• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!

WW2: World in Flames [REVISED]

Status
Not open for further replies.
1) What is the size of map? oO
2) Paris looks rly unrealistic^^
3) OMG, a palm is bigger than a car. And it's too high)
4) Tank looks as high as a building with 3 floors!
But I liked the map at all!

The map size is 420x420.

As for the rest.. Surely, i could make a map in the dimensions of 510 072 000 km², with an average army size of five million men - maybe then the cities would appear correct. But if everything would be to scale, then units would be microscopical in size, and frankly, impossible to select.
 
Level 22
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
3,091
I just thought of a silly funny thingy. If you reach the year 1970-1985 the Cold War should end in Nuclear War some how.. Like you could give Russia and America 10 nukes or just end the game at the year of your choosing with a big uber nuclear blast. This wouldn't effect the game much unless you were fighting your enemy for 6-8 hours, which would rarely happen.

You could add a doomsday clock. :D
Like they did in the 60's.
 
Level 12
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
579
I just thought of a silly funny thingy. If you reach the year 1970-1985 the Cold War should end in Nuclear War some how.. Like you could give Russia and America 10 nukes or just end the game at the year of your choosing with a big uber nuclear blast. This wouldn't effect the game much unless you were fighting your enemy for 6-8 hours, which would rarely happen.

You could add a doomsday clock. :D
Like they did in the 60's.

I'd rather let the one who actually researched his nuclears achieve victory.
We're not much into events which affects players in a way no matter what, everyone should be free to do what they want, how they want. Basically: let's keep it realistic.

edit:
I think and hope it will naturally end in a nuclear war by that time but not by timed events, rather by the players actions.
 
Last edited:

AoC

AoC

Level 2
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
21
Hmm... To prevent games going on really long, like your previous game, why not add the ability for people to call it a draw? I don't think people would actually want to play on, if they haven't left already >.>
 
You suggested this before.
I guess we could make a system that allows you to become a protectorate for another player, giving them 60% of your taxes, but i'm not sure how many would use it when you can just take the cities and have 100%.


Anyways, Vuorma has been doing some nice updates to the forum; for instance you now raise in rank the more you post, with the rank icons being the ones we use ingame. ;)
It is a good idea to register if you want to be able to participate in the beta tests. There will be a special locked forum available for beta testers to discuss their business in.
 
Level 5
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
161
I wish best successes in new year, anyway Im pretty sure You will be testing this map together. I hope creators won't surrender in making, even if people are beign bully.

Cheers.
 
Level 19
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
3,231
This will be a great project, Fin and Vuo aren't the type who give up halfway, they'll make it to the end:)
Oh, and about the E-Mail thingy on the Beta, does everyone who signed up get it?
 
Level 12
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
579
We will publish a open beta after that we're done with the closed beta which will occur very soon (balancing and making sure it's playable). Open beta will much likely be out in February.

This will be a great project, Fin and Vuo aren't the type who give up halfway, they'll make it to the end:)
Oh, and about the E-Mail thingy on the Beta, does everyone who signed up get it?

Thanks, well, as long as we got your interest we will work for it! :D

Yes, everyone who signed up got the email. We will be accepting people to the beta team within three days probably.
 
yea i got the email thing too i helped like 2 months ago with ideas/suggestions.

I think she meant the mail saying that you were accepted for beta team.
We have not sent it out yet, but we will soon - we're basically waiting to see who registers on the forums etc. and also making sure that the beta will be somewhat ready to commence once you have been notified, so that you can get right to the fun.

Me and Vuorma tried to make a 3-man test with one of his friends yesterday, byt he keeps running away right before we're about to start. ;)
 
Level 9
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
603
Have you thought of some way to prevent players from massing units? I'm talking about that day you guys dominated the world (Fingolfin had like 90% of Europe, and Vuorma 10% and the rest) and created an giant army of tanks :p.

Btw, holy shit StuGs are totally win. I've just destroyed 27 American Tanks (M4A1 Shermans, M4A1 76(W), Hellcats and M10s) using either a StuG IV or a StuG 40 Late, only being destroyed four times XD. That in Forgotten Hope 2, f-ckin addictive game lol.
 
Level 19
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
3,231
I have an idea Fin, what about having a 'maintenance' fee per a certain number of units, which discourages players from massing too much to a point of lag.
 
That is exactly what i just suggested, except i called it "upkeep".


@Vuorma: i still think it is realistic to have such a system; it would also solve the problem of the game lasting too long since players with only one factory would not be able to over-extend themselves. We might wait with this although and see if it is what we want for this map.
 
Level 9
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
603
Are you going to include Canada, New Zealand and Australia in the map? I think their help was very helpful in North Africa, in the Western Front(in the operation Overlord) and in the Pacific.
 
New zeeland and australia are both not present on the map, so it would be hard to include them.
As for canada, it is currently controlled by USA (atlantic) and contains most of the oil resources for the US player. We could discuss the possibility of making it a player of it's own, but i'm not sure what they would be doing on the world arena that the US wasn't - it is more likely that they would end up declearing war on eachother (although it would be very hard for the canadians to stand up against both american players).
 
Level 9
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
603
It depends on how the factories and airfields would be spread in both Canadian and USA territory. They should be mostly placed on the coast, close to shipyards. That would make things easy to one player control such large territory.
 
@Hugo: Well, to be honest, Canada doesn't appear to have that many cities at all.. Currently, i have terrained Toronto, Montreal, Quebec, Halifax and Labrador - and that's about all i can spot on the map.

Ofcourse, however, not all of neither Canada nor America is present on the map. It is basically just the two coasts that you're playing on.

@NightBlade: I will be uploading images of the allied soldier later this afternoon.
 
Level 19
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
3,231
That would be nice, an for vehicles too like, after they get shot a while you'll need to repair them in order to enter:)
 
@Miss foyy: You mean for transports? I'd rather not make them any worse than they already are, since you rarely ever build them anyways.

@WOWWARS: I'm planning to change "Britain(African)" into "Britain(Colonial)" instead and let them control india and singapore, I could give canada to the main british player, but it would screw up the trading routes since the british player could just be trading with the US via canada, and that makes the big gap that the atlantic ocean is quite useless.

It would be cool to have a chance of revolutions popping up etc (like in the total war games)., I just don't know how to code a complete new cpu player since warcraft only supports 12 players. I could however cause areas to turn neutral hostile with rebels spawningbut then i'm not sure about what would cause the unrest in the first place. It is however somrthing we can discuss.
 
Level 22
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
3,091
@Miss foyy: You mean for transports? I'd rather not make them any worse than they already are, since you rarely ever build them anyways.

@WOWWARS: I'm planning to change "Britain(African)" into "Britain(Colonial)" instead and let them control india and singapore, I could give canada to the main british player, but it would screw up the trading routes since the british player could just be trading with the US via canada, and that makes the big gap that the atlantic ocean is quite useless.

It would be cool to have a chance of revolutions popping up etc (like in the total war games)., I just don't know how to code a complete new cpu player since warcraft only supports 12 players. I could however cause areas to turn neutral hostile with rebels spawningbut then i'm not sure about what would cause the unrest in the first place. It is however somrthing we can discuss.

Sounds like a micro, but, if you wanted to do so you could use Neutral Hostile yes, but you could also use Neutral Passive, simply change their alliance settings using triggers.. They are considered a player also.
 
Allied soldier model complete!

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Soldier.png
    Soldier.png
    378.5 KB · Views: 286
Level 9
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
603
Pretty awesome!

Btw: I HAZ NEW AVATAR. BEWARE MY NEW MG-42. Her name is Carla, and she can't wait to see this map ready :B
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top