Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: I only just caught up | |
| Posted By: RC Master | Date: 4/12/12 9:21 a.m. |
In Response To: I only just caught up (SonGoharotto) : My thoughts in brief: >Headhunter 2.0 : Sounds good to me. : I also remember someone coming up with the idea of everyone cashing in their
I read that too - can't remember what they called it. But then games always go to the same length (to full time even) no matter how badly one side is being beaten - something I was trying to explicitly prevent with these designs. It also makes it highly chaotic and really only dependant on the final minute of gameplay: one team could have an absolute lead (x to 0 skulls) for the entire game, only to be killed 10 seconds before the end of the game and have all of their skulls taken - that might be amazing for the underdogs, but it's going to be frustrating as all hell for the team that was demonstrably better for most of the game. : >Golden Gun
: The Golden Gun is a Pistol by default for MM, but can be set to any other
: Melee with the Golden Gun is also an instant kill, but once you run out of
: The Golden Gun despawns instantly when dropped or if the carrier is killed
Because then you've just utterly broken expectations for that weapon. The point of this design was to explicitly NOT give the carrier an uber-weapon, but give them something that they can actually defend themsevles with, but isn't ideal in any situation. Golden Eye was part of the inspiration, but really it's not like the Golden Gun gametype at all and wasn't meant to be - so I've named it badly. In Golden Eye, the Golden Gun itself was always a 1-shot-kill whereever you encountered it (though you did so rarely) - so expectations for how that weapon behaved were always consistent. Not so in the Halo gametype you're proposing. Your gametype has two further problems:
These are the some of same reasons I initially considered, and then rejected a non-slayer points-for-kills gametype. Score-over-time ensures that things always progress and unless a dominant team can lock down the entire damn map then they're going to hold the Focus Rifle just so the other team doesn't get it and catch up. : >Jugger Gun
Sir, please, the entire multiplayer apart from Invasion is silly in epic proportions. I just felt I could offer an alternative to these less-played gametypes so I did. There is a reason they're in the 'crazy types' section. The 'demonically possessed gun' is just a way to think about it - really it's just as completely arbitray and silly as running around with a man's skull and claiming becuase you've held it longer you're the victor. And then that skull exploding for absolutely no reason. : I think Juggernaut should be about player traits. Greater damage output, more
: To offset the danger of someone with, say, a Sniper Rifle or Rocket Launcher
OK, I think the name is confusing you - this is a team-based gametype that it sourced primarly from Oddball and it's variant Hot Potato. It feels a little like Juggernaut only in that one person will be walking around with a powerful weapon, slowly, and scoring. Also I HATE gametypes that fiddle with traits too much. Being a zombie always fucks me up because the jump is completely off compared to what you've been using. I mean, if you're going to do anything like that, a simpler thing to do (that's just come to me) would be to have the Juggernuat turn into an Elite. Greater height, stronger shields, larger jump, faster, regenerating health - everything you want except the difference is it's not a weirded-out Spartan, but a complete and whole character that you can experience and get used to outside of that one tiny moment inside that one gametype. But even then, if you become the juggernaut in the middle of a crowd you can either be dead instantly or get a ridiculous multi-kill, if you do almost all the damage but don't get the killing blow, you also get nothing - it's really chaotic. : Most importantly, if you're not the Juggernaut, killing anyone other than the
So if you betray someone, you'd have to die yourself before you're allowed to become the Juggernaut and earn points? THAT is silly. Players, if they accidentally betray, are going to just kill themselves (or what, you going to punish them doubly for that?) so they can get the punishment over with. Then you might as well be cutting out the middle man and just kill players instantly if they betray a teammate (CoD 'Ricochet' rules). : >Power King
And this is not KotH: This is Power King. If you want real, pure map control, I think 3-Plot Territories is a much better candidate anyway. Complicated, yes, Ok - a fair criticism. : Unfortunately, maps tend to be arena shaped, with high points looking
: Maybe just being in the hill doesn't earn points. You have to get kills from
Still going to suffer from the non-capture problem. One of the reasons of tying the kill locations to weapons was to incentivise it - it ended up more like a single-location Territires I suppose since they would then lock - but that's so you don't just dip in, grab the weapon and then proceed to ignore the objective again. : >Infection 2.0
Multi-kills and sprees shouldn't give extra points towards the score since they mean basically nothing.
If you're talking about Killing Sprees as in 5 kills in a row, they're exceptionally hard for Zombies and the same principle still applies. Briefly, the scoring system I constructed for Zombies was primarily based upon time:
This would actually turn the zombies into the hunters in scoring at least. : >Oddball 2.0
: Holding the skull earns points as you hack it, but dropping it resets your
Interesting. I'll have to think about this one. Though I feel already that drops resetting your progress would make it so that the score would be less less likely to progress, and teams could abuse that by repeatedly dropping it intentionally to drag out the game.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |