/newbrit/ - /brit//politics/

TAKE NOTE - CERTAIN RANKS ARE UNABLE TO HAVE MORE THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UNITS UNDER THEIR COMMAND

as follows

Colonel - 1

Brigadier General - 3

Major General - 9

General - 9+

Character starting choices

All players get 20 points to spend

Rank[choose one] -

Colonel [200credits, 100 Manpower per turn] - 3 points

Brigadier General [600c, 250 MP per turn] - 5

Major General [1200c, 500 MP per turn] - 7

Agricultural Estate [+50c per turn] - 2

Plantation [+100c per turn] - 4

Charismatic [+250 Manpower per turn] - 3

Political Influence [+1 Rep per turn] - 3

Veteran [+1 morale for all troops under command] - 3

Footman [+1 morale + skill for all infantry under command] - 3

Horseman [+1 morale + skill for all cavalry under command] - 3

Engineer [+1 morale + skill for all artillery under command] - 3

Line Infantry[500 men] - 2

Light Infantry - 2

Rifle Infantry - 2

Light Cavalry[250 men] - 4

Dragoons - 4

Artillery[100 men] - 5

Skill 2 - 2

Skill 3 - 3

Experienced [+1 Morale] - 1

Well Experienced [+1 Morale] - 2

Post which faction you want to play as as well

I'll play as the chugs if possible

>>242182

>making things more complex

thanks lad, but I don't think I'd be able to make them a new faction smh

You could have chugs under your command though, maybe be a chug yourself for US or Britain

>tfw no-one wants to play

If you do and think it's too complicated just do this post >>242175 to start with and I'll hold your hand and guide you through the game, it's not as complicated as it looks

remember to add tibb#0215 on Bongo Bongo Land

>>242175

To add, all players start with 5 Reputation[out of a maximum 10]. They also start with a certain amount of wealth saved based upon their choices

For example, choosing Colonel, Plantation and Charismatic would mean that at the start of the game the player has 300 credits and 250 manpower.

Ill play lad I'm still trying to get me head around it

>when you wanted to make it extremely simple but ended up making it overcomplicated

just end my suffering now

*shoots self*

>>242218

No lad it seems coherent. Talk us through a turn sequence from start to finish

>>242221

A player sends an "order" to me detailing things they want to do during a turn[4 months]. For example, "move to/attack Montreal", as well as recruit units, which will appear next turn.

The defending faction will be notified of the invasion, and a campaign will commence if there are units nearby[for example, an army stationed in Quebec]. They will then have 4 turns each[or less] maneuvering, defender going first, until they meet on the battlefield. Once on the battlefield, only the players involved will be messaged, but there will be a maximum of 8 turns in the battle, though it will probably be less than this[defenders going first].

Once the battle is over, casualties will be taken into account, the Campaign phase will resume[if there are any turns left]. If it is the end of the Campaign phase for this turn, then it will resume next turn.

Sieges will not count as battles, but as Campaigns, so there will only be 4 turns each during the turn[4 months].

I'm trying not to make the game too dependent on mechanics, instead I want to make it more based upon how I think things would play out.

I have no idea what the fuck I'm doing

—

Major-General Cornelius Fothering-gore, Loyalist

Credits: 1200 (+200c/turn)

Manpower: (+500m/turn)

Reputation: 5/10

Traits:

Two Plantations (+200c/turn)

Veteran (+1 morale for all troops)

Ex-mercenary and commander for hire, Cornelius spent the better part of his years at war all over the globe before retiring to the Americas and amassing a vast wealth and family through financing extensive sugar plantations. Now, his teeth rotted by age and sucrose, he finds there is one last war to fight.

Army:

1st Light Infantry Gore's Own

Strength: 500/500

Skill:

Morale: (+1 from Veteran)

Upkeep: -100c/turn

Traits:

The 1st Light Infantry is a volunteer company raised of local colonists; hunters, trappers and trackers who have long benefitted from the Gore's munificence. Cornelius' grandson, Cornelius III the Younger is in command, a keen game shooter and duck hunter.

