|
Post by Hamilton House on Sept 28, 2015 22:44:05 GMT
Then can't it be like a more controlled game like each side as x amount of units so it would be more realistic?
|
|
|
Post by Omar Al-Ghazi on Sept 28, 2015 22:45:08 GMT
Not really. :/
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Nov 30, 2015 6:23:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Dec 17, 2015 17:57:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Omar Al-Ghazi on Dec 17, 2015 21:09:52 GMT
I keep on top of things. I've already checked the rules, made my accounts continued, etc.
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Dec 24, 2015 8:49:14 GMT
Bio Rules Updated : BioMention List
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Aug 26, 2016 17:18:46 GMT
The Biography rules have been updated to make the "General" character more distinct and also ensure that Battles run smoothly from now on : rotrwarzone.boards.net/thread/736/warzone-roleplay-guideThe gist of the changes is as such :- Only "Army General" characters can participate in battle roleplaying with thier armies. Other type of characters cannot participate in battle roleplaying. For now soldier type characters will be reviewed before a decision is made. Faction Leaders even if they are not Army Generals can participate in Battle Roleplaying as they represent all armies of thier faction. A faction leader cannot control the army of his faction members unless given permission by said members. Any comments post them here.
|
|
|
Post by Sergei Arkadyevich Ourumov on Aug 26, 2016 17:43:38 GMT
Technically, wouldn't the faction leader have executive control over all military happenings within a faction? The Presidents of Russia are the absolute highest authority in the military.
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Aug 26, 2016 18:07:02 GMT
Technically, wouldn't the faction leader have executive control over all military happenings within a faction? The Presidents of Russia are the absolute highest authority in the military. By control I meant it in terms of roleplaying. All generals of a faction have to follow the orders of the Faction leader when it comes to war but the actual warfare will be controlled by the generals and the faction leader won't be involved. For example, Dmitry orders Surorov to attack a location. Surorov goes and starts the battle, but all the battle roleplaying of his army will be under his control. However it happens that a general does not follow orders. If it ends badly, then the faction leader can give some punishment (Suspension of army). If it ends in a positive outcome then if the end outcome is good, then everything is good. It's also possible that a general might disobey all orders and start a civil war. However this will require admin permission along with a good Roleplay plotline. Basically, all faction members have to work as a team. The faction leader gives the orders, the generals follow them, but in the battlefield everything is in thier hands on how to make the battle happen. The autonomy that is given to the roleplayer over how to make the battle progress by controlling his army. This way the roleplayer can have some influence in the Battle realm of the RP. However to ensure that the army autonomy is not abused, the generals cannot use thier armies independently to have political power within a faction. They will have to follow the orders of the Faction Leader.
|
|
|
Post by The Warzone on Aug 26, 2016 18:27:28 GMT
Update : I removed the faction leader reference as I think the faction leader matter deserves it's own post.
|
|