Mechanics Beta Test 1

---

SCENARIO: Season 1 of Year 300, 7A. The kingdoms of Neitiznot and Jatizso have been through many hardships since the end of the sixth age. The Burgher and King of their respective isles have lost control of their constituency and their kingdoms have been split. You are now to play as the new Burgher and King (or, really, any title you can think of) of what is left of the kingdoms.

This beta-game is to test the efficiency of military v. diplomatic conquest. Neitiznot is the military kingdom, meaning it has an abundance of resources, and it will only take regions through military conquest. Jatizso is the diplomacy kingdom, meaning it has less resources, and CANNOT take regions through military. We shall now see how viable diplomacy is as a combat to... well, combat!

Conditions:

Both kingdoms are in an alliance - There is no need to attack each other
Both kingdoms are assumed Guthixian/Fremennik ideologies
Neitiznot is to only take regions by military force
Jatizso is to only take regions by diplomacy
Boats are forbidden

The game ends when all regions have been captured by any faction


Region List:

ABM - Abandoned Mine
- Wild

BRI - Bridge to Resource Island
- Wild

BTI - Bridge To Isles
- Settlement

CO - Coast
- Wild

DL - Deadlands
- Settlement

HBT - Here Be Trolls
- Settlement

JAB - Jatizso Bridge
- Settlement

JAM - Jatizso Mines
- Settlement

JAO - Jatizso Outskirt
- Wild

JAV - Jatizso Village
- Settlement

JAZ - Jatizso
- Starting Settlement

JP - Jatizso Port
- Settlement

MI - Mountain Island
- Settlement

MTH - More Trolls Here
- Settlement

NEI - Neitiznot
- Starting Settlement

NEO - Neitiznot Outskirts
- Wild

NEV - Neitiznot Village
- Settlement

OUN - Outside Neitiznot
- Wild

PRT - Port
- Settlement

RES - Resource Island
- Wild

RKC - Rellekka Camp
- Settlement

TKL - Troll King Lair
- Advanced

WAS - Wastelands
- Wild

WTO - Wizards Tower Outpost
- Settlement

YAK - Yak Fields
- Settlement

---

For this test, Urzanko and Lime will be competing against each other. In the future, we will be posing tests for:

Ground Battles w/ GW5 Mechanics
Naval Battles
Naval v. Land Battles
Dissent
Etc.

If you have an idea of what to test, or wish to be involved in a future test - please let me know through whatever medium you'd like :3

I presume Urzanko is that friend of yours?

Now, if we're doing playtesting like this, there needs to be a lot more combinations, and some that aren't more obvious than others.

I'll think of ideas later, I'll edit the post.


EDIT:
Espionage/Diplomacy, to let's say, find something of great power? Maybe add research in there.

ok so, am not sure how much or detailed I need the Leader dude for this test so am just going to list some basics to get it started and fill in any gaps that appear, and lets face it, theirs going to be some. O and Also I would like to say thank you for having me and I hope that I can test good enough to make the game fun. Good Luck.

Leader: King Leonardo of Jatizso
-Background-leads the Jatizso Faction as its current king. A Young strong willed ruler Seeks to expand his kingdoms territory in order to recover better from the hardships it has endured. To further prevent hardships, his goal is to use Diplomatic means to convert neighboring lands. Also is guarded by a male and female Body guard named Brain and Linda just in case a territory/region sends assassins or something to Leonardo.

Faction trait: Diplomat- makes Jatizso unable to take territory/region through military means, but improves Diplomatic units ability to increase relations with territory/region.

I would also like to know if Espionage is an option for me in this test and/or is it going to be used against me. there is also the issue about umm, is there going to be bandits or mercenaries attacking me? If so, should I like make a few units to protect places and/or my self. Thank you Mr.Toa for bringing up the espionage idea, I forgot to ask about it for this test.

If you want to heavily go RP-style, very detailed - very good.

You can have it any size, but fleshened is always better!

Lime, I can see your influence on this test. I'm afraid this particular test is immensely flawed. The ratio of settlements to wild regions is ridiculously out of balance to the point that any attempts of military conquest in the form it would appear in the actual game is nearly impossible, since all the npc-settlements would band together to destroy the one who is acting aggressive.

Similarly, too little breathing room makes diplomacy much harder as well, not to mention the fact that the troll king lair is run by trolls... Trolls who want to eat hoomans. They're not going to be diplomatic about it.

Lack of military on the diplomat gives them a huge disadvantage on the diplomatic playground, and they lose a valuable asset - threats. The lack of diplomacy on the militant faction gives them a huge disadvantage on the actual map, and they lose a valuable way of gaining a territory - surrender. I should not have been surprised that you would think of the ways of obtaining regions as black-and-white as you do. You cannot separate military from diplomacy, and vise versa. The entire game is based on juggling your relations with others through diplomacy, politics and the size of your army.

Back to the drawing board, Lime.

Oh, and welcome Urzanko. Espionage is one of the core assets of diplomacy, and will play a huge role in the upcoming game.

Lord William wrote:

Lime, I can see your influence on this test. I'm afraid this particular test is immensely flawed. The ratio of settlements to wild regions is ridiculously out of balance to the point that any attempts of military conquest in the form it would appear in the actual game is nearly impossible, since all the npc-settlements would band together to destroy the one who is acting aggressive.

Similarly, too little breathing room makes diplomacy much harder as well, not to mention the fact that the troll king lair is run by trolls... Trolls who want to eat hoomans. They're not going to be diplomatic about it.

Lack of military on the diplomat gives them a huge disadvantage on the diplomatic playground, and they lose a valuable asset - threats. The lack of diplomacy on the militant faction gives them a huge disadvantage on the actual map, and they lose a valuable way of gaining a territory - surrender. I should not have been surprised that you would think of the ways of obtaining regions as black-and-white as you do. You cannot separate military from diplomacy, and vise versa. The entire game is based on juggling your relations with others through diplomacy, politics and the size of your army.

Back to the drawing board, Lime.

Oh, and welcome Urzanko. Espionage is one of the core assets of diplomacy, and will play a huge role in the upcoming game.

But Siroki entirely designed the map and chose Neitiznot and Jatizso as the playfield. The only thing I personally said was that the Diplomatic Faction shouldn't use a Military in order to conquer regions. I suggested Asgarnia or Kandarin. None of the map influence you attributed to me was actually mine.

Not sure whats going on but.....Honestly it's a good idea to see just how soon an NPC army fights back against Mr.Lime. Scaling would seem to be a big issue . Especially on NPC army size. And not all of them would team up against him. Also am interested to see how my side would work out. There's a chance I would get attacked by NPCs so having the armies from the places that already join me would be put to good use. It's a test for a reason and it being unbalance should just make it that more interesting. It's not like its going to be the only one. And am sure that if I help out Mr.Lime with reputation problems, he could help defend me. Lets just see how this goes.

Lime's reputation "problems" is his own fault. Honestly, you don't need to know the problems, because that'll probably ruin the entire game for you. So, don't ask why.

No teacher is better then experience. I still think that this incident needs to be let go for the better of all. Even thou I have no clue what's going on. I still think we should just still go for it. The Data will prove useful on the next test.

Toa Takanuva wrote:

Lime's reputation "problems" is his own fault. Honestly, you don't need to know the problems, because that'll probably ruin the entire game for you. So, don't ask why.

piss off, you have a reputation of instigating things.

Limes wrote:

Toa Takanuva wrote:

Lime's reputation "problems" is his own fault. Honestly, you don't need to know the problems, because that'll probably ruin the entire game for you. So, don't ask why.

piss off, you have a reputation of instigating things.

Haha this is a complete misunderstanding. Urzanko was not referring to Lime's reputation as a player, but rather his Warlord's reputation within the God Wars game. Look at the context, its about being attacked... in game!

So, now that we have cleared that out of the way...


I am in agreement with William on this. It is a bit crowded, and won't be a good simulator due to the balance of Settlement : Non-Settlement Regions. But honestly, if it getting the ball rolling I am happy.

so I guess its rethinking time on region placement? shame, kind of looking forward to some action. Siroki get on and fix this madness.

Lime's problem (like I've tried explaining to him) in this particular aspect is that I am unable to drive to his skull that one cannot go on a mad rampage and conquer territory after another without any consequences. Anyone who attempts this WILL be crushed. The test is flawed not only because the map will give utterly inaccurate data but also because the fundamental principle on which it is built does not truly exist.

Like I already said, you cannot separate diplomacy and military and expect it to work.

Well, are history has shown that many powerful armies conquered huge parts of the world, Rome, Mongolia, hell even France. Pure military might is a valid option in my opinion. Plus, u know for damn sure someone is going to try it, especially when they gathered enough forces to overwhelm a group of regions. Its just going to happen, History repeats.

Said player can have fun when the entire world bands together to destroy them. Like you said, history repeats itself, and the players of this game have a nasty habit of allying themselves against a single enemy, usually the most powerful faction.

And when the npc states join this alliance as well... No single faction can conquer the world without diplomacy.

Lord William wrote:

Said player can have fun when the entire world bands together to destroy them. Like you said, history repeats itself, and the players of this game have a nasty habit of allying themselves against a single enemy, usually the most powerful faction.

And when the npc states join this alliance as well... No single faction can conquer the world without diplomacy.

Thats what this test was designed to find out, because I am of the opinion that Military Prowess is far too powerful in comparison to Diplomacy: The point being that a person investing all his resources into Military would not be inhibited by his lack of diplomacy. I feel that this is a massive hole in our game, and that players could ignore the Diplomatic way, and therefore we should fix it.

To back up Urzanko (By the way, I don't believe I've properly introduced myself. Apologies, I'm Lime, and I played the Nardan Commonwealth in the previous game.) the Trolls had VERY successful military campaigns during the 5th Age, having managed to constantly attack Burthrope, severely damage Neitiznot, and the Trolls nearly won against the Dwarves of Keldagrim until the Wise Old Man got involved. If Diplomacy and War are so inseparable, then how come the Trolls were so successful?

Also, as you mentioned the occasions when players Ganged up against a single faction, and that Single Faction was doomed to be destroyed. That's wrong. You see, in God Wars 3, you pussied out. You surrendered in a move that wasn't technically legal. When people got wind of the move, I was a good gamemaster and put an end to it before anything could be done, and apologized for my actions. In God Wars 4, there was no real offensives against the faction of Superior force: Toa. All offensives were aborted. There were no real attacks against the Bandosian Empire, just Toa's miserable failures of attacks against Wushanko, Siroki's retreat before Combat, my Brinkmanship in Karamja, and that incident at Lumbridge when Veylantz decided that giving Toa what he wanted was more important than preserving the already battered rules and balance of the game. So, there was never a real opportunity to test if the Superior Factions would've been destroyed by the Alliance of the less powerful nations. And, to be honest, I predicted that, had the assault against you in God Wars 3 would've been able to be fended off, even if it had been very bloody. Also, I remember you telling me that I blundered my opportunities against Toa, playing the Siroki-Infiltration card too early. As you can see, Just because a bunch of people gang up to take down the big guy doesn't mean that those bunch of people will technically win. The Big guy still has a winning record.

And even then, the statement that other factions will band together into a unified alliance in order to maintain a balance of power isn't true. If you would recall, Ascertes kept by your side in God Wars 3, and later on in God Wars 3, when the Menaphite Pantheon was clearly the most powerful faction in the game, spanning the Misthalinian, Morytanian, and Kharidian regions in their entirety, the other factions didn't band together to kill you Ascertes' Empire which you yourself had taken control of. Everyone was too busy trying to take down Veylantz, or, towards the end, Yuccon tried to take down his long-time ally: Unguis. Yet, while the entire world was at war, nobody raised a hand against the Massive Empire directly the the East. Also, in God Wars 4, Toa wasn't politically isolated: He had Yuccon with him. Yes, I understand that, in those scenarios, the Supreme Power had some degree of Diplomacy going on. But, while it is true that people will generally band together to take down a common enemy, that doesn't necessarily mean that the biggest guy on the block is the common enemy!  So, your statement that "all of the other powers will band together in order to fight the Supreme Power" is a nice ideal, but not correct. There will always be at least one power that is either loyal to the Big Bad, or intends to capitalize on the chaos that Big Bad's attack leads to.

But finally, I don't understand why you're so insistent to try and drill my brain in the incorrect fact that Diplomacy and Military are inseparable. If you're so confident that they are, then why not stand back and watch as I prove it to myself and have it blow up in my face? If you're right, then that means that I personally showed myself the truth, my self-confidence will be shot for a while, and you didn't have to do a bit of work to prove your point. If I'm right, that means we caught a big hole in our current Game's system, that people would be able to ignore the diplomatic game entirely, and we can go ahead fixing it before the Game's launch. It's a win-win.

So NPC can not only band together to fight you and others, they can join alliances too? holy crap there is going to be so much back stabbing u don't even know

Urzanko wrote:

So NPC can not only band together to fight you and others, they can join alliances too? holy crap there is going to be so much back stabbing u don't even know

Theoretically, yes.

NPCs joined alliances in the previous games, so yeah (Under certain circumstances).

I believe you just said the point I was making. Toa had Yuccon, Toa had diplomacy going on. The reason I'm against this "test" is the fact that unrealistic and flawed circumstances make any and all data gathered during it false.

The victorious faction in God Wars 5 will be the one who can manage both their aggression and their diplomacy with superior skill. You are welcome to go on a mad conquest, but unless you convince people you're not a threat, you will be destroyed.

You took me as an example from God Wars 3, where Ascertes stayed by my side when I faced the wrath of all the others. Newsflash: diplomacy. I didn't really pussy out, either: I merely executed a tactical action that you allowed, which then was completely legal. It was the best possible outcome from being beaten to a heap.

I understand, you want your precious Uzerite Empire to have a squeaky clean record of not harming anyone ever, just using your magical trading to take over the world. It's not going to happen. Do not delude yourself in being able to claim victory through diplomacy and politics alone, and realise that if you're too pussy to indulge in a little bit of headbashing, you may as well walk out.

Only through both masterful military tactics and cunning diplomacy and political manipulation will one be able to reign supreme.

Lord William wrote:

I believe you just said the point I was making. Toa had Yuccon, Toa had diplomacy going on. The reason I'm against this "test" is the fact that unrealistic and flawed circumstances make any and all data gathered during it false.

The victorious faction in God Wars 5 will be the one who can manage both their aggression and their diplomacy with superior skill. You are welcome to go on a mad conquest, but unless you convince people you're not a threat, you will be destroyed.

You took me as an example from God Wars 3, where Ascertes stayed by my side when I faced the wrath of all the others. Newsflash: diplomacy. I didn't really pussy out, either: I merely executed a tactical action that you allowed, which then was completely legal. It was the best possible outcome from being beaten to a heap.

I understand, you want your precious Uzerite Empire to have a squeaky clean record of not harming anyone ever, just using your magical trading to take over the world. It's not going to happen. Do not delude yourself in being able to claim victory through diplomacy and politics alone, and realise that if you're too pussy to indulge in a little bit of headbashing, you may as well walk out.

Only through both masterful military tactics and cunning diplomacy and political manipulation will one be able to reign supreme.

Fuck it, you'll never listen. Will you do anything to stop testing?

Unless you arrange this experiment in a way that it actually provides accurate information (there is none), I won't participate as its gamemaster. The best you could do is set up an open-world, general purpose beta, go on a rampage and get crushed.

Lord William wrote:

Unless you arrange this experiment in a way that it actually provides accurate information (there is none), I won't participate as its gamemaster. The best you could do is set up an open-world, general purpose beta, go on a rampage and get crushed.

The experiment *does* provide accurate information, and you were never intended to Gamemaster the experiment anyways. This experiment gets more gamemastering practice for Siroki.

So, first you get an imbalanced map, flawed test, and the gm is not the gm of the actual game. Well, have fun!

Well now then that's out of the way we can continue I guess, as soon as Siroki get on and says something. Also Hello Mister Lime, lets hope we can get some good tests in. Now, how about we do some science? btw Chariots Chariots