Empire UN

Put the rules on top so that you don't have to scroll down for them.

1. All neutral land is FFA; except for UN bases.
2. Both limited and total wars should be announced and approved by
UN in public chat.
3. For a total war without a valid reason both sides must agree.
4. Valid reasons for total wars include; only having one country after turn 3, another nation taking one of your
country's neutral cities, finding enemy units on your land, or losing a limited war.
5. For a limited war only one nation needs to agree, but must still get
permission from UN.
6. In a limited war UN will designate the countries where the war will be
fought (the war zone).The countries in the war zone should be of similar value.
7. A limited war is won when one nation (or group) has all the cities in
the war zone.
8.Countries involved in a limited war can not be declared war on until
3 turns after the end of the war.
9. Nukes are only allowed in total wars.
10. Countries can only be declared rogue if they; Attack another nation
without UN approval or use a nuke in a limited war.
11. Nations are not allowed to help other nations become nuclear powers.
12. Nuclear powers that become Alliance Leaders can veto any UN rogue declaration.
13. UN can not stop Alliance Wars
14. The World Bank loans money to nations, if the nation fails to pay the money back
in time the World Bank will confiscate a country of its choosing from the
nation (not a home country) and auction it. World Bank also takes control of
UN bases if a UN leaves.

I realize the rules are a bit complex so I've put a few Questions and Answers to clarify some things.
Q1: What if all my expansions fail and I only end up with my home country?
A1: If you only have one country after turn 3 you can declare total war on anyone.

Q2: What can an ally do to help in a war?
A2: I'll explain by using the players Ivan, Amok, and Meester.
Ivan is at war with Meester. Amok can help his ally Ivan by placing defensive walls in Ivan's country.
If Meester attacks Amok's walls, then Amok can declare war on Meester.

Q3: What is the point of the alliance boxes in the Pacific?
A3: Being able to see how alliances form makes a possible WW3 easier to manage for UNs.

Q4: How are the alliances formed?
A4: You can join an alliance at anytime by placing a unit in one of the boxes. However only a Nuclear power can become an
Alliance Leader. The Alliance Leader is decided among the alliance if there is more than one nuclear power.
The AL can veto UN decisions, and is in charge of declaring war on other alliances.

If you have anymore questions let me know so I can clarify it.
Last Edited 3/3/2014

You need to boost ethiopia, canada and russia, they look too weak and their expansion seems limited.

Well I could give them units around the region so that they can be a bit balanced with expansion.

This actually seems like a really interesting idea. I never liked UN games much, but creating your own Empire while still having the UN around to limit expansion is a great idea in my opinion.
I'd surely play this kind of ''UN'' as a former Roleplayer.

I don't know if I agree with rule 9, nukes don't really have a balanced out counter part like a "bunker" or something so they should only be used if a UN or country goes rogue. Nukes may have near to no defense but they travel far so one would only need to build up nukes and declare war then just drop all of them, this would be fine if there was a similar unit that defended well like a bunker would have no attack no movement and high defense, but then the whole game just becomes a game of nukes and bunkers. So at the end of the day conclusion is nukes should only be used if game rules are broken.

EDIT: I also want to add i really like rule 7, gives it more of an rp feel.

After playing through a bit with the old rules i noticed that a UN that can't attack "rogue" countries, just made people pissed off so I've changed a few things.
New Rules


Also I've gotten rid of Egypt since its expansion was almost always hindered making it not a very fun country to play as.
Canada, Africa and Russia were given two starting countries.
I reduced India's starting funds from 15k to 6k because it was way too op.

If this is serious theres already a map like this. (New World Order) Players start with 1 country and use diplomatic reasoning among one another. Very fun game. But yeah just get rid of UNs in general ^.^

Well I feel like getting rid of the UNs all-together will pretty much just make it a world game with slight changes to the map.

However I did feel that the UNs were much stronger than the countries, because the countries are small and the UNs are about the same strength as the C&C UNs.

So this is what I changed. I made it so that the UNs only start off with their home base (they'll have to capture the other bases), and no preset units. Also I made the UN have practically no starting funds. That way if a UN goes rogue early it'll be harder to kill the players.

I've updated the rules. Added a veto system for the countries that obtain nuclear power status.
Just added a "yes" unit and a "no" unit in the nuke silo. Countries send them near the UN HQ to vote in an election.
It gives players a reason to get the nuke silos.

