Growth mod

A place for all those house rules and custom campaign ideas from the players.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Re: Growth mod

Postby darbycmcd on Tue 02 Dec 2014 09:34

one good thing about decomp (can we call this type of game this?) is that you don't need to decrease costs as much. A strategy is ranked according to alternatives. So if it has a, say 3% return, that is great if everything else is 2% So for example, in a slow pop growth game, those extra PU are super valuable, especially if they are from a different HI (so that they get different T planets).
darbycmcd
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue 14 Jul 2009 14:38

Re: Growth mod

Postby Cralis on Tue 02 Dec 2014 15:07

reddavid wrote:The history of the Marine Corp in WW2 shows the progression from makeshift to professional invasions. Both equipment and training-doctrine show a vast change in just a few years.


More correctly, it shows the progression from an organization that had been theorizing about sea-borne invasions for a couple decades to an organization with practical experience in those same invasions, as implemented across the Pacific Theater. The basics of coastal invasions had been in discussion in design since WW1, and they even had prototype landing craft, but obviously no opportunity to actually practice them in any wide scale.

As per standard practice, the U.S. Marines took to it with a gusto and met the high expectations marvelously. I would say I'm biased, but history supports me. :)

I like having multiple ways to invade, some better-expensive than others. Some empires will invade a lot and others uncommon or rarely.


Already there are three ways to land invasion forces:
1. Landing large units on the ground and disembarking,
2. Landing shuttles on the ground and disembarking, eventually with a shuttle designed for the purpose,
and 3. Air dropping from the atmosphere.

We are going to add more options at higher SLs when we add new material.

darbycmcd wrote:one good thing about decomp (can we call this type of game this?) is that you don't need to decrease costs as much. A strategy is ranked according to alternatives. So if it has a, say 3% return, that is great if everything else is 2% So for example, in a slow pop growth game, those extra PU are super valuable, especially if they are from a different HI (so that they get different T planets).


Perhaps. PU also lose value since they no longer proliferate like bunny rabbits. The other investments we have don't decrease their ROR, so colonization takes a pretty major hit in the ROR department.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10738
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Growth mod

Postby reddavid on Tue 02 Dec 2014 15:37

I recently read the History of U.S. Marine Corps Operations in World War II in seven volumes. Just wow what they went through. I guess makeshift could be better worded as inexperienced but early was making due with limited equipment and doctrine. They were masters of improvisation and endurance.

Theory was good for the big picture but they learned a lot of details the hard way. Why I call them professional at the end.

Your points 1,2,3 work well as a Professional progression. If the Marine Corp had unlimited money in the 20s and 30s they may have discovered most of the details and equipment. My point is limited money limits professional development because theory is not very useful by its self. I think todays US armed forces show the power of money.

I guess my big point is you are on the right track. The framework is there, just make it fun.
Let me cry and I will take on the world
reddavid
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 687
Joined: Thu 02 Feb 2012 23:49
Location: Orion–Cygnus Arm

Re: Growth mod

Postby Cralis on Tue 02 Dec 2014 18:43

reddavid wrote:I recently read the History of U.S. Marine Corps Operations in World War II in seven volumes. Just wow what they went through. I guess makeshift could be better worded as inexperienced but early was making due with limited equipment and doctrine. They were masters of improvisation and endurance.


That's only one part of the United States Marine Corps history. Read about ALL the history and you'll be amazed. We have been slugging it through the mud making it work with sub-standard equipment from the Revolutionary War to Now. Read about Chapultepec. Tripoli. The trenches of France in WW1. The Vietnam War... did you know where the U.S. Marines were located, we were winning that war? Read about Korea and Chosen Ridge. The Boxer Rebellion in China. Lebanon. Grenada. Panama. Persian Gulf. Somalia. Kosovo. Timor. Afghanistan. Iraq... read about Najaf, Ramadi, Fallujah, and more. We have a long and storied history of young men making a difference wherever they go.

As Ronald Reagan said: "Some people wonder if they've made a difference in life. The United States Marines don't have that problem."

My grandfather was an Army Air Corps gunner in a B-24 flying off of Guadalcanal in WW2. When they instituted the 50 missions and you go home policy, he had 58. He once told me that the only reason he didn't die on the ground was because of the United States Marines on the perimeter.

Read the story of Platoon Sergeant Mitchell Paige and why his was the face of the first G.I. Joe.

The equipment I worked with was ten years old and came from the Army. The weapon I originally went to Iraq with had been in the Corps for more than 10 years, and it still worked like a well-oiled machine (and it did when I returned it). We were only just starting to receive new personal protective gear and equipment when I was deploying. Heck, the Humvee I originally drove around the base had old kevlar armor inserts under the sheets, on the floor boards, taped the roof, and side panels to provide some small measure of protection in case it was shot at.

There is no finer fighting force than the United States Marine Corps.

I know you're already expressing amazement. I'm just quite passionate about my Marines and easy to get worked up about them. :)

Theory was good for the big picture but they learned a lot of details the hard way. Why I call them professional at the end.


They were professional in the beginning. They just didn't have organizational experience in conducting coastal landings in the beginning of the war. I think we are talking about two different things here. Try telling a Marine he's not a professional. You'll hear a lot of yelling. We most certainly are and always have been. The word you want to use is inexperienced. :)

We have a saying in the Marine Corps: Semper Gumby. Always flexible. We can make it work with a broken springfield rifle, some chewing gum, and a kbar knife. We always have. We always will. We are proud for a reason.

Your points 1,2,3 work well as a Professional progression. If the Marine Corp had unlimited money in the 20s and 30s they may have discovered most of the details and equipment. My point is limited money limits professional development because theory is not very useful by its self. I think todays US armed forces show the power of money.

I guess my big point is you are on the right track. The framework is there, just make it fun.


Awesome! In that case, I really think you'll like the stuff I'm planning to implement. I just need to finish the current projects I'm currently working on so I can get to the Section V re-write.

The different "stages" of planetary assault methods are a technological progression. My intent is to make invasions easier through technology so that they can eventually compete more with other investment methods. Right now invasions and rebuilding are expensive enough that a lot of players don't bother.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10738
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Previous

Return to House Rules

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron