X-Com Enemy Unknown 2012, Semi-freeform Nationstate RPG

While it's true that it's conventional for the GM to also control the NPC sides, having the aliens be omniscient would not be consistent with how the XCOM aliens decided to take various actions (they had % chance of detection just like the player and had % chance of taking action--the first part would be handled by the GM, the second part would be the player's decision). I mean, in the high-level game, you could have the aliens controlled by the GM, but that would mean a good amount of work on one guy's hands.

If the squad combat is more the idea, then it would make even more sense to have the alien player be an actual distinct player so that both sides have accurately limited information.

Wow :X
I'm... sorry I totally forgot about this (that easily happens to me before I begin to really focus on something (it doesn't let go then though)). Thanks for not lynching me!

It could be any system really. I guess I could GM and just dish anything out. Or does anyone else want to be GM?

Also I was thinking about the strategic scale but squad combat would be awesome too!

I'm better at running games on the strategic level, but I'm comfortable with modern too. : ) though maybe the combat would bog things down too much on a tactical scale, it being a forum...

Well, if people want a more gamey type of play, as I said, I can work out a system for you guys to use--probably hybridize a friend's old system with how the XCOM system worked. What system did you have in mind, cwd?

If the pace is steady enough--like, a batch of turns every week to start--I might be able to GM it if somebody else plays as the aliens (they'd get info on what decisions aliens make, their victory conditions, etc.). That way, all I would need to do is figure out who can see what and what succeeds or fails, rather than do that and simultaneously run a faction.

In terms of 'winning'--among the human players, any group that decides to ally could be considered part of the winning team if any humans manage to win. In the game, though, some countries will occasionally sign secret treaties with alien forces as their government is infiltrated and stop funding XCOM. This could be represented in this game by human players secretly allying with the alien player, but the alien player--it should be noted--only wins alone, so at best it's an alliance to delay their own destruction.

If humans win, the alien player loses. If the alien wins, we could have the last surviving human player also win.

Perhaps a point-based system where you get points based on what percentage of your country is still intact.

So if you fight really hard against the aliens, then you increase humanity's chance of not being annihilated (which would cause all human players to get a score of 0%), but you also take more damage than other players who mostly freeloaded. So you have people trying to shift the war effort onto someone else while still hoping to win.

If your country is nearing destruction you might try to placate the aliens in the hopes this will help you survive long enough for someone else to defeat the aliens, but this move is unlikely to be popular with other human factions.

Also, just a thought: is there only one alien faction? If there are a bunch of aliens from different planets attacking us, then that's surely even more factionalized than a bunch on human nations on one planet. We could have a team vs team game with both sides having multiple players. That is, if we had enough players to have multiple teams...

There were different alien species that the player had to contend with in Enemy Unknown, but they all were part of an overall federation. They also weren't balanced against each other--there were some that you were more likely to encounter in the early game rather than the late game.

That isn't saying we can't go ahead and make them balanced against each other and run by different players if we have enough players. If the interest is there, we can do whatever the heck we want.

The flavor would be a bit different if they were actually sacking and burning parts of countries in this--in the PC game, they simply carry out certain missions on different parts of the world, like 'scout,' or 'research,' or 'abduction,' or 'establish terror site,' or 'brainwash leadership,' or 'establish base,' or 'assault XCOM headquarters.' The game was only lost when either XCOM went bankrupt from funding nations backing out or when the aliens assaulted the last player base (their eventual goal, enslavement of humanity, only being possible once XCOM was removed as a threat).

Again, not saying we can't do that--just saying it would be different.

So? The humans are also all on the same side, right?

If the aliens don't destroy your country, then constant conscription of fresh cannon fodder and crippling taxes to fund the war effort will. Assuming you try to push things that far.

But I do think that a ground war where human countries aren't directly under threat is somewhat unrealistic, unless the humans so vastly overpower the aliens that they're able to keep the fight on their terms. Which I get the feeling they definitely don't.

Hmm. If enslavement is their goal, then perhaps the first human player to surrender or lose to the aliens - and only the first - can also claim half a victory because the aliens reward them with relatively cushy positions (like middle management controlling the other slaves), rather than menial labor and food stocks.

If we cared enough, I'm sure we could set up some sort of metric, so that people could score points, and even the losing team would be rewarded for their struggle.

Like, humans could be: Total X-com funding + Aliens destroyed + Public approval rating (If that's a thing) + Something if they surrendered.

On one hand, I think that would be good motivation for each player's nation, but on the other, metrics aren't that great for RPs and they're a bit of work.

I'm not even sure how the alien scoring would work.

---

Oh, this is completely unimportant to the game, but I think it's been proven somewhere that slavery is actually pretty inefficient in the long term.

Then why have people been doing it for the majority of the span of human civilization?

However, as technology improves, economic demands change - menial labor becomes less valuable (machines can do it) and intellectual skills become more valuable (someone needs to make and control the machines), and as overall standards of life improve, it becomes possible for most people to have a cushy middle-class life and so there's not so much need to enslave a significant portion of the population for the remaining few to be comfortable. I think we abolished slavery because our economy essentially outgrew it to the point that slavery wasn't so useful anymore. Which raises questions about how hi-tech these aliens are...

But hey, who expects a story about aliens attempting to enslave humanity to be realistic? (For one thing, humans shouldn't even be able to survive on aliens' planets without spacesuits and separate food sources. That kind of cuts into the whole "cheap labor" thing.)

Then why have people been doing it for the majority of the span of human civilization?

It's good in the short term, and it's good for the few people who buy the slaves. However the economy as a whole would benefit more from X many more people than it would from X many more slaves.


I'm sure either of us could find out more about it if we just Googled "Slavery is inefficient" or something. I'm not feeling particularly motivated because I doubt it will have any affect of either of lives.

Well, I think I could be the GM or maybe the or one of the alien player/s. But since I suggested this I think I should probably take the responsibility and be the GM unless anyone else wants it. If I am GM I should note that 'winning' may be possible while still selling out. The alien player/s will have an unknown set of semi-fluid objectives that may or may not be compatible with different countries/organization or humanity at large who will have more open-ended objectives on top of survival (not being the ones initiating the conflict). I was also thinking of putting it on a more even footing, like the aliens are fighting a refugee war with very good technology but few numbers (sort of supposed to be a surprise, but it can be mixed back up again of course) and that could mean all sorts of splintering.
And IS this the game people want to play? I mean I want to play it, but I have been rather irresponsible in mentioning this and then forgetting I did, so I don't want to monopolize the decision-making on what we should play.
Overall there seems to be a good amount of desire to play something here which I think is precious so I think we should vote on whether this IS what we want to play.

Btw if it doesn't work out we can try someone else's idea, but if I end up the GM I'll do my best! (problem is I usually burn out sooner rather than later from hyperfocusing if I actually do my best, but I'll try to pace myself)

PS. Thnx for using my nick : ), please just call me cw though. cwD is short for cwDeici, I think I shortened it without shortening it enough lol, three letters is kinda awkward, where two or five are more fitting.

If we do end up playing an Alien Invasion grand strategy rpg who would want to be alien players, and what nations do would-be human players want? If I'm the GM there probably won't be a USA though, it's too unbalanced compared to other human countries militarily, so it'd be an NPC under intensive attack at the start.



One alternative is running a slightly simpler game, by substituting aliens for zombies. This tends to remove a lot of motivations and make human players a bit more aggressive after victory, but it might not be quite as fun.


Anyway I think I'm gonna go ahead and set up something I think I can handle without burning out or forgetting, and we can continue to talk about other forms of games or a second version of this? I dunno, I'm happy to have stirred up interest in playing together, and I feel a bit responsible but at the same time I don't want to monopolize it. I'll have something up by the end of the day. OK gtg be a KG assistant teacher now!

Individual hidden objectives more involved than just "kill the opposing side"? Could be interesting. Particularly with bluffing people about your objective, stealing a surprise victory when you looked like you were beaten, etc.

I know what that's like.

I think both Cw and Cwd are pretty awkward names.

