RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to 2300 Great Game Command Center

14:34, 29th March 2024 (GMT+0)

Historical interval 2055-2059.

Posted by RefereeFor group 0
Germany
player, 533 posts
Sat 4 May 2019
at 10:28
  • msg #14

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

Another question:

Should we write  news headlines, or we will do as last turn and they will be written latter, in the middle of the turn?
Co-GM
GM, 212 posts
Sat 4 May 2019
at 12:20
  • msg #15

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

In reply to Germany (msg # 14):

You should, where you can, write small articles for your PAs. These can either be used as they are or as inspiration when we're putting the news together
Germany
player, 534 posts
Sun 5 May 2019
at 03:58
  • msg #16

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

German and Saudi turns sent now. No more diplomacy allowed until responses.
Referee
GM, 157 posts
Sun 5 May 2019
at 17:50
  • msg #17

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

In reply to Germany (msg # 13):

>how should one specify those round trips (where one ends up in the same point as it
>began), if the destination (columns K-N) mean the final hex?

In the Military Units section of your orders only. A 'round-trip from Earth to Mars' is no more of a 'movement' than 'completing an orbit around the Earth' -->it is not movement worth recording as far as the game is concerned.
Germany
player, 535 posts
Sun 5 May 2019
at 18:27
  • msg #18

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

Referee:
In reply to Germany (msg # 13):

>how should one specify those round trips (where one ends up in the same point as it
>began), if the destination (columns K-N) mean the final hex?

In the Military Units section of your orders only. A 'round-trip from Earth to Mars' is no more of a 'movement' than 'completing an orbit around the Earth' -->it is not movement worth recording as far as the game is concerned.


I won't (of course) discuss with you about English language, but Round Trip is the term you use in the rules (section 9.4) to describe, for spaceships, a trip from A to B and return to A (or so I understand).

For this turn, I set the final position as destination in the units listings spreasheet (cells K-M), and specified how many (if any) round trips and to where they make in the Notes U part (cell O), aside from specifying in the military movements section of the orders.

I hope this will work, but, please, tell me how to do if it does not, so that we will avoid more such problems.
Germany
player, 541 posts
Thu 13 Jun 2019
at 13:40
  • msg #19

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

Some questions now that the turn is moving to WR1;

1) May we have any clue about where (if anywhere, and of course sugject to players unexpected actions) comflict might occur this WR?

It's quite a vital information if we want to give any order, as we have to devote resources to any occurring combat, but this is quite difficult if we have no idea of where can they occur. At best, we can give orders to all tropos worldwide,  but this will forcé the GM (alredy busy enough, I guess) to read lots of useless information...


2) Russian spaceship (unit #0566, Tsiolkovskiy-1) is listed as in orbit. Being fully propelled by solar sails, how has it reached it (only chemical propulsión and thrustrs allow you to move among surface and orbit in plantes whose size is 1+, according 9.4)?

In fact, according the spaceport description, it could not even be built, as it's not capable to land...

quote:
7.9.2 Interface Facility:

Spaceport (S): (...) Can assemble up to 10 000 tonnes of Modules per Turn into Spaceships that can reach orbit, as per section 9.4.(...)


quote:
9.4 Landings and Transport

(...)

If (number of Chemical and Thrusters Modules for Propulsion that the Spaceship has) is greater than (Ship Mass X World Size) / ((1 for Brigade Sized, 5 for Division Sized) X (10 000)) the Spaceship may move between the surface of a World and its Orbit hex.

Germany
player, 542 posts
Fri 14 Jun 2019
at 15:26
  • msg #20

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

Germany:
2) Russian spaceship (unit #0566, Tsiolkovskiy-1) is listed as in orbit. Being fully propelled by solar sails, how has it reached it (only chemical propulsión and thrustrs allow you to move among surface and orbit in plantes whose size is 1+, according 9.4)?

In fact, according the spaceport description, it could not even be built, as it's not capable to land...

quote:
7.9.2 Interface Facility:

Spaceport (S): (...) Can assemble up to 10 000 tonnes of Modules per Turn into Spaceships that can reach orbit, as per section 9.4.(...)


quote:
9.4 Landings and Transport

(...)

If (number of Chemical and Thrusters Modules for Propulsion that the Spaceship has) is greater than (Ship Mass X World Size) / ((1 for Brigade Sized, 5 for Division Sized) X (10 000)) the Spaceship may move between the surface of a World and its Orbit hex.


