I would really like to see more objective based tactical game play. So i'm thinking new game mode or tweaks to existing battle / siege mode.
1) Stronghold or
Commander Mode Battles sound very interesting to me. How about a blend between the initial stronghold system and defend the king and commander mode battle? Keep it
round based, just like current battle and siege modes.
Two teams.
Warm up stageAt the start of a round a commander is nominated on both teams. Both teams take a vote and pick their commander. The commander can control the flag and place a few select buildings (maybe weapon racks, healing tents, siege towers and a few basic static defensible buildings). Maybe limit building options and tie that to what area of the map you control (example: control lumber yard outside castle gives access to ladders).
The commander can also pick a main objective. The team will get a (spawn)ticket bonus for controlling that objective (and maybe a penalty for not controlling it).
The gameAn example: There are three mines / MotF flags / other points of interest and a town / tower / castle or defensive structure to control (example: the team's commander that does not control the castle can spawn a siege tower, the team that controls a mine (automatically) spawns a resource caravan that needs escorting, etc).
Maybe add buffs or perks to controlling certain parts of the map. For example: controlling the town gives you a healing tent, controlling a mine gives a weapon damage buff (better iron?) or successfully escorting the cart from the mines to your spawn temporarily decreases respawn time a bit, stuff like that...
The team that controls more than 50% of the map's assets makes the other team's tickets decrease. A typical map should last at least 15 minutes and up to 45 minutes, depending on how even the battle is. Controlling more than 75% of the points of interest on the map makes tickets decrease exponentially. On an even battle, it's the kills that make the difference, but if one team is losing heavily (controlling no points of interest) the battle should be done quickly.
Use a ticket system like in battlefield maybe. Or like the League of Legends Dominion game mode. Spawns use tickets and controlling more than half the map's assets (more than two mines or the town / tower / castle + 1 mine) makes the enemy tickets decrease over time as well.
Maybe add a little 'defend the king' type game play where a commander makes the enemy team's tickets drop dramatically when he gets killed (10+ tickets for a commander death, maybe more if recently died). Also add maybe an AoE defensive buff for the commander's flag or something, if at all possible (maybe future feature if that requires a lot of work, low prio) to balance out commander death penalty.
Use a large plains type map (not too many objects to prevent low framerates), but with one defensive structure (a town, tower, encampment or small castle) and two or three mines or other control point spots. Maybe also add a few non-random maps for balance. Make as much randomly generated as possible, if that is viable. If not, get mapmakers to build a few maps.
The game mode borrows elements from siege (tickets and a control point), but expands on that by adding several
control points, a commander to protect, stronghold-style placeable buildings (maybe add some building mechanic where stuff can be built with construction materials), etc.
The objective should be map control. Maybe you could even add
AI controlled resource caravans that move about on the map and need escorting and that deliver resources or tickets. (Guild Wars 2 RvR type of gameplay)
This is important, else camping ensues. Controlling a large part of the map should be difficult, because it splits up your team. On a typical battle, control should go back-and-forth between opposing teams. If it's too 'static' and campy during tests, decrease defences and buff attacking options (add back doors to towns / towers / castles, place more fixed ladders, etc)
(a thought: consider making three or four teams instead of two. Would make things more interesting, right?
)
I would recommend a death-wait-time of at least 30 seconds and spawns that are reasonably far apart. I dislike the instant-spawning we have as attackers on siege.
One thing that should be key to this game mode: purchasing (or upgrading) buildings for resources and completing objectives, such as controlling key points of the map but also escorting resource caravans between those points and maybe even completing building-based mini objectives.
Add (or let the commander spawn or build / activate / repair / upgrade) a few trivial buildings, such as a mill that spawns an AI controlled miller that rides with a cart towards spawn and gives a little buff or some bonus tickets when he arrives and stuff like that, to make it less campy and give more objectives to raid. The idea being that the winning team that controls the central defensive structure is tempted to attack those objectives to prevent the other team from winning and exposing their position (the main castle / defensive structure) to attacks.
--
2) Persistent world meets Guild Wars WvW:Make one server run a persistent map. Map design could be inspired on the
Guild Wars 2 WvW map (take just the 'Eternal Battlegrounds map', ignore borderlands for now). When you join the map, you get to pick one of the three (or more?) factions. Maybe the map is even simpler, like a large plains map.
Key point on this game mode should be multiple teams. Not two. Three at least. Maybe four.
There are no respawn tickets, only the respawn timer. Respawn timer can be influenced by player counts on factions for balance. There are no rounds. The map is persistent and does not (need to be) reset, ever.
Example: blue team has 16 players and has a base respawn time of 60+ seconds. Red team has only 8 players and gets a shorter 30 second respawn time. Green team has two players and has a minimal respawn time of only 0-10 seconds. Green team also gets an 'underdog' buff of 50% extra HP on their players, to compensate for the unfair teams. It should always be more attractive to join the smaller teams. Or maybe force some auto balance, but i'd prefer not to.
