Serious Discussion: WW3RP 'back to basics'... sortof

[STUCK IN A CAKE]

I haven't gotten around to reading the rest of the thread, only the main op.

But all in all, I feel this should've been the direction that Stasi-land should've taken in the first place, a more emphasis on the whole "Civilian vs Soviet" war. Like we see in Afghanistan and in eastern Europe. But on a much grander scale.

The asymmetrical combat definitely spices things up, however, make sure that there is a genuine upside to not being the soviets. To really push the balance from being one-sided. From the top of my head, I could say shit like "Soviets are forced to relinquish anything non-standard and are restricted to certain equipment allocation. Such as only 1 GPM per Fireteam or Sidearms are a no-no and other such restrictions due to the in lore 'Equipment Shortage' Whereas the Civilians have no real restriction, so long as they have it, they can use it." and with the likes of Script spawns, allowing the civilians to go 'incognito' to look for shit and wonder about ready to lay an ambush (with the risk of being spotted and searched by a patrol). Whereas soviets are strictly kept in base until a patrol is organized. This stuff would be easy to enforce with active staff members and would add a cool dynamic. So long as it isn't abused :^)

These are just some quick ideas, but you understand my point.

The scenario sounds nice and there's plenty to work with since NATO and Soviets made some pretty cool shit during the cold war. And the shit that was developed for Stasi-land was really fucking cool, with vehicle spawning and emplacements. It was just a shame that most of it were unseen by the average player.

All in all, I like the idea. WW3rp shouldn't attempt to be like HL2rp, the focus on the engagements should be it's selling point. Though RP shouldn't suffer either. Allowing the 'Generic Soldier' or 'Insurgent/Mercenary' be accessible by everyone while letting specialised roles with powerful equipment be whitelist only strikes a good balance for quality control in my experience.

 

[afric]

would need to get rid of the HL2 stuff somehow, plus the skybox isn't big enough for any aircraft, but otherwise pretty spot on imho

I am going to load it up tommorrow and gaze upon the fresh hell that is hammer editor

 

[Deleted member 1381]

we need to be a lot less nitpicky with maps as well, it would open up the pool threefold. people are more than happy to overlook some out of place parts of the map if its suitable for the gamemode as a whole

if we can find a map that's perfect, great, but the priority should be making sure the maps are suitable for gameplay, and have atmosphere be secondary(while still sought out). If the server is unenjoyable because of a map layout then atmosphere won't matter. Stalker maps usually fit the bill quite well, I remember combing over a few new ones towards the end of stasiland that I'll look out for

 

[Rondal]

Hate them as much as you want, but linear & vertical urban styles were very much achieved with evocity styled maps

remembering tbilisi as one of my favourite maps and character arcs, I'm not sure that would have been possible without the map's unique layout.

 

[Oxy[Morons]]

the server was never meant to be overhauled from its original concept
the server concept is, and always will be, about s2k and the means youre able to do it in within a short time. the best of management were the ones who realized the server survived off those people and catered to those types of players first. the roleplayers were catered to second; but still not ignored and provided ways to roleplay without having to have their existence solely reliable on s2k aspects. we just wanted them to roleplay more than they actually were, and were trying to find ways to encourage them to without restricting what they were actually here for.
the server best functioned as an environment that catered to the mindset that you could do both, without any ties or implications to the other, and will be the only way the server will ever be as successful as it once was.

 

[GenericPlayer]

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1765064201
good example of what I mean, fits the setting and it's dense, could do with some more interiors and no anomalies though, still

 

[Roosebud]

the server was never meant to be overhauled from its original concept
the server concept is, and always will be, about s2k and the means youre able to do it in within a short time. the best of management were the ones who realized the server survived off those people and catered to those types of players first. the roleplayers were catered to second; but still not ignored and provided ways to roleplay without having to have their existence solely reliable on s2k aspects. we just wanted them to roleplay more than they actually were, and were trying to find ways to encourage them to without restricting what they were actually here for.
the server best functioned as an environment that catered to the mindset that you could do both, without any ties or implications to the other, and will be the only way the server will ever be as successful as it once was.

Which is why we probably shouldn't have called Stasiland "WW3RP" but instead emphasized that it was a spin-off set within the same universe/lore.
Then again it did teach us valuable lessons, had us develop and experiment with new concepts and proved that "WW3RPrs" weren't interested in a full-on gritty hardcore RP experience that required investment to be able to regularly S2K. All in all the unique s2k/rp hybrid should be more treasured as there's not a lot of servers similar to it.

 

[Gabe]

a question that I thought about while talking with my bro generic gamer

How will the server move on, what will be the pace it moves since at the end of the day, this is an army fighting an insurgency, not another professional army. Back then operations were the deciding factor but that was due to the fact that both armies controlling a side in conventional warfare. Now we are in the unconvensional setting

 

[Rondal]

a question that I thought about while talking with my bro generic gamer

How will the server move on, what will be the pace it moves since at the end of the day, this is an army fighting an insurgency, not another professional army. Back then operations were the deciding factor but that was due to the fact that both armies controlling a side in conventional warfare. Now we are in the unconvensional setting

operations can be tamed down to something more intricate - perhaps assassinations, convoy strikes, things which can then change the actual gameplay of the server by benefitting one faction with more tools to fight

 

[Oxy[Morons]]

Which is why we probably shouldn't have called Stasiland "WW3RP" but instead emphasized that it was a spin-off set within the same universe/lore.
Then again it did teach us valuable lessons, had us develop and experiment with new concepts and proved that "WW3RPrs" weren't interested in a full-on gritty hardcore RP experience that required investment to be able to regularly S2K. All in all the unique s2k/rp hybrid should be more treasured as there's not a lot of servers similar to it.

yeah, the masquerade of players saying they want more roleplay to hide the fact they want to shoot people only goes so far once u finally manage to peel it back

something i failed to realize after so many years of playing it and getting caught up in it myself, until rather recently. respect to you guys putting up with it much longer than i could, even for all the shit i used to give ya'll

 

[Roosebud]

a question that I thought about while talking with my bro generic gamer

How will the server move on, what will be the pace it moves since at the end of the day, this is an army fighting an insurgency, not another professional army. Back then operations were the deciding factor but that was due to the fact that both armies controlling a side in conventional warfare. Now we are in the unconvensional setting

operations can be tamed down to something more intricate - perhaps assassinations, convoy strikes, things which can then change the actual gameplay of the server by benefitting one faction with more tools to fight

I imagine we can do the smaller stuff such as raids / surgical strikes etc more regularly as smaller-scale and closed server events. Perhaps we'll slowly develop the insurgency faction into becoming more organized and powerful. The addition of a relatively small NATO task force to their ranks should help with that.
Instead of taking countries in 2-3 events like we did on old WW3RP we can have it be focused on capturing cities, regions, ports, bases etc to steadily conquer areas and perhaps even create a new country.

I believe I mentioned this but we even had that one scenario where the Coalition of Independent Nations would be formed through player actions.

 

[STUCK IN A CAKE]

On another note about ranks and promotions,
Rewards for good conduct should come in the form of medals, money and sometimes specialised scripts. Not a promotion. Consistent good conduct and being reasonably trusted calls for a promotion.

And even then, one thing I hated more than anything was having a bunch of players promoted really quickly (Myself included) and having like 20 NCO's to 5 Enlisted (all who are like MSdr/SPC or some shit). If someone is promoted to an NCO position, they should be filling a role. Are they in charge of the motor pool or a certain tank? An experienced combat medic who's training other less experienced medics? Someone who's in charge of organising patrols? And an officer should be in charge of a solid branch of soldiers. Such as Engineers, Medics, Logistics, Artillery, Infantry. Being in a higher-ranked position calls for being in charge of some sort of management position. If you don't want to keep track of the forms or update logs, then you shouldn't be a 'manager'.

