Pending WW3RP: Summer Flavors

[Northgate]

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

it is an interesting concept, and a venture to the states would be welcomed by a lot of people. for a long time now, we've gotten used to be in Europe or Asia from HL2RP and WW3RP, it'd be a nice switch to be on America. but even outside of that, the possibilities of terrain and maps are practically infinite, as well as characters from various ethnicities. it could open a LOT of doors.

my only curiosity at the moment is, how will we be able to get some nebulous players back? a lot of the originals are inactive these days and I think keeping a stable player population with good systems in place from Day 1 should be an early focus.

 

[Akula]

renlisted for another tour of duty.... war never ends

honestly I'm pretty stumped, I like most of the ideas presented.

I want to like the Stasiland Red Dawn type scenario the most, because while I thought Stasiland might've been too ambitious/niche for the type of community had, I had also wondered if setting it somewhere more "familiar" to average people might've helped (not to imply people are dumb but getting into the mindset of a 1980s german can be tricky for a primarily british/american audience), but I do still feel wary about it being able to succeed, as much as I want it too

whitelisted event server sounds breddy cool, can't really go wrong there, only gripe is that I'm not personally a fan of episodic rp but it can be fun

as for classic WW3RP, it wasn't the best, and was frankly dogshit a lot of the time, but hey, it worked and a lot of people enjoyed it. It wasn't good RP (even calling it RP might be a stretch) but it didn't have to be, it was fun and I don't see too much harm in bringing it back. (tho for the record I'd vastly prefer something new over it i just dont think it'd be the end of the world to go back to square one)

i think whatever you choose is cool roosebud :grinning:

all i want is:
cold war kino
good army man rp
a tank, preferably

 

[bigdaddyman413]

Remember joining the server with 0 on and just walking around.

I wanna play WW3RP for real this time since everytime I joined I'd carouse an empty map...

 

['77 East]

suggestions for the new setting content-wise:

• please cut 90% of the NJSOC gimmicks that were never used (RC cars, micro cameras, etc)
  
• keep the stingers (but buff them so you don't need 5 direct hits to down aircraft), surveillance drone, demolition equipment and most of the exclusive weapons.
  
• almost all the old weapon lineup works besides some that feel out of place for the setting (niche DDR weapons, PTRS being replaced with a barrett .50, some of the more obscure european weapons.)
• some of the vehicles are going to need to be replaced with something more western, primarily the civilian variants.
• the PACT have the advantage in IFV's given that both the BDRM and BTR use autocannons with 20mm ammo, the VAB and ARV only have a HMG and a LMG respectively, maybe they could be 'updated' or replaced? perhaps a bradley would make more sense given the invasion is on US soil.
  
• replace the IED ringtone to something less jihadi

 

[TinPan]

Remember joining the server with 0 on and just walking around.

I wanna play WW3RP for real this time since everytime I joined I'd carouse an empty map...

Arguably a good justification for having it be open on certain days; means you’ll know that whenever the server is open that players’ll be online without having to worry about it being open 24/7 but with 0 players most of the time.

 

[ddæ]

if red dawn is going to be the given lore (which looks likely) and new york is going to be the big set piece (which also looks likely), can you please try to create less of a dependence on transportation vehicles and tanks rolling through the map?

the vehicles in garry's mod are janky as is and if you're going to base the map in a sprawling metropolis like NYC, it would be (for me) a lot more fun to fight through subways, delis and apartment blocks. create the baghdad experience.

i get that detachments will probably be making a return if it is a hybrid of this new lore with the old mechanics of "classic ww3rp", which means that the engineering detachment will almost certainly return, but that doesn't mean that their only explicit (main) use as a group of players should be to roll out the big armour when a fight is kicking off. that's not to say to get rid of them completely, just limit them in a way that is seen fit; i don't want the fun of a gun-fight absolutely curb stomped by this essentially un-killable (unless you have AT) mechanized beast.

engineers can fit into a squad well. the first guy in the door, CQB, the man with the explosives — opportunities for how they slot into a team is there — and i'd like that to take prevalence over spawning a vehicle via the Q menu.

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.

i understand where this concept comes from, but it's a double edged sword. don't you think that this will create even more of an elitist mindset between the two factions and a deterioration of relations at an incredibly quick rate? ego checking people whether they can shoot people in a game from 2004 better than the other group, or type out a yellow emote in a 2004 game better than the other group.

-

what are your objections (if any) to special forces detachments for both factions on this iteration?