Link to the new rules.
http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l583/ednoone/EmpUN.jpg

Rules in Text form
1. All neutral land is FFA; except for UN bases.
2. Both limited and total wars should be announced and approved by
UN in public chat.
3. For a total war without a valid reason both sides must agree.
4. Valid reasons for total wars include; another nation taking one of your
country's neutral cities, finding enemy units on your land, or losing a limited war.
5. For a limited war only one nation needs to agree, but must still get
permission from UN.
6. In a limited war UN will designate the countries where the war will be
fought (the war zone).The countries in the war zone should be of similar value.
7. A limited war is won when one nation (or group) has all the cities in
the war zone.
8.Countries involved in a limited war can not be declared war on until
5 turns after the end of the war.
9. Nukes are only allowed in total wars.
10. Countries can only be declared rogue if they; Attack another nation
without UN approval or use a nuke in a limited war.
11. Nations are not allowed to help other nations become nuclear powers.
12. Nuclear powers can veto any UN rogue declaration, by calling for an election.
Nuclear powers can then send a "no" vote or a "yes" vote to their closest UN
headquarters.
13. The World Bank loans money to nations, if the nation fails to pay the money back
in time the World Bank will confescate a country of its chosing from the
nation (not a home country) and auction it. World Bank also takes control of
UN bases if a Un leaves.

I wish this Gamemode would be played more often :/

Why even make a new UN scenario? UN will be boring anyways. If you can do like in this scenario, it is not UN, it is a normal game.


#UNSUCKS

Kirjoittanut Sanguinare, 19.11.2013 at 12:05

Why even make a new UN scenario? UN will be boring anyways. If you can do like in this scenario, it is not UN, it is a normal game.


#UNSUCKS

Well the original idea of my scenario was to make a UN game with more wars and more things to do by adding a different rule set.
I tried to make it so that there was more skill necessary to play my UN game than the C&C UN game. For example if you aren't good at first turn expansion you probably won't be a very powerful country, and players can't just sit there and decline all the wars due to the limited war system.

If you don't like the original UN game this probably isn't the game for you, but I don't mind if you hate it you're entitled to your opinion. Either way nobody is forcing you to play it.

I noticed, that there are still some problems

1: the rules are complicated and hard to tell
2: some people don't read the rules, if 2 guys attack one city it doesn't means that one of them is rouge
3: un mostly has no chance to react, because this happens 10 time a round and UNs mostly don't even care
4: it's way to hard to become a nuklear power
5:always when a limited war breaks out, it instantly without any time between turns out to a total war
6: people don't care that the un has to declare someone rouge though they can't easily attack someone they might think is rouge

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 19.11.2013 at 15:35

I noticed, that there are still some problems

1: the rules are complicated and hard to tell
2: some people don't read the rules, if 2 guys attack one city it doesn't means that one of them is rouge
3: un mostly has no chance to react, because this happens 10 time a round and UNs mostly don't even care
4: it's way to hard to become a nuklear power
5:always when a limited war breaks out, it instantly without any time between turns out to a total war
6: people don't care that the un has to declare someone rouge though they can't easily attack someone they might think is rouge

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Well sounds like some of the problems you face are a result of how players act and comprehend the rules.
The problem is there is no way to force people to follow the rules correctly especially if it's the UNs that don't follow the rules.

Kirjoittanut Sanguinare, 19.11.2013 at 12:05

Why even make a new UN scenario? UN will be boring anyways. If you can do like in this scenario, it is not UN, it is a normal game.


#UNSUCKS

Well, after some thinking, maybe this scenario actually will be a bit better than original UN.

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 19.11.2013 at 15:35

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Thirth.

Kirjoittanut Utah, 20.11.2013 at 17:53

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 19.11.2013 at 15:35

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Thirth.

Well I gave the world bank the designation of UN 3 so its now the third UN I probably won't add a thirth one though.
Also I gave UN3/world bank stronger units since he gets less reinforcements, such as the ultra powerful IRS Agent.

Kirjoittanut NoOne, 20.11.2013 at 19:04

Kirjoittanut Utah, 20.11.2013 at 17:53

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 19.11.2013 at 15:35

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Thirth.

A bank? Are you on crack?

