A "Mission Statement" for the ASP...

In other words, Glyphstone, you don't have to finish Karnak by the end of the week. The thing is just that we're going to set UWPs in stone now, so everyone who's in the process of creating a planet need to look at their UWPs, decide what kind of changes they want, and change their UWPs now. You then send your suggestion for a modified UWP to your subsector manager, who is in charge of shaping the entire subsector in to a whole. It just means you have to take a few minutes to plan the changes you want to make to your worlds, before the UWPs are set in stone.

Note: I must stress that we're only talking about social data being changed in the UWP. Population, government, tech level, law level, etc. Physical data such as star type, star size, planet size, atmosphere, hydrosphere cannot be changed unless specific permission is given from Kage. And to my knowledge, this has not happened yet.

As mentioned above, you can suggest that the population of your world is modified.

As with Sojourner, there's nothing to stop you from keep developing those systems eventhough we will be using Kage's GT:FT first. Then maybe we can adjust the models later, when you and Sojourner finish your work

I can definitely see the advantages (and disadvantages) of doing it the way you suggest, Destecado. I think that even if we do it this way, we should still have the UWPs set in stone by the end of this month, if not sooner, so we can start working on trade models. Working out trade models for a single subsector without taking the neighbouring subsectors into account might be a mistake anyway.

And though Kage will most likely stop using smileys for a while because of what I'm about to say.... the Archaios subsector has come quite far in terms of getting an SR for all its worlds. That is, unless Kage suddenly overrules me and disapproves a whole lot of worlds. Archaios is done, two Knight worlds are nearly done, Proteus is done as soon as I fix the ellipsoid atmosphere. If ZidagarDinoman, High Inquisitor and you (unless you've lost interest in Sistina) finish your worlds, that leaves only one empty slot in the Archaios subsector.

If I focus all my world-building efforts in the Anargo subsector, I might be able to finish a world by the end of the month. If I focus on the Archaios subsector, I'll finish my fourth world. If all the other worldbuilders in the Archiaos subsector finish their work this month, that gives us nine out of ten worlds finished. That might put a lot of strain on ZidagarDinoman though, so maybe someone could help him out.

---

With that said, I should point out that I don't really prefer focussing on one subsector myself. I think it would be a lot more productive if everyone finished what they were doing before moving on.

Whats the point of focusing on one sub sector, it just means the reletively few people who have an interest in that sub will be doing the work as everyone else scarpers off to work on stuff they find more interesting, which is fair, i'm not having ago at people here. I just mean its not going to speed anything up. At the moment I am trying to contribute to three sub sectors, however that is being hampered somewhat as
1) worlds that are done as far as I'm concerned, end up not being done at all but have to be redone

2)even when worlds are declared ok by most and deemed finished, they end up becoming doubtful of being accepted

3) it takse forever to gey feed back, this is not a critisism, its just physics, people are on at different times, people can't get on as often as they'ed like, people have many many other things to sort and respond to.

4) for those of us not on the privy council its impossible to finish a world without major and continuous input from upper level management. Meaning it takes a hell of a long time time to get a world done, eg Proculus 6 months and still counting, greavesdale was done in about a week and in the archives before you could say "how you getting on with your world CELS"
Again not a critisism, CELS i was not having a go at you, do not jump on me but you know what I mean, you know what you want the rest of us have to stumble about and try to come up with somthing that will be acceptable for you respective subs.

Dear me that was negative wasnt it, sorry if its not constructive, but those are the problems faced by world builders(mainy me ) None of the above effects my UWP output though all are modified and available for perusal in the appropriate threads.

Oh and can someone please answer the following
Can I just ask, the systems that are not suitable will be removed completely, and the one that are going to stay will be altered and then frozen. Yes. Will there be a set limit per subsector of how many imperial worlds there will be ie 10 perhaps. And also it sounded as if you were saying the first three numbers of the UWP can now be altered.

Ahh right, thanks CELS that was all I needed to know. Though I would argue for changing some of the physical data for some worlds...slightly, if we are limiting it to 10 worlds per sub, and I know thats not a definite, but if we are then Castellan will have a few problems. But thats for other to decide I'll bow out of that gunfight.