 

[Rondal]

I imagine we can do the smaller stuff such as raids / surgical strikes etc more regularly as smaller-scale and closed server events. Perhaps we'll slowly develop the insurgency faction into becoming more organized and powerful. The addition of a relatively small NATO task force to their ranks should help with that.
Instead of taking countries in 2-3 events like we did on old WW3RP we can have it be focused on capturing cities, regions, ports, bases etc to steadily conquer areas and perhaps even create a new country.

I believe I mentioned this but we even had that one scenario where the Coalition of Independent Nations would be formed through player actions.

Ah that was the sendoff idea that was developed following the Korea map where the Nebulous WW3RP saw its end, for the first time.

The plan being to have the Coalition formed to link both lores together awkwardly, but a link none the less.

 

[GenericPlayer]

Might also be worthwhile having a few different militia/insurgent bases scattered around, let folk occupy them if they don't want to work with the others, or better yet, if they want to fight with the others. Very rarely are insurgency movements ever really united.

Whether or not folk will be bothered to do that, I don't know, but the option should at least be there.

 

[Gabe]

Also, I do think insurgents shouldn't exactly be a 100% unified force but a few insurgent forces who agreed to work together but are pushing for their own goals as seen with the second Chechen war how on the Chechen side we had the Chechen republic soldiers and the Chechen mujahadeen aka the Wahab's.

 

[Roosebud]

Also, I do think insurgents shouldn't exactly be a 100% unified force but a few insurgent forces who agreed to work together but are pushing for their own goals as seen with the second Chechen war how on the Chechen side we had the Chechen republic soldiers and the Chechen mujahadeen aka the Wahab's.

That's mainly a gameplay thing, a unified liberation army simply works better in a faction v faction setting compared to having multiple groups with multiple bases also shooting eachother up without uniforms etc

 

[GenericPlayer]

That's mainly a gameplay thing, a unified liberation army simply works better in a faction v faction setting compared to having multiple groups with multiple bases also shooting eachother up without uniforms etc

I'm sure groups could come up with their own uniforms if they really wanted to, but either way that's part of the fun. Uneasy alliances and inter-faction rivalry could allow for some interesting roleplay, territorial disputes could result in negotiations or out-right conflict, factions might need to cooperate to strike occupational forces and so on.

Sure, it's WW3, but there still needs to be some RP in there, and that's a great way to go about doing it.

 

[Deleted member 61]

shoshone in germany?

shoshone in germany

 

[Roosebud]

I'm sure groups could come up with their own uniforms if they really wanted to, but either way that's part of the fun. Uneasy alliances and inter-faction rivalry could allow for some interesting roleplay, territorial disputes could result in negotiations or out-right conflict, factions might need to cooperate to strike occupational forces and so on.

Sure, it's WW3, but there still needs to be some RP in there, and that's a great way to go about doing it.

That's definitely something that would be cool, and we went for it in Stasiland. I'm just also wary of the fact that in practice it'll most likely just end up in people having more targets to shoot up and the staff having to deal with complicated event management etc.

 

[Gabe]

That's mainly a gameplay thing, a unified liberation army simply works better in a faction v faction setting compared to having multiple groups with multiple bases also shooting eachother up without uniforms etc

I'm not saying that on a gameplay scale, on a gameplay scale true, unified liberation army should exist but within that army are certain groups who want certain things and do certain things to achieve it. As you probably noticed I do take inspiration from the Chechen wars but then again, it is in my opinion the most accurate depiction of a modern conflict that occurred by an insurgency that got independence to only, in the end, becomes an autonomous region due to politics. Since I do remember watching a documentary on how Kadyrov's father was so afraid the Wahab's will become a majority and a dangerous one at that, so he actually began co-operating with the Russians and allowed Chechen high ups to be assassinated for him to only assume power in the name of said Russians. Like it would be cool that if the insurgents actually succeeded in taking over a country/territory, it would be up to a said group within the insurgency that has actually played their cards right to be the ones to own said area under their power from a lore perspective.