Reform
- Lord_Montague
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:39 pm
Reform
I think the time has come for Reform of the micronational recwarring interests and its my opinion that we do away with the Board of Annunia and instead become something similar to approaching the old MRWS.
Firstly I'd like to see the current idea of the Annunia Convention Board removed from the Annunia Convention and instead try to place it back into the old ways of the MRWS but more open. I don't know about others but I had problems with members of the MRWS board intent on abusing their power. I envisage an Association of Recwarring Micronations and States (ARMS) to oversee, store, maintain and enable the use of a number of recwarring rulesets. It would presided over by an elected Chairman appointed for a 6 month term and two associate members to oversee ARMS approved judiciary and common law and Points and Costings (envisaging Annunia and what I have heard are other developing charters based around SCUE.)
I propose that SNARL is offered along with Annunia and a reform of Annunia I like to call Annunia+. Annunia+ is the same as Annunia but the force limit is increased to 75,000 or 100,000, some of the points values are increased to maintain proportionality (ICBMS and stealth bombers is what I'm thinking of at the moment. Possibly A/C carriers?). Furthermore any other recwarring charter may be introduced for ARMS to maintain and look after, including any new SCUE related charter. I would also like to bring over the Zindarian Recwarring Rules (here:http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 072.0.html and explanatory notes here: http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 073.0.html). Although labour intensive for the judge and to a large degree dependent on a 3rd party's view on your moves it was a good recwar and it allows for cold as well as hot wars.
Another aspect that might be interesting is giving a sign up to the idea of permanent war, which was attempted in the MRWS but swiftly abandoned when Ocia did it. Essentially if you sign up to permanent war, you're permanently at risk of war or being invaded. For instance, in the recent dispute over Nova English Isles in Hamland, Hamland could have seized the islands by force and Nova England could have attempted to take them back. The same for the Amokolia crisis that brewed up. It adds a degree of reality but it is risky for the participants.
I look forward to hearing people's views!
Firstly I'd like to see the current idea of the Annunia Convention Board removed from the Annunia Convention and instead try to place it back into the old ways of the MRWS but more open. I don't know about others but I had problems with members of the MRWS board intent on abusing their power. I envisage an Association of Recwarring Micronations and States (ARMS) to oversee, store, maintain and enable the use of a number of recwarring rulesets. It would presided over by an elected Chairman appointed for a 6 month term and two associate members to oversee ARMS approved judiciary and common law and Points and Costings (envisaging Annunia and what I have heard are other developing charters based around SCUE.)
I propose that SNARL is offered along with Annunia and a reform of Annunia I like to call Annunia+. Annunia+ is the same as Annunia but the force limit is increased to 75,000 or 100,000, some of the points values are increased to maintain proportionality (ICBMS and stealth bombers is what I'm thinking of at the moment. Possibly A/C carriers?). Furthermore any other recwarring charter may be introduced for ARMS to maintain and look after, including any new SCUE related charter. I would also like to bring over the Zindarian Recwarring Rules (here:http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 072.0.html and explanatory notes here: http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 073.0.html). Although labour intensive for the judge and to a large degree dependent on a 3rd party's view on your moves it was a good recwar and it allows for cold as well as hot wars.
Another aspect that might be interesting is giving a sign up to the idea of permanent war, which was attempted in the MRWS but swiftly abandoned when Ocia did it. Essentially if you sign up to permanent war, you're permanently at risk of war or being invaded. For instance, in the recent dispute over Nova English Isles in Hamland, Hamland could have seized the islands by force and Nova England could have attempted to take them back. The same for the Amokolia crisis that brewed up. It adds a degree of reality but it is risky for the participants.
I look forward to hearing people's views!
In Battle; Unbeatable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
-
- Posts: 895
- Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 8:36 pm
Re: Reform
I don't think the Convention Board has done much to warrant it's retention - so fine.Lord_Montague wrote:I think the time has come for Reform of the micronational recwarring interests and its my opinion that we do away with the Board of Annunia and instead become something similar to approaching the old MRWS.