Well I gave the world bank the designation of UN 3 so its now the third UN I probably won't add a thirth one though.
Also I gave UN3/world bank stronger units since he gets less reinforcements, such as the ultra powerful IRS Agent.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 21.11.2013 at 01:10

Kirjoittanut NoOne, 20.11.2013 at 19:04

Kirjoittanut Utah, 20.11.2013 at 17:53

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 19.11.2013 at 15:35

maybe you should add a 3th un to improve uns power...

Thirth.

Well I gave the world bank the designation of UN 3 so its now the third UN I probably won't add a thirth one though.
Also I gave UN3/world bank stronger units since he gets less reinforcements, such as the ultra powerful IRS Agent.

A bank? Are you on crack?

Yes

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 06:24

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

well, you should know better, because this map is awesome, it's a un game that has wars, and un only makes rules about war

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 21.11.2013 at 11:50

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 06:24

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

well, you should know better, because this map is awesome, it's a un game that has wars, and un only makes rules about war

Is UN, nobody cares cuz only noobs play it

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 21.11.2013 at 11:50

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 06:24

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

well, you should know better, because this map is awesome, it's a un game that has wars, and un only makes rules about war

I don't play UN. *Runs out of thread before flame war starts*

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 14:14

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 21.11.2013 at 11:50

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 06:24

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

well, you should know better, because this map is awesome, it's a un game that has wars, and un only makes rules about war

I don't play UN. *Runs out of thread before flame war starts*

It's fine like I told minirussia you aren't forced to play a scenario you don't like.
UN is usually a hit or miss for a lot of people. I like the concept of UN, but I don't like the way it's played which is why I tried making
my own that I feel is better than the C&C UN.
Unfortunately C&C UN both popularized the RP genre in AW, but also ruined its reputation.
Due to the bad reputation of the other UN games, my scenario is called bad just for being a UN style game.

Anyway all I ask is that if you're going to criticize Empire UN use reasons why it's bad and not why other UN games have been bad.

Kirjoittanut NoOne, 21.11.2013 at 15:59

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 14:14

Kirjoittanut Sir.TalkALot, 21.11.2013 at 11:50

Kirjoittanut Utah, 21.11.2013 at 06:24

I actually only came here to say thirth. I have no idea what you chumps are talking about.

well, you should know better, because this map is awesome, it's a un game that has wars, and un only makes rules about war

I don't play UN. *Runs out of thread before flame war starts*

It's fine like I told minirussia you aren't forced to play a scenario you don't like.
UN is usually a hit or miss for a lot of people. I like the concept of UN, but I don't like the way it's played which is why I tried making
my own that I feel is better than the C&C UN.
Unfortunately C&C UN both popularized the RP genre in AW, but also ruined its reputation.
Due to the bad reputation of the other UN games, my scenario is called bad just for being a UN style game.

Anyway all I ask is that if you're going to criticize Empire UN use reasons why it's bad and not why other UN games have been bad.

Yeah I understand that you are putting a lot of work into this and actually trying to make UN better. This is why I simply ran from the thread and not start trolling like I usually do on "X's UN"

I hate UN and i think its cancer, but credit is due this is the least cancerous kind.

Kirjoittanut The Tactician, 23.11.2013 at 12:11

I hate UN and i think its cancer, but credit is due this is the least cancerous kind.

U give me cancer

Kirjoittanut Cpt.Magic, 23.11.2013 at 16:03

Kirjoittanut The Tactician, 23.11.2013 at 12:11

I hate UN and i think its cancer, but credit is due this is the least cancerous kind.

U give me cancer

gladly

So as I was playing a different UN i noticed that people usually just stack units near an enemy's capital wait for UN to approve the war and spam all those units in the capital.

I was wondering how I could prevent this so i figured that making it total annihilation instead of cap home country would force players to defeat their enemy, but also allow players to survive in their colonies should they have any.

What do you guys think?

Kirjoittanut NoOne, 24.01.2014 at 17:16

So as I was playing a different UN i noticed that people usually just stack units near an enemy's capital wait for UN to approve the war and spam all those units in the capital.

I was wondering how I could prevent this so i figured that making it total annihilation instead of cap home country would force players to defeat their enemy, but also allow players to survive in their colonies should they have any.

What do you guys think?

sounds alright except someone can have a hidden marine far away