RescueRanger
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 16,370
- Reaction score
- 244
- Country
- Location
Very nice, reminds me of nation states.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, sir, I agree with you. Could you please be HQ? No one would be able to beat the scenarios you design and I.m sure they.d be fun to.play.Just a suggestion. You need three parties to play it out. One, Control HQ that controls the wargame and paint situations, decides on which side to get success and otherwise etc.. Two, a Foxland and third the Blueland.
Normally, if both the FL and BL are live i.e. it is a two-sided war game, you can leave out the Control HQ, and can have an Umpire to sort things out in case things get messy.
I LUV the idea, have often wondered if I could raise it, and backed off, thinking it a bit cheeky for a guest to suggest the thing.
On the negative side, we have very poor band-width at the Uni, I am writing utterly boring Process Guides for the Purchase department and then to every other section or department, my campus apartment is as icy as a witch's left >>>, and my beloved Fiat Palio needs TLC desperately.
I am writing this on my knees, as close to prayer as an atheist can get.
Griffin tell us your idea then. I just thought of it, I.m not really sure about translating it.Love the idea.Thanks @jaibi...I'm totally in.but lets start from some simpler small scale exercises,too much complexity will make things messy.
Yeah, I think we should have some form.of economics involved.Will money be involved? Obviously fake money which players will have to earn (like they earn thanks), So they can acquire new things to get advantage on other side.
Thank you, sirjeeOk, i can play the Control HQ.
For a war game to be done, you need a necessarily rule to enforce on the Unit (like apache kill tank, SAM kill Apache, and tank kill SAM)
You also need to have a common map on both side but you can only allow each side to see their own unit and what do they see.
Finally you will need an expert on terrain effect (like infantry is protected more on a reverse slope than a marsh land)
It is not easy to start a war game until all of the above is solved
Then you will probably need a person who know well on command and control in large scale unit to tutor or mentor the person whom playing the game. I don't think even I am up to that job ....
Have any of you heard of time commander?
It's a program that was done by BBC whom invite everyday Brits in the chair of a commanding generals and lieutenant in one of the historic battle.
We could do something like that minus the game engine and simply use a map and some unit done by animation to illustrate the war as progress
You can check out what time commander on youtube
we can try something like board game like Terrible Swift Sword where we can move each regimental level.I personally think we should first try pre 1800 battles to make it simple.first,we should concentrate on maneuver and deployment as well as force concentration,and the strategy that how we can outflank or outmaneuver our opponent as well as record casualty.we should enforce some rules against what kind of terrain we're playing like you proposed and simply try our hands on basic formations.we can add different weapons like tanks,aircrafts,ships or missiles later.first we should concentrate on ground force.what say?? @jaibi what your take on this idea???
I love it, Grif, if you could elaborate the rules more we can try a test game as I've not played this board game.