Tweet
Apolyton Model UN
Hey s***bricks
Ever play Nation States? That little “build your own country” world affairs web-site game that’s so much fun – until the second week when “issues” are revealed as limited, robotic, and repetitive. Well – why not give an infinite voice to those issues, resulting directly from one’s own choice in specific matters and convincing argument regarding? This is something I think has potential for creating casual yet in depth discussion on abstract issues in CE&P, a sort of fun break from the often heated debate of more real and personally relevant issues in the news. Sooo.. in thinking up some sort of system to link together posters in such a world, the Apolyton Model UN has been dreamt up
October 24th – 1945: The United Nations is born
The “game” is made of up of a handful of forum players on the traditional world map – each controlling action of a nation state according to desire to see that nation progress and add (or detract) from the functioning of a cooperative world body. Actions of each state are asked (semi-often with specific choices provided) upon an ongoing structure of outcome events. Events and their player influenced outcome are to be decided and issued in thread to all players by the proportionally sized Secretary General.
This neutral Secretary General will initially be voiced by two or three outside individuals – including myself and whoever so wishes to sit out of play and rather regulate. Regulation of world affairs will basically consist of providing the assembly based world events, and deciding national & international progress regarding resultant action(s) chosen by the players. The actions of the more involved and/or relevant nations will indeed influence each regarding topic more so than the opinion of outside forces – so it’s your job to interact with the others when you see possibility for outcome that will affect your own state’s well being & progression. Be sure that everyone is eventually (and repeatedly) addressed with issues that put themselves on forefront of decision; and that even simple voiced participation of hoped/feared outcome(s) will greatly influence the SG’s providing of follow up result.
Event variables themselves will definitely play on historical example from time to time – but chosen action by you the members (and decided outcome) will make for a different resultant history, as well as subsequent future events. The first three flash assemblies the SG will provide are on a historical basis, but the sky’s the limit for follow up issues. It’s all in how the world reacts.
The first three presented issues are as follows, in listed order:
1 - Atomic Energy – Peaceful uses & potential elimination of WMD
2 - Resolution on Israel vs The Arab States
3 - Security Council response to the Korean peninsula invasion
Definitely a very conflict heavy agenda initially, but such was still the post WW2 climate. More humanitarian and trade based topics will arise as time and outcome progresses - which brings description of how each nation will be time and again “graded” and regarded in current diplomacy and world affairs. Each nation will be loosely described by the SG’s, identities that will shape and change over time and world situation. Description will be broken up into the following four categories:
1. Population 2. Economy 3. Military 4. Social Fabric
Each category will be headed in description by one of the following grades in this scale:
World Dominant – Super Power - Strong – Moderate – Inadequate - Weak – Disastrous
Each category will then be tailor described for the nation in a few sentences, to justify the grade. Such descriptions will rely on situation & progression of the following sub-categories:
For category 1
-Base # of citizens & Territory size
-Sustainable or rampant growth
-Immigration/Emigration
For category 2
-SOL/QOL
-Domestic Production & Resource
-Foreign Trade/Ties
For category 3
-Size & Type
-World span/influence
-Stability
For category 4
-Accordance to Human Rights
-Civil Unity/Strife
-Cultural Definition
-(SOL/QOL to be partially included)
A second, nation description ONLY thread might (upon permission) be used for these character identities, to avoid clutter of information/overview bodies with the hectic assembly interaction. So from there… last and not least, here are the actual nations involved, themselves:
Permanent members needed:
China
France
Soviet Union
United Kingdom
Unites States
Significant players also desired:
Japan
West Germany
Italy
Canada
Egypt
Brazil
*Poland*
*India*
*Arab States*
*Israel*
* Specific future/role to be decided heavily upon initial assemblies. Any direct request for one of these will result in definite inclusion*
Hopefully – if we get enough participation, nations such as the below will be offered, along with any that are widely requested or result from game play itself:
Congo
Australia
Chile
Indonesia
Nigeria
Spain
Iraq
Mexico
Cuba
Taiwan
Etc.
The five “permanent” members are the positions which must be slotted before role-playing activity begins – and induction of new members to control of later nations will subsequently be decided by these five major players and the SG’s. “Lesser” member input on such is not frowned upon – but significant weight will be given to the main five in such decisions to offer a small yet significant difference in power. If things go well and demand is high enough – the big 5 may be divided amongst two or more players each; who are expected to work together in arriving at finalized decisions. A possible concrete veto structure is yet to be decided.
