|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 6, 2012 22:01:48 GMT
Memzakian Army - Global Domination
The Game for Global Domination
In an attempt to get rid of all the pointless roleplay and add actual skill and strategy to our battles. I want to mix NGI with our battles, while keeping the roleplay intact, but having the outcomes of specific actions determined less by members of the MA and more by the Battle Calculator. I also wanna implement more specific units. Things that we research in the tech thread. I still want there to be roleplay. And roleplay on a global scale isn't as intense as roleplay on a more local scale. So I say we list all of our bases and "phoenix's" bases. And then when we play, we only focus on one at a time. I want every member of the MA that owns their own group of men that can contribute to the battle to play. I want there to be consequences for randomly throw out units. When you start to play, you start out with all of your men. When you finish a single battle or campaign you retain the amount of units you have at the end between battles (you will lose some). While playing, you can split your group of men into multiple squads (or foot armies). The map of the battle area also won't be completely known, and there may be secondary objectives. Anyone who doesn't own a squad will have a role, a special role (a covert one). If there is anyone who doesn't want to command units during a battle, you're welcome to play your own secondary character who plays a mastermind (or another unit for spying).
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 7, 2012 6:25:02 GMT
Sounds like... N:GI, with MA instead of Nonjas. Or do you mean applying that to this board?
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 7, 2012 14:59:03 GMT
Similar, but this game would zoom into specific battles with units and maps. And we would focus on one battle at a time, instead of simply rolling dice for many of them. We won't focus on countries either. Simply enemy bases, phoenix bases, maybe five or six of them. Since each one may be as long or longer than the battles we have right now.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 7, 2012 21:26:54 GMT
Hm, so one NGI-like thread where we organize battles, and separate threads for the RP of each battle?
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 7, 2012 22:10:46 GMT
I think it's a new MA game, based more like N:GI logic. (at least that's what I gathered from omnbl on chat) Also I approve of this idea.
|
|
|
Post by Fireball9903 on Jul 7, 2012 23:07:47 GMT
I dont approve this idea until I understand what N:GI means, when I find that out.... it sounds like a good plan I approve.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 7, 2012 23:13:58 GMT
It's a nonja game that is located in the Forum Games Board. It basically involves more statistics rather than RP and research.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 7, 2012 23:16:19 GMT
N:GI was a risklike game that was run awhile ago, on the old forum. Technically it's still running, but it has become an RP since the countries stopped conquering each other.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 7, 2012 23:23:55 GMT
Thank you Pie. I never really got into N:GI much. ( remember wanting to start and doing so in the early days, but then dropping out )
|
|
|
Post by Fireball9903 on Jul 7, 2012 23:26:22 GMT
Oh... So then I approve.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 7, 2012 23:37:40 GMT
Wonderful. It'll be another way for the MA to possibly gain support. (As in, if we have it in the Forum Games board, it might attract the attention of potential recruits) It'll also provide another outlet for people who do not wish to solely RP with a slight WarSim at the end.
|
|
|
Post by Fireball9903 on Jul 7, 2012 23:53:40 GMT
Good. All is well and done so everyone, our massive advertising campain starts!
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 8, 2012 2:02:52 GMT
Wow, this thread got active fast. But I have a feeling we misunderstood...
The goal was to remove the RP aspect and focus more on strategy, I still wanted to retain the RP aspect, but it not be so biased towards MA members. Also, the individual battles wouldn't be seperate threads. They'd be here.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 8, 2012 12:23:12 GMT
Oops. Yea, that is a slight misunderstanding... Is there any possibility that we have a hybrid between the two? I still like the RP and don't want to get rid of it completely. (even if it ends up a little biased to us) I think we should use this strategy region based game for some battles and RP for others. It's not like there is a shortage of Phoenix Federation Outposts/Base in which we can RP/strategy a victory? Perhaps we can implement this for attacking a certain area of bases, and attack the other half with RP. (then making the last major base a region based game with RP involved too?
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 9, 2012 0:50:12 GMT
I was thinking more like making it a RISK-like game that determines our losses/victory (taking into account technology), and we have to RP that goal?
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 9, 2012 4:09:10 GMT
....That was the goal.
(Honestly)
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 9, 2012 13:11:56 GMT
Oh? XD Well that works too. XD As long as there is still RP and technology is taken into account I'm happy. I won't be able to be as active as I'd like so we'd need to work out a system that works.
Also, another concern is the loss of units. When you specify we loose units, is it possible to keep tech-related units out of the mix? Or shall we work out a different system for building tanks and whatnot. (seeing as if we constantly loose tanks/planes/othertech in battles then we'd constantly be eating up 100DBs for every 10 tanks... or given tech units) Would that mean in order to gain units, we'd have to do a similar thing to the N:GI where we have to 'train' them or where we automatically get them every game 'turn' or what?
Furthermore, I guess we can create a fully sub-divided map after our siege on Gaia where we managed to 'acquire' a fully scaled map. Perhaps I could create a JS code that implements the current Map, amount of units, conquered regions and unit locations? My concern with that would be that I'd have to message and Admin every time there is an update. (or buy my own server/domain with a static IP, all my computers having a dynamic one)
Let me know on your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Fireball9903 on Jul 10, 2012 17:02:17 GMT
So let me get this straight.... This is supposed to add stratedgy to our battles and not just roleplaying...?
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 10, 2012 19:08:00 GMT
Yes
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 10, 2012 19:19:56 GMT
OK let me rephrase what I said. (seeing as you were confused as you said on chat)
My concern was when lost units would be replenished/new units recruited/new units built. It would be problematic if every time we had a battle it'd cost us DBs to replace lost tanks as DBs themselves are prone to run out just form our tech usage. (EG: It currently costs 100DBs for 10 MBT1's or 10 MZ-14s, 200DBs for MZ-15s and lots more DBs for Sub-Navy Stuff) Could troops/tech be repaired over time for no DB cost? Or new troops trained for the next battle? (Perhaps required a certain amount of posts in order to do so?)
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 11, 2012 4:43:35 GMT
There was RP and Technology in N:GI too, ya know. After the first quarter it was almost entirely RP, and there were whole debates about how some countries had overpowered technology. It was taken into account too much if anything.
|
|
|
Post by Clockwork on Jul 11, 2012 15:55:11 GMT
There was no strategy though. Just some roll of the dice.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jul 13, 2012 2:26:24 GMT
Of course there was strategy. There was strategy in where to battle and when to battle, in the roleplay itself, in how to properly proportion technological research. Just cause individual battles are determined by a weighted formula dependent on technology doesn't mean there's no strategy.
|
|
|
Post by ~Memzak~ on Jul 13, 2012 10:36:38 GMT
So shall we create a map? Use the one I had (and fill in the blanks, to the south should be ocean) and turn it into a region-based-map. Make sure to enlarge it so that there are plenty of regions to fight our way through.
|
|