Idea for a "Global Conflict" Persistent Campaign

[ThePhotoshop]

I've been thinking about this idea for a while. It is basically a huge expansion of Ice's campaign structure and Vis's campaign narratives into a kind of Global Domination scenario that is played out through organised matches on the BigD server.

Those of you who have played Risk (or even the Dark Crusade and C&C Campaigns) will know what I'm getting at.

Picture if you will a map of the world:



This world is then divided into territories, occupied by forces of opposing armies (USMC, GB, PLA, MEC, etc.):



We'll simplify this into an Axis vs Allies scenario, with USMC and GB forming Allies and MEC and PLA forming Axis.

Each side will be appointed a General. He will be the player in charge of his team, not necessarily in the matches themselves, but in the global scheme of things. The General decides which territories on the map to attack, which armies to reinforce, and the general strategy that is used by his team. We could even have multiple generals per side who debate over these things internally.

Each side will have persistent armies represented by the same players playing as that army in each match (much like the persistent armies are in our campaigns now).

When a General decides to attack a territory, a narrative or scenario is created which is then played out as an organised match on Server #2, also very similar to the current campaign. If the attacker wins, they conquer that territory and turn it over to their control. If the Defender wins, the attackers are pushed back to lick their wounds.

The idea is to make this a monthly thing, or if possible, fortnightly. For example's sake, let's say it's monthly. Each month will alternate between Generals, eg. Axis takes a turn, Allies takes a turn, Axis takes a turn, etc. with the ultimate objective being total control of the world.



Obviously there are too many countries in the world to do a country-by-country domination scenario, so we'd create custom territories that will group countries into a block that can be conquered in a single blow.

We can make this as deep and complex as we want. Certain territories could grant special bonuses to whichever team controls them. For example, controlling an airfield would allow you to attack any territory in a certain radius, instead of just the ones next to you. Or controlling a Naval Base would allow you to instigate a blockade, preventing opposing teams from crossing the Atlantic Ocean.

Controlling a certain amount of territories will grant you the opportunity to reinforce those you already own, bolstering armies other than your main and cementing your defense. Perhaps the ticket count at the end of each match could act as a multiplier for reinforcing, bonuses or otherwise.

All these global decisions would be made here on the forums. Axis and Allies could have their own special sub-forums, accessible only to them, where they can discuss tactics and plans of attack.

What do you guys think?

[daveee]

It's a great idea, but it will drag out for quite some time. Some people might not have the patience for it in the long run either.

Server 2 is booked out 8 out of 30 nights a month as it is also at the moment, and we haven't even started with scrims or clan training on a grand scale yet. The public also require use of the server, so we need to keep this in mind with GSA's wishes as they have been very good to us providing these servers to begin with.

The idea definately has promise though.

[Captain_Wolf]

Sounds like a sweet idea but it will require a huge amount of dedication from the players to turn up consistently. And if they don't the whole idea will fall apart quickly. Also we need to see if there are enough appropriate maps to represent the territories that we will be fighting over.

I don't know if PR has matured enough to support this kind of idea but I for one HOPE it has +1 photo.

BTW, I here by found the 1st Company/Regiment of the ADF (Allied Defence Force) or whatever we end up calling it lol.

[ThePhotoshop]

I can see where you're coming from. Keep it on the backburner though until we have the appropriate measures

[Lucid Nightmare]

It would be interesting to turn the axis vs allies idea into this. The stuff I've come up with mainly affects in-game so if peeps could devise rules for the world map, then it would be fairly simple to combine the two.

[Chickenhawk]

I see a disturbing lack in the Insurgency department........

I reckon this could be good, only problem it, what maps do you use? Obviously they're not going to suit all the possible different combinations

[Lucid Nightmare]

Perhaps we could split the terrain of the map into two sections. Green and brown. All the territories that are mostly green, a jungle/forest map will be played. All the territories that are mostly brown, a desert/urban map could be played.

The side who's turn it is could choose which map they'd like to play and what territory it will take place in (assuming that map isn't being played twice in a row). Of course, there would be some circumstances where specific maps should be played for certain territories, etc.

[ThePhotoshop]

My idea for the Insurgents is that they would have their own territories, but they do not move around and conquer things. They are a team in which any player from any side currently not competing is free to join (including people who don't play the campaign regularly). They would occupy territories that have special bonuses, so clearing out an Insurgency would be worth a reward.

Maybe you could add some kind of diplomacy system, and get one faction to convince the insurgents to side with them? Then they'd have all the functions of a regular army.

Edit: I like Lucid's idea of terrain specific maps than can be chosen by the sides. The attackers choose their map simulating the kind of approach they're taking into the territory. And yes, there would be specific maps for scenarios such as beach landings (Let's hope Gulf of Oman works in 0.6) and desert warfare (I think that 17km squared map would be perfect for the Australian Outback).

[Lucid Nightmare]

Only problem with the insurgency is that they only verse the allies...

So, perhaps, make them a temporary part of the axis team or something? And once that territory gets lost, any further battles are fought with conventional armies?

.:EDIT:.
Or maybe during areas that are heavily contested, there is a chance that it may revert to an insurgency territory?

And if it is to be a temporary part of the Axis side, if the territory in question was under insurgent control, any bonuses that territory may have given will be nonexistant/reduced even though the insurgents are on the axis side?

[ThePhotoshop]

I've another idea.

How about, after certain conditions are met, the Axis team is allowed to instigate an uprising in a territory that is already under Allied control (Insurgents pick up arms, pop up and fight, etc.)

No idea what those conditions would be though.

You could use this really tactially to break the rear enemy lines as you push the front at the same time.

[Lucid Nightmare]

Perhaps I could fix that my end. When a team wins a significant enough victory, they get a random card. This card can be used to penalise the opponent in a future battle, be it no armour, no gun choppers, no snipers, etc.

Perhaps, for the MEC side only, they could get a card that will reduce an Allies territory so that it is insurgent held?

[ThePhotoshop]

You'd need to counter that with something for the Allies.

Like an ICBM card that allows you to make one territory neutral per turn.

[Lucid Nightmare]

Naturally.
Perhaps on neutral and insurgent territories, no cards can be played?
And if the other team don't take back the neutral/insurgent territory in 'X' amount of turns, or they make a failed attempt, it will automatically revert to the appropriate side?

[+SiN+headhunter345]

omg this idea is awsome.
U could just do it every sunday night till it ends.

[VisOne]

See this POLL !!!

[Jim]

Photoshop is not active enough in PR to run this now.
It wasnt picked up in the past so it fell by the wayside.

No point dragging it up now.