Well, the USA could be relatively balanced against other factions if you merged them a bit (i.e., a European Union player instead of a Netherlands player), which is likely a good idea with so few players here. Just how many do we have, anyway? That's good to know before trying to figure out how to balance the factions.

Hmmm, thnx, it is quite akward both of 'em right? I'll just make a new user called Deici. : )

Ah yes, I guess I could merge them a bit. The EU is the natural choice, though I think China would need a bit of natural resources and miltech bulking (maybe add Russia or Japan).

PS. I'm not good with making maps.
Will be done with Kindergarden soon so will start working on this.

Well, this is The Future™. I don't know what X-COM canon is, but you can pretty reasonably say that some nations have grown or weakened in power, or formed new friendships (so you can have allied blocs between nations that currently don't see eye-to-eye) or grudges, as game balance demands. Considering we're talking about Earth being attacked by aliens and defending itself with plasma weapons, the political plausibility of your proposed future doesn't matter that much as long as it sounds vaguely believable.

China is a major economic force and has a large amount of raw numbers. While their power isn't on the level of the US, I'd expect them to be pretty strong compared to other nations. I don't know who would actually be willing to ally with China - they don't seem very popular right now.

Also for your Asian factions, don't forget India. They have nukes, and they have more of a claim to being a separate continent than Europe does (being that they're separated from Asia by the biggest and tallest mountain range on Earth, which was formed when Europe had already been fused to Asia for two hundred million years).

kinda rushed but:

Good points all around. (btw X-Com Canon is about the way things are in 1999, except the US isn't half as strong as it's supposed to be and it ignores a lot of countries... though that might just be the original game I didn't play any of the sequels)

You're right, I shouldn't be too focused on 2012 as the year of destruction/etc., if I plop it into 2050 it would ease the human tech imbalance and China would surpass the US (I think) in technologies not related to the military (f. exp. the US is being left behind in fusion research and infrastructure these days and is steadily losing space race advantages, though it's still like a hundred years ahead in miltech especially airforce). You're right it'd be jarring to have China allied with someone else or having conquered them so closely into the future... some experts speculate China's sixth (I think) generation of leaders (2022-2032) will probably introduce some democratic reforms, but she's still unlikely to have many friends.
Otoh India has underperformed grossly the last few thousand years as a power.
But yeah go 2050 and prolly.... USA-Canada, EU, Spanish America, Brazil, some abstract muslim superstate, some abstract African superstate, ASEAN (minus Japan) and Russia-Japan (that one doesn't make sense though).
Where would Russia go? Maybe rather take ASEAN minus India and have her work with Russia... or some states could just be weaker...


Btw. you asked about alien goals. It really depends on the aliens and their needs and personalities, if they're translatable to humanity at all (I don't think I'll be doing orange and blue morality though). As you mentioned some of them could be bluffing about friendship or destruction, though the main differentiator would be their goals... as I see it what aliens would want from Earth depends on their tech level.

If it's very high I think they'd be looking for information, that is DNA and cultural products, this wouldn't be very intrusive and could easily be done just by tapping into the waves and information networks and by abducting people and even less intrusive methods.
With the DNA of humans and other organisms they could recreate them on their own habitats, unless they're into the whole 'genuine product' thing.

Slightly lower tech might be interested in the biosphere, like some comic I read where the alien friend of this guy secretly wants to conquer the Earth for his race so that they can have all its dairy products.

Medium tech I think would go for the Earth's inorganic resources and the biosphere as a habitat in general, slavery might work for the former while the latter is probably more extermination mode.

Lower tech than that or just very weak organizations like refugees might be aiming for a place to live themselves for a while.

The way I see it these and other goals can mostly be achieved through a spectrum of methods, so it would depend a lot on their personalities.

I'm kinda rushed writing this right now though (sorry).
What do you think is natural for aliens Milo, hehe, 'natural', no pun intended.

Nothing unnatural about aliens. They must have evolved naturally in some sort of extraterrestrial ecosystem, nevermind how unusual they look by our standards.

As for what I think would be realistic for aliens, let's just say "nothing that would make for a good game" and leave it at that.