After about thinking it a little more, and to avoid greater damae to the Russian player, I'd suggest to allow the ship to be built, but it would be stranded at Damgarten until refitted so that it can take off (something that can be done next turn).
Referee
GM, 159 posts
Fri 14 Jun 2019
at 19:24
  • msg #21

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

In reply to Germany (msg # 19):

>May we have any clue about where (if anywhere, and of course sugject to players
>unexpected actions) comflict might occur this WR?

I can only reveal the combats where I have a reasonable expectation that other players would know about at this time. All else are hidden until the time is right.

>Russian spaceship (unit #0566, Tsiolkovskiy-1) is listed as in orbit. Being fully
>propelled by solar sails, how has it reached it

The Russian player executed a legal maneuver to achieve this, discussing it is up to him.
Germany
player, 544 posts
Sun 23 Jun 2019
at 14:19
  • msg #22

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

How should the news for this turn be? Like previous turns, or like this last one?
Germany
player, 546 posts
Sun 30 Jun 2019
at 16:20
  • msg #23

Re: Historical interval 2055-2059

One more question: the units moved during the orders phase (in German case units 210-211 and 212, moving from 4N21 (Greece) to 5N20 (Armenia) are still listed in their initial hex, while, if I understood well the rules, they should already be in the destination one (at least to avoid being confused with any unit moving in WR1).

As We cannot change the location hex, could please the GM (or Co-GM) fix that?
Referee
GM, 161 posts
Tue 27 Aug 2019
at 03:58
  • msg #24

Results for Quick Combat Round #1

The results for Quick Combat Round #1 have been posted. You will have until September 7 2019 12:00 UTC if you want to order more combat or expend Response PApoints, etc.,  otherwise the window for issuing orders will be closed and we will move onto processing Quick Combat Round#2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knock! Knock!#1

Canada attacking NordicFed

Canada : Unit#1,2,5,20,22
Mil Rank 1, Mil tech 8.7, Sum Basic Strength: 56, Final Combat Strength: 4268

NordicFed: unit#874
Mil Rank 1, Mil tech 8.7, Sum Basic Strength: 5, Final Combat Strength: 378

Odds are 4268/378 = 11.29 which becomes >10:1, Final Odds >10:1
23:02, Today: Referee rolled 2 using 1d10.  Knock! Knock!#1.
Results: 10%/5=2% loss to Attacker, 100%/5=20% loss to Defender,

Canada: 0.02 X 56 available hits =  1.12 = 1
Canada loses unit#2

NordicFed: 0.20 X 5 available hits =  1
NordicFed loses unit#874

GM Decree: The NorFed units were strictly ordered to not attack as is usually defined by the rules, and hence technically did not need to have column R of the Unit Spreadsheet filled out. However, incursions into the published owned hexes of another Settlement will from now on require it and this is the last time that the GM will allow such a loophole to pass. The published rules will be updated to reflect this.

--------------------------------------------------------------
The Phoney War#1

Persia and Iraqi rebels attacking Iraq and Canada

Persia: No Persian units at the time of orders deadline have column R filled out in the Unit List spreadsheet as required in the rules for an attack to occur. GM rules that due to confusion/unpreparedness of the Persian military, no significant movement or combat by Persian forces across the Iraqi frontier occurs in this round.
Iraqi rebels: 19 Basic Strength
Mil Rank 4, Mil tech 7.3, Sum Basic Strength: 19, Final Combat Strength: 1012

Canada : Unit#9 and 21. Units#6,8,and 18 are enroute but will not be available this round.
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Only 38 may participate in this round due to Iraqi instability and Persian influence. 19 are neutral at this time, the other 19 having gone to form Iraqi rebels faction.
Mil Rank 3, Mil tech 8.0, Sum Basic Strength: 54, Final Combat Strength: 3456

Odds are 1012/3456 = 0.29 which becomes 1:4 Odds, shifted 1 column to the left for difference in Military Rank , Final Odds 1:5
10:52, Today: Referee rolled 7 using 1d10.  The Phoney War#1.
Results: 100%/5=20% loss to Attacker, 0%/5=0% loss to Defender,

Iraqi rebels: 0.20 X 19 available hits =  3.8 = 4
Reduced to 15 Basic Strength
Saudi Arabia
player, 78 posts
Thu 29 Aug 2019
at 11:01
  • msg #25

Results for Quick Combat Round #1

Once again rules seem not to apply:

According them (6.4):

quote:
-The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM but will usually be:
(...)
The Sum Base Combat Strength will usually be about (# of Population Units of the area in revolt) X (Authoritarian Score of the Settlement)2 /10000


In this case, Iraq has AM 11 and 4690 Pop, so numbers would be (4890 x 112)/10000=56.7 (i guess rounded to 56).

