Each turn Berlin would receive DP's from Nazi-diplomats and friendly regimes at the start of the game (see JerseyJohn's Neutrals and biased neutrals).These points could then be spent on befriending true neutrals or increasing the level of influence in already Axis-oriented regimes. "Lets say Romania starts the game at level 1 of Axis influence.This would mean that a certain number of Romanian MPP's go to Axis. This number increases with the level of influence Axis has in Romania. The Allied player/ai can counteract this be spending his DP's on Romania.And so a diplomatic battle of influencing nations is created. A wise allocation of 'precious DP's is in order. "Now,when Romania reaches level 3,a puppet regime can be installed by Axis.This would ensure a flow of half of or 3/4 of Romanian MPP's to Berlin.From this point on Allied DP's spent on Romania would result in the appearance of partisan units near Romanian resource hexes (sabotage if you want). "The next step would be annexation (level 5?) and ALL Romanian MPP's go to Berlin.Romania is from then on lost for the Allies. "This system should IMHO be complemented with an historical event engine for each nation on the map. These events can alter the levels of influence by Axis or Allies. "Ofcourse this is just a rough idea and the most important part,the numbers (how many DP's,how many MPP's per level,wich events) is still to be invented.I'll leave this up to the peaople with the right knowledge. "Either way diplomacy should be interwoven with JersyJohn's and Shaka's ideas on economy and MPP's "And as JersyJohn stated,it would be nice to have a seperate forum for this where Hubert could easily monitor our progress." -- Kurt88 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IP: Logged [ February 06, 2003, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 Posted BY Kurt88 in the 'Biased Neutrals and True Neutrals' Forum. Moved here with Kurt's permission. "Ok here it is:my long and winding idea for a diplomatic system in SC2. It's based on diplomatic points much like MPP's in SC today (I'll call them DP's). "Lets take the Axis as an example.Each turn Berlin would receive DP's from Nazi-diplomats and friendly regimes at the start of the game (see JerseyJohn's Neutrals and biased neutrals).These points could then be spent on befriending true neutrals or increasing the level of influence in already Axis-oriented regimes. "Lets say Romania starts the game at level 1 of Axis influence.This would mean that a certain number of Romanian MPP's go to Axis. This number increases with the level of influence Axis has in Romania. The Allied player/ai can counteract this be spending his DP's on Romania.And so a diplomatic battle of influencing nations is created. A wise allocation of 'precious DP's is in order. "Now,when Romania reaches level 3,a puppet regime can be installed by Axis.This would ensure a flow of half of or 3/4 of Romanian MPP's to Berlin.From this point on Allied DP's spent on Romania would result in the appearance of partisan units near Romanian resource hexes (sabotage if you want). "The next step would be annexation (level 5?) and ALL Romanian MPP's go to Berlin.Romania is from then on lost for the Allies. "This system should IMHO be complemented with an historical event engine for each nation on the map. These events can alter the levels of influence by Axis or Allies. "Ofcourse this is just a rough idea and the most important part,the numbers (how many DP's,how many MPP's per level,wich events) is still to be invented.I'll leave this up to the peaople with the right knowledge. "Either way diplomacy should be interwoven with JersyJohn's and Shaka's ideas on economy and MPP's "And as JersyJohn stated,it would be nice to have a seperate forum for this where Hubert could easily monitor our progress." -- Kurt88 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IP: Logged [ February 06, 2003, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 As stated earlier in the other Forum, I think Kurt's got a great idea here; it ties right in with the Research method and the idea of Neutral Bias . REVISED NEUTRAL STATUS LIST: [copied from 'Neutrals Forum'] This idea assumes that, for economic purposes, no country is entirely neutral, and is reset accordingly. Specific percentages have not been offered as they should be worked out by those whose understanding of economics is greater than my own. United States -- UK only. Iraq UK only. Ireland UK only Denmark Both, edge to UK. Norway Both, edge to UK. Low Countries Both, edge to UK. Portugal Both equally. Yugoslavia Both equally. Greece Both equally. Spain Both, edge to Germany.* USSR -- Germany only.** Finland Germany only. Baltic States Germany only. Turkey Germany only. Bulgaria Germany only. Romania Germany only. Hungary Germany only. Italy Germany only. Sweden Germany only. Switzerland Both equally/Germany only*** *Spain's MPPs to Germany only if connected by land route. **Soviet MPPs to Germany decline as her war readiness increases. ***Switzerland Germany only after France falls. As part of this system, there should be heavy diplomatic penalties for invading countries that are deeply tied to the invading nation. For example, Germany should suffer diplomatically by invading either Spain or Switzerland. The Economic allignment altered by the extent the neutral goes in that direction, ought to also form the diplomatic basis for that countries leanings. --- * --- As pointed out by Shaka and Immer the idea needs to be polished to avoid automatically favoring the player with the earliest triumphs (usually Germany) and also to allow an open ended consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 As stated earlier in the other Forum, I think Kurt's got a great idea here; it ties right in with the Research method and the idea of Neutral Bias . REVISED NEUTRAL STATUS LIST: [copied from 'Neutrals Forum'] This idea assumes that, for economic purposes, no country is entirely neutral, and is reset accordingly. Specific percentages have not been offered as they should be worked out by those whose understanding of economics is greater than my own. United States -- UK only. Iraq UK only. Ireland UK only Denmark Both, edge to UK. Norway Both, edge to UK. Low Countries Both, edge to UK. Portugal Both equally. Yugoslavia Both equally. Greece Both equally. Spain Both, edge to Germany.* USSR -- Germany only.** Finland Germany only. Baltic States Germany only. Turkey Germany only. Bulgaria Germany only. Romania Germany only. Hungary Germany only. Italy Germany only. Sweden Germany only. Switzerland Both equally/Germany only*** *Spain's MPPs to Germany only if connected by land route. **Soviet MPPs to Germany decline as her war readiness increases. ***Switzerland Germany only after France falls. As part of this system, there should be heavy diplomatic penalties for invading countries that are deeply tied to the invading nation. For example, Germany should suffer diplomatically by invading either Spain or Switzerland. The Economic allignment altered by the extent the neutral goes in that direction, ought to also form the diplomatic basis for that countries leanings. --- * --- As pointed out by Shaka and Immer the idea needs to be polished to avoid automatically favoring the player with the earliest triumphs (usually Germany) and also to allow an open ended consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 Shaka of Carthage Hopefully you'll place a summary of your economic ideas here so we can have all three concepts alligned with each other. Anyone curious about more specific aspects of the original ideas can either read our original forums or can state it here and the desired information can be copied over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 Shaka of Carthage Hopefully you'll place a summary of your economic ideas here so we can have all three concepts alligned with each other. Anyone curious about more specific aspects of the original ideas can either read our original forums or can state it here and the desired information can be copied over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Great job JerseyJohn. Please keep moderating (wheeling it in the right direction)this thread! ps:like the title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Great job JerseyJohn. Please keep moderating (wheeling it in the right direction)this thread! ps:like the title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 Thanks for the Good Word Kurt. I'm sure this will be a very fruitfull Forum. Yeah, that title's an eye catcher! [ February 06, 2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted February 6, 2003 Author Share Posted February 6, 2003 Thanks for the Good Word Kurt. I'm sure this will be a very fruitfull Forum. Yeah, that title's an eye catcher! [ February 06, 2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Sure, I'll post a summary of my Economic suggestions. I'll have it done, sometime later today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Sure, I'll post a summary of my Economic suggestions. I'll have it done, sometime later today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Back when 3R with variants became A3R with research and diplomacy systems, the game changed for the worse IMO. Diplomatic "success" led to tactical opportunities, and tactical success led to diplomatic advantage. The systems fed off each other and could easily lead to unbalanced games. I eventually chose to not use these systems and stick with the variants. Hubert did not include diplomacy in SC for pretty much the same game balance concerns. A lot of diplomatic activity could be added to the game through random events and various player decision points in the game. HOI does this now - a window pops up with an event and asks the player to choose an option. Some events can be conditional, like German DOW on Denmark may have a chance the Danes surrender without a fight, or a chance that Romania switches sides if a Romanian unit in Romania is attacked by a Russian unit after some date like 1943 or 1944. Other events can just be random, like Yugoslavia activating as either an Axis or Allied minor, depending on date and other factors. Lots of things like this could be added to the game without adding another