RISK-like gameplay for Online Campaign

[illinifan]

I'm talking about the board game Risk here.

Basically, a map of the eastern front would be laid out, with a "general" assigning troops to various regions. these troops would represent reinforcements when the battles are fought.

Also, when a team wins a battle they have to split their remaining reinforcement tally between the territory they attacked from and the territory they conquered. and before every "turn", the general gets x amount of reinforcements to allocate to different regions

 

[[TW]schneidzekk]

Read the interviews again

 

[Fedorov]

I'm talking about the board game Risk here.

Basically, a map of the eastern front would be laid out, with a "general" assigning troops to various regions. these troops would represent reinforcements when the battles are fought.

Also, when a team wins a battle they have to split their remaining reinforcement tally between the territory they attacked from and the territory they conquered. and before every "turn", the general gets x amount of reinforcements to allocate to different regions

the devs beat you to it =P

 

[Bobdog]

Jacked from Ralfst3r's HOS Facts thread:

- Multiplayer Campaign Mode: 'When players enter into the campaign, it's a giant power struggle. As a team wins a map, it's marked on that large map and the battle progresses into a new area. As teams win they gain Combat Strength, which directly ties to reinforcements and allows them to fight further against the losers. Thus, as one team captures more areas, they both grow stronger but use more strength, leaving them more vulnerable as they approach complete domination. This creates an epic tug-of-war in which those original fifteen minute white-knuckle rumbles turn into a two to three hour war.' (Source:Voodoo Extreme Interview)

 

[Fedorov]

I have a question about this:

Will there be one big campaign with all the maps of the game?

or will those maps be split into various different campaigns?

 

[Mormegil]

What I'm really curious about is how much control the players have over which map is next. Say if the Axis wins Map A, then looses the next map, will the next game go back to Map A? Or can attacks be made at other disputed / border maps?

I could imagine playing the same 2 maps over and over might get a bit stale.

 

[Miro!]

What I'm really curious about is how much control the players have over which map is next. Say if the Axis wins Map A, then looses the next map, will the next game go back to Map A? Or can attacks be made at other disputed / border maps?

I could imagine playing the same 2 maps over and over might get a bit stale.

This ?

 

[Lucan946]

This sounds like it could be really interesting. How many people would be able to play in these. Supposedly 32 (maybe 50+ at some point, once someone figures a way) on a map, but how many players present in total? Could there be multiple battles at once?

 

[Xendance]

This sounds like it could be really interesting. How many people would be able to play in these. Supposedly 32 (maybe 50+ at some point, once someone figures a way) on a map, but how many players present in total? Could there be multiple battles at once?

I believe that each server will run it's own "campaign". They aren't connected to other servers and/or to players on other servers.

 

[Lucan946]

I believe that each server will run it's own "campaign". They aren't connected to other servers and/or to players on other servers.

I know. That wasn't part of my question.

 

[Mormegil]

I know. That wasn't part of my question.

Assuming it's the same server setup, the only way to have multiple battles would be to run multiple servers. So, indirectly, it was part of your question.

 

[Xendance]

I know. That wasn't part of my question.

Well elaborate then, what did you mean by "Could there be multiple battles at once"?

 

[Lucan946]

Assuming it's the same server setup, the only way to have multiple battles would be to run multiple servers. So, indirectly, it was part of your question.

Oh. Good point.

EDIT: @Xendance: It was folly on my part. Nevermind.