Alex Pennington
Level 54
Report
|
I have the basics of an idea for a new way of playing team games and I'm looking for a few opinions on it.
The idea is, have three teams, and a certain number of players (unsure how many) sign up to each team. The three teams will be NATO, Russia and her allies, and China and her allies (I'm also considering an African Union team but I'm not sure on that as of yet). Then, when all teams were full, game names and descriptions would be posted on a mail thread, with the number of players required from each team.
Example: Korean Front
1 NATO player and 1 China + allies player required
Pacific Front
3 NATO players, 1 Russia + allies, 2 China + allies players required
Etc etc
Each game would have a victory condition for each side (large maps so this is to cut down game time), for example on a Pacific game China's objective might be to take Hawaii and Port Moresby, NATO's objective might be to retake the Philippines, and Russia's objective would be to hold Alaska for five turns. Whichever team completed its objective first would be awarded points based on the size of the game. A 1v1 game (eg Korea) would earn the winning team 1 point, a game with over 3 players would give 2 points, over 5 players would be three points, etc etc.
Based on the outcome of all the smaller games, there would then be one final game, worth ten points. The setup would work based on the way the other games finished (so if in an earlier game, Russia completed its objective of, say, occupying the Baltic, then the custom scenario for this game would show that). The victory conditions for this game would be very difficult, along the lines of NATO must take and hold Moscow for ten turns and occupy the Philippines, Russia must hold the American West Coast and occupy Northeastern China, and China must entirely take Japan, and conquer Siberia.
It's still very much in development, and there are no finished templates as of yet, but any help or feedback on the idea would be appreciated
|