This wouldn't have anything to do with the armed forces of Lovely being turned into soft furnishings back in the day?Lord_Montague wrote:Firstly I'd like to see the current idea of the Annunia Convention Board removed from the Annunia Convention and instead try to place it back into the old ways of the MRWS but more open. I don't know about others but I had problems with members of the MRWS board intent on abusing their power.
No objection if it can be made to work practically when, for instance, sacking an inactive chairman or associates.Lord_Montague wrote:I envisage an Association of Recwarring Micronations and States (ARMS) to oversee, store, maintain and enable the use of a number of recwarring rulesets. It would presided over by an elected Chairman appointed for a 6 month term and two associate members to oversee ARMS approved judiciary and common law and Points and Costings (envisaging Annunia and what I have heard are other developing charters based around SCUE.)
How about a total points allowance of 100,000 with 75,000 allocated to personnel and 25,000 to hardware? The points values do need to be looked at again I think. The notion of a River Class Patrol Boat and a Eurofighter being on any sort of a par always amused me I must confess.Lord_Montague wrote:I propose that SNARL is offered along with Annunia and a reform of Annunia I like to call Annunia+. Annunia+ is the same as Annunia but the force limit is increased to 75,000 or 100,000, some of the points values are increased to maintain proportionality (ICBMS and stealth bombers is what I'm thinking of at the moment. Possibly A/C carriers?).
The Goloni War was the last wholly enjoyable war I can recollect (how the arms shipments, terrorist atrocities and coordinated aerial bombardment of the Ocian encampments by the IBAF managed to remain undiscovered I will never know...), so that sounds great in theory. Having what is in effect a GM would kill dead the tedious lawyering that plagues most wars as well as some of the more demented or implausible moves. The only downside is that whoever gets the job of pulling all the narrative threads together into a coherent whole would need a lot of free time and the patience of a saint. We were lucky in the Goloni War to have a non-micronationalist willing and able to perform the function of moderator.Lord_Montague wrote:Furthermore any other recwarring charter may be introduced for ARMS to maintain and look after, including any new SCUE related charter. I would also like to bring over the Zindarian Recwarring Rules (here:http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 072.0.html and explanatory notes here: http://www.micronationhistory.info/mnne ... 073.0.html). Although labour intensive for the judge and to a large degree dependent on a 3rd party's view on your moves it was a good recwar and it allows for cold as well as hot wars.
I think you would have to proceed on an 'opt in' basis for something potentially contentious like that. Where the MRWS went a little wrong was by trying to apply it across the board to all members, which prompted the subsequent walkout.Lord_Montague wrote:Another aspect that might be interesting is giving a sign up to the idea of permanent war, which was attempted in the MRWS but swiftly abandoned when Ocia did it. Essentially if you sign up to permanent war, you're permanently at risk of war or being invaded. For instance, in the recent dispute over Nova English Isles in Hamland, Hamland could have seized the islands by force and Nova England could have attempted to take them back. The same for the Amokolia crisis that brewed up. It adds a degree of reality but it is risky for the participants.
Re: Reform
For those of us who've only been around for the Annunia, what's the MRWS?
Also, if we're going to be making changes, something I've always wondered about: is it just our independent micronational spirit that drives us to invent RecWar systems when there's a dozen mods to a dozen RPGs that handle war combat (talking about a GM is what reminded me of it.)
Also, if we're going to be making changes, something I've always wondered about: is it just our independent micronational spirit that drives us to invent RecWar systems when there's a dozen mods to a dozen RPGs that handle war combat (talking about a GM is what reminded me of it.)
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
Re: Reform
Making points more complicated in the name of logistics is a bad move. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that anything at all that doesn't drastically reduce the complexity of this system is a bad move. The past several wars have been painfully marred by the fact that nobody really seemed to know what the hell was going on. Simply put, this system has too many rules for such a weak simulation of actual battle and quantative losses.
Yes. It's the same spirit that makes developing a government model with a dozen positions for a nation that's unlikely to get more than 5 distinct people sound like a good idea. It's also why the people that understand problems have a hard time getting their voices heard, since the voice is often saying things like "This is impractal for long-term! We need systems that are more rubust and easier to handle!" get droned out in favor of adding an assistant regional minister of immigration.King Ailin of Uantir wrote:is it just our independent micronational spirit that drives us to invent RecWar systems when there's a dozen mods to a dozen RPGs that handle war combat (talking about a GM is what reminded me of it.)
Re: Reform
So, if we're going to start changing up Rec Waring, then why not break the mold and find something, like the DnD Mass Combat rules, that are already balanced and play tested by those who's job it is to balance and play test this kind of stuff. It would be a firm rule set that everyone can hold their actions accountable to, and as a pen and paper RPG mod it's designed specifically to have DM oversight.
Doesn't have to be DnD, but it's a thought. If you're going to try to make it both simple and complex...there's resources out there that have already done the work.
Doesn't have to be DnD, but it's a thought. If you're going to try to make it both simple and complex...there's resources out there that have already done the work.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: Reform
If people want to ditch the Anunia Convention board or mess around with the convention itself, that's a-ok with me. I view it as a relic of an era when I still naively thought it possible to make a recwar system that would cater for everyone and avoid disputes.
Seriously though, some good ideas here Monty. If you can get a good permanent war system that's fun and adds a oft-missed element to our micronational simulation - the possibility to invade instead of having to agree to a war. There is the disadvantage, of course, that a war you haven't agreed to is likely to turn out badly; but I can definitely see it being used well and adding interesting flavour to diplomacy. As long as it was opt-in.
Points points points ... I think you really have to look at what people want out of a recwar, if you want to mess around with systems. Do you want to be able to have large scale conflicts? Do you want more micromanagement of units? Both of those would be good reasons to up the points amount. But you also have to consider how many people want that sort of thing. Also be thinking about backstory, and what role it should play. And how much balance should be done before the war and how much within it. And a decent dispute resolution system would be nice
And so I'm in favour of the idea of having a bunch of different recwar charters assembled in one place to choose from. Different charters suit different styles of recwarring and different people; and if we try to get people recwarring in what works for them instead of attempting one-size-doesn't-quite-fit-anybody, I think you'll get better wars.
Also, I completely affirm Harvey's call for simplicity in recwarring charters; particularly if you hope to attract new people to recwar, since the out crowd is slowly dying out.
@Ailin - MRWS was the Micronational RecWar Society - exactly what it sounds like. They used to run all recwars back in the day. Anunia was half devised to fill the gap after they folded.
Also, re using a pre-balanced system - a couple of us on Bastion are looking at using an online Advance Wars engine for recwars. Fully aware that this won't be most people's cup of tea; and also that it means realistically having three or four armies and not 15, but it meets my interest for non-magic battling so if I can find a couple other interested combatants, I'm more than happy to use it in battles against them.
Seriously though, some good ideas here Monty. If you can get a good permanent war system that's fun and adds a oft-missed element to our micronational simulation - the possibility to invade instead of having to agree to a war. There is the disadvantage, of course, that a war you haven't agreed to is likely to turn out badly; but I can definitely see it being used well and adding interesting flavour to diplomacy. As long as it was opt-in.
Points points points ... I think you really have to look at what people want out of a recwar, if you want to mess around with systems. Do you want to be able to have large scale conflicts? Do you want more micromanagement of units? Both of those would be good reasons to up the points amount. But you also have to consider how many people want that sort of thing. Also be thinking about backstory, and what role it should play. And how much balance should be done before the war and how much within it. And a decent dispute resolution system would be nice
And so I'm in favour of the idea of having a bunch of different recwar charters assembled in one place to choose from. Different charters suit different styles of recwarring and different people; and if we try to get people recwarring in what works for them instead of attempting one-size-doesn't-quite-fit-anybody, I think you'll get better wars.