There are several controllable objectives on the map. I'm thinking three 'spawn area' type castles / towns that act as an unconquerable safety zone, just like in GW2 WvW. Then a big castle in the center, three or more 'mines' or other resource giving points and maybe a few buildable / upgradable points of interest, such as a Mill (reduce respawn time a bit or increase health with 10%), an enclosed Field (allows horses / gives horses a significant buff), an armoury (allows heavy armor / gives armour buff), a Fletcher (unlocks best ranged weapons / gives ranged a significant buff), etc.
First and foremost, at the center of the map: the castle. Controlling the castle moves your team's respawn from the 'safety zone' border of the map to inside the castle. This frees up 1 safety zone and allows for a new color team to be created. It also gives some kind of buff. I'm not sure what to pick here... maybe the castle has an armoury that allows the defenders additional or more expensive equipment... maybe it buffs armour values... something like that. Maybe it has more 'unlock-able' or 'buy-able' buffs that players can purchase, costing resources.
Then there are the secondary objectives. The map has several mines or resource points. Once a team controls such a point,
automated AI controlled resource caravans start moving from those points to that team's spawn area. Controlling a small part of the map should be possible, even for only a few players. If AI controlled caravans isn't viable or too much work to build, make it player operated instead.
Resources also allow siege equipment to be built. Maybe even add a limited selection of buildings, just like Stronghold.
What i'm thinking of is an constant battle for map control, fuelled by the need for those resources. Taking control of the castle gives great defensive advantages, but moves your team away from the resource points and makes you a prime target. Those that control the castle will try to gain control over several resource points, forcing them to attack instead of camp their castle. However, due to their higher respawn time (60+ seconds) and the need to travel from the castle to the resource points, they risk losing their castle and being reverted to their original spawn area.
The teams not controlling the castle will try to gather resources and control the points of interest outside the castle and if they feel strong enough: mount a siege on the castle. Or they could try to win the game by controlling a majority of the map instead. Both should be viable.
You see, there is no real 'winning' to be done, because it's persistent and has no rounds. But maybe a ladder or some sort of score chart can be kept. Points over time for controlling the central castle and lesser points over time for controlling secondary objectives.
Once a team is clearly dominating (most players + controlling all resource giving points), new players cannot join that team AND that team gets a huge increase in respawn time. Maybe the opposing teams get additions buffs such as reduced respawn time, increased resource generation, bonus to hitpoints, armour or weapon damage, etc. It should me most attractive to join the losing / underdog teams.
Other possible point of interest might be a a Mill, a small village, some ruins. Each gives their own small buff. Elements from commander mode battle / defend the king, elements of Stronghold and Payload / Capture the flag type game modes could be used.
For example: once a team gathers sufficient resources, they can build their own castle to rival the central castle. Once a team controls a certain amount of the map, they can vote one of their players 'king' (or commander or something) and give him or nearby team mates certain buffs, but make that player a valuable target.
Maybe only that commander can build structures (stronghold style).
Controlling points on the map can be done with the current MotF flags system. Perhaps with a few tweaks. Once control is gained over a point of interest, it gives certain buffs or unlocks certain items (armour types, advanced weapons or maybe heavy horses). Maybe certain points of interest can be built or upgraded.
Perhaps the best way to start building this game mode is to start with the basics. And maybe it can't be truly persistent and needs a time limit of some sorts... i'm not sure yet.
Map needs: three spawn areas, three mines or other resouce-giving points, several basic 'points of interest' that can be conquered by standing near them, such as a mill, a tower, an armoury, some stables and a farm. Wouldn't it be cool if a controlled point of interest doesn't give anything until you repair or upgrade it? That would cost resources. You gain those resources by controlling (a) mine(s) and protecting the caravan.
Anyways, looks like this post is becoming much too long and somewhat unfocused. I'll look at it later and try to edit this into something more readable. Right now i'm just throwing together different game modes in my head, trying to figure out what would work. Maybe with a bit of feedback from the devs we can trim down this jumble of random ideas into something workable.
Stuff to look at or steal from / other random ideas:
3 Arathi Basin or other PvP instances from World of Warcraft
4) Go with a Capture the Flag based game mode (look at Tribes Ascend and many other games). My suggestions for our current CTF (i got to test that once) is to add significant respawn timers, making it less like deathmatch.
5) Look at Team Fortress' Payload game mode and steal that. Should be fun, though hard to balance.
6) One could also look at games like Battlefield 3 and borrow ideas from Rush game mode for example. Tweak Siege mode into a rush-siege mode: make several control points (town outside, walls, courtyard and keep maybe) and make the attackers conquer all points one by one within a time limit or (if possible) ticket limit.
Poll