It’s up to the potential player to decide who they may or may not want to represent. When choosing - be realistic. You’re not going to acquire voice of a nation if you obviously mean to dictate its policy completely contrary to its prevailing fabric & (immediate) path. Those seen as the more active members of OT will be given the most consideration towards control of one of the major five, when such is requested by PM. Following sets of nations are to be introduced upon general scenario and increased participation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
In short… this is simply to be an indefinite role-playing thread without “winner” – one which works upon cooperative relations with one another, while citing alternate world situation and the actual UN charter (as desired). Yes, fiction will take place, and yes – order or chaos can ensue if strings of decisions so warrant either of extremes. All in all.. let’s just try to have fun
Any suggestions for additional game-play mechanics before start of operations are desired! PM myself with your choices of nations (three choices in order desired), any suggestions, and/or volunteer to work as SG (the analytical greatly needed!). I’ll have the slots filled and posted after a week or so of consideration and consultation with any SGs
Ever play Nation States? That little “build your own country” world affairs web-site game that’s so much fun – until the second week when “issues” are revealed as limited, robotic, and repetitive. Well – why not give an infinite voice to those issues, resulting directly from one’s own choice in specific matters and convincing argument regarding? This is something I think has potential for creating casual yet in depth discussion on abstract issues in CE&P, a sort of fun break from the often heated debate of more real and personally relevant issues in the news. Sooo.. in thinking up some sort of system to link together posters in such a world, the Apolyton Model UN has been dreamt up
October 24th – 1945: The United Nations is born
The “game” is made of up of a handful of forum players on the traditional world map – each controlling action of a nation state according to desire to see that nation progress and add (or detract) from the functioning of a cooperative world body. Actions of each state are asked (semi-often with specific choices provided) upon an ongoing structure of outcome events. Events and their player influenced outcome are to be decided and issued in thread to all players by the proportionally sized Secretary General.
This neutral Secretary General will initially be voiced by two or three outside individuals – including myself and whoever so wishes to sit out of play and rather regulate. Regulation of world affairs will basically consist of providing the assembly based world events, and deciding national & international progress regarding resultant action(s) chosen by the players. The actions of the more involved and/or relevant nations will indeed influence each regarding topic more so than the opinion of outside forces – so it’s your job to interact with the others when you see possibility for outcome that will affect your own state’s well being & progression. Be sure that everyone is eventually (and repeatedly) addressed with issues that put themselves on forefront of decision; and that even simple voiced participation of hoped/feared outcome(s) will greatly influence the SG’s providing of follow up result.
Event variables themselves will definitely play on historical example from time to time – but chosen action by you the members (and decided outcome) will make for a different resultant history, as well as subsequent future events. The first three flash assemblies the SG will provide are on a historical basis, but the sky’s the limit for follow up issues. It’s all in how the world reacts.
The first three presented issues are as follows, in listed order:
1 - Atomic Energy – Peaceful uses & potential elimination of WMD
2 - Resolution on Israel vs The Arab States
3 - Security Council response to the Korean peninsula invasion
Definitely a very conflict heavy agenda initially, but such was still the post WW2 climate. More humanitarian and trade based topics will arise as time and outcome progresses - which brings description of how each nation will be time and again “graded” and regarded in current diplomacy and world affairs. Each nation will be loosely described by the SG’s, identities that will shape and change over time and world situation. Description will be broken up into the following four categories:
1. Population 2. Economy 3. Military 4. Social Fabric
Each category will be headed in description by one of the following grades in this scale:
World Dominant – Super Power - Strong – Moderate – Inadequate - Weak – Disastrous
Each category will then be tailor described for the nation in a few sentences, to justify the grade. Such descriptions will rely on situation & progression of the following sub-categories:
For category 1
-Base # of citizens & Territory size
-Sustainable or rampant growth
-Immigration/Emigration
For category 2
-SOL/QOL
-Domestic Production & Resource
-Foreign Trade/Ties
For category 3
-Size & Type
-World span/influence
-Stability
For category 4
-Accordance to Human Rights
-Civil Unity/Strife
-Cultural Definition
-(SOL/QOL to be partially included)
A second, nation description ONLY thread might (upon permission) be used for these character identities, to avoid clutter of information/overview bodies with the hectic assembly interaction. So from there… last and not least, here are the actual nations involved, themselves:
Permanent members needed:
China
France
Soviet Union
United Kingdom
Unites States
Significant players also desired:
Japan
West Germany
Italy
Canada
Egypt
Brazil
*Poland*
*India*
*Arab States*
*Israel*
* Specific future/role to be decided heavily upon initial assemblies. Any direct request for one of these will result in definite inclusion*
Hopefully – if we get enough participation, nations such as the below will be offered, along with any that are widely requested or result from game play itself:
Congo
Australia
Chile
Indonesia
Nigeria
Spain
Iraq
Mexico
Cuba
Taiwan
Etc.
The five “permanent” members are the positions which must be slotted before role-playing activity begins – and induction of new members to control of later nations will subsequently be decided by these five major players and the SG’s. “Lesser” member input on such is not frowned upon – but significant weight will be given to the main five in such decisions to offer a small yet significant difference in power. If things go well and demand is high enough – the big 5 may be divided amongst two or more players each; who are expected to work together in arriving at finalized decisions. A possible concrete veto structure is yet to be decided.
It’s up to the potential player to decide who they may or may not want to represent. When choosing - be realistic. You’re not going to acquire voice of a nation if you obviously mean to dictate its policy completely contrary to its prevailing fabric & (immediate) path. Those seen as the more active members of OT will be given the most consideration towards control of one of the major five, when such is requested by PM. Following sets of nations are to be introduced upon general scenario and increased participation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
In short… this is simply to be an indefinite role-playing thread without “winner” – one which works upon cooperative relations with one another, while citing alternate world situation and the actual UN charter (as desired). Yes, fiction will take place, and yes – order or chaos can ensue if strings of decisions so warrant either of extremes. All in all.. let’s just try to have fun
Any suggestions for additional game-play mechanics before start of operations are desired! PM myself with your choices of nations (three choices in order desired), any suggestions, and/or volunteer to work as SG (the analytical greatly needed!). I’ll have the slots filled and posted after a week or so of consideration and consultation with any SGs
Comment