how would we distinguish the leader unit from all other units of the same type?
28 Sept 2016, 21:10
Forum Gang Premier
you are a balls
you are a balls
The New Millennium RP (Remastered!)
Hello everyone! Awhile back I launched an RP called "The New Millennium".
THE ROLEPLAY WILL BE OPEN TO PUBLIC OCTOBER 7th, APPLICATIONS CAN STILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER THIS DATE!
THE ROLEPLAYING WONT START UNTIL ALL LANDSWAPS ARE COMPLETE.
THE NEW MILLENNIUM RP:
Created by: Vex03
Help from: Jhon Pete
Admining from: Not a Communist
Ideas from Mag, thanks pal!
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU REVERT TO THIS THREAD FOR RULE CHANGES, ADDED FEATURES, ETC. IT WILL CHANGE CONSTANTLY!
Start Date:
-June 1st, 2000
Everyday = 1 month in-game
Map:
-100 player map reserved.
List of Available Nations: [/u]
NOTE: Nations in black are available.
NOTE: Nations in Red are taken.
[color=#008000]NOTE: Green symbolizes admin for the match.
-Admin for the Roleplay -
-China- Taken (web4)
-India
-United States- Taken (ww2history)[/color]
-Indonesia - Taken (Rekwanze)
-Brazil - Taken (Purplepizza)
-Russia - Taken (Lord Asher)
-Pakistan - Taken (Patton789)
-Bangladesh
-Japan - Taken (Bluephantom)
-Mexico
-Germany* - Taken (Vex03)
-Vietnam *
-Philippines - Taken (D4VY)
-Egypt *
-Turkey *
-Iran - Taken (POL4R)
-Thailand
-France - Taken ( Arstotzka1)
-United Kingdom - Taken (Oceanhawk)
-Italy - Taken (Bacon230)
-Burma - Taken (MuffinMn)
-Ukraine
-South Korea - Taken (Nathan the Warrior)
-Spain - Taken (Witch-King)
-Poland- Taken (GreatBigHippo)
-Canada- Taken (Mkmach7)
-Afghanistan
-Iraq - Taken (ChewCoo)
-Malaysia
-Saudi-Arabia - Taken (Jhon pete)
-Taiwan
-North Korea - Taken - (amosisboss)
-Romania *
-Australia - Taken (Vangone)
-Syria - Taken (Alpharunner)
-Cuba *
-Greece*
-Portugal - Taken (Fenrir)
-Czech Republic - Taken (Prof. Communism)
-Yugoslavia - Taken (King Draza)
-Sweden*
-Israel - Taken (Ay Blinkin)
-Papua New Guinea
-Denmark - Taken (Drake)
-Finland *
-Norway*
-United Arab Emirates
-New Zealand
-Democratic Republic of Congo
-Republic of Congo
-Uganda
-Somalia (transitional government formed)
-Tajikistan
-Slovakia
-Ireland*
-Morocco *
-Algeria
-Libya*
-Ethiopia*
-Mongolia*
-Argentina - Taken (Hungry)
-La-Ida
(spoof of Al-Qaeda due to Bytro’s terms and service)
*- Symbolizes if country is playable by default
Disclaimer: La-Ida is a fictional group needed to truly depict the early 2000's and the war on terror. The state is loosely based off of Al-Qaeda. Selecting this state does not subject any player to ties, sympathy, or support with the group. Simply for roleplaying purposes. Personally, I am extremely conflicted on adding this into the game, but I want to make a good Roleplay.
RULES:
1. No land grabbing
Definition of land grabbing:
"Landgrabbing" is something that all RPers hate. It's pretty much just invading a nation for no reason at all except for land. For example, if say France were to attack the UK and invade them just because they wanted the UK's land, that'd be land grabbing. You must have a reason for war, which preferably you will build up over a few days atleast. However mass expansion is not advised, considering the time period, the days of large scale invasions are more or less over.
2. No Gold use, we promote equal gameplay experience income set aside.
3. No trolling
4. Must post everyday in World Herald! Posts must exceed or be equal to 1 well written paragraph.
5. Must ALWAYS STAY IN CHARACTER!
6. Must make all decisions based off a reasonable decision your country would make in real life during that time period. (2000)
7. You must have a legitimate reason for war! ALWAYS resort to diplomacy first.
8. AI’s will not be attacked. You may also not attack through AI nations.
9. NO “FIGHTING TO DEATH”, if you feel like you've lost the war, you must surrender and comply to the demands of the country who was victorious.
10. Do not escalate situations fast for conflict.
11. No intentionally targeting nations leaders unless it is roleplayed. Must be a good reason to target them.
Legitimate reasons for war should be common sense in this community. If you lack common sense, please refer to an admin of the game (myself) and he will guide you in the right direction.
Note: Failure to follow rules will result in extermination from the game.
War:
As many other Roleplay creators, I like to classify wars into a few categories…
Skirmishes-
Skirmishes occur over a short period of time about little conflicts. No more than one province can be captured during a Skirmish, unless it turns into a minor/major/World war.
Minor War-
Minor Wars occur with 1-3 countries. During a minor war, only up to 3 provinces can be taken per nation in war. Unless it is turned into a major/World war
Major War-
Major Wars occur when anywhere from 3-4 minor/secondary powers engage in a war. These wars are considered far more serious and up to 5 provinces can be captured per nation in the war. Unless turned into a World War.
Word War-
World wars are the most serious of all wars. Involves 4 MAJOR powers, with at least one major power opposing. During a world war, up to 10 provinces can be taken by the victorious faction. (Exception: Unless victors choose to create a vassal/puppet/etc.)
Note: PLEASE do NOT escalate conflicts into world wars with ease. Example, Skirmishes should not instantly turn into world wars.
Features:
Leader Feature:
This roleplay will incorporate a new feature that i am testing out.
Every country must have 1 Milita, that 1 Milita unit respresents the head of your state. (Your leader) he can travel around your country, but isn't require to attend every meeting. You can roleplay him in the newspaper going around the world, due to unrealistic travel times.
Rules on Nuclear Weapons:
Countries allowed to have nuclear weapons:
- USA
- UK
- France
- Russia
- China
- India
- Pakistan
- Israel
- North Korea (later in the game)
- Iran (later in the game
ALSO NOTE NUCLEAR WEAPONS CANNOT BE SOLD!
Admining:
To ensure the roleplay thrives, and all rules are followed, this roleplay will feature an admin. The admin will be respected at all times, and will enforce the rules as needed. The purpose of having one is to make sure everyone can have fun in a prosperous Roleplaying environment. (Admin for this roleplay can be found in the nations list.)
Factions:
This Roleplay will include all factions (that are important to the Roleplay) by default.
NATO:
NATO or North Atlantic Treaty Org. members by default are as follows;
NATO-
The United States of America
The United Kingdom
Portugal
Norway
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Italy
Iceland
France
Denmark
Canada
Belgium
Greece
Turkey
Germany
Spain
Czech Republic
Hungary
Poland
NATO’s essential purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of its members through political and military means.
European Union (EU)-
The EU’s (European Union) members are as follows;
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
The United Kingdom
The fundamental purposes of the European Union are to promote greater social, political and economic harmony among the nations of Western Europe. The EU reasons that nations whose economies are interdependent are less likely to engage in conflict.
United Nations (UN)-
The United Nations (UN) will feature all countries as members. For simplicity reasons.
UNSC (UN Security Council)
All votes to take any sort of action can be vetoed by any of the permanent members of the UNSC, those members are as follows...
-United States
-Russia
-France
-United Kingdom
-China
The central purposes for which the U.N. was established -- to maintain international peace and security; to foster cooperation in solving international economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems; to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; to develop friendly relations among nations
Tech Tree:
A Tech tree restricts certain nations from getting certain technology, that would be considered "unrealistic" given the time period.
Tech Tree link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17MEJQE-jFXmJeDw-2ptVCk2xwYKBqZooyjTC_g0lMZs
Landswap Map:
The landswap map has been released! You can locate that at the bottom of the thread.! Had trouble putting it in here 
cheers, thanks to jhon pete for the help.
------------------------------------------------------
Application:
Required *
*Player Name:
Skype Name: (only needs to be entered if you want to join the skype group chat)
*Leader Name (as of June 1st, 2000
*Country you wish to play as:
*Example of ability to RP (1-2 paragraphs
*I agree to comply with all current and future rules: (Yes/No)
*I will make decisions true to the country I have selected (Yes/No)
*I agree to stay active through all events in the game: (Yes/No)
*I agree to stay in character at all times: (Yes/No)
*I understand all current (and future) information of this forum post: (Yes/No)
Question: (Yes, ask it/No!)
------------------------------------------------------
CHEERS everyone !
PLEASE recruit, the faster we get spots filled up, the faster we can start Roleplaying!
Target start date is early October 
Thank you !
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
664 Replies
28 Sept 2016, 22:18
My thought going into the idea is find the most useless unit in call of war, and making him/her that. Again, just a suggestion. Not an added feature yet.GreatbigHippo wrote:
how would we distinguish the leader unit from all other units of the same type?
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
28 Sept 2016, 23:22
I'd say no to the unit idea personally, doesn't really add to the RP and the Unit travel time is waaay too long. Kinda complicates it. Just my opinion , but RPing your leader is easier.
28 Sept 2016, 23:38 (edited)
Yeah. We'll see what the poll comes to. Decision to be made at 10:00pm CT. Tonight.Not A Communist wrote:
I'd say no to the unit idea personally, doesn't really add to the RP and the Unit travel time is waaay too long. Kinda complicates it. Just my opinion , but RPing your leader is easier.
I ask everyone to please respect the outcome of the poll. If it does win, I will need ideas and such from you guys.
In the meantime, WE need recruits
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
29 Sept 2016, 03:02
wot is terrorism ? thats just freedom fighters (Drunk skype emoji)King Draza Mihajlovic wrote:
look at the map of 2000'sSirAmerican wrote:
I have got one question, my friend: what territory will be mine (what provinces shall I control)?if he drew the Borders correctly..... (edit, I just noticed that you picked a "terrorist" state, welp...you will find out what your borders are)
How many regert electing the current US president, and if not, please, tell me why you havent yet, id love to here you, hopefully smart answer.
29 Sept 2016, 04:58
Also one question, the 7th rule tells: You must have a legitimate reason for war! ALWAYS resort to diplomacy first. I don't think terrorists have legitimate reason for war and I don't think they resort to diplomacy first. Do I need observe this rule?
29 Sept 2016, 11:52
You are an exception to this ruleSirAmerican wrote:
Also one question, the 7th rule tells: You must have a legitimate reason for war! ALWAYS resort to diplomacy first. I don't think terrorists have legitimate reason for war and I don't think they resort to diplomacy first. Do I need observe this rule?
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
29 Sept 2016, 14:04
vex03 wrote:
If you don't believe so, I encourage you to check out S1914's roleplaying section and see the successful roleplays, in which I modeled mine after.
I can understand that Supremacy has more interesting RP's, since the unit options and gameplay are simpler than CoW. But in CoW, just the fact of so many different units limits the amount of rules that can be used to alter the game without messing up the mechanics of the game. It's hollowed ground I wouldn't cross.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.
R.I.P. Snickers <3
29 Sept 2016, 14:57
I see. Well you are entitled to your opinion. Thanks for checking it out !Diabolical wrote:
I can understand that Supremacy has more interesting RP's, since the unit options and gameplay are simpler than CoW. But in CoW, just the fact of so many different units limits the amount of rules that can be used to alter the game without messing up the mechanics of the game. It's hollowed ground I wouldn't cross.vex03 wrote:
If you don't believe so, I encourage you to check out S1914's roleplaying section and see the successful roleplays, in which I modeled mine after.
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
29 Sept 2016, 22:00
By the way, my CoW Username is DoctorHenry
30 Sept 2016, 10:43
Shouldn't Not a Communist have a country?Or does he have one already?
If someone asks why we have a good life in Arstotzka:
GLORY TO ARSTOTZKA!
GLORY TO ARSTOTZKA!
30 Sept 2016, 11:43
He is admining, to make sure no one ruins the roleplayArstotzka1 wrote:
Shouldn't Not a Communist have a country?Or does he have one already?
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
30 Sept 2016, 14:32
Hey, I just wanted to tell my concern with this feature. Militias, or any unit, are terribly slow, and if there is a UN meeting in New York... And my leader is in Brazil... And more leaders are in Asia and Europe... It will take six, seven days in real time for everyone to get there.vex03 wrote:
Okay, so we will be adding a in-game leader... to explain this idea alittle more, I will go much further in depth, now that it is planned on being added.How will be able to tell a difference?
Well, quite frankly, you won't. Which is why I plan on making a unit in Cow exclusive to the leader. I will have a poll on what should be the "exclusive unit" that will act as the leader.
What's the purpose?
Personally, I see it as making the roleplay much more immersive. Imagine trying to track down the leader of La-Ida and kill him! Same goes for if (for example) the UN holds a meeting, your leader can actually ATTEND the meeting! It would make it much easier to roleplay as your leader, and honestly I feel like it would add a really cool spin.
Why now?
Well, as you know this roleplay is constantly morphing based off your guys feedback. I feel like little features like such are innovative and separate my roleplay from others. Two things I hold dearly. As a creator and a person I especially tend to hold innovation dearly.
Thank you guys
P.S. REMEMBER TO TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO JOIN. FASTER WE GET MAJORS FILLED THE FASTER WE START
How about this: the militia represents the head of state for that country. If I'm Brazil, my militia can travel around the country and visit different cities. If I am invaded, and my leader unit is killed... So is the leader. But the leader shouldn't travel too far because that would take too long and be slightly unrealistic.
Then again, if a bunch of South American leaders are meeting in Rio de Jinero, for example, for a continental discussion, La-Ida could potentially kill all the leaders in a mock 'terrorist' attack by capturing the city and killing the militias.
Just some thoughts... A penny for your time.
30 Sept 2016, 14:46
I'm India though
30 Sept 2016, 18:38
That is actually a valid point...purplepizza117 wrote:
Hey, I just wanted to tell my concern with this feature. Militias, or any unit, are terribly slow, and if there is a UN meeting in New York... And my leader is in Brazil... And more leaders are in Asia and Europe... It will take six, seven days in real time for everyone to get there.vex03 wrote:
Okay, so we will be adding a in-game leader... to explain this idea alittle more, I will go much further in depth, now that it is planned on being added.How will be able to tell a difference?
Well, quite frankly, you won't. Which is why I plan on making a unit in Cow exclusive to the leader. I will have a poll on what should be the "exclusive unit" that will act as the leader.
What's the purpose?
Personally, I see it as making the roleplay much more immersive. Imagine trying to track down the leader of La-Ida and kill him! Same goes for if (for example) the UN holds a meeting, your leader can actually ATTEND the meeting! It would make it much easier to roleplay as your leader, and honestly I feel like it would add a really cool spin.
Why now?
Well, as you know this roleplay is constantly morphing based off your guys feedback. I feel like little features like such are innovative and separate my roleplay from others. Two things I hold dearly. As a creator and a person I especially tend to hold innovation dearly.
Thank you guys
P.S. REMEMBER TO TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO JOIN. FASTER WE GET MAJORS FILLED THE FASTER WE START
How about this: the militia represents the head of state for that country. If I'm Brazil, my militia can travel around the country and visit different cities. If I am invaded, and my leader unit is killed... So is the leader. But the leader shouldn't travel too far because that would take too long and be slightly unrealistic.
Then again, if a bunch of South American leaders are meeting in Rio de Jinero, for example, for a continental discussion, La-Ida could potentially kill all the leaders in a mock 'terrorist' attack by capturing the city and killing the militias.
Just some thoughts... A penny for your time.
I Wish I did not vote for Unit leaders...Rocket attacks can be a problem too
This player may have been reactivated in October 27th 2017
30 Sept 2016, 18:41
I see your concern. I will withdraw the leader feature.purplepizza117 wrote:
Hey, I just wanted to tell my concern with this feature. Militias, or any unit, are terribly slow, and if there is a UN meeting in New York... And my leader is in Brazil... And more leaders are in Asia and Europe... It will take six, seven days in real time for everyone to get there.vex03 wrote:
Okay, so we will be adding a in-game leader... to explain this idea alittle more, I will go much further in depth, now that it is planned on being added.How will be able to tell a difference?
Well, quite frankly, you won't. Which is why I plan on making a unit in Cow exclusive to the leader. I will have a poll on what should be the "exclusive unit" that will act as the leader.
What's the purpose?
Personally, I see it as making the roleplay much more immersive. Imagine trying to track down the leader of La-Ida and kill him! Same goes for if (for example) the UN holds a meeting, your leader can actually ATTEND the meeting! It would make it much easier to roleplay as your leader, and honestly I feel like it would add a really cool spin.
Why now?
Well, as you know this roleplay is constantly morphing based off your guys feedback. I feel like little features like such are innovative and separate my roleplay from others. Two things I hold dearly. As a creator and a person I especially tend to hold innovation dearly.
Thank you guys
P.S. REMEMBER TO TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO JOIN. FASTER WE GET MAJORS FILLED THE FASTER WE START
How about this: the militia represents the head of state for that country. If I'm Brazil, my militia can travel around the country and visit different cities. If I am invaded, and my leader unit is killed... So is the leader. But the leader shouldn't travel too far because that would take too long and be slightly unrealistic.
Then again, if a bunch of South American leaders are meeting in Rio de Jinero, for example, for a continental discussion, La-Ida could potentially kill all the leaders in a mock 'terrorist' attack by capturing the city and killing the militias.
Just some thoughts... A penny for your time.
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
30 Sept 2016, 18:56
You don't have to, I think the regional leader feature is better, but you don't need to remove the feature. After all it is your RP.vex03 wrote:
I see your concern. I will withdraw the leader feature.
For example La-Ida's leader can be killed. That is actually a really good idea. Also, small countries in a war with another country could really have a bit more realism with this feature. It makes countries really be concerned with security, as is realistic in the modern world with terrorist concerns.
30 Sept 2016, 21:45
What if I were to change the unit from milita to a plane of some sorts? Possibly a strategic bomber ?purplepizza117 wrote:
You don't have to, I think the regional leader feature is better, but you don't need to remove the feature. After all it is your RP.vex03 wrote:
I see your concern. I will withdraw the leader feature.For example La-Ida's leader can be killed. That is actually a really good idea. Also, small countries in a war with another country could really have a bit more realism with this feature. It makes countries really be concerned with security, as is realistic in the modern world with terrorist concerns.
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
30 Sept 2016, 21:48
What if instead of having a unit, players have to post an article every time their leader moves, and if the city the leader was in is taken by an enemy, the leader is killed.
Forum Gang Premier
you are a balls
you are a balls
30 Sept 2016, 23:48
You've got a good idea. I'll decide between my opinions as suggested.GreatbigHippo wrote:
What if instead of having a unit, players have to post an article every time their leader moves, and if the city the leader was in is taken by an enemy, the leader is killed.
Make America Great Again.
#Trump2016
#Trump2016
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
