Call of war/Sudden Strike 4/ and CoD mix

Now this game has alot of intresting parts that some can play for years and never understand them. But what if this game was even more specific and detailed. What if you could control each unit in a battle? What if you could accualy be the infantry on the ground fighting? This idea I've cobbled together is a 3 part based game where developers control their own third. For example: Byro would concentrate on the main full scale part, the part similar to Call of War. : Activistion or a similar company would take control the battle aspects, such similar to Sudden Strike 4. : finaly an company would take part in the control of the first person shooter aspect.

Your probably wonder things like how would the company's stay in together. That part would simply be a gentalmans agreement. Plus would people play a 3 part game they they can only play 2 parts? No. So they need each other to stay around. If your wondering why not keep it one company well the answer is simple. Can the comapny support it? I dont think so. Wile byro has done alot to prevent the bugs their still here. Imagen a game many fold bigger and the other parts arnt even the same. Simply put it would be a complicated and expencive way to keep the profit to one company. If we had a game like such but it was banded by 3 makers wouldn't it develop faster and most bugs be spotted sooner. Plus if a company dealt with its own familer part like byro handling the full war part like Call of War each piece would be better.

Now about how we tie this all together. How would a game like CoW tie with a SS4 (Sudden Strike 4) and then go further into a Cod type first person game. The answer is complicated but when understood is quite simple. Because their are many first person shooter fans out their it would be easy to fill the parts in a battle. If their was a point where the shooter could be droped in the battle accordingly to what is going on and have the numbers right. For example one way would have an application set up by the battle commander(whoever is in charge of the SS4 part) sent out to any shooters who wish to drop in a game. The one problem is that this requires alot of shooters in a short period. This is possible if this idea spiraled off to a large platform. The other way would be that the battle takes place whenever it starts and shooters can jump in at any time in any point in the battle as long as their are infantry options open. This is most likely not the better option as it would cause lag though out the battle. The prior option seems the be better, but it would cause a delay between battle commanders and for the generals (CoW players). But if the commanders and generals can deal with a little longer of a fight then it is definatly possible.

Now for the commanders. Now this part can be dictated by the generals. The 3 different ways this can go will be;

• 1) the general can pick the commander for this battle or the first to apply gets it.
• 2) the general would let this fight be conflicted by ai. Very similar to how battles are done in CoW now.
• 3) is that the general can accualy be the commander controlling the battle. This part would be favored by players like me who want to know that if they lost its their falt. They cant question someone else for the reasons they lost. Or if they wish to play that part as it is an enjoyable part to be in.

But if the general did pick for a human commander the next option would be to the commander. That option would be if infantry units were possibly ai, fill in if theirs people applying. Or that the commander would keep the units under his control. The probelm with having people accusly3 being your boots on the ground is them listening. Instead of directing an ai unit and them listening the commander makes "sugenstions" similar to the orders the main player would give his human commerads in Ghost Recon Wild Lands compared to the orders he would give to his ai comrades. Once they are human they get a message and a flag point as to what to do. If you just have a player that goes against command and does his own thing you and the commander would have the option to remove that player. One way to make sure the boots do as they are told would be to add a part for the commander where they can reprimand a player. This means they they would get a citation that would temporarily keeps them from advancing their points in that battle. This part would definatly need feed back and some testing to work it out the best.

And inally but most certainly not the least important part would be the generals. This part can be quite similar to CoW. But would have to take longer as battles would have to last hours and possibly even a day. (As real battles have taken similar time spans and some even longer) and to make things simplistic some events and maps would have to be eliminated. For example a monthly event just is to much. Maybe a tri or bi annual event would releave the system. Also this would have to be one base game. Either 1.0 or 1.5. I vote 1.0. If both were running that would cause to much confustion for commanders and would eat up some of the systems capabilities. Another way to combat the time problem would make every thing else faster. As to focus more on the battle.

I'd love some feed back. Any thing you can think of that I didnt explain. Or if theirs a better way to handle a probelm please respond below. Tell me what you think.