Postchivalry
Inactive Member
That's simply because we haven't HAD peacetime deployment in years ICly or even OOCly with Yamatai.
We also have to take into consideration that the in game mechanics are not equal to all real life tactics.
I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.
ALSO, moved... this is not a question.
Postchivalry said:That's simply because we haven't HAD peacetime deployment in years ICly or even OOCly with Yamatai.
I meant things that aren't necessarily straight-out, ship-to-ship warfare. E.g. there are plenty of ideas about taking on other ships, as well as subverting an enemy population. It made it kind of confusing to read.
I think it is completely unfair to force the other faction GMs to list out their tactics. First off, it seems to me that none of the factions deal with situations the same way that Yamatai does. This is good, gives variation to the setting. Second, it means that the other factions deal with situations on a case-by-case basis. Third, Postchivalry, why are you trying to create bureaucracy where there doesn't need to be any?Postchivalry said:I've been thinking a lot on the aforementioned wiki entry, and made a couple of additions.
However, I think it's best if there's some agreed consensus on what's most important to address. That way ideas can be logically and cleanly organised, and thus doctrines realised.
Another thing that bugs me is that there isn't a clean division between a war deployment and a 'peacetime' deployment in the tactics page.
A possible way to organise this information is by the types of predominant forms of operations undertaken by the Yamatai Star Army. Then we can move onto things like what are the best ways of achieving goals in those different types of missions? And make references to past roleplays as both benchmarks.
Yamatai is the most powerful state in the setting. This does not make it the best. Just because Yamatai does it doesn't mean that everyone needs to.A possible way to organise this information is by the types of predominant forms of operations undertaken by the Yamatai Star Army.
It means that a game doesn't match real life. Having an "agreed consensus on what's most important to address" and "doctrines realised" may be useful IRL, but in a game it's just BS. Bureaucracy that's unneeded. Otherwise, after seven years, don't you think we would have made some by now?We also have to take into consideration that the in game mechanics are not equal to all real life tactics.
I don't understand.
She means that she has the technical pages open, for detail. She knows how to use them, it's making sure she remembers the details of what they are correctly.I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.
And so your argument is that it's too complex to think up guide lines for using these systems? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.
It's a guideline, not a rulebook, and if someone uses OOC information ICly, that's a separate issue not related to this article - If we went by your logic, we should keep our ships and culture articles hidden too so they wouldn't be used against us. It just doesn't make sense. If it exists on Star Army, it should be wikified. Yamatai has tactical norms and ideas, and so I'm finally getting around to wikifying them as well as adding new content. It's a forum for sharing concepts.1) It exposes your tactics to the enemy, or to players of another faction who may use OOC knowledge ICly. As Kim mentioned, we try to keep them separate. If they get a hold of your tactical guide, then you're screwed unless you deviate from that.
Most players aren't tactical geniuses, but if we have a page full of ideas, it can help inspire them. Again, the idea is to take the best ideas from various players throughout the Star Army so admirals and captains can continually refine and expand their "playbook" over time as a group. It's not required to follow the guide.Players are going to deviate from a guide anyway, so why have it.
The first statement is completely untrue. Reference materials are one of the main ways new players familiarize themselves with the site, and often new players have asked for something like this page before. While I agree mentoring is best, it doesn't work alone and it works best in conjunction with standard reference material. Plus, a wiki article will still be around even when there's no GMs online to help.3) Wes' comment about a guide being needed for training the future officers is groundless. While a guide could be used IRL, it isn't practical for teaching tactics for RP. Training is not simply done by handing someone a guide and saying "have fun!" You can also teach them directly. It's called "mentoring" and, as long as we have senior roleplayers around, there will be people available to teach the next generation of officers.
This guide INSPIRES creativity. It doesn't limit players. As a Star Army Admiral/Captain you might not always know what is best to do next--the tactics guide is a wealth of ideas to consider and be inspired by, and anyone can add to it.4) It cuts down on creativity. Not all situations are going to be exactly the same (and if they are then the GMs aren't doing their job well : p ). If you have a guide with exactly what to do with what equipment at what time, then that's going to be a monster of an article. And if it isn't and is just a vague "do this and this and this, see these articles for more information", then that's just going to add to all of those tabs that Kim and other players have open. Getting down to it, multiple tabs or a very good memory are going to be necessary with or without this guide you're asking for. Having a guide, tactical or not, is just one more tab to have open during a JP or SP session.
Postchivalry said:I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.
And so your argument is that it's too complex to think up guide lines for using these systems? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?