Unknown Objectives

[Nathangun]

The most interesting QB I ever fought was a meeting engagement were there was no CP's on map, we just tried to jockey for position and tried to kill each other.

 

[Gunner]

I've been thinking of a mission for a long time but never really thought it could happen. Then I was reading and watched some videos about playing with advanced rules, and have begun to wonder if it might be possible.

It would be interesting and less gamey to focus on one's personal goals with no idea of what your opponent was about to do. The mission would be less about competition and more about realism and immersion. Not knowing the objective areas, or desired end states, for an opponent would open up vast possibilities.

But the trouble is that the gameplay is based on trust that both players do not seek to reveal the other's tasks by opening the mission in the editor. A rich experience would rely of the sense of fairplay and honor of each combatant.

The mission would also rely very heavily on a great mission maker, creating an interesting scenario with a believable story and plausible objectives. I've often thought that 20% causualities should be considered excessive, and leaders might often withdraw rather than take heavy losses. I'd like a mission to reflect serious plausible goals.

I'm not concerned much about the balance or fairness. I'm not focused on competitive equality as much as immersion. I would be pleased to lose a battle if the experience was exciting and seemed realistic, rather than a balanced sporting event.

Why this sounds like it would make for a good tournament.
I like the uniqueness of not knowing the VC's.
If you base it similar to the Probes tournaments you can create 4 scenarios and if you have it where the Axis/Allied players are only competing against other Axis/Allied players for the highest score balance doesn't really come in to play.
If you start the tournament sending out saved files with passwords attached you don't have to worry about anyone opening them in the editor.