Fosho. I remember reading about how it took 200-500 shots for a single casualty. They wouldn't be maps of 600 guys against 600 guys, but of companies or regiments against the same.
You are absolutely right about knowledge of the era, Sergeant. I know very little about it, and most people are probably the same.
I've been thinking about how it would fit as a whole. Instead of cramming a 6v6 into one thread, why not split them up based on a larger campaign map, delegated by command? It's pretty flexible for any kinds of design changes that would be desired. Be a chance to try out naval warfare, which isn't nearly as complicated as WW2 or Cold War Naval stuff.
As far as map-making, I'm shying away from the involvement required in well-done custom maps. I'm currently testing a method using Bing Maps, which has pretty much all the necessary tools. It has both marker and line tools, which can be used for depiction of infantry lines, battery locations, as well as movement and firing points of both.
All depends on interest. It's useless if nobody gives a shit.
If you build it (and maintain it), they will come.
If two of us here already had the same idea, then there are others out there.
First I think you need to decide what kind of experience you're looking to get out of it. One of the problems with IO, in my opinion, was a lack of a clear vision.
Do you want to focus on warfare or roleplay?
How wide is the scope of your game?
Do you want a realistic game or a more gamey experience?
Do you want to adhere strictly to the real history or let players to affect ahistorical outcomes?
Etc etc. Establishing, and making known, the vision will definitely help focus your effort into areas that are actually useful to getting the project off the ground.
First I think you need to decide what kind of experience you're looking to get out of it. One of the problems with IO, in my opinion, was a lack of a clear vision.
Do you want to focus on warfare or roleplay?
How wide is the scope of your game?
Do you want a realistic game or a more gamey experience?
Do you want to adhere strictly to the real history or let players to affect ahistorical outcomes?
Etc etc. Establishing, and making known, the vision will definitely help focus your effort into areas that are actually useful to getting the project off the ground.
Well let me give my opinion on these questions.
1. This is tough as it would be really interesting to see how people write things out, however it would be kinda difficult. Probably better off with sticking to warfare for the main battles, and RP for the side stuff (Tavern, Barracks etc.)
2. I don't have a ton of information about the Napoleonic Era, but I have a bit. Perhaps we include the Navy? It could spice things up a bit, and provide a different scope of warfare. Plus you have artillery, calvary, and of course line infantry.
3. Realistic for sure. No question.
4. Sticking to Real History would be good, however it may be more fun to let players decide the worlds fate through a "Campaign Map" like Hautt mentioned.
Edit: Now that I think about it, does anyone play M&B Warband - Napoleonic Era?
Do you want to focus on warfare or roleplay? The big gem would definitely be warfare. However, you can't campaign all the time. That'd wear anyone out. I'd like to do more non-violent roleplaying, if only to enrich the battles when they do come around.
How wide is the scope of your game? Britain to Russia and just about everything in-between. I'd like to see naval battles fought. The era favors naval roleplaying much better than WW2, and I figure that this is our chance to make a strong go of it.
Do you want a realistic game or a more gamey experience? Realistic. Harsh, unforgiving, reality.
Do you want to adhere strictly to the real history or let players to affect ahistorical outcomes? I'd love to see ahistorical play, myself. Start at a mostly historical point and let the players take it from there.
Blabbing I'd like to log in and have a world waiting for me. That pretty much describes aspirations for the game.
Pop on and find out that Austria has been pissing across the border into Prussia AGAIN. Prussian leadership is planning a reprisal, though there are disagreements over the importance of doing so. France has just defeated a British attack on Calais and has sent troops east, causing concern from both Prussia and Austria.
France has finished construction of several frigates, though their navy is still weak after getting thrashed by the Brits off the coast of Spain.
Russia is quietly stockpiling arms and munitions.
=============================================
See what I mean? Get on, and there's always something happening somewhere. Land or sea battles. Construction, production. Preparation. Infighting. Squabbles and disputes.
There were plenty of coalitions against Napoleon. I'd pick the Third Coalition v. France and French Client States.
I'd focus on generalship. There has to be a degree of individual action on the battlefield to keep things interesting. I'm not sure whether generalship or individual soldiers should be the way to present the war. Also, I'd prefer the site to be ahistorical. It encourages more creativity than the fatalism that being constrained to a timeline encourages. The Holy Roman Emperor wouldn't fight nearly as hard if he knew he was doomed to fail. Perhaps the coalition could win the Battle of Austerlitz.
The mention of going on campaign brought up an interesting idea and then I tripped over a complementary component while browsing Google images.
First) You have a map of Europe that has a number of major cities and who controls them marked. Not sure if each city should correspond to specific territory, or just be visually connected via lines that show adjacency.
A simple majority of active players for a given power decide to march on an adjacent city for conquest and a campaign is begun.
Campaign would consist of two stages: a march and the battle(s).
The march would be played on a map that looks something like this
Each power disperses (or doesn't) their forces. The armies try to maneuver around each other to engage on ground favorable to them.
Then when two forces meet on the march they engage in whatever manner you decide for the actual battles.
Just spit-balling and thought I'd share a cool idea
In case you're wondering, the campaign map idea came from here, which is pretty awesome in its own right. chtechnical.com/campaign/
I'm actually heart-broken, yet not surprised, to see that Issuing Orders is considered dead. I - by all means, encourage you all to make your own spin-offs, forums, RPG boards and to carry Issuing Orders within your heart.
However, who said this is the end? Reading all of these messages and seeing how Issuing Orders has effected the community AND myself, boy, it does pull at my heart strings. I too learned hell of a lot from this place. I went from writing semi-paragraphs in my posts, to full blown pages and I couldn't stop! For all of you that know me, "post-a-lot Danny" was born and I did post an awful lot and apologised on numerous occasions for blurring your eyes in the 'wee-hours' we'd all stay up late role playing.
No... I'm not going to let Issuing Orders go so lightly. I've been venturing down other paths for a while, most of you know of my YouTube channel and my career in the police; both of which have consumed all my sweet brain-juice and more importantly, time. I've made so many, literally, so many good friends from this place. Dom, Heiko, JT, Mac, Nathan, Friedrich, Stephen (Kitty), Raf, Strumfelder, Rhys, Erik, and that's just to name a few.
If you guys want to help me boost this place back into shape, I mean, properly back into the shape we can give it one last effort. You can all continue your endeavors in making your own RPG sites, by all means, that's fantastic and more the merrier. But Issuing Orders is my baby and to see it have an impact on so many, well blimey, let's give it one last try... But... There's going to be a lot of changes.
I think... Personally. No more moderation posts - unless absolutely necessary to resolve a problem or conflicting of interest. This most definitely drained the staff team beyond belief, writing moderation posts and unless later in time to come we implement it again, I think staff intervention should only be necessary if it's really needed to help resolve a matter.
No more shop - the shop was the highlight of this place, granted, but it was also the bane of this place. Without it, we struggled at times and it caused a lot of aggravation. Again, you're all mature enough to outline the gear you carry and the equipment you want to use - why not have that freedom to do the big battles you've always wanted? Perhaps later down the line we could make the shop again or something similar, but hey, I think it would be awesome to actually have the freedom to write how you best see fit, without limitations.
Lastly... Can we just enjoy ourselves? I'm going to push the boat out on this one and allure you all back in for one last shot. A lot has to change on this site, perhaps we'll make a new one? Or we'll revamp this one? Either way, I miss the community and I miss writing. This place is steeped in history, let's not forget it.
~Danny
Modded Deaths: 87 (Including Epic Battles) / Modded P.O.Ws/MIAs: 6 *YouTube Channel* Click if you dare...