Pending WW3RP: Summer Flavors

[FreeSpy]

i originally wanted the cool story driven more rp esque thing but honestly i havent actually done any real ww3rp. my only real experience was Stasiland, so, ill vote for four and i look forward to it ngl

 

[Laura]

You can take the options 1 & 2 and recycle them for side-stories basically to be run.
Personally I'm more of a 3 myself but I'll support the project regardless of what type it'll be.

 

[Tinbe]

it'd be cool if everyone reading the thread could vote so I can get a feeling for what kind of audience I'm working with

I've withheld from voting, since I can't guarantee my attendance. WW3RP's always kind of sat weird with me. It's always had this intrinsic friction between text-based roleplay and deathmatch S2K - even moreso than HL2RP - with the amount of OOC hostility that I remember hearing about. Maybe an event-based server would work better, but that brings the question of whether combat will be S2K, or S2RP.
Also the fact there's probably three dozen longtime WW3RP fans that would be ten times more qualified to partake in a temp event over any of my application attempts.

 

['77 East]

personally #1 feels like it's going to lead to heavy squabbling over players wanting to be Y faction as they are intentionally short campaigns. they all seem to be quite good though.

#2 would work well if staff/helpers can juggle creating & maintaining the 'enemy presence' with getting across just how dire the supply situation is; people who complain about being (deliberately) undersupplied should be booted out and replaced. a static(ish) environment means staff can show progression with destroyed buildings, shellholes, corpses, fortifications, burnt trees, etc all showing up as the conflict wears on.

not sure about letting dead players be opfor either, some people might abuse this to intentionally kill people they dislike/are pissed at. might be best to let them play civilians (refugees? collaborators? etc) or more lightly armed actors.

I'm leaning towards this and 3.

#3 seems to me the setting most people will clamor for outside of blind LP nolstalgia (#4). besides the america fuck yeah meme potential, having the heavy militia presence in yankeeland guarantees people will get some (decent?) weapons over the huge player drama last time about @Roosebud wanting players to craft weapons and people going out and farming soviets. instead of blindly recreating the past and leaving it to die just like every other server that's rebooted the 'old formula' this concept could actually change things for the better. factions built around key differences instead of "I wanted X gun/attachment so I joined Y faction".

i havent actually done any real ww3rp

if you were around for the last months of stasiland you experienced it

TDM with a third neutral 'faction', except this time they were doing drugs and setting buildings on fire instead of making jihadi meme videos

 

[Deleted member 5501]

The time is now to enact the Red Menace on the people of Nebulous. Let the Chaos ensue.

 

[dvn]

 

[Roosebud]

Okay so here's basically what I feel like doing, mind you this is entirely my personal interest right now:

I want to combine elements of 3 and 4 together. I want to keep the 'old cold war' and stasiland lore as the foundation, mainly because it's the ww3rp legacy and was entirely player-influenced. But I want to move it ahead towards a new era, I'm still working out the exact details but I want to break away from the endless war for europe stalemate and make a bit of a leap forwards, say a decade or so.

They way I've got it figured would also give us the necessary foundations for a 'war in North America' campaign, which is something I just really feel like doing. I feel like we should also come up with ways to allow the citizenry to be fully neutral or pro-either side if they so wish. So no 'natural' alliances. Perhaps a population breaking away from their government or trying to end the war themselves or whatever.

Gameplay wise, I feel like we should experiment with two factions each having a distinct approach. Whether that is 'one RP focus, one action focus' remains to be seen, hopefully based on player discussion in this thread. But I don't want to 'clone' factions again. I personally would like a main server, open to all. At the very least for as long as it remains interesting to people. I still really want to do some of the events mentioned in 'Task Force Europa', but those can easily be adjusted / be flashback events on weekend or w/e.

I'm currently working on revising the entire content to cut down in size but also swap out some unused or outdated stuff with new material. I've got a map already completely set up for 'regular' gameplay. I've also put in some hours on revising the factions, especially the PACT side and how it would evolve in the lore.

