New Gametypes?
by Eli McClanahan · in General Discussion · 12/18/2002 (7:55 am) · 12 replies
I was discussing this a little with James the other day, and I've also been discussing it lately with the people at the T2BB since T3 will be developed sooner or later. Personally, I think a lot of the current stock gametypes like CTF (especially CTF) are a little unbalanced. I'm sure we've all seen a CTF go the way of the dodo, when everyone on a team plays defense except for one man.
That said, and avoiding discussing CTF (just using it as an example), I was wondering what we could do to introduce some new gametypes?
Brainstorming time. A few I was thinking of:
Twin Siege/WAR: A Siege variant in which instead of one team invading a base, both teams are given objectives that affect gameplay, and must be destroyed. For instance, we could have two identical bases, both with a command center (of sorts) and a animal hold (barn, stable). Both must be destroyed to win. Destroying the command center would not only get you a step closer to winning, but would also make deploying items or building siege weapons (whatever) impossible. Basically, destroying an objective cripples the enemy in some way. James already added this to the documentation I believe.
Duel: What it sounds like. A lot of people are going to want to go one on one with a melee combat system. In T2, you're forced to be an observer and pick who you want to fight. Rather than take this approach, make the game style a little more friendly and with a couple of new rules. Say, make it like a martial arts tournament ring: you initiate combat by stepping up into a large circular ring with your selected equipment, after both players agree to facing one another with a yes/no dialogue box. Whoever is KOed first, or is knocked out of the ring (with a powerful blow or by tripping out of it) is the loser.
Construction/Construct and Destroy: Two teams start with a set amount of supplies, and must construct a fortification to withstand enemy attacks. The skill involved will be both in deciding what to use (a personal alloted amount of supplies is given, and if you don't use all of it, it goes into the "pool" of team resources used for creating siege weapons, possibly) and in where to place it (you can only place it in your team's boundary area, so people can't run off and building a box somewhere to prevent themselves from losing.) After a set amount of time (5 minutes perhaps) each team's defense is opened up, so that they may attack one another. Each team still gets a small amount of supplies (possibly based on turns or just time), just enough for minor repairs. Whichever team's structures are obliterated first loses.
Anyway, you get the idea. Storm away.
That said, and avoiding discussing CTF (just using it as an example), I was wondering what we could do to introduce some new gametypes?
Brainstorming time. A few I was thinking of:
Twin Siege/WAR: A Siege variant in which instead of one team invading a base, both teams are given objectives that affect gameplay, and must be destroyed. For instance, we could have two identical bases, both with a command center (of sorts) and a animal hold (barn, stable). Both must be destroyed to win. Destroying the command center would not only get you a step closer to winning, but would also make deploying items or building siege weapons (whatever) impossible. Basically, destroying an objective cripples the enemy in some way. James already added this to the documentation I believe.
Duel: What it sounds like. A lot of people are going to want to go one on one with a melee combat system. In T2, you're forced to be an observer and pick who you want to fight. Rather than take this approach, make the game style a little more friendly and with a couple of new rules. Say, make it like a martial arts tournament ring: you initiate combat by stepping up into a large circular ring with your selected equipment, after both players agree to facing one another with a yes/no dialogue box. Whoever is KOed first, or is knocked out of the ring (with a powerful blow or by tripping out of it) is the loser.
Construction/Construct and Destroy: Two teams start with a set amount of supplies, and must construct a fortification to withstand enemy attacks. The skill involved will be both in deciding what to use (a personal alloted amount of supplies is given, and if you don't use all of it, it goes into the "pool" of team resources used for creating siege weapons, possibly) and in where to place it (you can only place it in your team's boundary area, so people can't run off and building a box somewhere to prevent themselves from losing.) After a set amount of time (5 minutes perhaps) each team's defense is opened up, so that they may attack one another. Each team still gets a small amount of supplies (possibly based on turns or just time), just enough for minor repairs. Whichever team's structures are obliterated first loses.
Anyway, you get the idea. Storm away.
#2
Imagine, In T2, if a bomber flew over your base and blew a big hole in the ceiling for the enemy to jump through.
Kinda like Redfaction's Geo Mod, but better and more useful.
And like StarCraft or WarCraft where you need to build new equipment to gain diffrent weapons, armor, vehicels, anything you would need.
That is basicly what I'm adding to my game,I'm just not sure how I'm gonna do it yet. I've got plans drawn up for it though.
12/18/2002 (9:08 am)
I like the Idea of Construct and destroy. It similar to the idea I had to make a game where everything is destroyable by the enemy.Imagine, In T2, if a bomber flew over your base and blew a big hole in the ceiling for the enemy to jump through.
Kinda like Redfaction's Geo Mod, but better and more useful.
And like StarCraft or WarCraft where you need to build new equipment to gain diffrent weapons, armor, vehicels, anything you would need.
That is basicly what I'm adding to my game,I'm just not sure how I'm gonna do it yet. I've got plans drawn up for it though.
#3
Modified Assault: There is an ultimate goal (capture the enemy base) and tasks that have to be accomplished to reach that goal. For example, if you want to capture the enemy base, you need to:
1. Take down the shield generators
2. Destroy the front gates
3. Capture the enemy spawn points (so no more troops can re-spawn)
4. Capture the base.
etc.
Supply Run: Defenders spawn in a well-defended base with limited resources. Attackers spawn outside, fairly entrenched. Defenders have to break out, fight their way to some kind of supply point, then fight their way back. Obviously, the enjoyability of this kind of game depends on the world's movement rules.
Blitzkrieg: Attackers have to capture a point (or points) within a set time limit. Defenders have to stop them. Modified Blitzkrieg: Attackers have to capture a set series of waypoints.
Ambush: One team has a set period of time to set up, say 2 minutes. The other team has to get to a waypoint on the other side of the "ambush site". The "ambushed" team scores points based on how many members make it through to the other side
A Sports Game of Some Kind: UT2K3 has one. It's a hoot.
Arms Race: Parts of a "superweapon" are scattered around the countryside. Teams race to find the pieces and build the "superweapon" first. May each piece could give some kind of bonus.
Beat The Mob!: One side is a huge but poorly-armed rabble. The other side has superior weapons, but is vastly outnumbered.
Fighting Retreat: This is basically like a few of the TFC maps in Half-Life. There are a series of waypoints. When one is captured, the defending team falls back to defend the next one.
Braveheart Mode: 2 hordes fight it out. Last horde standing wins. Alternate name: Last Horde Standing.
Recon: This'd require a large map. A small Scout team is deployed and has to "map" a few sites ("mapping" could consist of standing in an area for, say, a minute) in anticipation of a coming attack. The Scouts are decently armed, but outnumbered.
King of the Mountain: The map(s) feature a huge mountain in the centers. Getting to the top nets a certain number of points. Time spent on top of the mountain also adds up points.
What was that game in T2 where one person had a flag and everyone chased after him and tried to kill him, then he died and someone else picked up the flag? That was insanely fun.
12/18/2002 (10:27 pm)
Hmm, I don't know how well these would work, but:Modified Assault: There is an ultimate goal (capture the enemy base) and tasks that have to be accomplished to reach that goal. For example, if you want to capture the enemy base, you need to:
1. Take down the shield generators
2. Destroy the front gates
3. Capture the enemy spawn points (so no more troops can re-spawn)
4. Capture the base.
etc.
Supply Run: Defenders spawn in a well-defended base with limited resources. Attackers spawn outside, fairly entrenched. Defenders have to break out, fight their way to some kind of supply point, then fight their way back. Obviously, the enjoyability of this kind of game depends on the world's movement rules.
Blitzkrieg: Attackers have to capture a point (or points) within a set time limit. Defenders have to stop them. Modified Blitzkrieg: Attackers have to capture a set series of waypoints.
Ambush: One team has a set period of time to set up, say 2 minutes. The other team has to get to a waypoint on the other side of the "ambush site". The "ambushed" team scores points based on how many members make it through to the other side
A Sports Game of Some Kind: UT2K3 has one. It's a hoot.
Arms Race: Parts of a "superweapon" are scattered around the countryside. Teams race to find the pieces and build the "superweapon" first. May each piece could give some kind of bonus.
Beat The Mob!: One side is a huge but poorly-armed rabble. The other side has superior weapons, but is vastly outnumbered.
Fighting Retreat: This is basically like a few of the TFC maps in Half-Life. There are a series of waypoints. When one is captured, the defending team falls back to defend the next one.
Braveheart Mode: 2 hordes fight it out. Last horde standing wins. Alternate name: Last Horde Standing.
Recon: This'd require a large map. A small Scout team is deployed and has to "map" a few sites ("mapping" could consist of standing in an area for, say, a minute) in anticipation of a coming attack. The Scouts are decently armed, but outnumbered.
King of the Mountain: The map(s) feature a huge mountain in the centers. Getting to the top nets a certain number of points. Time spent on top of the mountain also adds up points.
What was that game in T2 where one person had a flag and everyone chased after him and tried to kill him, then he died and someone else picked up the flag? That was insanely fun.
#4
12/20/2002 (11:43 am)
Your ideas remind me of BattleField 1942.
#5
There are plenty of variations you could come up with, but anything that I've seen here or gotten suggestions about have their basic principles in one of the types I listed here.
There are a couple of others I've thought up or variated from someone's ideas that I may add soon.
12/20/2002 (4:10 pm)
I wrote up a document for this: Game Type DocumentationThere are plenty of variations you could come up with, but anything that I've seen here or gotten suggestions about have their basic principles in one of the types I listed here.
There are a couple of others I've thought up or variated from someone's ideas that I may add soon.
#6
There are a number of villages on the map.
Each village may be captured ala flag mode.
Once you "control" a village, you can choose how that village is deployed. It is a resource of a sort. Its villagers gather raw materials, which can be turned into different types of useful things:
Health
Armour
Weapons
Magic
Defenses - In the form of AI creatures called Gollums. Big stone guards. They guard the village and its villagers. Think of these as free roaming heavy defenses.
So the point is? well, you have to decide on tactical solutions to the problems of what the opposition is doing, sometimes forming fast moving raiding parties to kill of the villagers (the less villagers the less resource produced). You can choose to build more guards, or leave out the guards and just try and build weapons etc.
Phil.
12/20/2002 (4:22 pm)
Myself and Pascal came up with a variation a long while ago.There are a number of villages on the map.
Each village may be captured ala flag mode.
Once you "control" a village, you can choose how that village is deployed. It is a resource of a sort. Its villagers gather raw materials, which can be turned into different types of useful things:
Health
Armour
Weapons
Magic
Defenses - In the form of AI creatures called Gollums. Big stone guards. They guard the village and its villagers. Think of these as free roaming heavy defenses.
So the point is? well, you have to decide on tactical solutions to the problems of what the opposition is doing, sometimes forming fast moving raiding parties to kill of the villagers (the less villagers the less resource produced). You can choose to build more guards, or leave out the guards and just try and build weapons etc.
Phil.
#7
In-game resources are catchy but difficult to implement unless you have AI. War, another one of the types I listed, operates on resources, in a way, that stop once Siege-like objectives are destroyed. The only problem is implementing that with RW, since I'm not sure what exactly we can use and alter yet, stat-wise.
Anyway, I uploaded a couple more types today: Scavenger Hunt and Gladiator Gambling.
12/20/2002 (6:29 pm)
It sounds sort of like one of the tactical types I have listed (Construct and Conquer), except more like King of the Hill.In-game resources are catchy but difficult to implement unless you have AI. War, another one of the types I listed, operates on resources, in a way, that stop once Siege-like objectives are destroyed. The only problem is implementing that with RW, since I'm not sure what exactly we can use and alter yet, stat-wise.
Anyway, I uploaded a couple more types today: Scavenger Hunt and Gladiator Gambling.
#8
you actually got to watch each fight before you went in and it is great for 2 players or a group of 16 =)
and I think that any time you add new gameplay types your players (unless they are brainless nitwits) will appreciate the work you put into the game (just IMO)
12/20/2002 (8:26 pm)
speaking of Duels and Jedi Outcast... the Duel gameplay type was great.you actually got to watch each fight before you went in and it is great for 2 players or a group of 16 =)
and I think that any time you add new gameplay types your players (unless they are brainless nitwits) will appreciate the work you put into the game (just IMO)
#9
In everquest, you go into a specific area to duel. There PVP becomes allowable. All you do is drop into the circle and then youre fair game.
Its setup like a roman amphitheatre so people can watch the bouts.
Very cool.. even fun to watch sometimes..
Phil.
12/21/2002 (2:51 am)
I like the idea of a duelling pit.In everquest, you go into a specific area to duel. There PVP becomes allowable. All you do is drop into the circle and then youre fair game.
Its setup like a roman amphitheatre so people can watch the bouts.
Very cool.. even fun to watch sometimes..
Phil.
#10
Thats called smear the queer. We play it in gym.
12/21/2002 (5:31 am)
"What was that game in T2 where one person had a flag and everyone chased after him and tried to kill him, then he died and someone else picked up the flag? That was insanely fun."Thats called smear the queer. We play it in gym.
#11
12/21/2002 (7:19 pm)
I don't think that was the official name, but smear the queer is exactly what it was. And in Tribes, it was a beautiful thing. In gym, it sucked to be the skinny kid.
#12
Ghost: one guy looks exactly like your fellow team members and nobody has I.D.'s. the only problem is he's against you. so he would run around killing people who wouldn't know if he was on their team or not. then when somebody killed him they would be the ghost. the only problem with this idea would be the amount of team killing. there would need to be a severe penalty for that
11/30/2004 (2:56 pm)
I thought of a really messed up gametype Ghost: one guy looks exactly like your fellow team members and nobody has I.D.'s. the only problem is he's against you. so he would run around killing people who wouldn't know if he was on their team or not. then when somebody killed him they would be the ghost. the only problem with this idea would be the amount of team killing. there would need to be a severe penalty for that
Torque Owner Chris Traill
Maybe it was just the whole challenging someone then turning on your lightsaber that made it the coolest looking thing in the world but it worked incredibly well. Shame that the actual saber-fighting wasn't implemented very well though.
They all seem like good ideas, I'm most fond of CTF or Seige matches in UT and still play a lot of them online.