IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Multiplayer Campaign/Tournament
Jakato
post 21 Jan 2018, 19:31
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 13 December 2017
Member No.: 16473



Disclaimer: I'm not a PvP player but I think PvP players might enjoy this. It's just a thought. It is not a formal suggestion.

I was thinking it would be interesting if there was a RotR event kind of like those persistent campaigns in games where every skirmish influences a bigger war. Now obviously this is not something you can do in the SAGE engine. But I think a campaign like this could be organized through the forums.

The campaign would take place on a board like this one: Attached File  RotR_Example_Tournament_2.png ( 990.83K ) Number of downloads: 20


Each square would be a territory and players would move between territories to take them. Games would involve turns where each player gets to take one action: Move, Take Territory or Fight. Players would only be able to move to territories their side owns or territories next to ones their side owns (to fight for new territory).

The whole goal is to own territories and each territory a faction has would give victory points after every round of turns. After a certain amount of rounds (that players will agree on before starting) the side with the most victory points wins. Each faction has a "home" territory that they do not get victory points for holding but they do get points for recapturing it. The reason factions do not get bonus points for holding a territory is to prevent turtling.

When players fight for a territory they will compete online and then upload the replay (or a screenshot of the final match statistics, I suppose). Players would need to play as a specific faction from beginning to end. That could get boring for some players. Also there may not be an equal amount of players willing to play for each faction. If that is a problem I suggest factions with less players get a bonus victory points for winning a round. Another solution is to limit a campaign to some amount (10?) players and have several campaigns.

Each map will correspond to a specific territory. I am considering having custom versions of the "home territory" maps that give the defender an advantage. The reason the game board I showed is placed on a satellite image, is because I think it would be cool to choose a map for a territory if it sort of matches the terrain of the real life area. So in the example image, SE areas would have desert maps.

One problem the players would have to work their way around is what happens if one player doesn't take an action for a long time, holding the game up. I suggest players are allowed to say "if I don't reply in X days, someone else from my faction can take my action for me". Players could also be allowed to trade actions. Suppose most players can play every 3 days. One player (let's call him Charlie of the ECA) can only play once a week. Charlie will say that the other ECA players can take a action for him and fight battles for him on Wednesday but on Sunday he will take the actions of the other players of the ECA.

Feel free to add to my idea or alter it. I'm interested to hear other people's thoughts. And yes, I am willing to co-ordinate this campaign for as long as I am capable (things may get pretty unstable in my country).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
XoGamer
post 21 Jan 2018, 20:28
Post #2


Tactically Toxic
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 191
Joined: 29 February 2016
Member No.: 12634



usa would win gg

there might not be enough from each faction (likely russia would have the most) - no one would be on the China team tongue.gif or on the ECA team that actually wins (eca is hard to play)


--------------------
"It'll be a nuclear winter, this year General."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maelstrom
post 21 Jan 2018, 22:05
Post #3


The owner of the 1st legit (and signed) CD of ShockWave
Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 531
Joined: 19 May 2013
Member No.: 9941



Seems similar to the old RP server, but with easier rules. I hope you can record the matches, and invent some backstory ^^. I'd gladly watch such a serie


--------------------

My Soundcloud profile: right here
My avatar got created by Aellyx, from NeedBackup
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
(USA)Bruce
post 21 Jan 2018, 22:13
Post #4


The Forums American Hotshot Flyboy
Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 2703
Joined: 22 November 2012
From: The foundation of modern freedom and Liberty;United States of America.
Member No.: 9500



QUOTE (Maelstrom @ 22 Jan 2018, 0:05) *
Seems similar to the old RP server, but with easier rules. I hope you can record the matches, and invent some backstory ^^. I'd gladly watch such a serie


Basically this yeah x)

Also I think I'd need some handicap for some sort of map or I'd be OP x)


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jakato
post 21 Jan 2018, 23:48
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 13 December 2017
Member No.: 16473



It will be a tricky issue to make things fair when different factions have different numbers of players and different player skills. I really hoped the best players would have a variety of factions they like, so each faction could have a really good player on their side.

The whole map thing is quite flexible. Factions can be removed or merged. Territories and paths between them can be added or removed. Players/sides can be buffed/penalized but there's only so much that you can do to make up for a side with more players. At a certain point getting more points for territories does no good if you can't even intercept all the other players. Imagine your side having to hold off two players while another player is free to run around and get every other territory.

I'm temped to make the rule that there must be equal players per side even if that means a few players get to play on a tiny board. Every "balancing" strategy I can think of for uneven teams is going to cause a problem. An alternate strategy to nerfing teams is to make the board easier to control for the teams with less players but that is tricky to design as well. I'd rather avoid the headache.

For individual player skills a skilled player will be more successful at taking territories from other sides but I think that's fine. As long as we don't end up with one faction full of pros, it shouldn't be a problem. People should get rewarded for their skill, but obviously we don't want a curbstomp where the ECA players are going "oh look, another territory lost. Surprise surprise"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jakato
post 22 Jan 2018, 12:21
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 13 December 2017
Member No.: 16473



I should mention that the territory system requires that you first move onto a territory and then either spend a turn capturing it or win it in a battle with an enemy player. The idea is that you need to build a base on the territory, so either you build one virtually with the "Take Territory" action or you win a match and the base you built to win the match is the base that controls the territory. The result of this system is that it's much easier to intercept players.

Obviously it's great to do clever things like flanking but the idea is that the PvP matches contribute to a greater battle. I want to encourage players to get territory by fighting for it. I wouldn't like to have a troll player running around and forcing the enemy to chase them but never getting to challenge them. I don't really intend for the maps to be large enough to dodge fighting anyway. With 10 players on the example map there is nowhere to move, and plenty of ways to fight.

Attached File  RotR_Example_Tournament_2.png ( 990.83K ) Number of downloads: 2


You may wonder what happens when more than two players end up in a territory. What if a ECA player faces two Russia players? The players will be paired for matches based on the order they take their turns. A player can fight multiple enemies in a territory. We will pretend their subordinates led the battles. A territory can only be captured when one side is left standing on a territory.

A defeated player is evacuated to the friendly territory furtherest from where they lost. If no friendly territories remain, the side is eliminated. If the side is fighting for it's last remaining territory, the player that lost in that territory is eliminated.
Attached File(s)
Attached File  RotR_Example_Tournament_2.png ( 990.83K ) Number of downloads: 2
Attached File  RotR_Example_Tournament_2.png ( 990.83K ) Number of downloads: 3
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20 June 2018 - 16:32