Thoughts: Stealth/Sniper Multiplayer Conquest Game
by Eli McClanahan · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 09/23/2004 (5:37 pm) · 32 replies
I've been playing with the idea of making a game themed around tactics and gaining territory more than mindless fragging, but I need some ideas on how to enhance the idea. What follows is my personal record of what the game would entail thusfar.
----------
FPS Conquest Stealth/Sniper Game
Combat is zone-based on battlefield influence. Map-defined areas are capturable. Zones are either gray (uncaptured), red (enemy-occupied), green (friendly-occupied) or yellow (occupied by both). Owning a maginot line of zones makes all unoccupied zones behind them owned as well. Owning a circle of zones around other unoccupied zones makes them owned. Owning zones gives team points, a value determined by either the mapper or by a predetermined matrix value like terrain/object height. Personal points come from kills and capturing zones. When no one is in a zone that is not enclosed by other zones, it becomes nuetral (gray, uncaptured.)
Gameplay is based around using long ranged weapons and secondary, silenced short range weapons, as well as items such as normal grenades, smoke grenades, gas grenades and various deployed detection items.
The more sound you make, the more visible your IFF is. No detectable sound means no IFF. Smoke from grenades mask your IFF, while items like deployed sensors and flares increase IFF visibility. Sound increases based on speed of movement and material type being stepped on. Map areas players may hide in, such as areas with high amounts of foliage or water, decrease IFF detectability. Player-worn items like grass outfits or rock jackets decrease detectability when worn in the right areas; in other areas they increase detectability (such as wearing a rock jacket in a blue-tiled room).
Movement options consist of jogging, crouching, going prone, crawling, creeping, leaping, and wall-straddling. Also, bodies and some map items may be held and used as shields. Generally, movement is much slower than most FPSs. Movement creates detectable sound.
All weapons are either long range or short range - none have splash damage, and all are hit-scan. Heavier, more powerful weapons and weapons with the longest ranges have slower aiming movement speeds. Smaller weapons, especially close range weapons, are easier to adjust aim for or have no restrictions at all. Different weapons create different levels of sound. Generally, most weapons are near one-hit kills.
Being hit will cause the player to stop or slow and experience recoil from the damage, depending on the strength of the weapon and the range from which it was fired.
Small game objects like boxes, barrels and logs, etc. may be moved slowly to be put into position to act as cover.
Maps are zoned in the same way the area map is: all areas have some sort of cover to use, and are sometimes enclosed to prevent sniping of that area, forcing infiltration to kill opponents.
--------
Right now my main concern is slowing down the game too much. There needs to be a way to actively encourage snipers to not camp in one spot for too long, so the game doesn't degrade too much into endless standoffs. I feel how scoring works will counter this somewhat, but I'm not convinced.
----------
FPS Conquest Stealth/Sniper Game
Combat is zone-based on battlefield influence. Map-defined areas are capturable. Zones are either gray (uncaptured), red (enemy-occupied), green (friendly-occupied) or yellow (occupied by both). Owning a maginot line of zones makes all unoccupied zones behind them owned as well. Owning a circle of zones around other unoccupied zones makes them owned. Owning zones gives team points, a value determined by either the mapper or by a predetermined matrix value like terrain/object height. Personal points come from kills and capturing zones. When no one is in a zone that is not enclosed by other zones, it becomes nuetral (gray, uncaptured.)
Gameplay is based around using long ranged weapons and secondary, silenced short range weapons, as well as items such as normal grenades, smoke grenades, gas grenades and various deployed detection items.
The more sound you make, the more visible your IFF is. No detectable sound means no IFF. Smoke from grenades mask your IFF, while items like deployed sensors and flares increase IFF visibility. Sound increases based on speed of movement and material type being stepped on. Map areas players may hide in, such as areas with high amounts of foliage or water, decrease IFF detectability. Player-worn items like grass outfits or rock jackets decrease detectability when worn in the right areas; in other areas they increase detectability (such as wearing a rock jacket in a blue-tiled room).
Movement options consist of jogging, crouching, going prone, crawling, creeping, leaping, and wall-straddling. Also, bodies and some map items may be held and used as shields. Generally, movement is much slower than most FPSs. Movement creates detectable sound.
All weapons are either long range or short range - none have splash damage, and all are hit-scan. Heavier, more powerful weapons and weapons with the longest ranges have slower aiming movement speeds. Smaller weapons, especially close range weapons, are easier to adjust aim for or have no restrictions at all. Different weapons create different levels of sound. Generally, most weapons are near one-hit kills.
Being hit will cause the player to stop or slow and experience recoil from the damage, depending on the strength of the weapon and the range from which it was fired.
Small game objects like boxes, barrels and logs, etc. may be moved slowly to be put into position to act as cover.
