Lap
08-08-2009, 09:40 PM
I've been a part of some meta campaigns before and I was wondering if anyone would be interested in participating in one for MOW. I'd like to base them off my experience with Combat Mission. For those of you who have never played a metacampaign before....
Basic metacampaigns work like this:
-A location is chosen for the campaign.
-Players choose a side.
-Players are given ranks and receive and execute orders on a strategic map using units they have been assigned or chosen. Players can request reserves/reinforcements/supplies from command and essentially operate as a real-life division or brigade.
-Battles are then created by game masters when forces collide and the results are reflected on the overall campaign.
-There are tons of rules and the level of detail and control can really be whatever we want.
These end up being a lot of fun since so many people get to participate in a grand scheme. It really gets the community going and there's tons of teamwork. It also really gives an extra meaning to the battles you play. I recall having a lot of fun being a saboteur unit scouting and doing hit and runs. I also recall an intense situation where I was trying to hold off a bridge versus two other players, knowing that if I fell the enemy would have an open highway to my team's vulnerable flank.
A metacampaign could work in one of two ways:
1. Full realism
A topographical map is chosen as the campaign site and players can view and move their units using COCAT
http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/vault/cocat/cocat.htm
The actual rules can be as anally detailed as the players want. The level of detail and control can be as detailed as http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/academy/academy.htm if required (essentially players give real orders that would be given in the real world, with fully realistic logistics.
2. DCG laziness
DCG already has a lot of work put into it and can essentially be modified to fit the purposes. The maps are already made and operations can easily be displayed. Not much work would have to go into editing any of these maps. The unit purchasing is something that already has a tool and could easily fit the purposes of the metacampaign.
Problems
There's a few main problems we have to work around here:
1. End match reporting is very difficult without replays, good statistics, or multiplayer saves. Possible solutions: having in game observers or abstraction of most losses and inventories. Perhaps only major losses like tanks and artillery would be specifically recorded and other losses would be simulated based on various parameters. The larger the force the player controls the less individual losses matter, so that might gear us towards larger forces.
2. Unlike some other games, there is no way to stop someone from opening up the file just before a match and seeing exactly what equipment the other player has. This is annoying and can be slightly hidden with some clever scripting to try to confuse most newbie cheaters, but ultimately there's no good way to hide the units besides sending the mission out just before the match. It's not too big a deal since big enough maps would mean starting placement isn't so much an issue. See alternate idea at end of post for another solution
3. We might have to make a specific mod for this just to correct some bugs and make this work smoother. Might not be a lot of work, but it still needs to be done.
Even with these problems I'd be interested in test running a very small operation and seeing what can be improved from there. Is there anyone that would be interested in helping develop or run this? More importantly, would anyone even be interested in playing this?
Alternate idea for units- Instead of having each unit be tracked individually, the actual compositions could be more abstracted. This would mean players wouldn't really know exactly what they will be fighting. For example, you are assigned an armored car division. The game master notes this and makes your side only able to select relevant reinforcements. You could then spawn whatever troops you wanted with a number of points given to you based on your unit's current strength. This would require some modding to make a custom gamemode, but not much.
Basic metacampaigns work like this:
-A location is chosen for the campaign.
-Players choose a side.
-Players are given ranks and receive and execute orders on a strategic map using units they have been assigned or chosen. Players can request reserves/reinforcements/supplies from command and essentially operate as a real-life division or brigade.
-Battles are then created by game masters when forces collide and the results are reflected on the overall campaign.
-There are tons of rules and the level of detail and control can really be whatever we want.
These end up being a lot of fun since so many people get to participate in a grand scheme. It really gets the community going and there's tons of teamwork. It also really gives an extra meaning to the battles you play. I recall having a lot of fun being a saboteur unit scouting and doing hit and runs. I also recall an intense situation where I was trying to hold off a bridge versus two other players, knowing that if I fell the enemy would have an open highway to my team's vulnerable flank.
A metacampaign could work in one of two ways:
1. Full realism
A topographical map is chosen as the campaign site and players can view and move their units using COCAT
http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/vault/cocat/cocat.htm
The actual rules can be as anally detailed as the players want. The level of detail and control can be as detailed as http://www.combatmission.com/CMMC/academy/academy.htm if required (essentially players give real orders that would be given in the real world, with fully realistic logistics.
2. DCG laziness
DCG already has a lot of work put into it and can essentially be modified to fit the purposes. The maps are already made and operations can easily be displayed. Not much work would have to go into editing any of these maps. The unit purchasing is something that already has a tool and could easily fit the purposes of the metacampaign.
Problems
There's a few main problems we have to work around here:
1. End match reporting is very difficult without replays, good statistics, or multiplayer saves. Possible solutions: having in game observers or abstraction of most losses and inventories. Perhaps only major losses like tanks and artillery would be specifically recorded and other losses would be simulated based on various parameters. The larger the force the player controls the less individual losses matter, so that might gear us towards larger forces.
2. Unlike some other games, there is no way to stop someone from opening up the file just before a match and seeing exactly what equipment the other player has. This is annoying and can be slightly hidden with some clever scripting to try to confuse most newbie cheaters, but ultimately there's no good way to hide the units besides sending the mission out just before the match. It's not too big a deal since big enough maps would mean starting placement isn't so much an issue. See alternate idea at end of post for another solution
3. We might have to make a specific mod for this just to correct some bugs and make this work smoother. Might not be a lot of work, but it still needs to be done.
Even with these problems I'd be interested in test running a very small operation and seeing what can be improved from there. Is there anyone that would be interested in helping develop or run this? More importantly, would anyone even be interested in playing this?
Alternate idea for units- Instead of having each unit be tracked individually, the actual compositions could be more abstracted. This would mean players wouldn't really know exactly what they will be fighting. For example, you are assigned an armored car division. The game master notes this and makes your side only able to select relevant reinforcements. You could then spawn whatever troops you wanted with a number of points given to you based on your unit's current strength. This would require some modding to make a custom gamemode, but not much.