STGOD rules thread

[frigidmagi]

This thread is for the discussion of modifications to the STGOD rules.

Ladies and Gentlemen, our starting point.

Simplicity itself. Simply assign your points to each of the categories until you run out. That'll give you the basis around which to write up the details of your nation.

Starting Points: 30

Population

0. 1 million
1. 30 millions
2. 60 millions
3. 90 millions
4. 120 millions
5. 150 millions

Home Territory

0: National Land Area of <20,000 sq. kms
1: National Land Area of >20,000 sq. kms
2: National Land Area of >200,000 sq. kms
3: National Land Area of >600,000 sq. kms
4: National Land Area of >2,000,000 sq. kms
5: National Land Area of >6,000,000 sq. kms

Colonial Territory

0: Nothing
1: Colonial Land Area of <200,000 sq. kms
2: Colonial Land Area of >200,000 sq. kms +1 population
3: Colonial Land Area of >600,000 sq. kms+ 1 to population+1 economy
4: Colonial Land Area of >1,000,000 sq. kms+2 to population +1 economy
5: Colonial Land Area of >2,000,000 sq. kms+2 to population,+2 economy


Industry

0: 30pts/3mo, size limit 10kt.
1: 60pts/3mo, size limit 20kt
2: 120pts/3mo, size limit 40kt (you need at least a total of 6 points in the following fields: population, infrastructure, economy and colonial possession)
3: 150pts/3mo, size limit 60kt (you need at least a total of 9 in the above-described fields) + 1 to a focus of your choice
4: 180pts/3mo, size limit 60kt (you need at least a total of 12 in the above-described fields with at least a 3 in population and a 3 in infrastructure) + 2 to a focus of your choice
5: 210pts/3mo, size limit 60kt (you need at least a total of 15 in the above-described fields with at least a 3 in population and a 4 in infrastructure) + 3 to a focus of your choice

Economy

0: No deficit in wartime allowed.
1: 25% deficit in wartime allowed
2: 50% deficit in wartime allowed
3: standard economy. 75% deficit in wartime allowed.
4: (you need at least a 3 in population for this) 100% deficit in wartime allowed
5: (you need at least a 3 in population and a 1 in colonial possessions for this) 125% deficit in wartime allowed

Infrastructure:

0: Your army is little faster than a walking pace because it continually has to stop and forage for food. Your airforce can barely keep a squadron in the air for lack of spare parts, and your navy is rusting in drydock because you aren't providing it any fuel.
1: Your supply and transport system is at the lowest functional level. 50% decrease in military readiness and response time.
2: Your supply and transport system is at the below-average functional level. 25% decrease in military readiness and response time.
3: Your supply and transport system is at the average functional level. Your response time is the baseline speed - which, naturally, is to be determined.
4: Your supply and transport system is at the above-average functional level. 25% increase in military readiness and response time.
5: Your supply and transport system is at the above-average functional level. 50% increase in military readiness and response time. You

Standing Military Limit:

0: 25% of standard forces. 175 points.
1. 50% of standard forces. 350 points.
2: 75% of standard forces. 525 points.
3: The standard for a typical nation. 700 points.
4: 125% of forces to spend - 1 to economy. 875 points.
5: 150% of standard forces - 2 to economy and - 1 to industry. At least a value of 3 in population and a 3 in economy needed. 1050 points.

Naval Focus:

0: You have your royal yacht and little else.
1: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 20% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 4 needed
2: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 30% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 6 needed
3: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 40% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 8 needed
4: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 50% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 8 needed
5: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 60% of your points. Combined industry/economy level of 10 needed

(Note: A capital ship is defined as being anything larger than fifteen thousand tons displacement. Placeholder tonnages until we can make sure of the limits we want. Shipyard statistics may also be added.)

Army Focus:

0: You have only your royal guard.
1: Your standing army is 10% of your points.
2: Your standing army is 20% of your points.
3: Your standing army is 30% of your points.
4: Your standing army is 40% of your points.
5: Your standing army is 50% of your points.

NOTE: You also have reserves. These are:
if Economy + Infrastructure = 10 points, then they are 20% of your population
if Economy + Infrastructure = 9 points, then they are 18% of your population.
(scales down to....)
If Economy + Infrastructure = 1 point, then they are 2% of your population.

Air Focus:

0: You refuse to embrace these ridiculous flying contraptions.
1: Your air force is 10% of your points.
2: Your air force is 20% of your points.
3: Your air force is 30% of your points.
4: Your air force is 40% of your points.
5: Your air force is 50% of your points.

Units:

Foot Infantry Division - 5pts (10,000 men)
Guards Infantry Division - 15pts (10,000 men)
Motorized Infantry Division- 15pts (5,000 men)
Cavalry Division - 10pts (5,000 men and 5,000 horse)
Tank Division - 20pts (200 tanks)

Attachments:

Artillery Regiment - 3pts (100 howitzers)
Siege Artillery Regiment - 5pts (20 heavy howitzers or 10 rail guns)
Engineer Regiment - 3pts (2000 engineers)
Guards Regiment - 3pts (2000 guardsmen)
AAA/AT regiment 3pts (100 guns)
Light Tank Regiment 5pts (50 tanks)
Heavy Tank Regiment 5pts (50 tanks)

10pts 1 wing of 20 monowing planes
15pts 1 wing of 20 2 engine bombers (1,200 pd bombload)
20pts 1 wing of 20 armored zepplins (8,000 pd bombload or 3 monowing planes)

-Navy (Escorts may have one upgrade, Cruisers may have two, Battleships may have three, Submarines cannot have any upgrades, a positive upgrade makes the effective increase one step better, and a negative attribute makes it one step worse. No single attribute can be lowered more than twice through upgrades. Battleships can opt to have no penalties for their upgrades, but pay double cost)

Escort: 20pt (Speed: High, Armor: Low, Attack: Low)
Cruiser: 50pt (Speed: Medium, Armor: Medium, Attack: Medium)
Battleship: 120pt (Speed: Low, Armor: High, Attack: High)
Submarines: 30pt (Speed: Medium, Armor: Low, Attack: Medium, Can only be attacked with +sub attack options and other submarines)

Carrier versions of cruiser and battleship can be opted for instead, with carriers able to carry 48, and 96 fighters depending on size. Carriers have very low attack and very low armor. Wings are purchased separately.

Upgrades:
Scout Vessel 5pt (+speed, -armor or weapons)
Anti-Air 5pt (+AA function)
Anti-Sub 10pt (+Sonar, -Attack vs. surface and air, +attack vs. submerged vessels)
Anti-Capital 15pt (+weapons, -speed or armor)
Reinforced Bulkheads 10pt (+armor, -speed or weapons)

Carrier Wings (Cannot use upgrade options from Air Force):
Interceptor (12 Fighters) (5pt)
Torpedo Bombers (12 Fighters) (10pt)
Escort/Recon (12 Fighters) (7pt)

The floor is open.

Note: Rule System updated.

[The Cleric]

Infrastructure seems awfully bland to just be affecting deployment. No bonus for econ at higher levels?

[Comrade Tortoise]

Alright, so i assume that infrastructure will also effect economic growth in some way? If so, how do we want to handle this?

[Comrade Tortoise]

Also: bb tonnage? Some of us are not familiar with military acronyms.

[Steve]

If I may, Thanas proposed a refined Economic system when we talked about actually quantifying it

He left the deficit bits in because we were debating adding money to the system with everything costing, but I think that's leaning a bit much toward number-crunching. As a result I proposed that we focus on his idea of modification of peacetime and wartime industrial points - reflecting the economy's ability to support government spending with a tax base and industrial productivity - and maybe put in a "time limit" for total war mobilization, in which a country that exceeds said limit would suffer overextension and risk strain and even collapse.

As for Navy Focus, strict limits on ships in the fleet's been reconsidered in favor of a tonnage limit, though not by type. Magi ccould restrict people from having top-heavy fleets (too many battleships, not enough lighter combatants) or let them have them and suffer getting their expensive battleline torpedoed when their screens get overwhelmed by a superior-balanced fleet.

[frigidmagi]

BB= Battleship. This is important because we are smack in the middle of the Gun Navy era. There won't be functioning Carriers for decades.

If I remember right...

BB= Battleship
BC= Battle cruiser
CA= Cruiser
CL= Light Cruiser
DD= Destroyer
CV= Aircraft Carrier
CVN= Aircraft Carrier Nuclear

Course I don't think we have light cruisers yet... You would have to ask Steve and company, I'm not a navy nut.

[The Cleric]

No nukes for weaponry, but how about power source and DU rounds?

[frigidmagi]

It's 1910. I can say with stern authority no one has figured out how to build a nuclear reactor.

Someone could very well figure out how to in future decades, but not anytime soon.

[Comrade Tortoise]

It's 1910. I can say with stern authority no one has figured out how to build a nuclear reactor.

Someone could very well figure out how to in future decades, but not anytime soon.

That is what he meant. Future decades

[Steve]

Cruisers? Oh, that's going to be fun.

Basically, our modern concept of the "heavy" cruiser vs. "light" cruiser is the result of interbellum period naval limitation treaties and such as well as consideration of the purpose of cruisers in world navies. Lighter cruisers like the Scout Cruisers were considered "light" for this purpose, while larger armored cruisers - or rather what was left of them - were called "heavy" (hence why WWII-era USN heavy cruisers' designation letters were CA for Cruiser, Armored).

At the turn of the century we had the Armored Cruiser and the Protected Cruiser, though not so many of the latter anymore IIRC. The PC was a cruiser in general, defined by using an armored protective deck in conjunction with the ship's coal bunkers to protect vital machinery in the ship's innards, allowing more mass to speed and to sizable guns.

The AC added armor belts to this, was larger, and had bigger guns, but still had a cruiser's speed. Such ships were so large they were about the same displacement as battleships of the era, maybe a bit lighter. The infamous USS Maine - the one that blew up in Havana - was originally built as an Armored Cruiser but was too slow to fulfill the role, so she ended up a "second-class battleship". The general "mark" point between an armored cruiser or a battleship was that a battleship would have 10" guns are larger while cruisers always had in the region of 9".

At 1910 start point, armored cruisers are dead ducks thanks to the battlecruiser. Navies generally suspended cruiser production in favor of the battlecruiser, though some like the Brits maintained scout cruisers or light cruisers for purposes being fleet scouts and fleet screens, leading destroyer divisions, or performing raiding operations. The USN in particular just about stopped building any cruisers, just laying three between 1905 and 1920.

In summation, most navies in 1910 would be building two cruiser types: Battlecruisers and light cruisers, designated either as light or as scout.

[Slacker]

It's 1901, correct?

The air force thing might be a little iffy. I mean, we're literally talking the era of lighter-than-air only.

[Hotfoot]

I'm just going to say this. You guys REALLY don't want to go far outside the realms of what was known back then, because if you do, I promise you that I have many more ways to make things painful for everyone.

It's possible, using 1910 tech, to do several things that were simply not done then, and if it's a war of Connecticut Yankees in Archduke Ferdinande's Court, it will simply not end well.

Now, that's not to say I will demand that the French use their suicidal weapon designs or such, but let's be reasonable about this.

As far as rules, here's what we need:

*Solid foundations for what can be done to improve armies, nations, etc.

*Possibly some simple mechanic for trade.

And here's what I'd like to see:

*Some sort of Espionage dynamic

*Some sort of R&D dynamic (this less so for obvious reasons)

[Hadrianvs]

It's 1901, correct?

I was pushing for 1901 others are pushing for 1910, but I've modified my opinion to 1905. Mostly, it is my sincere opinion that the Race for the All-Big-Gun Battleship is something far too epic to leave out of the game, and 1905 is the latest we can have said race. In 1906 the first ABG BBs get commissioned.

[Steve]

Granted, that was primarily because Britain rushed Dreadnaught into completion, even taking guns meant for Lord Nelson.

[Hadrianvs]

Granted, that was primarily because Britain rushed Dreadnaught into completion, even taking guns meant for Lord Nelson.

If the Japanese had not been too broke from the recent war to buy high calibre guns, the Satsuma would have been launched as an ABG BB before Dreadnought was, even with the British cheating.

[Steve]

Granted, that was primarily because Britain rushed Dreadnaught into completion, even taking guns meant for Lord Nelson.

If the Japanese had not been too broke from the recent war to buy high calibre guns, the Satsuma would have been launched as an ABG BB before Dreadnought was, even with the British cheating.

IIRC it was trouble getting the rest of Satsuma's 12"ers delivered that resulted in them just putting 10"ers on.

[Steve]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_cruiser

For further clarification. I was slightly incorrect, well, save that the US re-assigned the Armored Cruiser's designation to its largest cruisers, which eventually became known as heavy cruisers.

[Steve]

[04:10] magithis: I am wondering how we'll do combat but man I don't want this to turn into risk.
[04:12] sbbigsteve: Well, I suggest the following.
[04:12] sbbigsteve: A) The players can, if they want, determine the combat outcome by mutual agreement.
[04:13] sbbigsteve: B) Failing this, the two players provide the mod with their forces, dispositions, and commanders w/ personality traits of, at the very least, the senior leadership. The mod then decides who wins.
[04:13] sbbigsteve: THe mod taking into account opposing forces' capabilities, size, and positions, as well as leadership, area terrain, and intangible factors.
[04:14] sbbigsteve: C) If the mod can't be sure who wins..... your pick. Coin toss or having the two players play rock-paper-scissors via PM?
[04:14] magithis: Go ahead and post it, but it sounds workable to me.
[04:32] sbbigsteve: Also, a recommendation on improvement system, posted at SDN: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 1#p3193711
[04:35] magithis: Hrm.
[04:38] sbbigsteve: I recognize it realistically takes years to do these things.
[04:38] sbbigsteve: It took Japan decades to fully industrialize and they weren't capable of buidling their own large caliber naval guns until around WWI.
[04:39] magithis: There are a few things we need to consider. Can you boast an attribute past 5? Do you have to spend points to keep attributes at their current level? Can you go down a level?
[04:52] sbbigsteve: I'm talking such with Fin now.
[04:52] sbbigsteve: I'd like to think 5 is the max, but that's not entirely logical. Though maybe we mandate a 5 year period before permitting any 5s to hit 6.
[04:52] sbbigsteve: Or even to be invested in.
[04:52] magithis: There should be a hard max however.
[04:53] sbbigsteve: Alternatively, the category points only count at game start.
[04:53] sbbigsteve: Ecomomic growth comes from natural processes reflected in-game, industry grows with economy or faster if the player invests industrial points.
[04:53] sbbigsteve: Admittedly I want to be simpler than this on SDN, but LibArc has more dedicated gamers.
[04:54] sbbigsteve: Who won't mind number-crunching.
[04:54] sbbigsteve: I'd say that 5 should be the max on the three Focus scores.
[04:54] sbbigsteve: Because they reflect sophistication and support for a military service, not a raw number.
[04:54] magithis: Works for me.
[04:55] sbbigsteve: Quantifying Army beyond number of troops hasn't really happened yet.
[04:55] sbbigsteve: I suppose you could accept Hotfoot's idea of expanding the categories and adding 3 points per.
[04:56] sbbigsteve: Then we could have a category for R&D, specific things like Gun Technology, etc.
[04:56] sbbigsteve: If you want a more fine-tuned things.
[04:56] sbbigsteve: Naval Focus would add a natural +2 or +3 to Gun Tech then to reflect that a powerful Navy uses powerful guns.
[04:57] magithis: I'm waiting to see everyone's thoughts.
[05:05] sbbigsteve: Well, one thing to consider....
[05:05] sbbigsteve: We're starting in 1910 right?
[05:05] magithis: Yes.
[05:05] sbbigsteve: Even that late.... I don't think Air Focus is quite so good a category.
[05:06] sbbigsteve: Though... granted, let's see Nit's proposal first.
[05:06] sbbigsteve: I'd say Nit, if he gets what he wants, is a solid 5 in AirF.
[05:06] sbbigsteve: If Nit's proposal is accepted than yes, we need air Focus.
[05:07] magithis: Zepplins. Plus bi planes are being used. The US used bi planes during the hunt for Pacho Villa.
[05:09] magithis: Hell, I can say pretty factually that a zepplin can carry 600 pounds of bombs for sure. That's not bad really. Nothing compared to a B-29 though but eh.
[05:14] sbbigsteve: Well, what I was thinking was that air forces aren't so big that Air Focus could be easily spread among available points.
[05:14] sbbigsteve: I mean, if an Air Focus of 5 gives you 30 biplanes and 20 zeppelins, is it worth sinking two extra points into?
[05:15] magithis: I would prefer to leave it in place. I'm pretty Cat has plans for that to.
[05:15] magithis: Still like I said, post the suggestion in the rules threads and if enough people agree then that's what we'll do.
[05:16] sbbigsteve: Hrm, can I be lazy and just post this IM convo? :-p
[05:17] magithis: Sure.

[Slacker]

So our air forces will consist of biplanes and zepplins?

Wow, this really is turning into Seas of Steel.

[Cynical Cat]

I would really prefer a later start date tech wise (1930s)and a clarification of air forces. You can spend five points on the bloody things and only get 600 planes. They had better be bloody potent for that price.

[General Havoc]

Frankly I'm not terribly sure that I agree with the sentiment that more number crunching is good. The numbers here would appear to be sort of general extrapolations in any event, and placing over-reliance upon them penalizes those whose country "build" is not mathematically "optimal". For the same two points that nets you a couple hundred biplanes, you could increase your overall home territory from the size of Texas to the size of North America.

That aside, I'd like a little more detail on how to resolve combat beyond the suggestions above. Are we going to submit battle or campaign plans to mods for decision? Is there room for strategic maneuver and the like?

[Hadrianvs]

Infrastructure seems awfully bland to just be affecting deployment. No bonus for econ at higher levels?

Allow me to quote The Rise and Fall of the Great Powersfor you, it shows by way of example the importance of a good infrastructure in sustaining a prolonged war effort:

But the impressive rise of in Russian arms output, and indeed overall industrial and agricultural production, during the first two and a half years of the war greatly strainied the inadequate transport system, which in any case was finding it hard to cope with the shipment of troops, fodder for the cavalry, and so on. Shell stocks therfore accumulated miles from the front; food stuffs could not be transported to the deficit areas, especially in the cities; Allied supplies lay for months on the harbordsides and Murmansk and Archangel.

It is not just redeploying troops, but also supplying them. The number of men that can be adequately fielded by a State at any one time is dependent upon industry (producing supplies, guns, and ammo) and infrastructure (getting them to the troops). Of course, nothing stops the State from fielding an under equipped and under supplied army; on occasion it is better to do that than field no army at all. Furthermore, one can expect that a poor infrastructure country will suffer greater strain on its civilian sector from fielding a large army for extended periods of time than a country with good infrastructure. It's as much an important part of staying power as industrial might and economy.

Of course, none of that helps any if the war is over before these resources can be properly mobilized and the enemy worn down. Being a top heavy military power can be a valid strategic decision if a short victorious war is a realistic proposition, which depending on the situation it can be. Furthermore, an alliance between a military focused State and a neighboring economically focused State can be immensely powerful, as was the case of the Franco-British alliance in the First World War. So even if a long war is expected, the strategic situation can determine that top-heaviness is useful and even necessary.

[Ezekiel]

I say the following as the person who coined this ruleset and is mildly horrified at what's become of it.

Things I want to demolish and do over:

-Infrastructure
-Standing Military Limit
-All Foci

Things I don't:

-Population
-Industry

Things I'm iffy on:

-Territories (both kinds - specifically the overly-generous km^2 values)
-Economy (GDP calculation is a complicated beast)
---

What I suggest;

Infrastructure:

0: Your army is little faster than a walking pace because it continually has to stop and forage for food. Your airforce can barely keep a squadron in the air for lack of spare parts, and your navy is rusting in drydock because you aren't providing it any fuel.
1: Your supply and transport system is at the lowest functional level. 50% decrease in military readiness and response time.
2: Your supply and transport system is at the below-average functional level. 25% decrease in military readiness and response time.
3: Your supply and transport system is at the average functional level. Your response time is the baseline speed - which, naturally, is to be determined.
4: Your supply and transport system is at the above-average functional level. 25% increase in military readiness and response time.
5: Your supply and transport system is at the above-average functional level. 50% increase in military readiness and response time. You

Standing Military Limit:

0: 25% of standard forces. 175 points.
1. 50% of standard forces. 350 points.
2: 75% of standard forces. 525 points.
3: The standard for a typical nation. 700 points.
4: 125% of forces to spend - 1 to economy. 875 points.
5: 150% of standard forces - 2 to economy and - 1 to industry. At least a value of 3 in population and a 3 in economy needed. 1050 points.

Naval Focus:

0: You have your royal yacht and little else.
1: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 20% of your points. Total capital ship tonnage cannot exceed 5% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 4 needed
2: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 30% of your points. Total capital ship tonnage cannot exceed 10% of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 6 needed
3: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 40% of your points. Total capital ship tonnage cannot exceed 20% (round down) of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 8 needed
4: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 50% of your points. Total capital ship tonnage cannot exceed 30% (round down) of your points. Combined Industry/Economy level of 8 needed
5: Total naval tonnage cannot exceed 60% of your points. Total capital ship tonnage cannot exceed 40% of your points. Combined industry/economy level of 10 needed

(Note: A capital ship is defined as being anything larger than fifteen thousand tons displacement. Placeholder tonnages until we can make sure of the limits we want. Shipyard statistics may also be added.)

Army Focus:

0: You have only your royal guard.
1: Your standing army is 10% of your points.
2: Your standing army is 20% of your points.
3: Your standing army is 30% of your points.
4: Your standing army is 40% of your points.
5: Your standing army is 50% of your points.

NOTE: You also have reserves. These are:
if Economy + Infrastructure = 10 points, then they are 20% of your population
if Economy + Infrastructure = 9 points, then they are 18% of your population.
(scales down to....)
If Economy + Infrastructure = 1 point, then they are 2% of your population.

Air Focus:

0: You refuse to embrace these ridiculous flying contraptions.
1: Your air force is 5% of your points.
2: Your air force is 10% of your points.
3: Your air force is 15% of your points.
4: Your air force is 20% of your points.
5: Your air force is 25% of your points.

Home Territory and Colonial Territory will take some figuring out, but I really hate the land-area-in-km^2 thing.

Tell me what you think, lads.

[Ezekiel]

Something else for you guys to think on (Frigid in specific):

For starters, this ruleset isn't finished. Thanas put some bandaids on the holes and pronounced it finished for the SDN version of the game, but as far as I'm concerned my-our ruleset isn't finished yet and the version you guys were given (the above-mentioned Thanas copy) is pretty much an early alpha.

Secondly, given the lack of completion, going through the claiming process in any detail greater than "I'd like to play (Japan/Russia/China/Germany/etc)" is way too far ahead of schedule. You're all working off of assumptions that are, if I'm allowed to put my ruleset right, soon going to be retroactively made quite incorrect, causing you to have to essentially redo your claims from scratch.

Lastly, because you guys are using what is effectively the alpha of the ruleset, you've given me valuable feedback regarding the Territory categories, such as the fact that Colonial Territory needs to be changed and better restricted, and that Home Territory needs to be similarly restricted. In the words of many a lategame Paradox game player, "there's way too much blobbing."

'm not going to name any specific players (there's no gain in that), but I'm now quite sure that the game would benefit from changes that will encourage less pre-game colonial claim and more ingame imperialism and treaty-hammering and other interaction over disputed territory. Dunno how to effect that yet, but I'll figure it out and post it here.

But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong. ;)

[rhoenix]

Despite me not being an active player (any longer), given that this site has made gaming almost an art form, I say work with fine-tuning the rules until you're satisfied. Others here would add their feedback and critiques as well.