A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
The Anunia Convention is called the Anunia Convention because Jess wanted Amokolia to gain more prestige and said, "Let's write a new recwar convention."
The Anunia Convention was written because several prominent people were dissatisfied with SNARL as it was, and wanted to fix it up. At the time, there were various recwar conventions around that were used internationally. SNARL was generally used. ZRS had been tested (though deemed too judge-intensive). ADB was around, though the two questions on every recwarrers lips were: "Will a war ever be fought with ADB?" and "Will a normal war ever be fought on Giess?". Anunia was deliberately written to provide a half-way point between SNARL and ADB. SNARL embodied all of simplicity, and a host of assumptions the original creators were used to but were lost on everyone else. ADB embodied all of realism, and a host of complexities that turned off most potential participants. Anunia tried to fit in the middle - to be simple, but to resolve all the ambiguous assumptions, and to allow extension for the more experienced recwarrers. That mostly came in the form of 'Experienced Units' (at the time, making your own units in Paint was all the rage), 'Existing National Defence' and allowing any unit to be used, while still providing 'standardised' ones for those who wanted them.
Now, the international recwarring scene is quite a different place. The old stalwarts of Stomark, Alexandria, New Britannia, Natopia and Riponia have all but disappeared. Babkha has reared its head for the last time. Anunia stands as the only real choice for international recwars. MRWS or any equivalent recwarring organisation is long since gone (at least, anything international). Antica and Extreme have returned to the MCS recwar scene after a year or two's absence. And my job as moderator of the Anunia forum has basically become to try and compromise between the two evolving 'factions' - those interested in realism and high level military knowledge; and those interested in game balance and story telling. And this is hard as I'm probably the leader of the second 'faction'. Neither is wrong about how best to do recwar. They're just different, and as the latest war has shown, Anunia's attempt to clarify all assumptions still hasn't resolved everything, as a few different assumptions that Chrimigules and Extreme have brought from earlier recwarring have clashed horribly with the assumptions the Novatainians and Tokians have been making.
I have little doubt that Chrim, Extreme and Monty could write a charter that would suit recwarring as they want it. And I know that Novatainia and Toketi can write a charter that would suit recwarring as they want it because we have. The question is, if we want Anunia to remain the only option for international recwars, how can we write it in such a way both 'factions' are happy, or, if not happy, at least equally dissatisfied . The ideal would probably be something where those who want can go into greater levels of complexity, but those who don't want to are not in any way pressured into doing so.
So, what will we as a community do? Will Anunia go one way or the other? Will we work hard and find the middle path? Or will we end up with Anunia A and Anunia B ... and whoever starts the war gets to pick the version? The time is nigh to make a choice one way or another. (not to be melodramatic or anything ...).
The Anunia Convention was written because several prominent people were dissatisfied with SNARL as it was, and wanted to fix it up. At the time, there were various recwar conventions around that were used internationally. SNARL was generally used. ZRS had been tested (though deemed too judge-intensive). ADB was around, though the two questions on every recwarrers lips were: "Will a war ever be fought with ADB?" and "Will a normal war ever be fought on Giess?". Anunia was deliberately written to provide a half-way point between SNARL and ADB. SNARL embodied all of simplicity, and a host of assumptions the original creators were used to but were lost on everyone else. ADB embodied all of realism, and a host of complexities that turned off most potential participants. Anunia tried to fit in the middle - to be simple, but to resolve all the ambiguous assumptions, and to allow extension for the more experienced recwarrers. That mostly came in the form of 'Experienced Units' (at the time, making your own units in Paint was all the rage), 'Existing National Defence' and allowing any unit to be used, while still providing 'standardised' ones for those who wanted them.
Now, the international recwarring scene is quite a different place. The old stalwarts of Stomark, Alexandria, New Britannia, Natopia and Riponia have all but disappeared. Babkha has reared its head for the last time. Anunia stands as the only real choice for international recwars. MRWS or any equivalent recwarring organisation is long since gone (at least, anything international). Antica and Extreme have returned to the MCS recwar scene after a year or two's absence. And my job as moderator of the Anunia forum has basically become to try and compromise between the two evolving 'factions' - those interested in realism and high level military knowledge; and those interested in game balance and story telling. And this is hard as I'm probably the leader of the second 'faction'. Neither is wrong about how best to do recwar. They're just different, and as the latest war has shown, Anunia's attempt to clarify all assumptions still hasn't resolved everything, as a few different assumptions that Chrimigules and Extreme have brought from earlier recwarring have clashed horribly with the assumptions the Novatainians and Tokians have been making.
I have little doubt that Chrim, Extreme and Monty could write a charter that would suit recwarring as they want it. And I know that Novatainia and Toketi can write a charter that would suit recwarring as they want it because we have. The question is, if we want Anunia to remain the only option for international recwars, how can we write it in such a way both 'factions' are happy, or, if not happy, at least equally dissatisfied . The ideal would probably be something where those who want can go into greater levels of complexity, but those who don't want to are not in any way pressured into doing so.
So, what will we as a community do? Will Anunia go one way or the other? Will we work hard and find the middle path? Or will we end up with Anunia A and Anunia B ... and whoever starts the war gets to pick the version? The time is nigh to make a choice one way or another. (not to be melodramatic or anything ...).
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
- chrimigules
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:04 am
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
Oi, why are you lumping me into a group that isn't interested in storytelling? And why must there be a dichotomy? In my opinion, being accurate frees you to craft a story. The goal of recwarring is to collectively write a story, and it's hard to do that when you have secret moves and people doing things that can't be done, or ignoring things that should be done. I don't consider myself to be in a crowd that prefers simply to win. I'd rather write a story about losing.
I'm a big supporter of Section VII.A, one of the few things directly carried over from the SNARL charter.
I'm a big supporter of Section VII.A, one of the few things directly carried over from the SNARL charter.
Коля лает «гав-гав».
- Lord_Montague
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:39 pm
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
Yes, I resent the remark that I'm not interested in story telling also. I agree with Chrim that the creation of a story does not mean that one negates military accuracy and vice versa.
I can create a narrative just as well (and arguably better) than a number of Novatainians have in the past. Look at Second Micronational World War; a grieving commander bitterly opposed to his enemies as he believes they killed his family seeking revenge for their deaths by any and all means necessary. For goodness sake, I just won a FNORD for storytelling! Chrim had a brilliant narrative in this war stemming from the destruction of the Enyo and the missing siblings etc. Meanwhile, if I'm honest, most of your commanders had no story bar to hunt Extreme down. If I'd had the time in this war I would have developed my story better from my opening post but time restrictions and unfortunate events in RL stopped me from doing so.
I think your attempt to rally people has done nothing more than polarise people, Andreas.
I can create a narrative just as well (and arguably better) than a number of Novatainians have in the past. Look at Second Micronational World War; a grieving commander bitterly opposed to his enemies as he believes they killed his family seeking revenge for their deaths by any and all means necessary. For goodness sake, I just won a FNORD for storytelling! Chrim had a brilliant narrative in this war stemming from the destruction of the Enyo and the missing siblings etc. Meanwhile, if I'm honest, most of your commanders had no story bar to hunt Extreme down. If I'd had the time in this war I would have developed my story better from my opening post but time restrictions and unfortunate events in RL stopped me from doing so.
I think your attempt to rally people has done nothing more than polarise people, Andreas.
In Battle; Unbeatable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
-
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:26 pm
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
I think that when Andreas talks of story, he talks more of an RPG-style elaborate story that has absolutely no major development (war-related) in most story posts. Thus, something akin to what he has been posting in this war.
I think what he wants/was thinking about was posts where 80% of the post talks about story (non-war related stuff) and then 20% or less about the war. Basically the entire move is made in a summary or something.
If it is the above, then I agree I fall in the other category primarily because i keep it the other way around. I put 80% of my post roughly towards a war-related military action (i might describe how the attack is to be carried out, what weapons to use, other potential moves in case of random enemy actions etc...) and then 20% towards story (which is either related to certain character development or again towards improving/raising morale of the unit).
I think what he wants/was thinking about was posts where 80% of the post talks about story (non-war related stuff) and then 20% or less about the war. Basically the entire move is made in a summary or something.
If it is the above, then I agree I fall in the other category primarily because i keep it the other way around. I put 80% of my post roughly towards a war-related military action (i might describe how the attack is to be carried out, what weapons to use, other potential moves in case of random enemy actions etc...) and then 20% towards story (which is either related to certain character development or again towards improving/raising morale of the unit).
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
*sigh* Did I say you guys didn't like story telling? I just said you liked realism and military more, and the otherside put story telling and game balance as a higher priority. What, did you think I was implying no Tokian had any military knowledge?
Montague, I know you can write stories. As I recall I nominated you for the FNORD. Likewise Chrim - you, Scott and Ardy kept the war of Gascon Liberation interesting. But you also all seem to agree a high level of realism is needed, sometimes at the loss of game balance, and 'storytelling' seemed a good describing word for the other view point. Because, Tokians aside, people like Harvey, Scott and the Novatainians have limited military knowledge and have this strange belief we should be able to recwar fine with basic military knowledge because we've done a whole lot like that. We come more for the joy of backstory and pulling off strategies that are interesting to describe. But when any dispute requires us to spend an hour researching military units for some obscure tertiary function to be able to do anything, we find that annoying. Perhaps just like the law of narrative necessity (what the story needs, the story gets) seemed to annoy you, Montague, when we finished off the Omen by lifting an island . Oh, and if you'd read some of Harvey and Gman's thoughts ....
Take the comment as it was intended. There definitely is a difference in our approach to how a recwar should be run, and it is cropping up in how best to cost units and decide battles. If I've labelled the two sides inadequately, oh well. There's still the issue Why must there be a dichotomy? Well, that's what I'm hoping we can sort out together, and remove the 'must' .
Oh, and for the record Extreme - most of my posts actually were my commanders spending the whole time talking about what they were doing. I just added in a few Andreas posts in response to Scott's evolving story, which turned out to be most useful when Scott ran out of time to finish his plan .
Montague, I know you can write stories. As I recall I nominated you for the FNORD. Likewise Chrim - you, Scott and Ardy kept the war of Gascon Liberation interesting. But you also all seem to agree a high level of realism is needed, sometimes at the loss of game balance, and 'storytelling' seemed a good describing word for the other view point. Because, Tokians aside, people like Harvey, Scott and the Novatainians have limited military knowledge and have this strange belief we should be able to recwar fine with basic military knowledge because we've done a whole lot like that. We come more for the joy of backstory and pulling off strategies that are interesting to describe. But when any dispute requires us to spend an hour researching military units for some obscure tertiary function to be able to do anything, we find that annoying. Perhaps just like the law of narrative necessity (what the story needs, the story gets) seemed to annoy you, Montague, when we finished off the Omen by lifting an island . Oh, and if you'd read some of Harvey and Gman's thoughts ....
Take the comment as it was intended. There definitely is a difference in our approach to how a recwar should be run, and it is cropping up in how best to cost units and decide battles. If I've labelled the two sides inadequately, oh well. There's still the issue Why must there be a dichotomy? Well, that's what I'm hoping we can sort out together, and remove the 'must' .
I quite agree with that comment.The goal of recwarring is to collectively write a story, and it's hard to do that when you have secret moves
Oh, and for the record Extreme - most of my posts actually were my commanders spending the whole time talking about what they were doing. I just added in a few Andreas posts in response to Scott's evolving story, which turned out to be most useful when Scott ran out of time to finish his plan .
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
- chrimigules
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:04 am
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
Perhaps less a dichotomy and more a spectrum?
I mean, I personally love looking up technical things, but at some point, I pull myself away from my calculations and say "you know what... screw it."
I mean, I personally love looking up technical things, but at some point, I pull myself away from my calculations and say "you know what... screw it."
Коля лает «гав-гав».
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: A Brief History of Anunia ... and a new direction
Yes, spectrum is a very good word.
Andreas
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander
"He showed up three or four years ago and accidentally took over the micronational world by being way more competent and enthusiastic than everyone else. Now he sort of rules us all, but it's a benevolent sort of thing, as far as we know."
~Scott Alexander