Serious Bring Back WW3RP

[Deleted member 4609]

just a bit ironic that you always feel the need to reminisce on getting hl2rp operator in loads of threads but when people want to reminisce about ww3rp you ask for the thread to be locked

what? what are you on about?

 

[Danny]

Cease fire please

I we were was enjoying this thread

 

[ddæ]

Why not continue some WW3RP events to actually finish it off? Shrug

: - )
this would be NICE

 

[Powley]

I know what you mean, but each constructive comment and nostalgic look back is outclassed by another two or three negative, really rude posts from people who just can't seem to accept what's happened to WW3RP. That's my thoughts on it anyway, feel free to disagree of course.

the same can be said about hl2rp and any other roleplaying based gamemode on and off garrysmod

 

[cns - he/him/his]

I'd just love a third server that could be given to a certain concept for a set amount of time to test it.

 

[aperson]

mfw I realise I was one of those people that only cared about s2k and genuinely cared for my place on the gametracker scoreboard

Honestly as much as I love the coalition vs globalists lore (I prefer alternate lore over IRL lore stuff you know what I mean), WW3RP has been done some many times I can't think of anything else new/different to do with it. The "This War of Mine" scenario sounds rad as I think its a setting not commonly touched on and could be interesting with the everyday life a civilian in a war-zone and the politics that surround it. Possibly base it off the Ukraine War (thought that may be in bad taste)?

Scenarios like WW1 and WW2 wouldn't be that good imo as they've been done to death; WW1 would be boring trench warfare "/me dies of trench foot" and WW2 has the obvious good side vs bad side (which would probably just devolve into memes aka hehe mr american soldier kills all the jap).

I'd nut if VietnamRP was done, however I don't know exactly how it would play out (focus on US or Vietnamese) and if there is even enough content to support it.

tldr; if ww3rp was to open it should be on a different aspect of war (like the This War of Mine scenario) or just something completely new and different, as well as having a PRIMARY focus on RP (make s2k rarer(or non-existent) or even more methodical such as long-drawn out battles where a there is no "real winner")

 

[Deleted member 1381]

WW1RP wouldn't work because it'd become redundant. it wasn't all trench warfare but i doubt it would work
WW2RP would work but the playerbase would turn everything into a heh did nazi that coming jew mad lol meme
vietnam RP would be one big meme

the playerbase was the issue with WW3, not the mechanics. people didnt appreciate the ranking structure, authority was based on ooc popularity. many more but i dont think naming them would matter now

 

[PilotBland]

ncr hated by some little wack ass 'le epic hate commie' civilian political party that retropirate orchestrated to cause a massive split in the community, leading to that server's downward spiral.

that's not the reason SERVER which is not even up anymore but I'm not allowed to name to avoid a forum ban

the server got shat on cause people were oocly trying to make their factions THE BEST and not in the servers interest for conflict, and the staff resorted to having cliques OF favoritism and butt buddy groups cause they were in power, and the server went to shit cause of it cause they thought they were untouchable and their player pop wouldn't diminish due to spotty admins and ooc facilitated factions like the NCR which was trying to shoehorn heavy troopers to 'teach those frikkin civis a lesson!!'

also owner was a jerk, and admins who were my mates apologizied after the server went down cause the power actually went to their heads and shit. It was fun whilst it lasted tbh

2 years of development for 2 weeks of uptime :grinning:

 

[aperson]

Also forgot to put what WW3RP on Arma would be nutty, and might be more accessible (and stable) than Gmod as I assume most RP would be done via in-game and VOIP instead of text (which probably turned away a lot of people in general from Gmod RP)

 

[Deleted member 93]

russian gang member goes ham on america

[17:04:23] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Pvt. John Winters with fas_ak47
[17:04:25] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Sgt. Sarah Johnson with fas_ak47
[17:04:43] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Spc. Dan Jackson with fas_grenade
[17:05:12] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed LtCol. Serena Harrison with fas_m9
[17:05:13] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Cpl. Collin Lucid with fas_m9
[17:05:17] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Pfc. Daniel Michaels with fas_m9

[17:05:50] Cpt. Victor Popov has used "/r I hear gun shots, sounds like an MP5. All squadrons report and prepare for Globalist contact, over."
[17:05:55] Cpl. Idi Nahio has used "/r fuck off cunt thats me and ive killed most of them"

[17:05:30] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed LCpl. Sarah Lackey with fas_mp5
[17:05:32] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Pvt. Keith Jenkins with fas_mp5
[17:05:33] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed LCpl. Howard Thompson with fas_mp5
[17:05:37] Cpl. Idi Nahio has killed Sgt. Jason Dove with fas_mp5​

made my day
meme of ripe harvest

 

[GenericPlayer]

A 'This War of Mine' civilian centred server around the Iraq War would be kinda cool, with a highly organised NATO coalition against Revolutionary Guards and insurgents. Just my two cents.

 

[Ond]

A 'This War of Mine' civilian centred server around the Iraq War would be kinda cool, with a highly organised NATO coalition against Revolutionary Guards and insurgents. Just my two cents.

chechnya?
kosovo?

 

[GenericPlayer]

chechnya?
kosovo?

could even be something like somalia, or libya

lots of choices for that kinda setting

 

[Holymilk]

A 'This War of Mine' civilian centred server around the Iraq War would be kinda cool, with a highly organised NATO coalition against Revolutionary Guards and insurgents. Just my two cents.

Yes, a high-risk scenario between insurgents vs nato. The insurgents are given sub-par weaponry, but have the advantage of being covert within the population and knowledgable in the area, allowing them to ambush patrols/convoys and capture nato. However, the fighters are all under PK risk if captured, being at the mercy of NATO as they are unlawful combatants.

On the other hand, NATO, being the superpower they are, are obviously given better weapons and augments to those weapons in order to dispatch threats. This, alongside mechanized superiority and airpower, cripples the insurgent's side to fight off at full front, however NATO infantry are under constant threat of death and capture. With this in mind, being captured as a NATO infantryman is also a PK risk. Combat could be minimal because of this risk, NATO players and insurgents/other second world government factions would have to really be on their toes in combat scenarios, NATO in particular.

Also, if a firefight is won, the insurgents/second world government power can enjoy the spoils of war by doing whatever they please.

 

[Ond]

Yes, a high-risk scenario between insurgents vs nato. The insurgents are given sub-par weaponry, but have the advantage of being covert within the population and knowledgable in the area, allowing them to ambush patrols/convoys and capture nato. However, the fighters are all under PK risk if captured, being at the mercy of NATO as they are unlawful combatants.

On the other hand, NATO, being the superpower they are, are obviously given better weapons and augments to those weapons in order to dispatch threats. This, alongside mechanized superiority and airpower, cripples the insurgent's side to fight off at full front, however NATO infantry are under constant threat of death and capture. With this in mind, being captured as a NATO infantryman is also a PK risk. Combat could be minimal because of this risk, NATO players and insurgents/other second world government factions would have to really be on their toes in combat scenarios, NATO in particular.

im not a fan personally of there being any on-server conflict between the two sides outside of events as it just leads to another s2k shitfest

unless its handled like how HL2RP does rebel v union engagements

 

[GenericPlayer]

im not a fan personally of there being any on-server conflict between the two sides outside of events as it just leads to another s2k shitfest

unless its handled like how HL2RP does rebel v union engagements

I think if NATO teams had to secure towns to help out the local populace/secure resource points whilst insurgents could have the ability of planting IEDs wherever they please (Within reason) that could lead to some interesting dynamics. I don't think that in this scenario we'd ever really see the S2K fest that was present between fireteams on WW3RP or at least, not to the same scale.

 

[Black Rain (1989)]

If things did come back, which I doubt, it would be nice to end the 1983 - 1990rp lore. Especially since it's been two years without a conclusion.

 

[Holymilk]

im not a fan personally of there being any on-server conflict between the two sides outside of events as it just leads to another s2k shitfest

unless its handled like how HL2RP does rebel v union engagements

Probably correct, however I'm hoping the circumstances that lead to s2k engagements change with this idea. The side who are "insurgents" or another second-world army aren't in a "war" but a conflict, so they are ill prepared to take care of NATO, thus they will suffer in direct combat. NATO weapons /should/ be better in every way, with different ammo that the other side can't use unless they capture some.

The insurgent/second world side must adapt and use whatever they have at their disposal sparefully, setting up traps within key NATO points and defend with weapons that may only be good at damage like using the AKM, or the like.

e: The "conventional" side definitely doesn't have to be NATO, it could be of other countries or perhaps our own fictional factions, like the coals or globs being the conventional side.

 

[Deleted member 1381]

The insurgent/second world side must adapt and use whatever they have at their disposal sparefully, setting up traps within key NATO points and defend with weapons that may only be good at damage like using the AKM, or the like.

basically just be vietcong, guerilla warfare and only attacking in situations/environments they know they'd win in; i.e an ambush at night/when numbers are higher

rules would have to be tight though as there'd soon be some one-man rambo loophole going on

 

[Ond]

rules would have to be tight though as there'd soon be some one-man rambo loophole going on

fixed by using the hl2rp model

if you die as insurgent in a fight you get pkd