system to manage. All diplomacy points will do is reduce uncertainty one way or another depending on what you're pushing for. In the end, it will still be a random process to ensure replayability. Something simple that works in the background is preferable to something more complex that players have to manage each turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Back when 3R with variants became A3R with research and diplomacy systems, the game changed for the worse IMO. Diplomatic "success" led to tactical opportunities, and tactical success led to diplomatic advantage. The systems fed off each other and could easily lead to unbalanced games. I eventually chose to not use these systems and stick with the variants. Hubert did not include diplomacy in SC for pretty much the same game balance concerns. A lot of diplomatic activity could be added to the game through random events and various player decision points in the game. HOI does this now - a window pops up with an event and asks the player to choose an option. Some events can be conditional, like German DOW on Denmark may have a chance the Danes surrender without a fight, or a chance that Romania switches sides if a Romanian unit in Romania is attacked by a Russian unit after some date like 1943 or 1944. Other events can just be random, like Yugoslavia activating as either an Axis or Allied minor, depending on date and other factors. Lots of things like this could be added to the game without adding another system to manage. All diplomacy points will do is reduce uncertainty one way or another depending on what you're pushing for. In the end, it will still be a random process to ensure replayability. Something simple that works in the background is preferable to something more complex that players have to manage each turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankWWIIOnline Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 This should most definitely be an option, at most. HoI succeeds in this area because you can choose to stay historical, or go ahistorical. I think playing an ahistorical game of SC2 would be cool, but not all the time. One of the great things of SC is that the game does not have any event that seriously throws the game out of the lines of history. There are already options for countries to stay neutral, random or historical. Plus there is the awesome incentives of possibly getting Spain and/or Turkey to join on the Axis side. They are possible...but pretty difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankWWIIOnline Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 This should most definitely be an option, at most. HoI succeeds in this area because you can choose to stay historical, or go ahistorical. I think playing an ahistorical game of SC2 would be cool, but not all the time. One of the great things of SC is that the game does not have any event that seriously throws the game out of the lines of history. There are already options for countries to stay neutral, random or historical. Plus there is the awesome incentives of possibly getting Spain and/or Turkey to join on the Axis side. They are possible...but pretty difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 I don't know if this will ever fly, so here is my two cents. Diplomacy is a very subjective item. Some countries have good diplomates as leaders and some don't. Some countries will enfluence their neighbors, others won't. Events, percieved victory, military power enfluence countries to act a certain way. So how do you create a standard to go by? At the beginning of the war, Germany had the best propaganda machine, followed by England (this of course is a subjective analysis). Dr. Goebbels in the thirties saw the power of the Silver screen. He created in the minds of Germans that Hilter would bring them three things 1) Stability, thus in all the movies of the Nazi leaders and people, he showed them together healthy and with oneness of heart, and how all should join the cause. Every moving picture show happy content young people all wearing the same clothes, strong and happy. Germany was in the middle of one of the worst depressions in modern times. This vision was reassuring to the common man. 2) Strength with Leadership, goose stepping Nazi's marching down every street, very strong, arrogant, unstoppable, in the thousands. There is power in the news reels showing 100,000 german soldiers standing in the sports arena giving Hilter allegence. Germany at that time had a very weak Weimar Government (some call it a democracy, I don't) under Hindenberg- a real doufus. 3)Purpose, the reason for the raise of the german people was to be the masters of all others. If you feel that you are superior to someone else you have an edge (as opposed to feeling inferior). The holy purpose of the Arryan race was to be the masters over the other inferior races of peoples around Germany. Germans are the best looking, smartest, strongest, fastest, pure people on the face of the earth, no one can stop a people with a vision, and with the truth of who they are. (wow, where do I join, just joking, in reality the Arryan race is a Myth, never existed). My point is that propagnada and diplomacy are connected, they are perceived truths and are powerful. How to give a factor number to German diplomacy is the question. Also how good were the Intel Agencies. Ger Hitler, Ribbentrop= 100 DP's UK Churchill, Eden= 80 DP's USSR Stalin, Molotov= 70 DP's It Mussolini, Ciano= 60 DP's USA Roosevelt, Hopkins= 50 DP's Jap Hirohito, Tojo= 40 DP's Fr Reynaud, Clouseau 20 DP's Ger Abwehr 80 DP's UK MI-5 100 DP's USSR NKVD 40 DP's It MI 30 DP's USA OSS 70 DP's Jap MI 50 DP's Fr Fifth Bureau 20 DP's [ February 06, 2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: SeaWolf_48 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 I don't know if this will ever fly, so here is my two cents. Diplomacy is a very subjective item. Some countries have good diplomates as leaders and some don't. Some countries will enfluence their neighbors, others won't. Events, percieved victory, military power enfluence countries to act a certain way. So how do you create a standard to go by? At the beginning of the war, Germany had the best propaganda machine, followed by England (this of course is a subjective analysis). Dr. Goebbels in the thirties saw the power of the Silver screen. He created in the minds of Germans that Hilter would bring them three things 1) Stability, thus in all the movies of the Nazi leaders and people, he showed them together healthy and with oneness of heart, and how all should join the cause. Every moving picture show happy content young people all wearing the same clothes, strong and happy. Germany was in the middle of one of the worst depressions in modern times. This vision was reassuring to the common man. 2) Strength with Leadership, goose stepping Nazi's marching down every street, very strong, arrogant, unstoppable, in the thousands. There is power in the news reels showing 100,000 german soldiers standing in the sports arena giving Hilter allegence. Germany at that time had a very weak Weimar Government (some call it a democracy, I don't) under Hindenberg- a real doufus. 3)Purpose, the reason for the raise of the german people was to be the masters of all others. If you feel that you are superior to someone else you have an edge (as opposed to feeling inferior). The holy purpose of the Arryan race was to be the masters over the other inferior races of peoples around Germany. Germans are the best looking, smartest, strongest, fastest, pure people on the face of the earth, no one can stop a people with a vision, and with the truth of who they are. (wow, where do I join, just joking, in reality the Arryan race is a Myth, never existed). My point is that propagnada and diplomacy are connected, they are perceived truths and are powerful. How to give a factor number to German diplomacy is the question. Also how good were the Intel Agencies. Ger Hitler, Ribbentrop= 100 DP's UK Churchill, Eden= 80 DP's USSR Stalin, Molotov= 70 DP's It Mussolini, Ciano= 60 DP's USA Roosevelt, Hopkins= 50 DP's Jap Hirohito, Tojo= 40 DP's Fr Reynaud, Clouseau 20 DP's Ger Abwehr 80 DP's UK MI-5 100 DP's USSR NKVD 40 DP's It MI 30 DP's USA OSS 70 DP's Jap MI 50 DP's Fr Fifth Bureau 20 DP's [ February 06, 2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: SeaWolf_48 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Economic "enhancments" for SC (not SCII). Mines are assigned "mineral points" (MP). Oil wells are assigned "oil points" (OP). They are produced in direct proportion to the MPP value of the site (suggested values are listed below). Germany can convert one (1) MP into three (3) OP. (synthetic oil) Optional: MP and OP not consumed are available the next turn. Every six (6) MPP's require: 2 MP, 3 OP. Atlantic convoy supplies UK with MP and OP. Mediterrian convoy supplies UK with OP. German excess MP and OP will be provided to Italy, unless Italy has secured its own MP and OP sources. Shortage Effects: Oil... reduce your national supply level. Mineral... reduce available MPP's (max reduction of 50%) One of the Swedish mines should be owned by Germany. Persian mines should be owned by the UK. ================================================= None of the above require any actions by the players. It all happens automtically, based on the resources you have. Effects Enough damage to the UK convoys will "starve" the UK economy. Italian MPP is halfed, unless Germany helps out. Strategic bombing can cripple the Axis economy. German MPP growth is limited (about three times initial) unless Germany secures additional resources. German invasion of "non-historical" targets has drawbacks in the resource strain it puts on the economy. Allies have no resource problems other than ensuring UK stays supplied. Diplomacy model would have a method of dealing with obtaining resources from the neutrals. MP and OP Values Swedish mines: 80 each (there are two of them) German mine: 40 Romania oil: 55 each (there are two of them) Norway mine: 70 Spanish mine: 60 French mine: 70 Persian oil: 140 each (there are two of them) Canadian mine: 55 US mine: 800 each (there are two of them) US oil: 800 each (there are two of them) USSR mines: 25 each (there are seven of them) USSR oil: 125 each (there are four of them) USSR "lend-lease": would include around 70 oil points from US. [ February 06, 2003, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Economic "enhancments" for SC (not SCII). Mines are assigned "mineral points" (MP). Oil wells are assigned "oil points" (OP). They are produced in direct proportion to the MPP value of the site (suggested values are listed below). Germany can convert one (1) MP into three (3) OP. (synthetic oil) Optional: MP and OP not consumed are available the next turn. Every six (6) MPP's require: 2 MP, 3 OP. Atlantic convoy supplies UK with MP and OP. Mediterrian convoy supplies UK with OP. German excess MP and OP will be provided to Italy, unless Italy has secured its own MP and OP sources. Shortage Effects: Oil... reduce your national supply level. Mineral... reduce available MPP's (max reduction of 50%) One of the Swedish mines should be owned by Germany. Persian mines should be owned by the UK. ================================================= None of the above require any actions by the players. It all happens automtically, based on the resources you have. Effects Enough damage to the UK convoys will "starve" the UK economy. Italian MPP is halfed, unless Germany helps out. Strategic bombing can cripple the Axis economy. German MPP growth is limited (about three times initial) unless Germany secures additional resources. German invasion of "non-historical" targets has drawbacks in the resource strain it puts on the economy. Allies have no resource problems other than ensuring UK stays supplied. Diplomacy model would have a method of dealing with obtaining resources from the neutrals. MP and OP Values Swedish mines: 80 each (there are two of them) German mine: 40 Romania oil: 55 each (there are two of them) Norway mine: 70 Spanish mine: 60 French mine: 70 Persian oil: 140 each (there are two of them) Canadian mine: 55 US mine: 800 each (there are two of them) US oil: 800 each (there are two of them) USSR mines: 25 each (there are seven of them) USSR oil: 125 each (there are four of them) USSR "lend-lease": would include around 70 oil points from US. [ February 06, 2003, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 As pointed out by Bill Macon, this is the key: Something ... that works in the background is preferable to something ... that players have to manage each turn. Complexity of the method is not relevant, if we the players don't have to manage it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 As pointed out by Bill Macon, this is the key: Something ... that works in the background is preferable to something ... that players have to manage each turn. Complexity of the method is not relevant, if we the players don't have to manage it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Bill ,just finished your home-made Fall Weiss scenario.It was a three-day game of fun,especially for a newbie Axis player like myself,much more of a challenge than the original one. In your post you described what Grand Strategy is about (IMO).A good combination of brains (diplomacy,cunningness and a military genius) will lead to victory.That's how it should be (except for the Iraqi ) Rightly you stated that alot of historical events could improve the variation in the game.But their function would also be to make sure the diplomatic decisions of the player wouldn't disrupt the balance of the game. Both the DP's and the events can open the door to a lot of new approaches and strategies,especially in multiplayer. I took a look at JersyJohn's figures and I figure that can give the right basis. One thing you're right:the numbers make all the difference and should be looked in over and over again.Unfortunately I'm not the one who can give you these :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Bill ,just finished your home-made Fall Weiss scenario.It was a three-day game of fun,especially for a newbie Axis player like myself,much more of a challenge than the original one. In your post you described what Grand Strategy is about (IMO).A good combination of brains (diplomacy,cunningness and a military genius) will lead to victory.That's how it should be (except for the Iraqi ) Rightly you stated that alot of historical events could improve the variation in the game.But their function would also be to make sure the diplomatic decisions of the player wouldn't disrupt the balance of the game. Both the DP's and the events can open the door to a lot of new approaches and strategies,especially in multiplayer. I took a look at JersyJohn's figures and I figure that can give the right basis. One thing you're right:the numbers make all the difference and should be looked in over and over again.Unfortunately I'm not the one who can give you these :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt88 Posted February 6, 2003 Share Posted February 6, 2003 Shaka,what you say is true. But I wouldn't mind SC or SC2 becoming a bit more complex. 2 phases per turn would ideal IMO. Ocourse this brings up a whole other discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts