Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Part 7 - Invasion Control gametype | |
| Posted By: pete_the_duck | Date: 3/24/12 3:02 p.m. |
In Response To: Re: Part 7 - Invasion Control gametype (RC Master) : Please explain. I don't understand this. Where do you get weapons from except : from spawn then? What is the point of kill points if capturing three : territories wins the game? Correct and correct. Imagine Invasion Slayer, as it is now, but the random hills are actually territories. Don't get hung up on the word Slayer--I'm using Invasion Slayer as a functioning example, not saying this is a Slayer gametype. You can call it Invasion Control or whatever you want--a name isn't important. You would fight over each territory when it appears, scoring points only by capturing the territory. There could be some weapons on the map, but per the Invasion style, loadouts would escalate after a certain number of territories have been captured. : Doesn't have to be, I just described the most basic structure that a map
: Besides, SMART teams might want to loop around the centre territory, capture
My basic problem with your idea is using captured territories for both scoring and spawn points. I would probably be ok with either of those elements, both not both at the same time. My Invasion Slayer example is just a thinking-out-loud counter-suggestion to your Invasion Control. I'll get into why with the next point.. : In that situation, the team has executed an effective play. Plus, since they
: And as Chris was saying, that type of problem is more down to map-balance and
Yes--but unless a map had all territories perfectly balanced, then I see two unhappy things happening:
You're basically creating a source for significant inbalance in a gametype but using the excuse that the map design will perfectly compensate, or that no compensation is necessary because of skill. It wouldn't always have to play out those ways, but with how critical you've been of the potential pitfalls in existing Reach gametypes, you seem to be brushing this one off a bit too easy IMHO. I just personally feel that having territories that are both scoring elements AND spawn points are a bad idea. I would actually find it really interesting if there was a slayer gametype that had territories that did not count towards the score, but counted as spawn points. These wouldn't lock and could be recaptured by the other team. Scoring would still be based on kills and wouldn't really be unfair, since map control isn't essential to winning slayer--sure, one team would have an advantage in being able to spawn in a bunch of places but they still have to engage you to win. I've been pinned down like that in Team Slayer before and had my team come out victorious, despite the enemy "owning" 75% of the map.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |