Ultimate Modern World RolePlay Scenario

Rules for Ultimate Modern World Roleplay:

1. War Must be Declared in Public Chat the turn before attacking. So if USA declares war on Mexico in chat on turn 2 they can not attack until turn 3.

2. Turn 1 Wall-Breaking or Entering Opposing Player's Lands turn 1 is reason to be called "Rogue".

3. Rogue Players are automatically at war with every nation and every nation can use nukes against them.

4. Nukes can only be used against Rogue Nations or if both parties agree to it, using nukes without these rules results in Rogue status.

5. Report rogue players to the thread to be put on a ban list for the game.

6. Oil Fields on Water are Free For All for any nation to take. Once you take it that doesn't mean you own it forever, any player can attack an occupied oil field without warning. However, attacking more than an oil field (the land of a player) in addition to the oil is Rogue.

7. Oil Fields on Land and Nuke Silos on Land are for the nation in which the city is located in. Attacking an oil field or nuke silo not in your lands will result in Rogue Status.

8. Military Bases on land fall under the same rules for oil fields and nuke silos in rule 7.

9. When a player leaves he may leave it to an ally or a friend unless he is already in a war or entering a war that turn, this is to prevent cheating nations out of a fair war.

10. Do not attempt to wall your lands if it will result in WFing an opponents city.

11. 2 players may enter a 1v1 in which no other nations can help either side directly in the war.

12. Nation A wars Nation B, if Nation B is allied to Nation C, and Nation C wants to help Nation B, then Nation A must agree. If Nation A doesn't agree to the 2v1 then it can not happen.

--------------------------------------------

Ban List:

Tunder3 (Turn 1 Leaver)

killjoe1077 (Illegally used nukes in war)

tokenyiddoo (Illegally used nukes in war)

EugenioRepublica (Entered a War without Declaration)

PartySUPERB15 (Turn 2 Leaver)

Killer-san (Turn 2 Leaver)

Goblin (Turn 2 Leaver)

rabihr (Turn 1 Leaver)

MichaelB350 (Turn 1 Leaver)

samtair (Trolling)

Unleashed/Unleasheds Wrath (Existing)
--------------------------------------------

I guess this covers all the rules for now. Any more suggestions leave in the Thread below, the Scenario is not published and waiting for people to play it

Rule 10? just because you are on your own land does not mean you can WF someone

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 06.06.2014 at 01:13

Rule 10? just because you are on your own land does not mean you can WF someone

Good idea thanks

Can I ask you something? Why can't people have a 2vs1 war if one side doesn't agree? Life isn't fair, if a (small) nation has good allies, then why can't they help him against an enemy? I believe that, if the war is defensive, then allies can help the defender against the conqueror, without the conqueror's agreement.
Isn't RP about diplomacy? Also, the declaring war thing is stupid. How can you pull off a ''surprise'' attack like that? Undeclared wars can happen in real life, the rule about rogues isn't ''used'' correctly. A country that fights a lot of wars for stupid reasons or that fights undeclared war could be a rogue, but roleplay-wise.
What I mean is that said country could be a rogue and a coalition could be formed against it, leading to an alliance of all the said country's neighbors fighting that specific country.
A rogue, that should be banned, would be the guy who attacks everyone without declaring war for no reason in order to SP farm, without stopping or anything or who breaks other rules.

लिखा द्वारा Nitmaros, 09.06.2014 at 09:36

Can I ask you something? Why can't people have a 2vs1 war if one side doesn't agree? Life isn't fair, if a (small) nation has good allies, then why can't they help him against an enemy? I believe that, if the war is defensive, then allies can help the defender against the conqueror, without the conqueror's agreement.
Isn't RP about diplomacy? Also, the declaring war thing is stupid. How can you pull off a ''surprise'' attack like that? Undeclared wars can happen in real life, the rule about rogues isn't ''used'' correctly. A country that fights a lot of wars for stupid reasons or that fights undeclared war could be a rogue, but roleplay-wise.
What I mean is that said country could be a rogue and a coalition could be formed against it, leading to an alliance of all the said country's neighbors fighting that specific country.
A rogue, that should be banned, would be the guy who attacks everyone without declaring war for no reason in order to SP farm, without stopping or anything or who breaks other rules.

Rule 12 touched on that, considering balance, I tried to balance the wars, big nations like USA, Russia, China etc have more expensive units than smaller/poorer areas an in terms of possible income its relatively similar as to prevent a wipeout war.

Rule 13? Say, A attacks B, C wants to help B. So C can ask D to help A to make a 2v2.

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 05.06.2014 at 21:31

Rules for Ultimate Modern World Roleplay:

1. War Must be Declared in Public Chat the turn before attacking. So if USA declares war on Mexico in chat on turn 2 they can not attack until turn 3.

2. Turn 1 Wall-Breaking or Entering Opposing Player's Lands turn 1 is reason to be called "Rogue".

3. Rogue Players are automatically at war with every nation and every nation can use nukes against them.

4. Nukes can only be used against Rogue Nations or if both parties agree to it, using nukes without these rules results in Rogue status.

5. Report rogue players to the thread to be put on a ban list for the game.

6. Oil Fields on Water are Free For All for any nation to take. Once you take it that doesn't mean you own it forever, any player can attack an occupied oil field without warning. However, attacking more than an oil field (the land of a player) in addition to the oil is Rogue.

7. Oil Fields on Land and Nuke Silos on Land are for the nation in which the city is located in. Attacking an oil field or nuke silo not in your lands will result in Rogue Status.

8. Military Bases on land fall under the same rules for oil fields and nuke silos in rule 7.

9. When a player leaves he may leave it to an ally or a friend unless he is already in a war or entering a war that turn, this is to prevent cheating nations out of a fair war.

10. Do not attempt to wall your lands if it will result in WFing an opponents city.

11. 2 players may enter a 1v1 in which no other nations can help either side directly in the war.

12. Nation A wars Nation B, if Nation B is allied to Nation C, and Nation C wants to help Nation B, then Nation A must agree. If Nation A doesn't agree to the 2v1 then it can not happen.

--------------------------------------------

Ban List:

Tunder3 (Turn 1 Leaver)

killjoe1077 (Illegally used nukes in war)

--------------------------------------------

I guess this covers all the rules for now. Any more suggestions leave in the Thread below, the Scenario is not published and waiting for people to play it

> Bans tunder3.

This game mode won't work, people don't want to play balanced like this, noobs of atwar like imbalance, op-ness and unit statistic inflation. They do not like balanced wars. It is very clear, and a very simple fact. RP also relies on individuality, the fact that you can become any country, which is clearly lacking in this scenario.

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 04.07.2014 at 08:33

Rule 13? Say, A attacks B, C wants to help B. So C can ask D to help A to make a 2v2.

Who the fugg is A to attack B? And, why doesn't C attack directly D instead of using A and B as a pretext? Oh my God; to many questions?
Some or all are rhetoric!

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 04.07.2014 at 10:00

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 04.07.2014 at 08:33

Rule 13? Say, A attacks B, C wants to help B. So C can ask D to help A to make a 2v2.

Who the fugg is A to attack B? And, why doesn't C attack directly D instead of using A and B as a pretext? Oh my God; to many questions?
Some or all are rhetoric!

So C can attack D AND C.

Or maybe he should just declare war on both...

Fuck I fail.

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 04.07.2014 at 10:00

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 04.07.2014 at 08:33

Rule 13? Say, A attacks B, C wants to help B. So C can ask D to help A to make a 2v2.

Who the fugg is A to attack B? And, why doesn't C attack directly D instead of using A and B as a pretext? Oh my God; to many questions?
Some or all are rhetoric!

Exactly, black shark youre quickly losing quality in terms of questions.

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 04.07.2014 at 11:05

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 04.07.2014 at 10:00

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 04.07.2014 at 08:33

Rule 13? Say, A attacks B, C wants to help B. So C can ask D to help A to make a 2v2.

Who the fugg is A to attack B? And, why doesn't C attack directly D instead of using A and B as a pretext? Oh my God; to many questions?
Some or all are rhetoric!

Exactly, black shark youre quickly losing quality in terms of questions.

That was just 2 times. Doesn't mean nothng.

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

लिखा द्वारा International, 05.07.2014 at 05:05

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

You're right, if you want to war you better have allies.

And add anti nuke thingies please?

लिखा द्वारा International, 05.07.2014 at 05:05

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

1st off neither Poland or chile are playable nations but make up a group of nations in a common region. While some nations are more powerful than others there is a certain amount of balance that is there. Most (if not all nations) make around 2k or more starting income and have enough money, more powerful nations like USA and Russia have more expensive units with the exact same stats. The rules are to prevent gang banging and unfair wars. In some instances it might harm the nation it was trying to protect but such is the nature of rules, they are imperfect, if I didn't have the rule then Russia, Arab League, India and Turkey could all war Iran & Syria for no reason and win easily.

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 05.07.2014 at 06:15

लिखा द्वारा International, 05.07.2014 at 05:05

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

You're right, if you want to war you better have allies.

And add anti nuke thingies please?

I like anti-nuke idea but nukes are effective against rogue nations who invade, if I make anti-nukes then a rogue nation can spam them and just resort to land warfare which it might lose eventually but that takes a lot of time.

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 08.07.2014 at 13:48

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 05.07.2014 at 06:15

लिखा द्वारा International, 05.07.2014 at 05:05

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

You're right, if you want to war you better have allies.

And add anti nuke thingies please?

I like anti-nuke idea but nukes are effective against rogue nations who invade, if I make anti-nukes then a rogue nation can spam them and just resort to land warfare which it might lose eventually but that takes a lot of time.

But nukes fuck up the world. Maybe have them at a really expensive price?

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 08.07.2014 at 14:42

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 08.07.2014 at 13:48

लिखा द्वारा Guest, 05.07.2014 at 06:15

लिखा द्वारा International, 05.07.2014 at 05:05

I agree with the above concerns. In my opinion, one of the most interesting aspects of a global role play is being able to be a medium power (Poland and Chile come to mind). These rules are unfavorable to these medium powers. Also, by requiring permission of the enemy to be able to call an ally to arms, these rules are restricting in-game diplomacy severely (no coalitions, defensive pacts, etc). If diplomacy is restricted to such a degree, why have role play at all?

You're right, if you want to war you better have allies.

And add anti nuke thingies please?

I like anti-nuke idea but nukes are effective against rogue nations who invade, if I make anti-nukes then a rogue nation can spam them and just resort to land warfare which it might lose eventually but that takes a lot of time.

But nukes fuck up the world. Maybe have them at a really expensive price?

I would but 5k is the highest atwar can go. Idk why I disagree but oh well another reason this game is fucked up

4 noobs decided that they couldnt fight me 1 v 1 so they rogued me by declaring right at the end of a turn after they destroyed all my walls and took my lands.
Spain Italy and Ukrane and belarus where the ones who rogued btw.

लिखा द्वारा CIA, 19.07.2014 at 12:46

4 noobs decided that they couldnt fight me 1 v 1 so they rogued me by declaring right at the end of a turn after they destroyed all my walls and took my lands.
Spain Italy and Ukrane and belarus where the ones who rogued btw.

little tip:
dont talk so open about playing roleplay on AW forums, people will hate you for that

लिखा द्वारा CIA, 19.07.2014 at 12:46

4 noobs decided that they couldnt fight me 1 v 1 so they rogued me by declaring right at the end of a turn after they destroyed all my walls and took my lands.
Spain Italy and Ukrane and belarus where the ones who rogued btw.

this isnt my map

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 23.07.2014 at 23:19

this isnt my map

Looks all the same.

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 24.07.2014 at 00:27

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 23.07.2014 at 23:19

this isnt my map

Looks all the same.

except mine is basically justworld map, I boosted the income in some places to help balance and added oil fields and such

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 24.07.2014 at 00:27

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 23.07.2014 at 23:19

this isnt my map

Looks all the same.

But that's clearly UN's successor, tempted rp

लिखा द्वारा Columna Durruti, 24.07.2014 at 00:27

लिखा द्वारा Quantum027, 23.07.2014 at 23:19

this isnt my map

Looks all the same.

all you pathetic anarchists look the same to me, just butthurt they dont have a place amongst the elite.