[NationStates] Location, Location, Location

[Gregor]

I believe freedom from corruption is hard enough of a stat to maintain and realistic enough (Administrative efficiency) to claim spots.

I do not say this because I have low corruption (In fact, the inverse).

But the stat requires sacrifice from others usually in issues (Economy in particular) and rarely comes up.


Alternatively, I think my flat rate of population growth equalling territories combined with the current stats would work enough.
(One free territory per week)

 

[Lord_Sinclair]

Again, I must reiterate that the current system is not designed to be completely arbitrary in how stats are used to claim land. The stat categories currently being used have a direct link to expansion. Frankly, I can't see any connection between corruption/freedom from and expansion.

Also, I really, really don't like the "one territory per week" system idea. Under that system, every nation would be exactly the same size, and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Cap]

Also, I really, really don't like the "one territory per week" system idea. Under that system, every nation would be exactly the same size, and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

I believe he means you get one territory a week free, + whatever you can claim using stats.

 

[The Courier]

Changed my decision:

DEF: 10
REL: 37
CUL: 0

 

[Lord_Sinclair]

I believe he means you get one territory a week free, + whatever you can claim using stats.

Why add a free territory, though, if you're using stats?

Furthermore, what's the reasoning behind giving a "free" territory? Just for the sake of more rapid expansion across the map? Half the point of the reset was to prevent crowding up the map; I have no desire to speed up expansion.

 

[LightTwig]

I think the point of culture, military, and religion being the factors that allow you to claim means that militaristic nations become large (as they have in history) whereas nations prioritising tech or freedom from corruption remain medium-small.

 

[Lord_Sinclair]

For the sake of convenience, I'm going to use my initial post about using SAL as a percentage boost to Defense Forces as a poll to see whether it should be implemented or not.

Right now, the post has 3 agrees and 3 disagrees, so it's a tie vote.

However, I throw my own vote into the disagree category, so the count actually stands at 3-4 against. I know, I'm voting against my own proposal, but I still feel as though the categories used to calculate claims should be restricted to Culture, Religiousness, and Defense Forces, categories that have clear, direct links to expansion.

 

[LightTwig]

I also think that allowing science might lead to people asking for other factors contributing to expansion, when really, I agree that it should remain as the three initial ones.

 

[Tomato150]

I personally like the science modifier for expansion, due to the reasoning you're not gonna see knights claiming much land in a world of guns. This would give countries, such as colonial empires, the edge over more primitive nations which in turn, would provide a more realistic expansion game

 

[BarbarianGaming]

I personally like the science modifier for expansion, due to the reasoning you're not gonna see knights claiming much land in a world of guns. This would give countries, such as colonial empires, the edge over more primitive nations which in turn, would provide a more realistic expansion game

The technology difference in nations I don't think is big enough to make a real difference as we are all playing nations with access to technology from 1950-Now.

 

[Tomato150]

The technology difference in nations I don't think is big enough to make a real difference as we are all playing nations with access to technology from 1950-Now.

Exaggerating there, but I was trying to get the point across that you don't see nations that are less advanced than others taking more land than more advanced nations, unless it's uncontested

 

[LightTwig]

Exaggerating there, but I was trying to get the point across that you don't see nations that are less advanced than others taking more land than more advanced nations, unless it's uncontested

If you have a large enough army tech doesn't matter much. Since none of us are in the stone age, I'm pretty sure the differences in tech are incremental to say the least.

 

[Tomato150]

If you have a large enough army tech doesn't matter much. Since none of us are in the stone age, I'm pretty sure the differences in tech are incremental to say the least.

Very true, though since we all started at the same time, giving us all equal populations . . . Tech might give that slight edge needed.

 

[BarbarianGaming]

Very true, though since we all started at the same time, giving us all equal populations . . . Tech might give that slight edge needed.

Slight edges usually lead to Pyhhric victories.

 

[MaelstromPuddle]

Slight edges usually lead to Pyhhric victories.

Don't you mean? Every win for the Imperium in all of Warhammer 40k?

 

[Baron]

Defense Forces at 22, expanding nation to the following:

 

[Raith]

these are the new claims for Falsark

 

[Lord_Sinclair]

Updated Map with Claims:

(Zanalan D/R/C = 18/5/0)

I must say, quite a few nations are taking a... unique approach to expansion. I'm see quite a few nations that claimed territories in a line rather than a circle. OOC, this is technically acceptable, but IC, the effort required to hold a line of territories is much greater than the effort required to hold the same number of territories closer to the mother province.

 

[Lord_Sinclair]

Miscellaneous Trivia Fact:

When I placed the nation names on the map, I attempted to have them cover the territories I would have expanded the nations into if I was each nation.

 

[Tomato150]

Miscellaneous Trivia Fact:

When I placed the nation names on the map, I attempted to have them cover the territories I would have expanded the nations into if I was each nation.

How'd it look, curious to see what the nations would look like in your perspective.