Avatar of Shorticus
  • Last Seen: 10 yrs ago
  • Joined: 10 yrs ago
  • Posts: 1645 (0.43 / day)
  • VMs: 1
  • Username history
    1. Shorticus 10 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

Well, I butchered a historical Libyan coat of arms, but I got a flag.

Here's a rough sheet. It is incomplete. It has a map with the four provinces I'd like to claim included.

I wasn't sure what sort of climate you wanted for each area. I keep looking at the map and thinking the region I placed my stuff reminds me of the Strait of Gibraltar between Iberia and North Africa, so that's what I rolled with. I can change this if you'd like.

I'm not sure exactly what we need in our unit layouts, so I'll wait to hear more on that.

As new nations may be popping up in my region soon, I'm gonna wait a couple days before I make my own second IC post.
Can you host the image on Imgur or another site? Photobucket and my computer have never interacted well.

Also, do you want potential players to start drafting up their sheets?
<Snipped quote by Shorticus>

I'd rather start at the end of the war (where the treaty is signed) than start a whole war.


Up to you. I'll let you decide.
Okay: ancient empires are awesome. Playing kingdoms more akin to Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome than to medieval nations... That sounds fun.

I like the idea of the GM deciding how the populace interacts with the nation, and how trade is going, how battles go, etc. Sounds like a good mix of good ol' fashioned tabletop gaming and Nation RP.

Count me in. I can make an IC post 2 times a week with no difficulty. I won't say "once a day" because I've got university to contend with and it could whisk my time away from me at any moment.
In Deleted 10 yrs ago Forum: Advanced Roleplay
I'm going to start on my post today. It'll be up tomorrow night at the latest.
Alright, I have fixed up the map a bit. Here's the improved map (imgur link)! Instead of war, how about a simple border agreement/border treaty?

Needs a fancy name for it.


I'll outright say that while the League likes to avoid war, I'd be happy to see some war happen between your alliance and the League if it could provide good story drama. Neither group has to be led by warmongers for that to happen; simple border friction and escalation could create such a conflict. I'll let you and @Abefroeman chew on that.
If you don't mind, I would lay stake upon Northern California and Southern Oregon.


Someone in my region? Heck yes!
@ClocktowerEchos Bears


I knew it! They've been consorting with the enemy! Behold!

So why is it that some of these newer games can't seem to grasp a player as much as the older ones?


Part of it is nostalgia. Part of it is, yeah, we forget the crappy games. But there's more to it than that, in my opinion.

Firstly, simplicity can win out in a LOT of cases. Let's look at Quake 3 for instance. Quake 3 is a simple 1st person shooter based around multiplayer arenas: spawn, grab gun, kill guy with gun, take guy's gun, die, respawn, rinse and repeat. It has no story; it has no super complex mechanic for me to grasp; yet somehow that game was the game I loved most for three or so years, and I still play it on and off afterwards.

I think the gameplay is just way more simple and, well, instinctual than shooters made today. You have health and armor and guns and that's it; you can jump, you can crouch, you can run and duck and weave, but nothing else has really ever delivered that lovely "Run and gun" gameplay that I love besides maybe Borderlands 2. Even then, Quake 3 wins out. It's good, simple fun. And it has needless gore that looks like a joke rather than like the game is trying to take itself seriously.

Simplicity also makes a game easier to balance. Simplicity also lets you focus on other elements of the game, like making animations feel crisper or adding little details to the scenery. Simple design also means you don't have to drop an infodump onto the player as a "tutorial." In general, simple but deep games are really good.

(Of course, not all of the great games from the past are "simple." One of my all time favorites is King of Dragon Pass. I'm not sure what complexity I'd call that game, but it sure ain't "simple.")

Now, there are plenty of modern games that deliver and damn do they deliver. But I do think games are getting more complex and we're expecting more out of them. Heck, imagine if someone gave you a sandbox RPG and didn't let you customize your character. In the past, you'd be okay with that, totally okay. Nowadays, that might actually be a reason not to buy a game if customization is important enough to you.

And of course: never underestimate nostalgia, and never forget that the games of the past that are with us today are the big names of their time. Tons of lesser known games have been lost to us.
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet