Dynamic Universal War System - A Campaign

[Lord Penney]

On Saturday, a few of us chaps played some unorganised A3 and were trying out a few missions in the workshop. In this session, I discovered a scenario on the workshop called 'Dynamic Universal War System' (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... =167274881), in which you must build up your base in order to reclaim Altis from an AI controlled enemy that is trying to do the same. Enemy outposts/ strategic points/ side missions are all generated at the start of the game, and your team is free to reclaim the island as you see fit.

I know what you're thinking, "But Lord Penney! Altis is huge! It would be impossible to capture the whole thing in a couple of hours!" To which I say, stop using so many exclamation marks. But in an unrelated thought, did I mention that progress in DUWS can be saved?

Basically, I thought this was really cool and I really like what I played of it. Therefore, I'd like to start an organised FA campaign in which we claim Altis in the name of tractors, comradery and the good of the party.

Let me know what you think below; and if you like the idea, let me know what day would be good for you. Saturday would be great for me, but I'm open to other suggestions.

UPDATE: An excellent suggestion from Head, persistent squads would be a thing.

[Medic Eugene Roe]

I played the mission in singleplayer, and it was good fun. Take one camp, RTB and pickup more troops, rinse and repeat. My problem was when I died in the rinsing process.

I'm up for it.

[Satire]

Brie team leader reporting for Duty !

Just one slight suggestion, possibly look into de-pbo'ing the mission and making the guy in the big tin shed invulnerable, so we don't get a campaign wipe if the enemy get lucky or grenade based accidents happen?

[Lord Penney]

Good suggestion Brie, but there are two ways of thinking about this:

1) The commander represents our fail state, if he dies then we lose. The enemy will attempt to raid our base in order to kill him, and we will (eventually) try to do the same for them. Disabling this fail state removes any sense of urgency from defending the base. Besides, there's no severe penalty if we save regularly since, effectively, the only 'punishment' for him dying is to go back to the last save.

2) It would be kind of bullshit if we'd have to go back to the last save due to an unlucky keypress. Furthermore, I'd be really annoying if we were conducting an operation when suddenly, our base is attacked by an AI opposition and then suddenly we lose.

Let me know what you think below. Personally, I think option 1 is the way to go; I'll just need to remember to save more often!

[head]

I love it. totally down.

persistent squads would be nice too!

[Thirith]

I might join every now and then (and thanks to Croc's helpful suggestion, I'm 95.3% less likely to grenade the commander to death in future sessions!). It depends a bit on the Steam group I've got, which was started with people from a different, non-Arma community; usually the only people around for our Saturday games are Folk ARPS members anyway, but if anyone from the other community is playing I'd probably be playing with them.

Also, whenever you guys get tired of Arma 3/DUWS, there's always CWR2 and the add-on maps to explore. Sander's put together some cool missions for those.

[Satire]

Good suggestion Brie, but there are two ways of thinking about this:

1) The commander represents our fail state, if he dies then we lose. The enemy will attempt to raid our base in order to kill him, and we will (eventually) try to do the same for them. Disabling this fail state removes any sense of urgency from defending the base. Besides, there's no severe penalty if we save regularly since, effectively, the only 'punishment' for him dying is to go back to the last save.

2) It would be kind of bullshit if we'd have to go back to the last save due to an unlucky keypress. Furthermore, I'd be really annoying if we were conducting an operation when suddenly, our base is attacked by an AI opposition and then suddenly we lose.

Let me know what you think below. Personally, I think option 1 is the way to go; I'll just need to remember to save more often!

Actually, I forgot you can save the mission, so if we save before and after every jaunt out we should be ok. I've just got bad memories of early versions of DUWS where the base was defended by two riflemen who'd been drinking meths all day and would just let CSAT commandos stroll in and cap the CO. A good saving routine should minimize inconveniences from accidents and still retain the risk of enemy attack.

[Stoner]

An excellent idea. I just installed DUWS and will play with it a bit. A DUWS campaign, and ultimate inevitable victory, will prove, once again, the Party is destined by God to lead all mankind.

I watched the DUWS video, and I noted that no goats were mentioned. The party demands goats. We should should immediately send a strongly worded message to the DUWS creator to add goats.

[Medic Eugene Roe]

I agree. Sometimes you just wanna be a goatherder. Arma: goatherder simulator 2014. mod: goat simulator. mission: eat all cabbage.

[thekev506]

My name is Mrkev, and I approve this message.