So odds would be 2984/3456 = 0.86. So 1:1.5, one column shift makin git 1:2

A roll of 7 would mean Results: 80%/5=16% loss to Attacker, 20%/5=4% loss to Defender,

So, Iraq would have lost 56 x 0.16 = 8.96 (rounded to 9)
Canada would lose 76 x 0.04 = 3.04, (rounded up to 4)

And yes, I know it says "at GM discretion" and "will usually be" (twice), but barring cloear reasons (and I'm not aware of any, as Canada did not even invest in Iraq this turn), IMHO, this is a "usual" case, and so "usual" results should be expected.

PS: it's no secret I believe those numbers in case of revolt are too high (despite last changes on them), as I already complained about it, but is what is in the rules...
Co-GM
GM, 217 posts
Thu 29 Aug 2019
at 14:26
  • msg #26

Results for Quick Combat Round #1

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 25):

quote:
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Only 38 may participate in this round due to Iraqi instability and Persian influence. 19 are neutral at this time, the other 19 having gone to form Iraqi rebels faction.


Not an insurgency as per rules. These forces are Iraqi military defecting, not a population rising up. See above quote.
Saudi Arabia
player, 79 posts
Thu 29 Aug 2019
at 14:43
  • msg #27

Results for Quick Combat Round #1

Which quote do you talk about?

!Iraqui rebels! means insurgence or rebellion, so a revolt, as rules say...

As Kelvin uses to say, those details are out the scope of the game, a revolt is a revolt
This message was last edited by the player at 15:00, Thu 29 Aug 2019.
Referee
GM, 162 posts
Thu 29 Aug 2019
at 21:31
  • msg #28

Results for Quick Combat Round #1

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 27):

>Once again rules seem not to apply:
>
>According them (6.4):

As per the rules, section 6.4 paragraph#4 "The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM..."
Saudi Arabia
player, 80 posts
Fri 30 Aug 2019
at 11:06
  • msg #29

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #1

Referee:
In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 27):

>Once again rules seem not to apply:
>
>According them (6.4):

As per the rules, section 6.4 paragraph#4 "The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM..."


Right, I pointed this myslef in my post, and any RPG player knows it's the GM prerrogative to overrule the rules or alter them to better fit his kind of gaming (House ruling).

But this overruling the rules should be the exception, and it is becoming the norm, and not where they are not clear, but on things that rules clearly tell the expected results, be it oil increases, the srength of a revolt or other things.

And I talk about those two cases because on them you cannot even claim the results surprised you, at least if you read (and I have npo reason to believe you didn't) my commentas about the rules, as I warned you about them in both cases.

As for the last isses in this sense, players may not trust to have the returns told in the rules, as the possibility of the GM overruling them has become, IMHO, too frequent.
Referee
GM, 164 posts
Sat 7 Sep 2019
at 18:39
  • msg #30

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #1

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 29):

>>Once again rules seem not to apply:
>>
>>According them (6.4):
>As per the rules, section 6.4 paragraph#4 "The characteristics of the insurgency are
>at the discretion of the GM..."
>
>
>Right, I pointed this myslef in my post, and any RPG player knows it's the GM
>prerrogative to overrule the rules or alter them to better fit his kind of gaming
>(House ruling).
>
>But this overruling the rules

"The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM" is the rule, it is the direct and explicit rule as per the rules. The only "...overruling the rules" going on here is insisting on using the formula, which you have done wrong anyways; if I had meant 'Population of the Settlement' in the formula, I would have said 'Population of the Settlement'. The rule is "The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM" because of the ease and frequency of unusual circumstances expected to occur which would make use of the formula inappropriate; such as this case where you did not think to include the actions of Persia, as detailed in the History 2055 section.

Focus on the game, leave the Refereeing to the Referee.
Referee
GM, 165 posts
Sat 7 Sep 2019
at 20:06
  • msg #31

Results for Quick Combat Round #2

The Phoney War#2

Iraq and Canada attacking Persia and Iraqi rebels

Canada : Unit#6,8,9,18 and 21.
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Only 48 may participate in this round due to Iraqi instability and Persian influence. 9 are neutral at this time, the other 19 having gone to form Iraqi rebels faction.
Mil Rank 3, Mil tech 8.0, Sum Basic Strength: 112, Final Combat Strength: 7168

Persia: No Persian units at the time of orders deadline have column R filled out in the Unit List spreadsheet as required in the rules for an action to occur. Referee rules that due to confusion/unpreparedness of the Persian military, no significant movement or combat by Persian forces across the Iraqi frontier occurs in this round.
Iraqi rebels: 15 Basic Strength
Mil Rank 4, Mil tech 7.3, Sum Basic Strength: 15, Final Combat Strength: 800

Odds are 7168/799 = 8.97 which becomes 8:1 Odds, shifted 1 column to the right for difference in Military Rank , Final Odds >10:1
14:54, Today: Referee rolled 5 using 1d10.  Phoney War#2.

Results: 0%/5=0% loss to Attacker, 100%/5=20% loss to Defender,

Iraqi rebels: 0.20 X 15 available hits =  3
Reduced to 12 Basic Strength

The Referee rules that the Iraqi rebels have elected to continue the fight, there will be a Round#3.
This message was last edited by the GM at 23:01, Sun 27 Oct 2019.
Saudi Arabia
player, 81 posts
Sat 7 Sep 2019
at 20:10
  • msg #32

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #1

Referee:
In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 29):

"The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM" is the rule,


Well, the rule is a Little longer tan this... If this is the only part t obe applied, I'd suggest you to delete the rest of it.

Referee:
it is the direct and explicit rule as per the rules. The only "...overruling the rules" going on here is insisting on using the formula, which you have done wrong anyways; if I had meant 'Population of the Settlement' in the formula, I would have said 'Population of the Settlement'.


THen what population the rule refers to?

If not the settlement's, then I mussunderstood it and I apologize, but, please, be kind enough to tell me how to read it, as it seems I didn't rightly.

Referee:
The rule is "The characteristics of the insurgency are at the discretion of the GM" because of the ease and frequency of unusual circumstances expected to occur which would make use of the formula inappropriate; such as this case where you did not think to include the actions of Persia, as detailed in the History 2055 section.


Yes, I included Persian actions from the history section. The one I guess can apply here is:

quote:
- Convince Iraq’s Shia to join Persia: Iraq is already embroiled in a Revolt, the Shia people are easily swayed to rebel against the central authority.


So, I understand Persia helped the revolt, and I expected (perhaps wrongly( that externa support to a revolt would increase its forcé, not decrease it...

Referee:
Focus on the game, leave the Refereeing to the Referee.

</quote>

I try, but precisely to be able to focus in the game, I try to understand the effects actions may have, and when they are not the ones in the rules (aside from Referee's will, of course) i get confused.

If the problem is, as I understand you said above, that I applied wrongly the formula when I assumed pop refered to the settlement, I repeat, I apologize, but I'd like to know what does then pop mean, to know what to expect in the future if  Iwant to incite, or avoid, or fight a revolt.

As now, I feel like firing blind, hoping rules say what I think they do, and this way it's not easy to focus in the game.
Saudi Arabia
player, 82 posts
Sat 7 Sep 2019
at 20:56
  • msg #33

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #2

First of all, glad to see things are moving quicker now, thanks for the effort.

Now,  forgive me to again to ask about the results, but I only intend to understand well the rules and their application:

Referee:
The Phoney War#2

Iraq and Canada attacking Persia and Iraqi rebels

(...)

Odds are 7168/799 = 8.97 which becomes 1:9 Odds, shifted 1 column to the right for difference in Military Rank , Final Odds >10:1
14:54, Today: Referee rolled 5 using 1d10.  Phoney War#2.


As I understand the rules, the odds being 8.97, it should be 9:1  (if the rebels were the attackers, it would be right to count it as 1:9, so I guess this time it's only an errata), but the column right should move it to 10:1, as rules say:

quote:
For simplicity of display, odds greater than 5:1 and less than 1:5 are grouped together but each integer multiple still counts as a separate column for purposes of column shifting


So, I understand the combat should have been resolved in the 7:1 to 10:1 column, not in the >10:1. Am I right here?

See that the result would have been the same, so, I repeat, this is only an academic question for better understunding of the rules.
Saudi Arabia
player, 83 posts
Sun 8 Sep 2019
at 08:14
  • msg #34

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #2

Public Apology

Referee:
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Only 48 may participate in this round due to Iraqi instability and Persian influence. 9 are neutral at this time, the other 19 having gone to form Iraqi rebels faction.


So, the 19 initial points do not represent a popular revolt, but the part of the Iraqi Army tha rebelled.

That makes sense, and as I promised:

Saudi Arabia:
If not the settlement's, then I mussunderstood it and I apologize.


And, as I agued publicly, also public is  my apology.

Just let me ask you to be clearer should similar cases appear again, and we can avoid such discussions.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:16, Sun 08 Sept 2019.
Referee
GM, 166 posts
Sun 27 Oct 2019
at 23:00
  • msg #35

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #2

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 33):

>the combat should have been resolved in the 7:1 to 10:1 column, not in
>the >10:1. Am I right here?
No, but there were typos which made things confusing and I have fixed.
Referee
GM, 167 posts
Sun 27 Oct 2019
at 23:06
  • msg #36

Results for Quick Combat Round #3

The Phoney War#3

Iraq and Canada attacking Persia and Iraqi rebels

Canada : Unit#6,8,9,18 and 21, giving 64 Basic Strength. 105 SU required, 214 SU available, 109 SU final
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Only 53 may participate in this round due to Iraqi instability and Persian influence. 0 are neutral at this time, the other 19 having gone to form Iraqi rebels faction. Since last round: 5 of the neutral have gone to the Iraqi rebel faction, 4 of the neutral have gone the Iraq faction.
Mil Rank 3, Mil tech 8.0, Sum Basic Strength: 116, Final Combat Strength: 7424

Persia: Units 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 22, giving 63 Basic Strength. With units 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25 en route and arriving in QCR#4. 125 SU required, 135 SU available, 10 SU final
Iraqi rebels: 17 Basic Strength
Mil Rank 4, Mil tech 7.8, Sum Basic Strength: 80, Final Combat Strength: 4868

Odds are 7424/4868 = 1.525 which becomes 1.5:1 Odds, shifted 1 column to the right for difference in Military Rank, Final Odds 2:1
16:31, Today: Referee rolled 7 using 1d10.  Phoney War#3e.

Results: 20%/5=4% loss to Attacker, 60%/5=12% loss to Defender,
Canada, Iraq: 0.04 x 116 available hits = 4.64 = 5
Persia, Iraqi rebels: 0.12 X 80 available hits =  9.6 = 10
Iraq reduced to 46 Basic Strength
Iraqi rebels reduced to 12 Basic Strength
Persia unit#7 destroyed


-------------------------------------

We will have a Quick Combat Round#4 and you will have until November 3, 2019 12:00 UTC if you want to issue order for combat, or expend Response PApoints, etc.
Germany
player, 560 posts
Mon 28 Oct 2019
at 18:34
  • msg #37

Re: Results for Quick Combat Round #3

Referee:
We will have a Quick Combat Round#4 and you will have until November 3, 2019 12:00 UTC if you want to issue order for combat, or expend Response PApoints, etc.

From Messages part in the HP:

quote:
The results for Quick Combat Round #3 have been posted to the RPOL forum. We will have a Quick Combat Round#4 and you will have until October 30, 2019 12:00 UTC if you want to issue order for combat, or expend Response PApoints, etc. Unless something big changes, we will be seeing:


So, which date is it?
Referee
GM, 169 posts
Mon 4 Nov 2019
at 02:52
  • msg #38

Results for Quick Combat Round #4

The Phoney War#4

Iraq and Canada attacking Persia and Iraqi rebels

Canada : Unit#6,8,9,18 and 21, giving 64 Basic Strength. 105 SU required, 109 SU available, 4 SU final
Iraq: Original 76 Basic Strength. Current strength 47.

Mil Rank 3, Mil tech 8.0, Sum Basic Strength: 111, Final Combat Strength: 7104

Persia: Units 5, 6, 8, 13, 22, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25 , giving 107 Basic Strength. 350 SU required, 10 SU available, 0 SU final
Iraqi rebels: 12 Basic Strength
Mil Rank 4, Mil tech 7.8, Sum Basic Strength: 119, Final Combat Strength: 7240

Odds are 7104/7240 = 0.981 which becomes 1:1.5 Odds, shifted 1 column to the right for difference in Military Rank, Shifted 2 to the right for an almost complete lack of supplies for the Persian/IraqiRebels side. Final Odds 2:1
20:12, Today: Referee rolled 10 using 1d10.  Phoney War#4.

Results: 0%/5=0% loss to Attacker, 100% due to lack of supplies this is not divided by 5 however due to the partial supplies this is reduced to a final of 80% loss to Defender,
Canada, Iraq: 0.00 x 111 available hits = 0
Persia, Iraqi rebels: 0.8 X 119 available hits =  95.2 = 96

Iraqi rebels reduced to 1 Basic Strength
Persia unit#6, 11, 12, 13, 21, 22 destroyed

The Iraqi Rebel faction surrenders.
-------------------------------------

The GM decrees that enough time has passed in the Turn that we will not have a Quick Combat Round#5 unless a player goes to some notable effort. Players will have until November 10, 2019 12:00 UTC if you want to issue orders for combat, expend Response PApoints, etc. upon which the 2055 Turn will be considered to have ended.
Sign In