 

[Angel]

 

[Northgate]

Okay so here's basically what I feel like doing, mind you this is entirely my personal interest right now:

I want to combine elements of 3 and 4 together. I want to keep the 'old cold war' and stasiland lore as the foundation, mainly because it's the ww3rp legacy and was entirely player-influenced. But I want to move it ahead towards a new era, I'm still working out the exact details but I want to break away from the endless war for europe stalemate and make a bit of a leap forwards, say a decade or so.

They way I've got it figured would also give us the necessary foundations for a 'war in North America' campaign, which is something I just really feel like doing. I feel like we should also come up with ways to allow the citizenry to be fully neutral or pro-either side if they so wish. So no 'natural' alliances. Perhaps a population breaking away from their government or trying to end the war themselves or whatever.

Gameplay wise, I feel like we should experiment with two factions each having a distinct approach. Whether that is 'one RP focus, one action focus' remains to be seen, hopefully based on player discussion in this thread. But I don't want to 'clone' factions again. I personally would like a main server, open to all. At the very least for as long as it remains interesting to people. I still really want to do some of the events mentioned in 'Task Force Europa', but those can easily be adjusted / be flashback events on weekend or w/e.

I'm currently working on revising the entire content to cut down in size but also swap out some unused or outdated stuff with new material. I've got a map already completely set up for 'regular' gameplay. I've also put in some hours on revising the factions, especially the PACT side and how it would evolve in the lore.

keeping the legacy lore is a great decision, it allows for major events to be recalled and gives everyone and their characters a sense of purpose, nothing better than being immortalized in a state of affairs / timeline post!

mixing 3 & 4 is a good idea, gives both the Stasiland newcomers and WW3RP OGs a good vibe to begin with. the North America idea is interesting, since this will actually allow people to create characters from a variety of backgrounds and ethnicities. also giving this kind of mission to the citizens will create some pretty great scenarios, where in the players themselves can influence the next steps, something I really love.

although, one thing I'd like to address: I personally believe all factions, to some degree atleast, should be held up to an equal standard. giving one faction 'less' roleplay than the other, for example, will just result in eventual toxicity. this isn't always bad, a certain degree of competition is good to keep people engaged and honestly is fun for both sides. just my concern is, that in this case NATO would become mad at PACT forces because one prefers roleplay, the other prefers gunplay. both are super understandable, and they can all have fun - it's just important to find a balance here.

 

[Tinbe]

It's always had this intrinsic friction between text-based roleplay and deathmatch S2K - even moreso than HL2RP - with the amount of OOC hostility that I remember hearing about.

Didn't expect to see my point proven so soon.

 

[Thood74]

Gameplay wise, I feel like we should experiment with two factions each having a distinct approach. Whether that is 'one RP focus, one action focus' remains to be seen, hopefully based on player discussion in this thread. But I don't want to 'clone' factions again.

Uncertainty on how you'll enforce this aside, I feel Northgate is right it will eventually boil down to toxicity, as well as in my opinion giving strong favour to Pact by getting people who near exclusively express interest in gunplay and will (probably) have more opportunities to practice it.

I plead that if you try to create asymmetrical combat, do it through IC means of a factions military doctrine, structure and equipment instead. These things are far easier to fix than a faction that has until then appealed to only one type of person until that point.

 

[Angel]

Nothing about that meme is toxic, you guys need to relax and enjoy jokes for what they are

 

[Northgate]

I don't think it's *that* deep LOL

There's a fine line between a meme and making fun of players for choosing a side not everyone likes, or even just taking an unpopular opinion. it is instead a persistent roleplay issue of a tight knit group sitting in a Discord call late at night, laughing about how stupid people are for not representing the exact idea they want. that's a driving force behind a lot of toxic behaviour, since they're harder to target as a group.

Not that it's bad, my most enjoyable times on HL2RP were listening to chit-chat on TS / Discord. It's just a line that is crossed once people start shit talking.

 

[Mic15000]

I voted for both #1 and #4, the reason being I think having WW3RP show up again might be very interesting for a lot of returning players plus it is gmod and a lot of the gmod player base likes war (shocked I know) so having an ability to draw in new players is always nice. At the same time, if things don't work out OR if things do work out, you can, as I believe you already mentioned roosebud, do it while the main server is running, either as spin-off or to connect it to the main server lore. This can be done via the event server and allows for the best of both worlds. Either way, trying to go for the open approach is still a win-win since you will not lose much if it does not work out since you can still do the episodic scenarios which are bound to have players at the very least.

 

[TinPan]

3 as the setting and 4 as the formula would arguably be enough to work with in my personal opinion for a server (so long as SF isn’t brought back in any capacity whatsoever). You could go anywhere in America from rural to urban depending on where you want people to fight at. Maps like RP_UnionCity, RP_Southside and RP_Necro_Forest (if the server size is smaller) immediately come to mind as unique maps that fit into the America theme.

All that’d be nice to have is just a more prominent focus on RP where it plays a more major focus than hearing “when is next mission?” as 20 people sit AFK in the FOB with no RP whatsoever. Factions leads and NCO’s alike should actively be doing RP-oriented stuff like organising meals at the mess hall, equipment inspections or even entertainment like a boxing tournament; just stuff that breathes actual life into each faction.

Not to mention finding a way around the major problem of the constant need for admins to train new players up— something like a pop-up displaying important information that they need to understand followed by a questionnaire afterwards to make sure they’ve actually read through it.

 

['77 East]

They way I've got it figured would also give us the necessary foundations for a 'war in North America' campaign, which is something I just really feel like doing. I feel like we should also come up with ways to allow the citizenry to be fully neutral or pro-either side if they so wish. So no 'natural' alliances. Perhaps a population breaking away from their government or trying to end the war themselves or whatever.

Could set the remaining US government as being very authoritarian prior to the invasion, with heavy rationing, hugely lacking humanitarian help, martial law justice (executions) for medium infractions. Enough for the people who are interested in going neutral / pro-PACT to have justification for it.

 

[Thood74]

Could set the remaining US government as being very authoritarian prior to the invasion, with heavy rationing, hugely lacking humanitarian help, martial law justice (executions) for medium infractions. Enough for the people who are interested in going neutral / pro-PACT to have justification for it.

This aswell, another reason I was kind of against the North American setting. Beyond the fact it'd be more urban enclosed environments instead of the more open areas I've seen in video which I don't think would be good from the combat perspective but thats ultimately an opinion.

Theres no real reason not to support the US Government during an actual invasion of the country, and the only way to really make it so there is any moral question here is to engage in heavy revisionism and make the US an actual openly authoritarian evil on the same level of or worse than the USSR they are fighting, instead of any moral ambiguity coming from the neglect or apathy of NATO forces towards the civilians in the countries they fight in. Something that is slightly more believable than the US neglecting it's armed, politically divided and hasty-to-act population during or prior to an impending invasion.

 

[Roosebud]

The lore surrounding a US campaign is something that can be deepened out later. Right now it was mainly the discussion if said campaign would be cool, which I think it is. The lore, especially with out plans, can be as flexible as possible

 

[Thood74]

Right now it was mainly the discussion if said campaign would be cool, which I think it is.

Even in that regard I prefer a more open combat area with towns and military bases dotted around. Something more like Battlefield than Call Of Duty. The setting of New York isn't exactly an open combat area.

 

['77 East]

The setting of New York isn't exactly an open combat area.

Urban fighting works just as well, look at Sarajevo or Grozny.

Most of Stasiland's firefights were either enclosed areas (rooms, people firing into buildings from 8m, hallway gunfights) or large open areas where snipers reigned supreme until gunships or IFV's showed up. You can get both of these experiences in an urban setting, especially when players have to maneuver around buildings, rubble, defenses blocking roads, etc.