Also, I completely affirm Harvey's call for simplicity in recwarring charters; particularly if you hope to attract new people to recwar, since the out crowd is slowly dying out.
@Ailin - MRWS was the Micronational RecWar Society - exactly what it sounds like. They used to run all recwars back in the day. Anunia was half devised to fill the gap after they folded.
Also, re using a pre-balanced system - a couple of us on Bastion are looking at using an online Advance Wars engine for recwars. Fully aware that this won't be most people's cup of tea; and also that it means realistically having three or four armies and not 15, but it meets my interest for non-magic battling so if I can find a couple other interested combatants, I'm more than happy to use it in battles against them.
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
Re: Reform
This.Andreas the Wise wrote: As long as it was opt-in.
And this.And so I'm in favour of the idea of having a bunch of different recwar charters assembled in one place to choose from.
First Senator of Dazhou
Minster of Defence for the Kingdom of Victoria
Former Victorian Ambassador to the MCS
Proud owner of 500 Dverghallen Næringer shares
http://dazhou.proboards.com/index.cgi
Minster of Defence for the Kingdom of Victoria
Former Victorian Ambassador to the MCS
Proud owner of 500 Dverghallen Næringer shares
http://dazhou.proboards.com/index.cgi
Re: Reform
Your link to Advanced Wars is broken.
Most DnD esque Mass Combat systems supports magic. Just saying.
Most DnD esque Mass Combat systems supports magic. Just saying.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
- Lord_Montague
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:39 pm
Re: Reform
@Ardy
Well it did but I always had problems with the manner in which it was done. Looking back we were in the wrong and certainly werent helped by a person I can only call at his best as being psychotically unhinged in the form of Trip having such power over what we said to people. Yet even you must admit it was a bit of a vendetta to humble Lovely. Sneak attack on us by people, people switching their alliance to then gang up on us, the use of an obscure and stupidly wide-ranging clause in the SNARL charter and all that. The actual infringement used against us was outside the purview of the Recwar itself. And in its condemnation of us, the MRWS used methods exactly the same and even worse than the methods we used against Alexandria which they in turn used against us. The issue with the MRWS, particularly Mr. Gray at that time, was for its desire to regulate intermicronational relations beyond recwars in my opinion.
I like the idea of the personnel and hardware though I think that might itself be a variant on the charter. The beauty of Annunia now appears to be its modificability if that is a word at all.
With Goloni I loved the fact how Lovely were capable of launching its air strikes and simply blaming the Ocians. Who are you going to blame? AND who do you want to blame?
@ Everyone. The permanent war would be opt in only I think on everyone and could only be used by nations on the opt in alone. So for instance, using three old nations as examples; Lovely, the CIS and New Brittania are on Micras all bordering each other. Lovely and CIS are opt in, NB is opt out. NB can't attack Lovely just because its opt in. Both parties to a permanent war should be opted in.
As for the DnD mentions I guess that might Dungeons and Dragons? As Andreas will doubtlessly tell you it involves newness and magic elements so therefore I sneer and avoid such innovativity like the plague.
Well it did but I always had problems with the manner in which it was done. Looking back we were in the wrong and certainly werent helped by a person I can only call at his best as being psychotically unhinged in the form of Trip having such power over what we said to people. Yet even you must admit it was a bit of a vendetta to humble Lovely. Sneak attack on us by people, people switching their alliance to then gang up on us, the use of an obscure and stupidly wide-ranging clause in the SNARL charter and all that. The actual infringement used against us was outside the purview of the Recwar itself. And in its condemnation of us, the MRWS used methods exactly the same and even worse than the methods we used against Alexandria which they in turn used against us. The issue with the MRWS, particularly Mr. Gray at that time, was for its desire to regulate intermicronational relations beyond recwars in my opinion.
I like the idea of the personnel and hardware though I think that might itself be a variant on the charter. The beauty of Annunia now appears to be its modificability if that is a word at all.
With Goloni I loved the fact how Lovely were capable of launching its air strikes and simply blaming the Ocians. Who are you going to blame? AND who do you want to blame?
@ Everyone. The permanent war would be opt in only I think on everyone and could only be used by nations on the opt in alone. So for instance, using three old nations as examples; Lovely, the CIS and New Brittania are on Micras all bordering each other. Lovely and CIS are opt in, NB is opt out. NB can't attack Lovely just because its opt in. Both parties to a permanent war should be opted in.
As for the DnD mentions I guess that might Dungeons and Dragons? As Andreas will doubtlessly tell you it involves newness and magic elements so therefore I sneer and avoid such innovativity like the plague.
In Battle; Unbeatable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
- Guido Zambelis
- Posts: 2854
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:26 pm
Re: Reform
At my uni we have "crisis games" which seem to be rather like the Zindarian ruleset; every side can make "moves" without regard as to how realistic they may be. However, moves are required to be approved by a judge/judges (otherwise they can be ignored) and they also allow the judges to act as "Gods", in that whatever they say is "true" - they can make "moves" which are then true for the purposes of the game, like bad weather, public opinion turning, etc. Would be good to see that integrated in some way into a new Zindarian-based set.
-
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 8:34 pm
- Location: Novatainia
- Contact:
Re: Reform
The site seems to be having server troubles at the moment. It's up now.King Ailin of Uantir wrote:Your link to Advanced Wars is broken.
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
Re: Reform
That's cool, I remember playing the original on...gameboy advance I think? I'm on my phone, so will check in more detail later.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
Re: Reform
This "Permanent War" thing sounds a lot like my opinion of micronational economies – a couple people really care and get all hardcore into the rules and the math and become powerful, a sizable minority wants nothing to do with it and opt out quickly, and the vast majority of people sign up because it sounds vaguely interesting, don’t really do much, but get sort of taken advantage by the hardcore crowd. Getting invaded at any point, regardless of what both sides are interested in? Sounds terrible. It’s hard enough to get willing volunteers to recwar.
The Advance Wars systems sounds cool, but the more I think about it, the more using really small maps is the only way to get things done quickly. Realtime Advance Wars games can take FOREVER if you have a poor strategy because of how balanced the sides are. I have a hard time believing we’d ever actually finish games online. But if we do smaller maps, might be feasible.
And Montague, you can sneer if you want, but you’ll be sneering alone. The current state of Anunia has failed. People still want recwars, yet only 2 major wars have started in the past few years so it’s obvious that people don’t want to use Anunia as it stands. Unless we want to abandon the recwar concept entirely we’re going to need some sort of very drastic changes here.
Maybe we all just like the idea of recwar and not the playing of recwar. We like the concept of 10-15 dedicated players scheming against eachother, backstabbing but laughing since it's only a game and they can play another one whenever they want. But when it comes down to the tedium of playing the game every single day for a few weeks / months, nobody ever wants to do so.
The Advance Wars systems sounds cool, but the more I think about it, the more using really small maps is the only way to get things done quickly. Realtime Advance Wars games can take FOREVER if you have a poor strategy because of how balanced the sides are. I have a hard time believing we’d ever actually finish games online. But if we do smaller maps, might be feasible.
And Montague, you can sneer if you want, but you’ll be sneering alone. The current state of Anunia has failed. People still want recwars, yet only 2 major wars have started in the past few years so it’s obvious that people don’t want to use Anunia as it stands. Unless we want to abandon the recwar concept entirely we’re going to need some sort of very drastic changes here.
Maybe we all just like the idea of recwar and not the playing of recwar. We like the concept of 10-15 dedicated players scheming against eachother, backstabbing but laughing since it's only a game and they can play another one whenever they want. But when it comes down to the tedium of playing the game every single day for a few weeks / months, nobody ever wants to do so.