 

[avralwobniar]

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.

the north america idea is unrealistic as they simply would never lose

it sounds fun, whatever you come up with I will try. I still think something less serious is the best idea tho

 

[Roosebud]

the north america idea is unrealistic as they simply would never lose

it sounds fun, whatever you come up with I will try. I still think something less serious is the best idea tho

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

 

[Goopy]

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

would a US soil campaign remove the possibility of the absoloute banger of a classic pripyat being used?

 

[Northgate]

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

In occupied PACT territory, will there be a force similar to Stasi for citizens to interact with? Even though there were some early activity problems, I really enjoyed their roleplay and would even be happy to see them in a smaller position (i.e. local police force etc). I miss @Poopship McGee being a scary motherfucker as the Stasi director

would a US soil campaign remove the possibility of the absoloute banger of a classic pripyat being used?

florida campaign
Could always just say a city has been bombed to absolute shit, it might not look 100% authentic but honestly, people will make a couple funny references and then everyone is gonna focus on having fun in the event

 

[Thood74]

what are your objections (if any) to special forces detachments for both factions on this iteration?

if special forces exist, they should have a clear and important purpose. They shouldn't exist 'just because'. They also shouldn't be packed to the brim with fancy, unused toys. Hardware isn't what makes special forces any more useful than a regular soldier.

 

[avralwobniar]

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

I was just joking, you might have some armchair historians that really fight it tho. have you tried africa or south america?

 

[dvn]

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

could just have both sides be pathfinder/expeditionary units and transfer around the world, including into conflict zones like europe and the west coast

 

[Roosebud]

I was just joking, you might have some armchair historians that really fight it tho. have you tried africa or south america?

I personally have very little interest in either locations because they feel even more distant and unknown than the obscure balkan regions we used to fight in. Also don’t really want to deal with the inevitable stereotypical militia characters that it will spawn.
[doublepost=1655228254][/doublepost]

would a US soil campaign remove the possibility of the absoloute banger of a classic pripyat being used?

Not at all, it’s only an issue for the really specific themed / landmarker maps.

hell we had rp_pripyat be a paris suburb during 2018

 

[avralwobniar]

I personally have very little interest in either locations because they feel even more distant and unknown than the obscure balkan regions we used to fight in. Also don’t really want to deal with the inevitable stereotypical militia characters that it will spawn.

go to brazil, trust me

 

[Deleted member 5501]

Coloured me intrigued, but as someone who hasn't ever played WW3RP, Im excited to check it out and hopefully WW3RP Revival will be the new HL2RP Relaunch, perhaps we kicked about for a while with WW3 and GTARP :D, i am excite.

 

[TinPan]

Honestly I’d rather come up with lore that explains a fight on US soil (which isn’t that big of a stretch at this point in the ‘1983 timeline’) than use distinctively looking US-based maps that are really cool and have everyone go “why is the statue of liberty in europe xddd”.

The map is equally important to the lore. You could pour your heart and soul into making something truly well-detailed and unique, but if you then put players down into rp_stalker and try to somehow justify to them it's the Bayou then people will simply lose interest faster than dropping bricks off a skyscraper.

The map needs to match the world your going for, and if your going for something that is in the United States; the map should reflect the environment as close as it could. RP_UnionCity and RP_Southside instantly come to mind as maps which match the setting as well as having enough variety in terms of areas where people can engage eachother in combat.

That, and it’s an unexplored avenue of ww3rp rather than europe or asia again. More free range of character possibilities as well

I'd even go as far as to turn the NATO faction into literally just some sort of US National Guard unit that holds a mixture of fresh-faced recruits and veterans from the Europe conflict who've been otherwise relocated.

The US is that diverse in terms of ethnicities and sub-cultures within each individual state that you could easily justify having it as it's own dedicated faction that still facilitates people being able to play whatever ethnicity they want, versus trying to somehow justify why you've got soldiers from every single corner of NATO fighting on US soil.

 

[Chester]

what are your objections (if any) to special forces detachments for both factions on this iteration?

hey thats me!!

As someone who has been in leadership capacity of several renditions of SF detachments on WW3 over the years (GSOC, UCTF x2, Spetsnaz, 2017 ARC-Z and so forth) and also someone who has purely played SF on WW3 over the years, I have numerous issues with the detachment existing on WW3. I'm going to try to keep this post short and sweet in comparison to my literal wall of text earlier in the thread. Keeping in mind, I'm going to be exploring these in PAST TENSE... because we were all teenagers at the time, with different mentalities.

Also, I'll preface by saying ALL of the issues I'm referencing are from 2014-2017. I don't know much about any SF stuff beyond those years.

1) It was a breeding ground for egos and toxicity. Most if not all the "best S2Kers" in one subfaction, what could go wrong? People who weren't good S2Kers were routinely excluded from joining SF and also SF-led patrols, simply because they weren't as good at rooty-tooty-point-and-shooty as the rest of the patrol team. There was no reason for this... other than, well, "you're shit and I'm not, you'll get us all killed, go away". When, in actuality, some of these people managed to outlive SF in patrols!!! SHOCK!!!

SF should've been leaders by example. They were not. Not by a long shot — in fact, they were the complete opposite... I'm going to go as far as saying as a good 80% of the server's headaches stemmed from SF. No cap. You heard it from me.

2) SF served no purpose. Nobody wanted to do operations because "muh character" and "I don't want PK'd!!!", so what was the point in SF if they never did SF things? The majority of the operations that WERE carried out were either minimal risk or they had these silly little get-out-of-jail-free cards known as PK-free operations. I think it was like, two a month you could do? Except... well... for a notorious example, 2016 UCTF on Panama City PK'ing a Globalist MP. On a PK-free operation for themselves. That meant UCTF did not get PK'd if they died during the operation. So... to sum it up, SF didn't serve its purpose.

Metagaming and the notorious "military intelligence" shit was also rife within SF during these periods. People didn't want to play fair, and saw no reason to. All they (and by me saying "they", I also mean we, I was also a part of the problem during that 2014-2017 period) cared about was who had the most gametracker score and taunting people in LOOC and OOC during/after firefights. A lot of people in SF were also on some high-power bullshit and routinely tried to circumvent chain of command and commanding officers, I believe there were some attempted coups at some point...?

I want to be optimistic and say that maybe people would be a lot different this time around. And I like being optimistic, so let's stick with that. Whatever decision is made re: SF must have these issues in mind, though. If SF does get brought back? There needs to be constant operations being executed and planned out so that SF fulfil their purpose, and the rest of the flaws I've mentioned simply cannot exist. Otherwise it needs to go.

 

[Roosebud]

what are your objections (if any) to special forces detachments for both factions on this iteration?

I'm still tinkering with the different 'detachments' I'd want to add. Since it's looking like those'll be the main differences between factions (aside from lore, rules of engagement, yada yada) if we let go of the "action-oriented vs rp-oriented" things.

Special Forces didn't really have a purpose beyond their PK-free missions every once in a blue moon (which was usually just pow rescue or some destruction that was fixed within 2 /me's) and essentially being some sort of elite shock troops on the field (or the 'recon teams' that were just used as an excuse to sit on a hill sniping / wiping out squads in 'self defense' when they weren't baiting the enemy).

I guess, if we decide to add a layer of gameplay like that, I'd rather turn it into a more intelligence focused group rather than an elite deathsquad with better guns. As in, a more civilian-oriented group that runs informants and embeds undercovers in groups to feed information provided the civilian factions evolve enough. Perhaps have some leftovers like certain PK-free passes under certain criteria for special undertakings. I'm undecided on other functions as of right now.

In general I feel like we can create a lot of diversity and interesting dynamics by having both sides have different detachments with different strengths / objectives.

 

[Staylone]

Hey there.

Honestly, Red Dawn concept fits the most. Classic ww3rp will become privates rushing and dying.

But what about changing the location? Like, invasion of america is... pretty overused?

What about the Balkans or some kind of proxy war in South/Latin America? One of the best things about WW3RP was the lore and to actually have fun player should have read about event, whats happening on the front.

My idea is to make the kind of ideology orientiered thing. Whitelisted head staff will be on the role of coalition/globalist advisors, most of the players are part of para-military groups of different political views. Main target of any side is to make diplomacy with "big guys" also controlling the supply chains, strategic recource points, military bases etc. Main thing are supply chains, so there would be some kind of tactic and strategy to defeat the opponent.

About ideology - para-military groups, as i said, can have different political views and thoughts on how to do war. OFC the main target is to defeat the enemy, but everybody can have their personal intrests, which could be interfered. Different rightists or leftists, the influence of advisors and their intrests, civil wars between groups. Also, globs/coals "spec ops" can be used sometimes.

And civs as neautral side.

Examples of such conflicts could be the Balkans, Nicaragua, 2nd congolezian war etc.