It's strange, when I typed up that quick reply the other responses did not appear for me... <sigh> Anyway, I shall try and respond to this in a fairly quick and, for me, lucid manner. Thought that CELS could have a break from the quotes!

One Subsector at a Time
This is a valid approach which was attempted once before. The main problem there was that if someone didn't want to contribute they were just silent. Strangely enough exactly as it stands working on separate subsectors at the moment.

That does not mean that I'm ignoring the return to this suggestion. Rather, I would strongly suggest that it has its place. First and foremost is getting up a consistent UWP and concept framework for all the subsectors. Once this is done we can consider everything together and consider the ramifications of the various worlds, look at the GT:FT trade routes and volumes of traffic etc., and see where things might need to be altered.

In essence this will be the lull, the point at which we step back and go "Hmmmnnn..." Once we have taken this step, it will then be able to better determine which of the subsectors will be handled and just how. If we were to take a piecemeal approach then given the 'completeness' of Archiaos subector - and I will be honest and state here that I am yet undecided on a number of the systems - it will be a coin flip between Castellan and Anargo.

To reiterate, therefore, the need to get the UWP up and running is something that I strongly advocate. After that a more piecmeal approach to the subsectors is potentially valid though it really is a "6 of one, half-dozen of the other" kind of situation. Concentrating on one subsector at a time to full development will, however, create more problems in the long-term than I feel that it will solve, including a necessarily ad hoc creation process. Start big (grainy resolution), then focus (small resolution).

Other Races
Given their current minimal impact on the project, they will take a temporary back-burner. If you have all your time invested in that particular forum then, well, it will be good for you to get out and about. On the bright side this means that when we get back to this side of things that there will be more people to respond to the appropriate threads. (Personally, while I have tried to keep track of them I have not for some time been inspired to reply, and this has little to do with the fact that they're uninspiring but more to do with the fact that there is far more pressing things to be done.

Acceptance of Worlds to Date
To answer this, erm, continual 'complaint' there is a reason for this and it is this reason that has prompted my posting of this "Mission Statement". Quite simply it is because they are mere islands, lacking in integration. (With increasing number of worlds created in conceptual stage, sometimes by the same person, this has becoming increasingly obvious.) This is a byproduct of the problems with the project more than the design. Once this issue is addressed the PPLs can readily get to addressing the suitability of those worlds currently submitted... One thing that was fairly clear from the start was the submission of a concept did not guarantee's the successful acceptance of that concept or world. That is something that we have all had to deal with.

The point here is to move forwards in an integrated fashion with a wider understanding of the forces that operate in the Anargo sector, a feature that was made clear with the recent posts about the Lord Militant Protector and Lord Anargo (amongst other things).

So, for the moment, it behoves all members to move forwards creatively and with a wider approach than thus attempted or, at least, given a great deal of attention to.

While there is a problem with 'acceptance of worlds' regardless of the above, it was exacerbated by the creation of multiple worlds despite indications to the contrary.

Worlds Per Subsector
This has only ever been a guideline of 'around 6-10'. Simple.

Changing the UWP Statistic
There will be greater latitude to changing the characteristics of worlds, but only by special permission. See CELS signature for an example of the process, i.e. work with what you've got and only then make a request to the PPLs or whomever.

Fundamentally, though, the approach on physical statistics has not changed. Again, work with what you've got and don't do a GW.

"... Core Rules of the Game System..."
I once again reiterate that there is no 'core game system' other than the wargame, regardless of how useless it is in some of the more abstract situations.

RPG systems are useful in that they model those bits of the game universe that we might need 'numbers' for without just waving hands around. Using those systems we'll be waving hands around in certain directions. As I'm practically the only person on the board that has an interest in RPG systems, and because of the initial setup of the project, this means that some attention is given to GURPS but that's about it.

No official system other than the wargame, despite how ineffectual that is.

Economy
Once again, the GT:FT system will be used as a basis to start off with. Since zholud has not had the time to create consistent and cohesive rules, or at least post them, this is the best working average that we're going to work with. Simple.