>>242355

Thanks lad

I should have mentioned on the ranks, the 1200 credits is also per turn [pretty much a government salary to replace losses and train troops], and the Plantations means you also start with money, so you'll be getting 1600 credits per turn[not including expenditure] and 1600 at the start of the game. You also start with 500 Manpower.

All units start with a base of 3 morale, militia 2.

I'll send you a message/report status which will be clearer, like this

Rank-Major General, Location-x

Income-1600[1500], Expenditure-100,Wealth Saved-1600

Reputation-5, Manpower-500[500+]

Notes : [info of character] 2 Plantations, Veteran [+1 morale for all troops]

On the unit report, I'll probably make the message like this for all players :

Unit : 1st Light Infantry Gore's Own.

Strength-500, Skill-1, Morale-4, Upkeep-100

Notes : [info/traits here]

I-I hope more people join

As far as I can tell the only rational set up is Wessex's, are you sure this is balanced Dorset? The points for double the benefit of major general/ brigadier don't add up?

>>242377

I'm trying lad but it seems like there isn't a choice for how to start? The first few general options and traits don't seem well costed?

So if you pick a colonel at the start can you hire other generals later? I don't get it if I'm honest smh

>>242387

No lad, only player's armies are ingame if that's what you mean

>>242385

Yes it's double the amount of credits/manpower of a Brigadier General, but a Major General would usually have triple the responsibility of a Brigadier General[allowed 9 units instead of 3], so for unit to cost ratio Maj Gen is slightly less well off, he only gets double the credits instead of triple.

>>242386

What do you mean?

>>242389

Brigadier General [600c, 250 MP per turn] - 5

Major General [1200c, 500 MP per turn] - 7

For 50% points price increase you get a 100% resource increase - it would be illogical to choose anything else? Surely there should be a balancing stat like the top general is politically shit but a colonel is +2, which is obviously backwards. Its like there's only one set up that isn't retarded?

Surely being allowed more units to command is a positive? It seems like choosing a ford focus for £10k or a lambo for £20k

>>242391

If this was

Brigadier General [600c, 250 MP per turn] - 4

Major General [1200c, 500 MP per turn] - 9

Or something it would make the investment a personal choice?

>>242391

>>242393

For instance:

Brig gen + plantation + political bonus doesn't even slightly equal major general yet costs 150% of it

>>242391

>>242392

hmm yes I suppose there isn't anything to stop a player choosing Maj Gen and only having 1 unit, never realised this fucking hell

Options I see to fix it is make Colonel 2 points, Brig Gen 4, and something else but I'm not sure what. Another neg is reputation loss. A Maj Gen losing a battle/campaign will lose more Rep than a Colonel

I'll give some events that will force the Maj Gen to focus not just on military matters as well

What else could be changed?

>>242393

That seems better, would mean Wess would have to redo though but that's not much of a problem I don't think

>>242396

Reckon the per turn reinforcementa should be a % of current army + generals % bonus

Properties should be marked on the map so if you don't choose them at the start you can capture them from others/NPCs?

Should make more smaller estates that benefit different parts of the army ie: an estate gives +5% artillery manpower etc, can be randomly distributed?

>>242398

would be a bit complicated tbh

I wont show properties on the map, but as in the OP, anything within reason is allowed, so there isn't any reason why a General can't take/buy a property during the game

Phone just crashed and lost a massive post I'm so annoyed

>>242402

ye that sucks smh

o ye I was going to post this

the thread is basically just a test for organising everything and making sure the mechanics work, most of the posts are probably not the final version tbh

>>242404

That's sweet lad

>>242405

If I ever became involved in a forum again then I would probably play RP forum games again, and I thought this would be a good opportunity to test an idea out if I ever hosted something, or maybe even something irl relating to wargaming

>>242406

Never played forum games tbf, except BBS/email chess, interesting to think about these types of games.

>>242407

They're quite fun, though as with many games, enthusiasm from players and host can drop quickly, after a couple of turns, though I did play a couple of games that had quite a lot. One reason is the host overburdens himself and burns out, another is the players lose interest after having initial enthusiasm, but there were a couple of games that had a lasting enthusiasm until the host called it off after around 8 or so turns, and it was a big game as well. I don't think processing things will take long at all in this game for the host, 4-5hours a week or two at the most, depending on players, trying to find what works is important tbqh

>>242399

>>242398

Reinforcements = current force x (#of properties ÷ 10) x (morale/10) x generals bonus

= 100 x 0.4 property x 5/10 morale ||||| + 30% maj general bonus

=

27 reinforcements

Straightforward balancing equation would make it fair.

>>242409

wew lad it's a bit too much for me tbh, i'd rather keep it a simple set amount subject to change by events[manpower shortage lowering it by a certain % for example]

I'll definitely be working on balancing starting positions/points today though

>>242410

Sorry lass thought that'd be easier, its how my brain works

>tfw can't remember what I thought about yesterday to make it balanced

smh lmao

>>242462

Alright so here's what I have, several options

1 is to remove rank entirely

2 is to have all starting players the same rank

3 is to balance points so that higher ranks is considerably more points etc, but I'm trying to think of a negative to being a higher rank. Obviously more points spent on rank means less points spent on other things, but I had a thought which I cannot remember fully about Maj Gen needing to spend money outside of military matters, maybe through events

>>242472

another option is a historical character with historical events tbh

>>242472

Hmm

Could be semi historical, events forcing history

Everybody starts as a colonel/politician/landowner with different balanced benefits?

Business man - 900c/turn, 100 man power, + something resupply based? - morale

Politician - 500c/turn, 250 manpower, + diplomacy - loyalty

Soldier - 300c, 350mp, + morale, - diplomacy

Etc

Is there a limit to moves in a turn? Could high ranks have to spend time on admin etc

Or have to pay the wages of the previous rank each turn

Or have higher maintainence costs without reason

Colonel - X money + Y men = Z points

General - 1.5X money + 1.5Y men = 2Z points

Major General - 2X money + 2Y men = 4Z points

>>242502

one option is colonel x1 money is 4 points, brigadier is x2 at 8 points, maj gen is x3 at 12 points, with each rank having to be forced to have a minimum number of units [1, 3, 6 respectively]. therefore at the start the colonel can have an elite unit with good stats, while the maj gen is forced to have a poorer, yet larger, force

I lean towards the idea of having no rank at all[in mechanics terms, and more as a RP title]. For example, someone with 3 units is automatically made a Brigadier General but this has no impact on the game

I don't want to overcomplicate things and the whole thing is sort of doing that tbh

>>242499

Dunno tbh, historical events would be good I think. Maybe player made characters/armies combined with historical events.

Another option is basically no income/manpower and instead have it as events/player choices. For example, taking over an area as Britain may give a couple of Loyalist units.

I kind of want a game that relies on mechanics as little as possible, instead things that happen are through player decisions and events, with the host determining the results, which I think is a more realistic and RP type of game.

>>242501

There's a limit of movement during a turn, I've thought about scrapping the "Campaign phase" and just having movement within a turn.

The extent to which each army moves is based upon the hosts judgement.

A "campaign" will still happen but it will be fluid, both players will be messages and they will message me about what they want to do.

When a sufficient amount of time has passed[for example, moving across the country would take a couple of months], then the turn ends.

>>242504

That first option seems good then.

If its more a re enactment then surely it defeats the rp objective? If the choices aren't going to make a real difference then isn't it like a pre written play?

>>242506

I don't mean historical battles or reenactment

Just mean a few minor historical events[for example, outside of the players control], as well as ahistorical ones.

Choices will definitely make a difference, that's what I intend, didn't explain it too well smh

>>242507

I thought so lad was only clarifying. Just want to make sure we can all have different strategies that are kind of equal.

I like the ideas in your last post, I'm just keen on it not being entirely at your discretion who gets reinforcements etc :^)

Rolled 11, 75 = 86 (2d100)

Could we roll for reinforcements?

>>242508

If I did remove income/manpower, then I could still keep a different reputation system for extra recruitment.

Though most of the commanders during the war had to make do with the units they had

I do sort of want to make it so that the player can reinforce through his own means, but at the same time, if there is no income/manpower mechanics, I believe it would have to be through decisions/events, which would sort of be at the hosts judgement.

>>242509

>games based upon dice

*shoots you*

Rolled 96, 1 = 97 (2d100)

>>242510

Recruit only in towns / farms / docks ect when the general is there, amount based on rep & current historical events?

>shoots you

*rolls for agility*

Rolled 44, 31 = 75 (2d100)

>>242511

So its at your discretion as to its success, but our choice to travel to a town and pressgang niggers into service

Rolled 68, 52 = 120 (2d100)

Like in the 4 months you could campaign or retreat and reinforce

And as you said before when capturing areas you might give recruits/prisoners

Rolled 42, 86 = 128 (2d100)

>>242513

Or when you hold position you can request reinforcements that you choose when and if are granted based on rep and events

>>242511

Dunno, the map isn't really a real mechanic, just a representative of areas controlled, for example, the major cities don't provide any game mechanic, it's just a "key" so to speak.

I'd like to have it so that a General can recruit anything realistically, for example being in the middle of Ohio would mean you're probably not going to get reinforcements soon, but you might be able to request them to travel to you. You could however choose to recruit natives.

A General could also spend rep points for units, which I sort of would like to make the main way of gaining more troops

>>242513

I like the idea of it taking 4 months/one turn for a unit to arrive as well

another thing, if a unit takes casualties, it will take time to reinforce, maybe more so if you send it to a town/port

>>242512

yeah, you could also have numerous other factors as well as a result of previous decisions and events

Btw, what should I do about starting units armies and characters? Player designed but a bit more simplified?

Rolled 19, 3 = 22 (2d100)

>>242515

Yeah I think I'm on the same page as you now, so if your 150 man unit took 50 fatalaties and 75 casualties it would take 2 turns to heal on the march, or could be sent to a town if there's one nearby to regen the injuries quicker and you could request troops or have the general try and recruit locally if there's a population nearby, all decided at your end on rep

Etc etc

>>242518

you still got dice on lad

Rolled 98, 8 = 106 (2d100)

>>242517

Hmm do it like the kriegspiel but with less unit choice? Maybe like medieval tw and upgrade them with some points?

Basic militia 1pt

Veteran militia 2pts

Minutemen cavalry 3pts

Vets 4pts

Etc?

>>242519

Sorry dude lel

>>242520

Yeah, maybe 4 or 5 unit types at the most

I'll still keep the old militia mechanic, that they can be recruited immediately from locals, but wont like travelling far and will perform poorly

Militia

Line

Light[if they have rifles, it could be listed under "notes"]

Cavalry[again, type of cavalry listed under notes]

Artillery

As for morale/skill, how is the current mechanic of 0-5 morale, and 0-3 skill?

>>242522

Yeah I like the unit customisation - skirmish rifles cost the same as regular line inf but have less troops, like a trait rather than separate unit options?

And the morale and skill seem good tbh, are they linked? Like a high skill troop loses morale slower?

Are you going to have mutiny and such? Like could a general that spunks his money and fights often have his troops rebel?

>>242523

>And the morale and skill seem good tbh, are they linked? Like a high skill troop loses morale slower?

yeah, though a high skill unit can have low morale, for example after losing lots of battles or men, just as a low skill unit can have high morale

>>242523

>skirmish rifles cost the same as regular line inf but have less troops, like a trait rather than separate unit options?

what do you mean by this? a skirmish rifle unit will have the same amount as a skirmish musket unit, but they will be the same type of unit[light], with differences listed under notes. I think I follow you

>>242524

Not sure if money will even be in the game, I'm not sure how to make mutiny a thing, maybe I wont. Interesting though, mutiny and desertion was common especially among some American units, not sure how I could implement the possibility

>>242525

>implement mutiny

You could decide based on other historical battles that happen contemporarily in the game how likely it was, and orders after victory could include being generous to troops with plunder or banking it towards reinforcements, all decided by you? And losing / injured armies face more desertion to encourage strategic retreats

>>242525

>, but they will be the same type of unit[light], with differences listed under notes

Exactly, so a 4 v 3 infantry battle could go either way depending on unit traits and terrain, I assume this is already your plan and I'm just catching up lel

>>242527

Yeah that's an interesting idea thankee lad.

example, a player could lose a battle, suffering heavy losses, but otherwise keeping much of his army intact and retreats. he gets a message/report saying that there is rampant desertion and a mutiny forming[with a bit more information]. during the next turn he then gives orders on how to deal with it.

