|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 3:42:42 GMT
What should the next theoretical war be about?
|
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Oct 24, 2015 4:03:57 GMT
How about different forces, like Europe vs. America vs. Asia vs. Australia?
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip II of Macedon on Oct 24, 2015 4:08:41 GMT
I think we can all agree australia would lose , it doesnt have the population or the money to be a serious threat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Oct 24, 2015 4:16:38 GMT
Then Australia can join Asia!lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 4:30:30 GMT
I thought more of like a European War where there is a neutral person making updates to a map
|
|
|
|
Post by Haelicon on Oct 24, 2015 4:39:50 GMT
From the experience before, this wouldn't work. But let's try again  |
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Oct 24, 2015 6:08:45 GMT
I thought more of like a European War where there is a neutral person making updates to a map i can be the neutral map maker if you want |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Oct 24, 2015 7:35:24 GMT
I thought more of like a European War where there is a neutral person making updates to a map i can be the neutral map maker if you want That would be wonderful. Now we just need a scenario I can't really do a poll because different people want different things. |
|
|
|
Post by Suvorov on Oct 24, 2015 13:00:10 GMT
i can be the neutral map maker if you want That would be wonderful. Now we just need a scenario I can't really do a poll because different people want different things. Perhaps Russia vs. China. But that would mean people can control tank armies, airfleets etc. but those things require stragetical knowledge |
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Oct 24, 2015 13:34:34 GMT
That would be wonderful. Now we just need a scenario I can't really do a poll because different people want different things. Perhaps Russia vs. China. But that would mean people can control tank armies, airfleets etc. but those things require stragetical knowledge i can create a non - realistic map where every country got 5 areas in the beginning. al area produces the same money and you gain the money of an area if you own them. with that money you can invest in technology (so you can get better units), economy (so the income from one specific area will boost), and army (i will think of some units), the army will take money to maintain. because every one got the same in the beginning there isnt a thing like hes stronger or hes weaker etc... i think you get the money once per day and you can use it. when you are attacking another player and win you got to create a threaty with that guy. for every area you choose youll loose 20% chance that you get it. i will do this with randomnumber.org or some site like that. you can create an army to invade others. all units got a attack and a defend power. if you attack somebody your attack will be measured towards his defend power. the bigger this difference is, the bigger the chance you win. (i have to think about a formula for this and afterwards to randomnumbers.org) every unit cost the same money per day to maintain it. so if you dont got money some units will leave. because of this it is good to create stronger troops. because they got the same money to maintain. you can unlock different types of troops with upgrading your tech-level maybe we can do something like this. |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Oct 24, 2015 15:24:43 GMT
I have an idea:How about alternate history? There's been multiple occurrences in history where war could've happened but it didn't. Why don't we do one of those scenarios I say the first scenario we try is an extension of the Russo-Japanese War. What I mean by that is this: Britain was allied with Japan, and France was allied with Russia. Russia and Japan go to war in 1904. In real life, Britain and France signed a treaty stating that they would not intervene in the war/Allied. But in this alternate scenario, Britain and France intervene on their respective sides. And later, other countries could get involved. So maybe Germany and Portugal could get involved on the side of the British, or America and Italy could maybe help the French. You would need a justification to go to war with a certain side if you are initially neutral like the U.S, or you can just auto join if you're already allied with a side like Portugal. And if we do this, I call America  |
|
|
|
Post by General William T. Sherman on Oct 24, 2015 15:26:44 GMT
I have an idea:How about alternate history? There's been multiple occurrences in history where war could've happened but it didn't. Why don't we do one of those scenarios I say the first scenario we try is an extension of the Russo-Japanese War. What I mean by that is this: Britain was allied with Japan, and France was allied with Russia. Russia and Japan go to war in 1904. In real life, Britain and France signed a treaty stating that they would not intervene in the war/Allied. But in this alternate scenario, Britain and France intervene on their respective sides. And later, other countries could get involved. So maybe Germany and Portugal could get involved on the side of the British, or America and Italy could maybe help the French. You would need a justification to go to war with a certain side if you are initially neutral like the U.S, or you can just auto join if you're already allied with a side like Portugal. And if we do this, I call America And somebody can be Norway or Switzerland or something to update the map or help negotiate peace terms. If you are the country who will update the map or help negotiate peace terms, You cannot go to war unless it's with a completely non-belgierant nation or if it's for colonization. |
|
|
|
Post by Suvorov on Oct 24, 2015 15:35:56 GMT
I have an idea:How about alternate history? There's been multiple occurrences in history where war could've happened but it didn't. Why don't we do one of those scenarios I say the first scenario we try is an extension of the Russo-Japanese War. What I mean by that is this: Britain was allied with Japan, and France was allied with Russia. Russia and Japan go to war in 1904. In real life, Britain and France signed a treaty stating that they would not intervene in the war/Allied. But in this alternate scenario, Britain and France intervene on their respective sides. And later, other countries could get involved. So maybe Germany and Portugal could get involved on the side of the British, or America and Italy could maybe help the French. You would need a justification to go to war with a certain side if you are initially neutral like the U.S, or you can just auto join if you're already allied with a side like Portugal. And if we do this, I call America And somebody can be Norway or Switzerland or something to update the map or help negotiate peace terms. If you are the country who will update the map or help negotiate peace terms, You cannot go to war unless it's with a completely non-belgierant nation or if it's for colonization.I accept, but I won't be Russia. I was that the previous time. I'm going to be Japan I think |
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Oct 24, 2015 15:46:29 GMT
I like that scenario. But I think that all of the extra things that Netherfreek would be too complicated to implement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Oct 24, 2015 15:46:59 GMT
I will be any country, if anybody wants Britain you can have it.
|
|
