Victory flags, other goals and time limit
Status: Inactive
Brought to you by:
mcwizard
Menu
▾
▴
#45 Victory flags, other goals and time limit
Matti Kuokkanen here. Around here I have registered
myself as Isojalka. Anyway I have some things I want to
tell you about.
I have seen whine about campers and jumpers. I think
best way to solve those problems is to take example
from other strategy (or tactic) games.
In many other strategy games there are other goals
than destroy all enemies. Like destroy something,
capture and hold something, defend something etc. In
addition there are time limits which force attacking
player (or AI) to attack instead sit tight.
In Combat Mission 2: Barbarossa to Berlin is possible
create custom missions bit same way as in MM.NET.
There are defined parameters which may affect to
terrain (hills, trees, humidity etc.), which side attacks,
and of course pick the units. When ready, game picks
(or generates) map which match to parameters, place
victory flags and sides. This works great.
In MM.NET most of the parameters would be as they are
right now: attacking player attacks with some BV and
someone choose to defend. There would be only few
maps available per planet depending terrain of the planet
(does Dustball have any trees?).
So if there are victory flags and turn limit in conquer,
attacking player MUST attack and defending player can
stay still (if so chooses) and defend. There would be no
camping on the attacking side, there would be no
stalemate and there would be no need to chase down
last jumping Spider or Phoenix Hawk. Side who has best
control over victory flags in end of the turns wins.
In addition this would add new dimensions to
raids. 'Mechs storm in, grab component crates, get to
the Hell out of the map - or maybe even to pickup point
ala MechCommander. I don't know how 'Mech raid works
in CBT rules, but APC carrying MechWarriors to 'Mech
yard, MWs climb to 'Mechs and get them out. Delay
raid... how about blowing things (factories) up? SRM
Carrier would do it.
What is it going to be? Too complicate? Too fancy? Not
fancy enough?
Logged In: YES
user_id=681274
Even through I like the idea, there are several problems
with it.
- ELO: You may not want to inbalance the fight by giving one
side an advantage during fight. If an attacker has "only" to
reach capture flags, he may get an advantage. That will
break the current system of deciding the players strength
based on ELO. Yet very much suggestions were rejected
because it would give some side any advantage...
- Interoperability between MegaMek and MegaMekNET: We, the
coders of MegaMekNET would have to change the source code of
MegaMek (the ingame battle engine). Traditionally there is a
mistrust between us and the MM-guys ;-|.
- Balancing: It would be a hell to manually balance the
thing out.
- No BattleTech anymore: Most of us want to play BattleTech.
And this means firing each other mechs, not running with a
LCT-horde around and grab flags. Although this could be fun
for some, others would not like it. If you make it a part of
the blinding battle system, you force people to do such
non-classical battles.
- Quite a lot work: It is not easy. Not even close to easy
to code I think. I am not going to do it...