Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
10-19-2010, 05:43 AM
This sounds like a simple and great idea. It makes perfect sense for both ground and space.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
10-19-2010, 06:50 AM
100% agreement.

Also,

"Assasin".

There is a VIP (could be an NPC that travels of its own accord perhaps, or follows the group) that must be protected at all costs. Points are only scored for kills against the VIP.

"King of the Hill"

One capture point. Countdown timer based. Team with most ships in designated area "owns" the point and accrues time on flag. At the end of the game, team with most time accrued on the flag wins.

"FFA"

Free for all. Says it all. Just because.

"Last man standing"

Would be best suited to 3+ teams of 5. No alliances, no respawns. Last team wtih 1+ player standing wins.

"Flag rally"

A number of flags dependant on team sizes. First team to hold all flags at the same time wins.

"Stampede"

Countdown timer based. In Stampede, each team starts the game with a herd of controllable NPCs and some flags. The goal of stampede is to get your herd to the enemy's flags. Once they are at the flag, the herd will teleport back to your starting position and you will gain a point. The team with the most points at the end of the game wins.

"Last man on the flag"

Countdown timer based. Similar to "King of the hill", although all that matters is who owns the flag when the timer runs out.

These are PVP gamestyles that exist in various formats in various games. Use to play some on an old Bungie game called "Myth 2" and they can be hella fun.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
10-19-2010, 07:20 AM
Good ideas , but you wont see any for a long time.

These will only be suitable for ground pvp , and noone plays ground pvp lol

Still if they put it in then it may make more players play it.

Then again klingon players will hardly ever do ground pvp , as they are a pvp race so all there skills go into space skills.

Conundrums lol
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
10-19-2010, 08:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fewzz View Post
Good ideas , but you wont see any for a long time.

These will only be suitable for ground pvp , and noone plays ground pvp lol

Still if they put it in then it may make more players play it.

Then again klingon players will hardly ever do ground pvp , as they are a pvp race so all there skills go into space skills.

Conundrums lol
Plenty of people, Klingon and Fed, play ground.

Besides, every idea works for both ground AND space. There are mechanics already in use in the game for all of them, in space.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
10-19-2010, 12:47 PM
I wouldn't mind a few "ayssymetric game modes. One side is defending, one side is attacking.
Also, having some map-specific mechanics. (Say, beam the ambassador to a different ship so he doesn't die with you)

Here is my "old" idea of the Freighter Convoy again - Starfleet/KDF base is resupplied by a convoy of freighters. KDF/Starfleet intercepts them. Your task is to either protect the convoy or destroy it. (maybe for an additional challenge, the convoy isn't to be destroyed, but to be looted, requiring to beam over troops. Not sure if that's realistic, it would require clearing an entire area so no one shoots at you.)

Attacker vs Defender mission are required anyway for any attempt at territorial PvP.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
11-26-2010, 03:41 AM
Use me.. erh.... this thread!!

Bump.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
11-26-2010, 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustrumRidcully View Post
I wouldn't mind a few "ayssymetric game modes. One side is defending, one side is attacking.
Also, having some map-specific mechanics. (Say, beam the ambassador to a different ship so he doesn't die with you)

Here is my "old" idea of the Freighter Convoy again - Starfleet/KDF base is resupplied by a convoy of freighters. KDF/Starfleet intercepts them. Your task is to either protect the convoy or destroy it. (maybe for an additional challenge, the convoy isn't to be destroyed, but to be looted, requiring to beam over troops. Not sure if that's realistic, it would require clearing an entire area so no one shoots at you.)

Attacker vs Defender mission are required anyway for any attempt at territorial PvP.
I like that idea, although maybe there should be 2 objectives:
- destroy the freighter(s).
- destroy the base that the freighter(s) are heading towards.

The outcomes:
- destroying one objective leads to a marginal victory for the attacker (if the base lives then maybe another convoy might make it at a later date, if the freighter(s) live then the route is open for more freighters to bring supplies to rebuild the base). [defender gets half a winning bonus]
- destroying both objectives leads an overwhelming victory. [attacker gets double the winning bonus]

(the map becomes more strategic, and a weaker team has an achievable objective even from a losing position... it also reduces the odds of a single all-encompassing battle)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
11-26-2010, 06:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splutter
I like that idea, although maybe there should be 2 objectives:
- destroy the freighter(s).
- destroy the base that the freighter(s) are heading towards.

The outcomes:
- destroying one objective leads to a marginal victory for the attacker (if the base lives then maybe another convoy might make it at a later date, if the freighter(s) live then the route is open for more freighters to bring supplies to rebuild the base). [defender gets half a winning bonus]
- destroying both objectives leads an overwhelming victory. [attacker gets double the winning bonus]

(the map becomes more strategic, and a weaker team has an achievable objective even from a losing position... it also reduces the odds of a single all-encompassing battle)
This is an interesting idea.

One way I can "emotionally" handle games I know I am gonna lose is setting me a different objective, like at least kill 1 enemy (or one more) so it doesn't end 0/15 or something like that. Having this inbuilt as a map rule would be compelling.

This might also add interesting nuances to potential Open PvP and Territory Control game modes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-26-2010, 07:52 AM
It would be good for ground, but i can forsee it being weird in space. What are you thinking in terms of numbers for this map?

Also above i like the idea of a free for all/Last man standing map. Although you would have to have a rule that forbids cloaking.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
11-26-2010, 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekkameron View Post
It would be good for ground, but i can forsee it being weird in space. What are you thinking in terms of numbers for this map?
Shouldn't really matter - 5 or 7 are the 2 current limits I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekkameron View Post
Also above i like the idea of a free for all/Last man standing map. Although you would have to have a rule that forbids cloaking.
CO did FFA, and it was a quite spectacular failure:

- 2+ fleet-mates joining an FFA map tend to team up. There is no real way to avoid it, it's just flawed.
- it forces players into a specific set of builds which are highly optimized for this particular game mode, eventually nobody else joins.

For me, the key to successful PvP is "killing the enemy should be a means to an end, not the end in itself".
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:34 AM.