Assault [PE vs PE]

  • May 30, 2016 at 3:13 PM #131307
    SergeDavidSergeDavid
    Moderator
    Colonel
    Total posts : 3065

    So this thread got me going… http://steamcommunity.com/app/280440/discussions/0/364042703863651359/

    Bombdog Studios [developer] May 27 @ 10:54pm
    There will also be dedicated game modes that have options for PvE. Assault mode is still in the planning phase, but could be a PvE mode and Story mode will always be co-op PvE.

    So now to get down and dirty with Player and Environment vs Player and Environment theory crafting.

    The basics of Assault is one side is attacking while the other side defends a set of key buildings. These buildings is the “Base” which is a large dominating building that has a TON of health such as 100,000 for example. and the auxiliary base buildings of 5k to 15k health so that you can’t win with just spawn base dialing using howitzers.

    The defenders have a wide selection of filler buildings / alternative objectives “such as barracks which grant cheaper bot upkeep fees unless it is destroyed” and walls so attackers need to fight their way to the base to deal with the auxiliary buildings with any sort of assurance for a win.

    The defenders would get natural turrets and landmine fields to help defend with but for attackers they could be granted little “AV’s” aka Assault Vehicles which the easiest way to picture them is Turrets on a moving chassis like a mini hover / quadtroped / reverse joint that spawns in waves or on map launch “depending on how many you “buy to battle with””.

    I guess the easiest way to picture it is trying to siege high ground on dota2. Most of the human players will be focusing on the other human players but with all the craziness going on with the cannon fodder on both sides it’ll give an interesting effect.

    I can also picture something like in a 24 player server we’d end up with 10 defenders vs 14 attackers or maybe worse odds depending on how reinforcing mid match works and how drawn out these battles will become since we’d want the time to win as attackers being fairly long while time to win for defenders is either killing all attackers or if there is a time limit when it expires after 30~ minutes.

    "I think you are going to like what I am doing even more than I like your comparison tool and I like your tool a LOT"

    September 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM #141133
    AxleNo7
    Participant
    First Lieutenant
    Total posts : 865

    gonna bring this thread back to life after serge, rusty, and i discussed it again today. it probably be a great time to bring back the assault mode concept just to help with player retention, something thatll keep users engaged and rewarded.

    id like the gameplay design to be more inline with unreal tournaments assault mode, wolfensteins enemy territory, and quake wars enemy territory. same basic concept as above; a defender versus attack situation, defenders own most of the map with many natural defenses and buildings and objectives to protect, attackers are running missions against the defenders trying to advance one objective at a time like: pacify the township, intercept the enemy convoy, defend against enemy counter attack, destroy enemy gate, disable enemy static defenses, raze the enemy FOB. just at the slow pace we know and love from MAV, essentially a combination of arena and siege. with objective based gameplay but with respawns, or even limited lives.

    wed need alot more static assets to actually make this satisfying to look at, but with the advent of tewdrig valley i think it be a perfect map to set this all up on. of course balancing is gonna take ages, but thats what were here for

    September 23, 2017 at 2:02 PM #141136
    Rusty ShacklefordRusty Shackleford
    Participant
    Master Sergeant
    Total posts : 244

    This is a quick and dirty co-op mode meant to be unique from the current death match/siege game modes while also avoiding major overhauls, assets and systems added in order to get it working:

    1. The pre-game lobby would remain the same, but all bots and players are forced to opposite teams.

    2. All players spawn in at the same location and have one life. The AI respawn at the objectives once the previous one has been completed by the players.

    3. The map has a set of (randomly placed?) objectives labeled alphabetically that the players must reach. For easy initial implementation, all of these objectives can be “destroy the base”, but more varied ones can be added later on.

    4. Players win once all objectives have been cleared. They lose if they all die.

    Resupply can be left up to the players, or the objectives can have a repair shed.

    If the asymmetrical respawn system is too much to implement, then both sides can just respawn every time an objective is taken. Either that or both sides can just respawn an unlimited amount. Insurgency has the AI respawning infinitely with the players only respawning upon taking an objective.

    The newest map, Tegid valley, would be perfect for this as it has a huge play area and small clusters of buildings all over:

    I’ve been talking about a mode like this for a long time, as it helps with player retention in other games. It’s especially appealing to small discord/teamspeak groups that aren’t into playing competitively against other people.

    Example of how this gamemode plays out in another game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH6uxFAumow

    M.A.V. HD on Youtube and @RustEShacky on Twitter

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.