>>242528

Yeah, as well as commander's tactics/choices as well

I'm unsure about creating maps for battles though, the historical ones are easy, but if two players fight in an area which historically there was no battle, I'm not sure what to do, other than create a map. Maybe make it based upon who decides to attack/defend[with some bonuses for each side]

>>242530

Yeah spot on, so you might choose to retreat to friendlier territory to stem the desertion, and so cede the ground.

And also so the choice between blitzkrieg, slash and burn and stormtrooper tactics have varying effects on morale and desertion, if there's no mathematical reinforcing? Like raping and burning your way cross country would lower the amount of troops you can recruit as you advance and increase desertion, whereas guarded advances through neutral towns would increase, or whatever

>>242536

Ye pretty much.

Hmm, only issue now really is starting location.

If we use a historical map[such as OP], then there's already a siege taking place at Boston, but I wouldn't mind players choosing[within reason] if at least 2 players[one on each side] choose Boston. hmm

>>242538

Sick, I'm 110% on board then, get the new start lists out then boyo. Wess can't play till Saturday tho, unless its not secret armies

>>242542

Couldn't you play as an NPC and let one player siege you in Boston?

Or have that as a contemporary event just off map?

>>242544

>>242545

Guess it depends on what players choose. Alternatively I could force at least one British+American player to be in Boston at the start of the game

>>242547

Have random start points but force 2 there yeah

If other battles have effects in game, do standing orders from HQ have the same? Like if George Washington wanted you to take a bit of map as the objective and doing it adds to reinforcements, or the king ordered the yanks cleared from near Boston by x date or whatever and you get bonuses for it?

>>242551

I'll leave it up to the players to decide their strategies/objectives I think

I think having only player armies as main armies would be preferable, maybe some minor NPC skirmishes but nothing major [so no George Washington]

Of course taking over certain areas will naturally give certain results, but not as a defined mechanic tbh

Test post for start position/points let me know what you think. 20 Points to spend. Still unsure on balancing.

Name -

Faction -

Location -

Line[500men] - 3

Light[250men] - 3

Light[250men, rifles] - 6

Cavalry[250men] - 6

Artillery[100men,10 guns] - 9

Upgrade a troops skill for 1 point for + 1 skill, 2 points for + 2 skill

Upgrade a troops morale 1 point for + 1 morale, 2 points for + 2 morale

Veteran[+1 morale for all troops under command] - 8

Footman[+1 morale for all Line infantry] - 3

Light Foot[+1 morale for all Light infantry] - 3

Horseman[+1 morale for all cavalry] - 3

Engineer[+1 morale for all artillery] - 3

Charismatic - +1 reputation per turn - 2

Political connections - +2 reputation per turn - 4

[Unsure of what else to add here]

btw I'll make a new thread when everything is sorted, with updated mechanics, most likely tomorrow or friday

>>242568

That's pretty bloody good lad, looks balanced.

>Unsure of what else to add here]

War hero +2 rep +1 morale to all troops 6pts?

I'll be setting up a new thread today

Does this sound balanced? Players gain +2 rep per turn[not including events/decisions]

Cost to recruit in reputation [one regiment of 500 Line, 250 for Cavalry and Light infantry/rifle,100 for artillery] -

Skill 1 Reg - 4 rep[+1 for rifle,+2 for artillery]

Skill 2 Reg - 6 rep[+2 for rifle,+3 for artillery]

Skill 3 Reg - 8 rep[+3 for rifle,+4 for artillery]

>>242592

Looks good lad