I have a dream.

[Meanfcker]

CarlVon first raised the thought with me and it is a darn good one, so I will share it.
Not yet, but someday soon, perhaps 6 months to a year, there will be enough of us familiarized with the unified command structure, that we may engage in a 6 v 6.
The idea would be to have a Supremo, and he issues orders to two experienced sub commanders, and they then each issue orders for their two subordinate army commanders. This would obviously require 12 players with good reputations for hanging in and not disappearing, but we are almost there already.
The guys I am thinking of are Kombrig, Ironduke, Lazyboy, Webizen, All5n, Rander, Juergen Giess, Jreid, Shadehawk, CarlVon and possibly Allan's brother Wade.
This is something that would be a real slow cooker, probably take a year or so to play out, but man what a war we could have!
Any thoughts?

[ironduke1955]

Sounds great. Count me in.

[Tac2i]

This is an interesting idea. One thing I've petition Vic for is the ability to select the people groups you want to use in your random game. I think that feature would work well with this idea. The idea is there would only be two people groups (i.e. anglo-saxon people group vs the russian people group) made up of, to use your example, 7 anglo-saxon regimes and 7 russian regimes. The CiC of each side would control all production, perhaps the Navy and maybe strategic bombers.

By the way, as you describe it I think it would be 7vs7: 1+2+(2+2)=7. My very limited experience with games of this number of players is 1) a single turn can take over two weeks to complete and 2) despite best intentions someone always drops out.

Update: @Mean - Actually, given the parameters you use for your random games, I think I could edit an at2 file so that there are only two people groups.

[Rander]

Hello.

Great idea!
And I'm very glad that you consider me for the game.

Bye!,
Rander.

[kombrig]

You can count me in.

(I had once a similar dream:
tm.asp?m=3179865 )

[Josh]

"Any thoughts?"
 
Yeah; WOW!
 
I'm not in, but I would love an AAR from this one. [:D] It would be epic!

[LazyBoy]

I would play

[LazyBoy]

I would play

[Meanfcker]

I am glad to see there is some interest here.
AAR would probably end up in the hundreds of pages.
This war would be a long bitter fight.
We still have a few command and control secrets that haven't come out yet.
Once both teams are up to speed.....
One thought I was kicking around. The Supremo would claim one city and one factory from each player on his team.
The production thus produced would be true "strategic reserve, held in the hands of the Supreme Commander, to use as his personal shotgun to try and shape the battle as he desires.
The Supremo would direct what production comes from each city and factory so that he could shape the game changing reserve to any particular situation.
Just thinking out loud here.
Meanie

[kombrig]

Considering the large number of players, the problem is that the game will be surely very slow and part of the players will no doubt drop out. If we start such a game, we should do everything to speed it up.

Maybe it would be better leave all the production in the hands of supremo and almost all fighting in the hands of subcommanders with no producing decisions (only requests)? Supremo gives orders, produces, distributes production and controls rear area and strategic assets.

This would of course mean that the supremo himself would have less fun on the battlefield. But if one gives armies directly also to supremo, there will be danger that he will start to renforce his forces in the expense of others (since he controls all the production).

Also it is in great doubt that we ever get 14 players. Maybe it would be more realistic to set the goal at first for 10 players - each supremo commands directly four players?

But anyway, I'm ready to play also in the settings proposed by Mean

[Meanfcker]

The team that I am on will function in the manner that we are used to.
We almost have 12 now, and we will only let in guys with a good reputation.
My team will run the way we usaually do, the other team may do as it pleases.
On my team, Supremo has sole discretion in matters of strategy.
Operations are evaluated and modified on a turn by turn basis.
All players will run their own economies and produce and control their own armies.
My team will all make a small contribution toward a strategic reserve, to be held by the supremo and used any way he wishes.
Supremo will take his turn, (usually he goes first) and then hand down strategic/operational directives to his sub commanders.
They will take their turns, in direct support of Supremo's operational orders. They will then issue operational/ tactical orders to thier sub commanders.
This is a very effective method of staying organized and co-ordinated.
This is been combat tested in some of the toughest fights that you could imagine, and it conitues to function quite well now, as I am sure many of you are aware.
Meanie

[kombrig]

"Good reputation" however does not guarantee that one does not drop out or that the game speed is optimal. The more players and the slower the game = higher possibilty that the game goes nowhere. That's the point. [;)] And "continues to function quite well now" does not mean that it is the most effective way to organize a huge multiplayer game. But it's your dream and I can live with it.[:)]

[Meanfcker]

Supremo and Sub commanders can keep all team mates passwords.
Then in case of prolonged absence without word, we can recruit, or let one of team take the turn until a recruit is found.
So no real problem there.

[jreid]

I'm in on the "Do As They Please" team

[Tac2i]

Agreed. A game with 14 players can easily take 3-4 weeks per turn and at that pace I almost guarantee someone will grow weary of the pace and quit playing. SailingGuy tried a couple of games like this and they just didn't last very long before the game fell apart. That said, I do hope you are successful in getting the 14 players and actually getting it started.

ORIGINAL: kombrig

"Good reputation" however does not guarantee that one does not drop out or that the game speed is optimal. The more players and the slower the game = higher possibility that the game goes nowhere. That's the point. [;)] And "continues to function quite well now" does not mean that it is the most effective way to organize a huge multiplayer game. But it's your dream and I can live with it.[:)]

[Meanfcker]

I am in no hurry. It is just a dream.
I figure it would be one turn every two to three weeks.
My best guess is that it would take a year or two to play out.
I also allow that some guys might get bored or become ill or otherwise unable to continue.
That is why we would arrange for redundant password keeping, and the option of recuiting or a team mate filling in until a recruit could be found.
We dont quite yet have the fourteen guys required for the pyramid command structure. We are close though.
All of the guys that I named in my original post have proven themselves dependable enough to be invited to something like this.
Like I said, just a dream.
3 or 4 months from now? Who knows?

[Josh]

3 or 4 months away..? well who knows the more you keep posting and keeping people interested the better the chances get.
Sure an AAR would stretch for many pages, but it would be an instant classic. [&o]

[Rander]

How goes this dream?
Any advance?

Bye!