So, out of curiosity

First off, I don't believe this belongs in any other section but I'm not positive. What I wanted to do was find out how many people would be interested in an idea that I have had for awhile.

Here goes, first off there is a map divided into 30 or so provinces/territories. Each player picks a race and controls one home province. Each province provides x amount of resources, and depending on the territory a bonus (25% discount of air units etc, 5 free supply, etc.)

Each "turn" the players send in an order to produce units, attack, and build. Each province that is neutral is an individual mission which you bring your army to attempt to conquer. Furthermore, each province you conquer leads to further resources, and a larger potential army. However obviously it leads to more territory to defend, and more potential problems.

Anyway, there are obviously multiple different ways that it could go, and work. The reason I was posting was to find out how many people would be interested in playing a game like this over the course of several weeks, or even months?

 

So basically it's an extremely slow version of starcraft?

 

Risk.

 

Hmm, ok mabye im not communicating quite clearly. If anyone has played dawn of war soulstorm or dark crusade they will know what I am talking about.

Basically It is a strategic campaign, where the individual battles are still fought on sc2 maps.

If someone attacks your province where youve built 23 photon cannons and 14 colossi, thats the defensive force you start with. Furthermore each map would have its own gimmick, so every map would be unique. They would also provide nifty bonuses for controlling them.

It would be similar to risk in the strategic sense, however all battles WOULD be tactical, and the strategic depth would be greatly improved

 

So wait. It would be like risk, but whenever there's a battle you would have to play it out in a starcraft custom game?

 

correct, like I said it would take awhile

 

Hmmmmm... yeah I can imagine about 50 things that could go horribly wrong with this. Think of the arguments about OP, people losing because of terrain during the battle, etc... and we could just go play SC2 ladder instead.

 

I think its a pretty cool idea . With a few suggestions.


1st off i suggest making the game x team vs Y team. Team vs team games are in general easier to balance and simpler in concept. You ever play a starcraft 1 map called "Civil War: Virginia"? Its kinda a long the same idea as your map. The only bad part of the map was the long load times and im sure sc2 wouldn't have those issues.

Civil War: Virginia basically a top vs bottom map, where you would control a general unit that represented an army. If your army (plus any of your friends / foes armies) met up, they would start a battle. Depending on where you met for the battle, the terran map would match. In the battle there would be 7-9 flags that could be captured, the one with the most flags at the end won, or if the enemy army retreated you would win.

Your army (that you got over time) were stationed in a safe corner in the map until you got into a battle. After a battle units could gain experience and become veterna versions of themselves. Along with this, winning a battle would reward tech point (represented by gas at the time) that you could use to upgrade your units into suppier version of themselves. If you upgraded a veteran unit, it would upgrade to veteran suppler unit.

A very fun map , you should try to find it somewhere if it still exists. Might lead to come good ideas.

 

Thats actually a really good idea.... huh

 

Great idea IMO Reldric! But if you would rather make teams why not 3 (one for each race)?

 

hmmm, 3 teams, with 3-4 players each team would be interesting... use a riskish map, with all armies being held off to the side could really work.