Feature idea: Victory Conditions

[tflst5]

This is just a thought - i realize that the mod is going to stay true to the original game and i appreciate that. One thing that i would have like to see in the original renegade was a minor expansion on the victory conditions that we could adjust.

We could effectively disable Renegade's point system by selecting no time limit to our games. That forced opposing teams to destroy each other bases to win. But that also wasn't always ideal. As many of you know - from playing on marathon servers - the no time limit games can go on for many hours. When your hosting and organizing a clan match this isn't what your after. People have schedules and most can't stay on for 4-5 hours at a time. What i'd like to see is another option that we could use to determine a winner within a time limit. Something like

1. Winner is the side that has destroyed the most buildings within the time limit. The tiebreaker is points

would be pretty awesome. We would have an option away from the Renegade system that tends to reward base/harvie camping over base destroying.

Maybe this is something already in the mod. I don't know

[Xaivor44]

I really like this idea as an option to the host to choose from before the game starts. Adds more complexity, tactics, and teamwork as opposed to just point whoring.

[JCLA3114]

I also agree. Keep up with the good ideas

[klote2314]

Combat Command mode

this game mode also needs bigger maps in order to be played correctly

and multiple tiberium fields

1 commander (depending on the rank points he got for evey game he won and lost ore voted for just like BF2 )

2 sargeants (second and third highest rank ore voted for just like in BF2)

this mode will include capturing certain points like tiberium cristal fields just like capturing a flag in BF2 when standing near tiberium field and ellimenated all enemy near the spot you will able to build a tiberium refinary once you captured the tiberium field the more tiberium fields u captured to credits your team will earn

you can also loze these spots to your enemy

the commanders options in the game

each commander can build refinaries guard towers and weapon crates and drop certain types of vehicles anywhere on the map

the sargeants can only drop weapon crates and certain types of vehicles

if you still dont understand what type of game mode im talking about you should play the game Battle Zone 2

[R315r4z0r]

I like the idea of victory conditions, but I don't like the suggested one.

You're basically taking away a major key initiative from the game play. People will lose interest in the game if they simply have less buildings than the other team. Just because you're team has less buildings, doesn't mean they are necessarily bad or that they are losing. The team with less buildings at one point in the match can come back and win a match with points. Taking points out just takes away a lot of teamwork and makes the gameplay stale.

Personally, I happen to enjoy marathon games that go on for hours upon hours. If someone can't fit it into their schedule, then that's their problem. It's only a game!

[An4x1mandr0s]

^^ I agree with that post

oh i know add a sort of pedestal that you can oh wait... :lol:

maybe move the pedestal to a new location? like instead of being in a building there is a sort of bunker or something that has the ped inside/over it , i think something like this is preferable as an optional victory condition

[JCLA3114]

QUOTE (klote2314 @ Sep 4 2009, 01:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Combat Command mode

this game mode also needs bigger maps in order to be played correctly
and multiple tiberium fields
1 commander (depending on the rank points he got for evey game he won and lost ore voted for just like BF2 )
2 sargeants (second and third highest rank ore voted for just like in BF2)

this mode will include capturing certain points like tiberium cristal fields just like capturing a flag in BF2 when standing near tiberium field and ellimenated all enemy near the spot you will able to build a tiberium refinary once you captured the tiberium field the more tiberium fields u captured to credits your team will earn
you can also loze these spots to your enemy

the commanders options in the game

each commander can build refinaries guard towers and weapon crates and drop certain types of vehicles anywhere on the map
the sargeants can only drop weapon crates and certain types of vehicles


if you still dont understand what type of game mode im talking about you should play the game Battle Zone 2[/b]

I think that the refineries should be already built , and we just capture them.
Also they should be destructible.

[An4x1mandr0s]

That would be too much work , something simpler that can be done in regular C&C mode plz

[tflst5]

I figured the building condition would be fairly easy to implement. There are other alternatives that would be better but might require more work for a developer.

Beacon pedestal is similar, but an unrealistic achievement in competitive clan games. In all the non-marathon clan games i've played over the years i've only seen a successful beacon pedestal happen one time. Its more common in marathons, but very rare in the typical 30 minute match. The objective is just too easy to defend against, and in a point battles it is actually a bigger risk because you give the other team free points for disarming your beacon.

A building condition wouldn't eliminate base camping, but it would create a wider range of strategies. Teams could opt for a riskier base rush instead of a conservative base camp or harvie camp. After all, one successful base rush give them a 1-0 lead in the game and forces the other team to counter.

[klote2314]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Sep 4 2009, 03:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like the idea of victory conditions, but I don't like the suggested one.

You're basically taking away a major key initiative from the game play. People will lose interest in the game if they simply have less buildings than the other team. Just because you're team has less buildings, doesn't mean they are necessarily bad or that they are losing. The team with less buildings at one point in the match can come back and win a match with points. Taking points out just takes away a lot of teamwork and makes the gameplay stale.

Personally, I happen to enjoy marathon games that go on for hours upon hours. If someone can't fit it into their schedule, then that's their problem. It's only a game![/b]

you can limit the buildings per sargeant
and yes just like in an rts when you have no refinaries you will have an dissadvantage.
but hey dont you already have that when you destroy the enemy harvester in an normal renegade game?
all you gotta do is defend your refinaries be smart and kill theirs to decrease their money income and you will slowly kill your enemy team

this doesnt mean that you cant have long marathon games if you play it right and protect your refinaries you can play for ours

[R315r4z0r]

QUOTE (klote2314 @ Sep 5 2009, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you can limit the buildings per sargeant
and yes just like in an rts when you have no refinaries you will have an dissadvantage.
but hey dont you already have that when you destroy the enemy harvester in an normal renegade game?
all you gotta do is defend your refinaries be smart and kill theirs to decrease their money income and you will slowly kill your enemy team

this doesnt mean that you cant have long marathon games if you play it right and protect your refinaries you can play for ours[/b]

I didn't say anything about building limits, refineries or economy... so what exactly are you replying to?

[dustzone]

As far as extra buildings/refineries, I figure a good idea would be to have a neutral building somewhere centrally on the map. The team that conquers the building would if it is was a refinery for instance get increased income, but also have their units stretched due to the more buildings to defend. Other buildings could offer different advantages (think Communications Center or Bunker (with turrets/guns to man)).

[omega79]

i like it the way it is ... the idea sounds good at first but if you think about it ... hmmm ...

btw ... marathon roxx ...

it happened i joined a server played 2 hours and had to leave for something ... but when i returned after couple of hours the same map was still running ...

and not just the map ... the same match was running for hours ...

once iwas in a game what almost run 24h, a server crash did quit that game if i remember right (i wasnt ther all the time, but one player was ... sadly i forgot the name)

[An4x1mandr0s]

i think its good , just needs to be tested and balanced

[R315r4z0r]

I think it be cool if they thought up and calculated special 'marathon mode' maps. They would be larger than normal AOW maps, but have the same sort of choke point style that allows matches to run for hours. That way the game wouldn't become stale on a smaller map.

It would have to be designed the perfect way to make it large and incorporate battle choke points but small enough for people not to get aggravated at long hikes/drives.

[An4x1mandr0s]

... why do i suddenly get the urge to remake the second GDI map from Tiberian dawn into something for this ?

[Demigan]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Sep 7 2009, 04:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it be cool if they thought up and calculated special 'marathon mode' maps. They would be larger than normal AOW maps, but have the same sort of choke point style that allows matches to run for hours. That way the game wouldn't become stale on a smaller map.

It would have to be designed the perfect way to make it large and incorporate battle choke points but small enough for people not to get aggravated at long hikes/drives.[/b]

Simple: give infantry the ability through tunnels to reach everything quickly, from the enemy base to key choke points. Then make several ways for vehicles to reach a chokepoint, have 4 chokepoints (for example), one at each base and 2 in between. That way it won't be that they are either camping at either base but more dynamic with infantry battles mattering throughout the game, but not dominating it.
For instance by making sure that only vehicles can destroy buildings. That way, infantry will be key to break a chokehold by taking the fast ways through tunnels towards them/behind them, but vehicles must be key to base destruction. In that case, vehicle production facilities must be build most back from harm to prevent one team winning due to destruction of air/wf. Otherwise, one building like the pp can be destroyed by infantry, but easily defended so that infantry can still win a map but does not guarantee victory.

But who's nuts enough to make something like that?

[An4x1mandr0s]

...someone that will make a Command & Conquer mod for that !

no really guys this (while it might be cool) it's asking too much ;/

[tflst5]

Marathon games work because they force teams into forming a strategy. Pulling up in front of the base and shooting for points isn't the only option like it is in the timed games. Timed games are flawed for this reason. In a marathon you have to attack the base or place a beacon on the pedestal. Shooting buildings gets you money, but ultimately it does nothing if the other team is repairing it. It was funny in the first couple of marathon games i hosted to watch the teams eventually realize that they needed to form some kind of strategy. Sometimes it would take hours for this to happen, but it always happened or the marathon never ended.

Putting in victory conditions for the timed games would give them some of flavor that the marathon games have. Right now a timed game comes down to which team is able to point whore more effectively. Base rushing never happens in competitive games because its risky to give up field position for little payoff. Just camp the base and rake in the points. A couple of different options would add some more layers to the gameplay. Building win is one idea, what if you did the same for harvesters? (of course prevent players from blocking the harvester first) Which ever team kills 10 harvesters first wins. Theres a bunch of different ideas you could do. Having more options is nice as long as they are easy to program in.

[klote2314]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Sep 6 2009, 01:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't say anything about building limits, refineries or economy... so what exactly are you replying to?[/b]

im trying to say that people wouldent leave you already have this problem if you loze your barracks ore your weapons factory all it would do is put you in a dissadvantage i have seen many battles won without a refinary ore a barracks this would just improve and make the game's longer bigger battles it would take hours just to finnish 1 battle lol

this would also improve strategic battle tactics and team play
i dont think it would hurt the team play at all i think it would improve it kamiux and st0rm already hosted theese kinde of server and they where played in 24/7 and yes there was team play

all you need is a good commanding system in order to pass orders you might wanna include some way of message popups just for 1 team you know just like in renegade we used that to mass attack

btw if there is no teamplay what so ever in 1 team then its the fault of the commander he aint doing his job obviously