Re: Reform
A lot of that tedium would be dispersed when it stops being 'a bunch of people making stuff up and continually tinkering with their rules' and became an actual game with balanced rules everyone can look to.
It's amazing what that 'third party' aspect can add to civility. There's none of that 'the in crowd made up these rules and they are biased towards them!' or 'If they can make up the rules so can I, none of this is fair!' incredulous thinking available, because no one who's close to the game made the game.
It's amazing what that 'third party' aspect can add to civility. There's none of that 'the in crowd made up these rules and they are biased towards them!' or 'If they can make up the rules so can I, none of this is fair!' incredulous thinking available, because no one who's close to the game made the game.
His Incomparable Highness,
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
His Matchless Grace,
His Majestic Honor,
His Eminent Splendor,
His Chivalrous Eminence,
The Rook
Lord Protector of Uantir
- Lord_Montague
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:39 pm
Re: Reform
Now I know why people tend to dislike you.SaiKar wrote:This "Permanent War" thing sounds a lot like my opinion of micronational economies – a couple people really care and get all hardcore into the rules and the math and become powerful, a sizable minority wants nothing to do with it and opt out quickly, and the vast majority of people sign up because it sounds vaguely interesting, don’t really do much, but get sort of taken advantage by the hardcore crowd. Getting invaded at any point, regardless of what both sides are interested in? Sounds terrible. It’s hard enough to get willing volunteers to recwar.
The Advance Wars systems sounds cool, but the more I think about it, the more using really small maps is the only way to get things done quickly. Realtime Advance Wars games can take FOREVER if you have a poor strategy because of how balanced the sides are. I have a hard time believing we’d ever actually finish games online. But if we do smaller maps, might be feasible.
And Montague, you can sneer if you want, but you’ll be sneering alone. The current state of Anunia has failed. People still want recwars, yet only 2 major wars have started in the past few years so it’s obvious that people don’t want to use Anunia as it stands. Unless we want to abandon the recwar concept entirely we’re going to need some sort of very drastic changes here.
Maybe we all just like the idea of recwar and not the playing of recwar. We like the concept of 10-15 dedicated players scheming against eachother, backstabbing but laughing since it's only a game and they can play another one whenever they want. But when it comes down to the tedium of playing the game every single day for a few weeks / months, nobody ever wants to do so.
Do you ever read the posts you comment on? For starters I was being sarcastic and playing on the conception Andreas has of me from the other times we've debated the merits of recwar. Did you not read my post about how I think its best to have Annunia in conjunction with a tonne of other recwarring charters? If Uri wants to create or amend slightly the DnD rules and place them in the ARMS repository then he'd be more than welcome to and if a judge is needed ARMS would provide them. Personally, would I like to fight under DnD? No. Would I like to fight in a magic war? No. So therefore I wouldn't choose to ever recwar under that charter. But if I, and let's say Extreme007 as he's no longer around, wanted to recwar and we both liked Annunia we could do it under Annunia.
The whole idea of this reform I propose is to have a body managing recwars that the micronations themselves want. ARMS should be an enabler and not a controller of what recwar dictates. That's why everything will be opt in. I hope to lay out in whatever reform treaty I propose that any permanent war idea (probably for the realist simulationists out there such as the Ashkenatzans as I've been facing a lot of calls from Aster on the limitations of Annunia as it is) would be opt in under certain catagories. So an opt in under Annunia rules would not be an opt in under a DnD format. The only one I would put in as opt in being permanent would be under ZRS rules as that's the most likely where it would really work effectively but then again thats not a decision for me but for the ARMS associate states.
To use a sporting analogy I don't want to see ARMS as the FA but more like the IOC; a multi-disciplinary overseer of sports.
In Battle; Unbeatable.
In Victory; Unbearable.
In Victory; Unbearable.