Collapse
No announcement yet.
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tug-Of-War / Frontlines MP gamemode suggestion.

    #1
    The multiplayer of most C&C games was always the same: "Just rush as fast as you can"

    This is why I don't like to play TW, RA2+3 etc. online and it's the only reason why I liked the MP of C&C4 in some way. The game allowed you to play the way you want.

    Please notice that I don't want to replace the normal Deathmatch mode. If you like it, keep play it!


    Bioware already announced that we get different MP game modes. I suggest this team-based one:

    Tug Of War or Frontlines

    http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/2735/pic000j.jpg

    Two teams (2-4 [5] players each) start at specific spawn locations of the map. These are the main bases (1). Between the main bases are the Frontlines (2) with the control points (3). The main bases are not vulnerable as long as the enemy has not taken the last frontline in front of the base. At the beginning of a round only the middle frontline is neutral and the target for both teams.
    To take a frontline a team must have units (on the ground) in all control points of a frontline at the same time and stay there for a specific amount of time. E.g. For the middle frontline 5 seconds, the second frontline 10 seconds and for the last frontline (which maybe even have some small defensive buildings) 25 seconds.
    Once the middle frontline is taken the next frontline gets attackable for the superior team while the defending team can retake the frontline the enemy has just taken. If all frontlines are taken by one team the main base becomes vulnerable and can be destroyed.
    In the main bases are just a little amount of resources while across the map resources and tech buildings are spread (4). All bases that are build outside the main bases are vulnerable.
    Additionally I would suggest that the host can set a maximum game time (e.g. 20 minutes) and the team which advanced farthermost wins.

    This game mode would request a lot of teamwork while making rush tactics less effective and lets you focus on tactical battles without worrying about your base might be taken by an engineer rush.


    So say your opinion, especially if you like this concept. If enough people support it we actually might get some fresh air in the RTS gameplay. There should be still enough time to implement such things.



    Thanks for reading!
    Last edited by bombspy; 08-02-2012, 10:09 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    I like your suggestion, but I do want to clarify something for you regarding this quote:

    "Just rush as fast as you can"
    "Rushing" is an inherent part of a real time strategy game. The objective is to do things faster than your opponent, not just better things. A good plan is irrelevant if you're too slow to execute it.

    What you consider rushing, is how the game is "supposed" to be played, if you want to win. You're more than welcome to play however you would like, but that doesn't mean it should be as effective as the "right way". It's to be expected that some strategies are worse than others. What's the point of strategy if all strategies and play styles are equal? Good strategies should be effective, and bad strategies should not.

    If you're not playing quickly, or you're playing how you want to play, and it's not compatible with the game's design, then that's invariably going to be a bad strategy. There's really no avoiding that to be honest.

    I could play C&C 4, and attempt to play by using nothing but a Tier 2 crawler, but that would fail. I shouldn't be successful by doing whatever I want.

    Comment

    • #3
      Your idea feels like CNC4 on the effort of taking over the control points part.

      Comment

      • #4
        Originally posted by stormgear View Post
        Your idea feels like CNC4 on the effort of taking over the control points part.
        It was rather inspired by the best multiplayer RTS game of all times: World In Conflict

        Comment

        • #5
          I like the idea, but you should get some good reason for the bases to be invulnerable before getting the frontline points captured.

          For example, the points could control a high-tech defence system than pwnerises everything that comes close to the base, and you must take control over the points in order to turn if off.

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Borreh View Post
            I like the idea, but you should get some good reason for the bases to be invulnerable before getting the frontline points captured.

            For example, the points could control a high-tech defence system than pwnerises everything that comes close to the base, and you must take control over the points in order to turn if off.
            Sounds good for me.

            Or the bases could be protected by massive defensive units which will retreat if the frontline is closing in.

            Comment

            • #7
              Reminds me of DOTA for sum reason,,,

              Comment

              • #8
                So this would be like Dawn of War 1, fighting for control points.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Commander32 View Post
                  Reminds me of DOTA for sum reason,,,
                  It's also similar to Star Wars: Empire At War (well if you take out the control points)

                  The concept isn't new but it wasn't tried to mix it with the C&C gameplay mechanics yet.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Yes.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      If applied on Generals 1 mechanics...
                      GLA with fastest expansion get advantage in early part of game while in late will be decimated by offensive General powers agains which is often limited or no defense.
                      It can work with equal armies like USA and China but with GLA I don't think this game mod will work very well...

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by IonorRea View Post
                        If applied on Generals 1 mechanics...
                        GLA with fastest expansion get advantage in early part of game while in late will be decimated by offensive General powers agains which is often limited or no defense.
                        It can work with equal armies like USA and China but with GLA I don't think this game mod will work very well...
                        What's the point of applying Gens 1 example for Gens 2 game mode?

                        We do not know what units, powers or even FACTIONS will be in game nor how will it be balanced. If this game mode will be in the game, then the game's factions will be balanced from the start to be useful in all game modes, including this one.

                        Listen, you can't just take a theoretical idea for a future game and then try to prove it's wrong because when place it out of the context in another title it appears to be unbalanced. Heck, that's, sorry for harsh words, completely dumb and stupid. You will not prove anything and just annoy a lot of poeple.
                        Last edited by Borreh; 04-03-2012, 06:30 PM.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          What's is percentual chance that GLA will be without Workers and Tunnels, or get strong support powers like A10, Carpet bombers or artilery strikes...?

                          Even if EU get cheap unmanned Dozers still will be lacking ability to send quick reinforcements of cheap but value effective units which are critical in early stages.

                          If you think little more about concept you find that most played maps in Generals are small because allow for relative balance and also they have usualy two resource depos for resources that are in many cases enough for entire match, but if you introduce expansion requirement to get sufficient resources, GLA is in first stages unmatchable by faction without Tunnel networks or similary priced builder like cheap Worker.

                          Differencies between factions also poses limitations on maps and modes in which this factions can fight fair battle, if you do something like in C&C3 with 3 factions with same building and gathering mechanism than is this game mod possible to balance imho...
                          Last edited by IonorRea; 04-03-2012, 06:56 PM.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            You arguments contain a lot of IF's

                            We should wait with such judgement until we get some proper information on game mechanics and factions.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Originally posted by bombspy View Post
                              You arguments contain a lot of IF's

                              We should wait with such judgement until we get some proper information on game mechanics and factions.
                              Question is on what if's is based your game mod, because I hope that Generals 2 will be miles away from C&C3 limited faction diversity.

                              Try make some in depth update to design to describe how it will work with for you most probable Generals 2 concept, I for now don't see much future in it.

                              Comment

                              1 2 Next
                              X