cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Topic started by: Slamz on April 07, 2012, 11:23:26 pm
-
Since Stronghold is dead, what about something similar like "Defend & Destroy"? (This was my favorite game mode from original Tribes.)
It goes a little something like this....
* Each side has a base. (This doesn't necessarily have to be a "castle" and it's probably just as well if it's not anything that big.)
* Each side has several items that must be destroyed (and defended). This could be food stores, catapults, stabled horses, draw bridge controls, whatever.
* First team to 10 points (or whatever) wins, where destroying a thing gives you a point. (Some things could be worth more points than others.)
Tribes also had a "capture and hold" flag objective in the middle that granted a few points to whatever team held it. It can become interesting if you need 2 more points to win and the flag is worth 2 points... suddenly it's a hotspot.
The nice thing with this game mode is that it's MUCH easier to have balanced gameplay. The two sides can simply be mirror images.
And it's interesting to play because there are multiple things to attack and defend and the very nature of the game means there's more resistance as you go along. Destroying the first few items is easy because defense is necessarily spread thin but when they only have a couple things left to defend, it's much easier to guard them.
So it might be a little similar in spirit to "Stronghold", minus the custom built castles.
-
Let me ask a question first, what is "stronghold"? A game mode?
-
Well, I was about to start developing something similar but a bit more complex. Unfortunately, its on hold.
I'm pretty sure if you don't make it yourself you won't see it in this mod.
-
Let me ask a question first, what is "stronghold"? A game mode?
It was one they were working on but abandoned due to limits in the game engine. I believe the idea was two teams building castles (by placing walls, gates and so forth) and then attacking each other's castle (with catapults and ladders and all that). They ran into a problem where the game couldn't handle that many "deployables".
Basically I think it would be good to have something other than deathmatch that can still be balanced, unlike siege (which is almost impossible to balance).
Deathmatch is really the lowest form of gameplay you can have. It's kind of surprising that its still cRPGs main game type.
-
No Cav Allowed!
-
I'd love a game mode like this!!! "Capture & Hold" would be great as well. Any game where a bit more strategy is needed is good in my book (I agree, pure Deathmatch is the lowest form).
And Siege is so varied. Some maps it's huge advantage to defense... some are damn near impossible to defend (which can reflect real life... but doesn't help as balance goes). In Siege, obviously the defending Archers/Crossbowmen have the advantage, with a huge disadvantage to attacking ranged players. With a mode where both teams have to attack & defend on equal parts... I could see every class playing it's part effectively. Melee guys may move in to take an objective, then the ranged guys would setup to defend it (in Capture & Hold).
Either game mode will obviously get my vote... however, I by no means can help develop such. So here's to hoping!!!
-
I'd love a game mode like this!!! "Capture & Hold" would be great as well. Any game where a bit more strategy is needed is good in my book (I agree, pure Deathmatch is the lowest form).
And Siege is so varied. Some maps it's huge advantage to defense... some are damn near impossible to defend (which can reflect real life... but doesn't help as balance goes). In Siege, obviously the defending Archers/Crossbowmen have the advantage, with a huge disadvantage to attacking ranged players. With a mode where both teams have to attack & defend on equal parts... I could see every class playing it's part effectively. Melee guys may move in to take an objective, then the ranged guys would setup to defend it (in Capture & Hold).
Either game mode will obviously get my vote... however, I by no means can help develop such. So here's to hoping!!!
Hmm, in my opinion archers are not really that effective in both sides. Melee classes can kill more in that chaos. I think the problem with that is sieges are not like epic sieges you play at native, but more like a deathmatch that the teams try to capture/defend the flag. Walls and defenders are not as effective as they should be, due to the high frequency of heavyish armors. In that kind of play, archers have very little use. At least compared to melee classes. Siege is much more fun in 22nd battalion server where the fight is much more longer and goes on a slower pace. In native, it is also important to defend certain strategical positions, whereas the only thing should be defended is the flag in crpg. Something lowers the quality in my opinion.
Back to the main topic, I'd love to see this gamemode. It seems like a mixture of two gamemodes from native. Why not :)
-
Hmm, in my opinion archers are not really that effective in both sides. Melee classes can kill more in that chaos. I think the problem with that is sieges are not like epic sieges you play at native, but more like a deathmatch that the teams try to capture/defend the flag. Walls and defenders are not as effective as they should be, due to the high frequency of heavyish armors. In that kind of play, archers have very little use. At least compared to melee classes. Siege is much more fun in 22nd battalion server where the fight is much more longer and goes on a slower pace. In native, it is also important to defend certain strategical positions, whereas the only thing should be defended is the flag in crpg. Something lowers the quality in my opinion.
Back to the main topic, I'd love to see this gamemode. It seems like a mixture of two gamemodes from native. Why not :)
QFT. Vanilla sieges are the best. I especially like the limited defender lives system. Give more advantage to the defenders and make deaths cost!
....AND ADD BACK THE FUCKING LADDDERS.