Maps are zoned in the same way the area map is: all areas have some sort of cover to use, and are sometimes enclosed to prevent sniping of that area, forcing infiltration to kill opponents.
--------
Right now my main concern is slowing down the game too much. There needs to be a way to actively encourage snipers to not camp in one spot for too long, so the game doesn't degrade too much into endless standoffs. I feel how scoring works will counter this somewhat, but I'm not convinced.
About the author
#22
10/02/2004 (1:21 pm)
Personally, I agree with the anti-radiation stance. I mean, if someone were to go into combat carrying ratiation-laden shells, wouldn't they also have some sort of radiation-proof clothing? Makes sense to me.
#23
And I've never approved of that sort of passive stance to balancing a game. It's not only lazy, but highly ineffective in the long run, as there are sometimes unanticipated situations to which the argument will not apply. Even so, if you're going to have to move anyway, then I guess it won't really bother anyone except players that want to do nothing else but abuse a position.
10/02/2004 (2:26 pm)
Assuming they're human, and it's even radiation.And I've never approved of that sort of passive stance to balancing a game. It's not only lazy, but highly ineffective in the long run, as there are sometimes unanticipated situations to which the argument will not apply. Even so, if you're going to have to move anyway, then I guess it won't really bother anyone except players that want to do nothing else but abuse a position.
#24
Actually your game idea makes me think of good old Delta Force 1 and 2 days. Focused action, but you could still walk one and a half kilometer away and snipe. Of course, there was nothing as fun as sneaking up on a sniper that had taken MY spot, draw the knife and get a 3 pointer!
But then I would have to change spot pretty fast, for obvious reasons!
The bottom line is, I think both camps (no pun intended!!1) had a lot of fun playing DF1 and DF2. Think about it before you decide you need to gimp sniping.
Oh another thing, consider adding a prestige or ranking system where killing someone with a high score counts more. Thus if you knife a sniper with a perfect 1000000 kills to 0 deaths you get a LOT of points...
-Bjorn
10/08/2004 (2:37 am)
Eli, personally I never understand why YOU people hate US campers so much! Deal with it! Just draw the knife and go get em!Actually your game idea makes me think of good old Delta Force 1 and 2 days. Focused action, but you could still walk one and a half kilometer away and snipe. Of course, there was nothing as fun as sneaking up on a sniper that had taken MY spot, draw the knife and get a 3 pointer!
But then I would have to change spot pretty fast, for obvious reasons!
The bottom line is, I think both camps (no pun intended!!1) had a lot of fun playing DF1 and DF2. Think about it before you decide you need to gimp sniping.
Oh another thing, consider adding a prestige or ranking system where killing someone with a high score counts more. Thus if you knife a sniper with a perfect 1000000 kills to 0 deaths you get a LOT of points...
-Bjorn
#25
10/08/2004 (10:29 am)
I don't understand why people hate campers so much. They think maybe it's playing cheap for easy kills and perhps gets annoying, but really there's pros and cons to camping... if you camp too much or don't camp carefully you will usually lose in the end. A good player shouldnt complain if someone's camping, he should turn it to his advantage.
#26
Besides, by eliminating camping, with lots of players, the game turns into more of a Slayer style, rather than a careful sniping game. I'd rather play something that allowed someone to sit still and carefully plan their next tactic than be forced to keep moving.
I also agree with Bjorn about the knife (or other melee) kills. Sniping gets one point, something that requires much more skill yields a higher score. The good players would then try to melee attack more than sniping since that's what would give the best scores.
10/08/2004 (10:43 am)
Camping is good. If a game were to allow camping (lack of the radiation and heat sensors or whatever), then that'd add to the realism. I mean, if someone knows about a choice spot, then someone else will know exactly how to clear that spot out.Besides, by eliminating camping, with lots of players, the game turns into more of a Slayer style, rather than a careful sniping game. I'd rather play something that allowed someone to sit still and carefully plan their next tactic than be forced to keep moving.
I also agree with Bjorn about the knife (or other melee) kills. Sniping gets one point, something that requires much more skill yields a higher score. The good players would then try to melee attack more than sniping since that's what would give the best scores.
#27
I've heard all the arguments for all sniper tactics, believe me.
And melee attacks will be the only kind of attacks that can force a player to respawn (a kill) rather than be a strategic crippling blow, so they're going to be worth more points anyway.
10/08/2004 (3:05 pm)
The problem with camping in this game is that if it's not discouraged, then games will degenerate into standoffs that no one wants to break, since everyone on the field is a potential sniper.I've heard all the arguments for all sniper tactics, believe me.
And melee attacks will be the only kind of attacks that can force a player to respawn (a kill) rather than be a strategic crippling blow, so they're going to be worth more points anyway.
#28
@Scott: Realism is good sometimes; but if it doesn't make the gameplay better, then there's no point adding it in. Not to mention talking about "realism" in a sci-fi stealth game is a bit of an oxymoron.
Eliminating camping won't necessarily eliminate the careful sniping aspect of the game either, it depends on how its executed. If enough time was allowed for a person to prepare for a snipe, then it would be okay, but it would depend on other factors too, like how fast and how often your enemies move, etc. That kind of thing can only be worked out through playtesting.
@Will: You're stating that if someone is a good player, they shouldn't complain about camping. What if they aren't a good player, for whatever reason? Perhaps they're new to the game, and haven't quite mastered the controls or dynamic of the game.
In a game where camping is inhibited, the advantage of experienced players is lessened, and gives less experienced players a chance to get off the bottom rung. To a player, this may seem unfair or 'dishonourable' (for lack of a better term), but that's the difference between a game player and a game designer.
To be fair though, there are alternatives to inhibit camping that may have been overlooked. The first is ensuring good multiplayer level design. This may seem obvious, but most camping is due to players taking advantage of poor level design. The second is levelling out the pick ups and starting items available to players. Most weapons in games get bigger and better as you go along, but there's no reason that has to hold true for this game.
Those are my thoughts anyhow.
Cheers,
Paul.
10/08/2004 (4:33 pm)
Camping, with regards to the overall game design and fun for all (and not just the camper) is bad. While camping could be regarded as staying in one spot, I've always thought it more as staying around a handy pick up.@Scott: Realism is good sometimes; but if it doesn't make the gameplay better, then there's no point adding it in. Not to mention talking about "realism" in a sci-fi stealth game is a bit of an oxymoron.
Eliminating camping won't necessarily eliminate the careful sniping aspect of the game either, it depends on how its executed. If enough time was allowed for a person to prepare for a snipe, then it would be okay, but it would depend on other factors too, like how fast and how often your enemies move, etc. That kind of thing can only be worked out through playtesting.
@Will: You're stating that if someone is a good player, they shouldn't complain about camping. What if they aren't a good player, for whatever reason? Perhaps they're new to the game, and haven't quite mastered the controls or dynamic of the game.
In a game where camping is inhibited, the advantage of experienced players is lessened, and gives less experienced players a chance to get off the bottom rung. To a player, this may seem unfair or 'dishonourable' (for lack of a better term), but that's the difference between a game player and a game designer.
To be fair though, there are alternatives to inhibit camping that may have been overlooked. The first is ensuring good multiplayer level design. This may seem obvious, but most camping is due to players taking advantage of poor level design. The second is levelling out the pick ups and starting items available to players. Most weapons in games get bigger and better as you go along, but there's no reason that has to hold true for this game.
Those are my thoughts anyhow.
Cheers,
Paul.
#29
They shouldnt complain either way. Just learn from your mistakes and find counterattacks.
What's wrong with sniper standoffs? Those can be alot of fun.
10/08/2004 (9:23 pm)
Well, half the time, it's the noobs who are camping... it's not just experienced players. If your a beginner and you see a place that looks safe you go there and hide, let your stamina build up... and then rather then venturing out and getting shot in the ass, you remain hidden and wait to pounce on a passerby. That's perfectly fine to me. Whether your experienced or not, camping is just like a natural instinct.Quote:You're stating that if someone is a good player, they shouldn't complain about camping. What if they aren't a good player, for whatever reason? Perhaps they're new to the game, and haven't quite mastered the controls or dynamic of the game.
They shouldnt complain either way. Just learn from your mistakes and find counterattacks.
Quote:The problem with camping in this game is that if it's not discouraged, then games will degenerate into standoffs that no one wants to break, since everyone on the field is a potential sniper.
What's wrong with sniper standoffs? Those can be alot of fun.
#30
10/09/2004 (9:40 am)
If they don't happen all the time, yes. Sniper standoffs are actually the reason I thought of the game to begin with, since I like being pinned down and creeping forward to gain a position.
#31
Done right it can be an effective tool. (I fared well during office games of "Quake" by "camping" in key places)
Done wrong it can be annoying.
10/10/2004 (11:38 am)
"Camping" can be a bit like a Basketball team going into "Slowdown" mode. Done right it can be an effective tool. (I fared well during office games of "Quake" by "camping" in key places)
Done wrong it can be annoying.
Torque Owner Will Harrison
Sounds cool... also, it should waver around unsteadily when you move (walk or run) and slowly settle in as you hold yourself in a prone position.
As for grenades, definitely. Cooking off grenades and tossing them at the right moment to land at your opppenent's feet is damn fun.
....I don't really get the whole radiation thing... you want to limit the sniper's time in one area? I don't see why you need radiation to do that. If a sniper finds a "sweet spot" and stays there, eventually he will be found out and killed... you have to re-locate anyway to avoid being found, right?