A designated Battlefield and how a war should be fought?

[TheWhiteWolf 1075]

Hey everyone i had an idea and would like your opinion on it.

When a nation goes to war against another nation maybe there should be a designated battlefield of which the two armies fight on. The 2 leaders of the nations shall meet and decide when they should meet on the battlefield. The 2 armies meet at that time and line up on each side in whatever order there commanding officer wants. The commanding officers and leaders will then meet in the middle to discuss there terms. Then if the terms are not met or one leader just wants to destroy the other army the leaders will go back and the commanding officers will call charge.

Then the battle takes place untill one commander calls retreat or the army is all killed.

This is just an idea and if you wish to improve it or add or change it any way post below and tell me what you think.

[Zee762 0]

I don't like this, I think wars should be fought like they are now in different battles and different areas. Not like a heroic battle in Lord of the Rings, cause, that only happens in the movies. :)

[andyboy124 7]

I don't like this either. Battles should be fought wherever the 2 (or more) armies meet, and your idea of how they should fight was a little complicated.

[Aceeri 7]

I think there aren't any "Terms" in a war... I think most are just going to charge :P

[Amagous 4]

Hey everyone i had an idea and would like your opinion on it.

When a nation goes to war against another nation maybe there should be a designated battlefield of which the two armies fight on. The 2 leaders of the nations shall meet and decide when they should meet on the battlefield. The 2 armies meet at that time and line up on each side in whatever order there commanding officer wants. The commanding officers and leaders will then meet in the middle to discuss there terms. Then if the terms are not met or one leader just wants to destroy the other army the leaders will go back and the commanding officers will call charge.

Then the battle takes place untill one commander calls retreat or the army is all killed.

This is just an idea and if you wish to improve it or add or change it any way post below and tell me what you think.

That's how the british used to fight during their control of America. Look what happened to them.

AKA, not a fan of this idea.

@ Aceeri, too true.

[CalinderTheSly 2]

I don't like this, I think wars should be fought like they are now in different battles and different areas. Not like a heroic battle in Lord of the Rings, cause, that only happens in the movies. :(

Actually many of the great and famous battles of the medievil age were formal, organised occasions.

[Account Awaiting Deletion 0]

[He put his glasses on]

The concept is right, but the reality is more complicated.

In the Middle Ages there were strict rules during battles -thing that Tolkien knew well (the Lord of the Rings isn't a Fantasy book, or something too far away from the medieval culture)-, and some of those were

-The battle can be developed only in open neutral lands, without the involvement of the population or other nations

-The battle can begin only when both the formations are ready and the respective heads have defined the arrangements

-If a formation refuse to be ready after a day and one hour the other formation can attack legitimately

-After a head of a formation is dead in the battle, the formation can interrupt the battle for three days and three hours legitimately; if the other formation attack in the meantime, all the members of the formation that attacked illegitimately can be considered cowards, and can be killed by any free citizen of any nation without breaking any law

-blahblahblah

[John (Zevandir) 80]

Personally, I think this is an amazing idea, it adds extrodinary RP opportunities and depth to the idea of conflict, also, it would appear to create more of a Roleplay server than PVP server, as the battles themselves are orchestrated displays where tactics and skill come together to create something worth watching and being part of. It also creates opportunites for military groups, ambassadors and even new roles, such as heralds.

Has anyone actually played strategy games? Such as Rise of Nations, Age of Empires, the Total War series? All of these games have mighty battles conducted by proffessional soldiers in either raids on cities or vast battles where great armies clash. None of them support individual peasants grabbing a sword and killing some other peasants who grabbed swords.

Props to the guy who made this thread. Excellent idea. I like how someone dragged in both the Medieval ages and Middle Earth. Perfect examples.

[Account Awaiting Deletion 0]

Personally, I think this is an amazing idea, it adds extrodinary RP opportunities and depth to the idea of conflict, also, it would appear to create more of a Roleplay server than PVP server, as the battles themselves are orchestrated displays where tactics and skill come together to create something worth watching and being part of. It also creates opportunites for military groups, ambassadors and even new roles, such as heralds.

Has anyone actually played strategy games? Such as Rise of Nations, Age of Empires, the Total War series? All of these games have mighty battles conducted by proffessional soldiers in either raids on cities or vast battles where great armies clash. None of them support individual peasants grabbing a sword and killing some other peasants who grabbed swords.

Props to the guy who made this thread. Excellent idea. I like how someone dragged in both the Medieval ages and Middle Earth. Perfect examples.

You guy just save me a lot of words. I quote everything you said, except when you refer to me. I don't like to be narcissist at all.

I don't really know what to say..

[Aceeri 7]

Wow, does any here realize that this is MINECRAFT and most of the people playing it are 12-15 year olds... I don't think most of them know a lot about organization...

[Account Awaiting Deletion 0]

Wow, does any here realize that this is MINECRAFT and most of the people playing it are 12-15 year olds... I don't think most of them know a lot about organization...

This is Lord of the Craft, not simply Minecraft itself. The people of 12-15 years old can execute orders, the other ones will be military chiefs.

The first lines don't have to know a single bit about formality, they have only to fight when their leader tells to do it. It's quite ordinary, isn't it?

[Aceeri 7]

Complicated much? Lord of the Craft is made in Minecraft, so therefore it is Minecraft...

[Account Awaiting Deletion 0]

This is Lord of the Craft, not simply Minecraft itself. The people of 12-15 years old can execute orders, the other ones will be military chiefs.

The first lines don't have to know a single bit about formality, they have only to fight when their leader tells to do it. It's quite ordinary, isn't it?

Read again, you could be luckier

[Aceeri 7]

So your saying it should be based on age? That doesn't make sense... Also I am just saying most wars aren't going to be fought with epic proportions and such. Also it would be hard to keep every single person in line...

[Account Awaiting Deletion 0]

So your saying it should be based on age? That doesn't make sense... Also I am just saying most wars aren't going to be fought with epic proportions and such. Also it would be hard to keep every single person in line...

Calm down, dude, and start listening to me

You aren't understanding what I'm talking about. You said that young people doesn't understand complicated things, then I answered that they don't have to.We are suggesting to revamp the battle system, and if this is similar to the one utilized into epic proportion battles it doesn't mean that we aspect huge battles; and the "line" is metaphoric.