Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Warfare Design Proposal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Warfare Design Proposal

    One of the biggest challenges that the Unreal Tournament Community (the players) have faced over the years is the fragmentation of the community brought about by epic's myriad gametypes and third-party mod/mutator development. So even when the game was very active, alot of people were playing different games.

    In hopes of promoting greater unity, while also delivering *FUN* to a broad audience and playerbase, I propose the following guidelines for Unreal Warfare gameplay:

    1) For each team base and for SOME of the resource nodes - create INDOOR (TDM / CTF Style) "Bunker" environments with objectives like "capture/defend" resources.

    2) For the spaces between those bunkers, utilize OUTDOOR (ONS/VCTF style) environments with similar of node/resource control.

    For a model - look at UT:XMP's gameplay - the demo map almost does this PERFECTLY.

    With those basic principles, it should be possible to build a gametype that caters to virtually all of what UT has been, while still advancing the brand, the game and the design. And depending on map scale, you could have successful 8v8 to 16v16 games and beyond.

    What I would like to see in Warfare is a gametype that not only brings in new players, but also provides an over-arching summary of the UT experience to date - where skills learned in Warfare could be applied to the other gametypes, be they vCTF or TDM.




    Now certainly Ventrillo / TS would need to be TWEAKED to allow effective communication amongst 12 people (maybe multiple broadcast modes, that are broken down into SQUAD (4 man group) and TEAM (12 man channel) so you could send the proper info to the proper recipient).

    p.s. it would be a bonus if you could build in elements that also appease your former assault audience

    #2
    I started reading this ready to curse you for your half baked idea... But it's actually a really good idea.

    I like it... Epic, take notice.

    Comment


      #3
      Some ONS maps are way ahead of you. There are even some ONS maps that have no vehicles.

      Comment


        #4
        Interesting concept chu. I am just hoping the gametype doesn't suck.

        As for the rest, IMHO you will pretty much always get the vehicular players branching out into the other gametypes as opposed to the other way around.

        For the most part though you will still see most folks sticking to their favorite gametype.


        Originally posted by EntropicLqd View Post
        Some ONS maps are way ahead of you. There are even some ONS maps that have no vehicles.
        ONS-Grendlekeep doesn't count

        Comment


          #5
          decent idea, I wasn't a big fan on ONS after I got competetive with TAM, since there was very little upclose killing in ONS. Also didn't like how 80% of the people on the server had no idea what to do.

          Comment


            #6
            It seems like a decent guideline for custom map development, anyway. This will let the DMers stay indoors, and the Onslaghters stay outdoors with the vehicles. ONS players will venture indoors at their peril, while DMers will avoid the outdoors as much as possible. Nice concept. Wonder how useful it is, given the gameplay of Warfare?

            Comment


              #7
              Based on what's been seen of Warfare to date, it does *appear* that Epic is trying to cross the divide as your posts suggests.

              Examples:
              The *Orb* objects/assest that can be picked up at some nodes as seen at E3
              Nodes that are inside sturctures that require ground based attack

              As others have mentioned it all comes down to map design as much as game mechanic. All things are possible if the mapper makes it so.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Spec7re View Post
                decent idea, I wasn't a big fan on ONS after I got competetive with TAM, since there was very little upclose killing in ONS. Also didn't like how 80% of the people on the server had no idea what to do.
                You are playing on the wrong servers. If you are in NA you need to play on SCK... then again only at certain time when the clanners are on.

                Competition and in pugs

                I am an above average player and any other than what I've listed I dominate.

                ya know chu you keep this up you are going to get a gb2ina tag

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by chu::LOB:: View Post
                  One of the biggest challenges that the Unreal Tournament Community (the players) have faced over the years is the fragmentation of the community brought about by epic's myriad gametypes and third-party mod/mutator development. So even when the game was very active, alot of people were playing different games.

                  In hopes of promoting greater unity, while also delivering *FUN* to a broad audience and playerbase, I propose the following guidelines for Unreal Warfare gameplay:

                  1) For each team base and for SOME of the resource nodes - create INDOOR (TDM / CTF Style) "Bunker" environments with objectives like "capture/defend" resources.

                  2) For the spaces between those bunkers, utilize OUTDOOR (ONS/VCTF style) environments with similar of node/resource control.
                  then you get things being very repetetive if you are always inside for a core. a mixture of indoor and outdoor would be best.

                  What I would like to see in Warfare is a gametype that not only brings in new players, but also provides an over-arching summary of the UT experience to date - where skills learned in Warfare could be applied to the other gametypes, be they vCTF or TDM.
                  yes we really need to prepair people for the rest of the game. it would be like sending the kiddies to school to prepair them for the real world /sarcasm

                  your idea is unessecary. You cannot expose everyone to everything and expect to have a good game. things would get watered down and the entire game woudl suffer from that. if someone wishes to branch out then they can take the initiative. forcing it upon people is never a good solution.

                  Now certainly Ventrillo / TS would need to be TWEAKED to allow effective communication amongst 12 people (maybe multiple broadcast modes, that are broken down into SQUAD (4 man group) and TEAM (12 man channel) so you could send the proper info to the proper recipient).
                  show personal restraint? dont comm everything unless it is incredibly important. but what you are talking about CHU has nothing to do with epic so :\

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I love how people think that Epic is going to screw up. THEY'RE NOT.

                    2k4 ONS was NOT made by Epic. Hell, 2k* wasn't made by Epic (they just fixed things in 2k4 to make it less horrible). This is what contributed to 2k* being the least popular game in the series.

                    The game is being made by Epic and not Digital Extremes. Warfare is going to rock and the game is going to rock.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by ChaosGrape View Post
                      I love how people think that Epic is going to screw up. THEY'RE NOT.

                      2k4 ONS was NOT made by Epic. Hell, 2k* wasn't made by Epic (they just fixed things in 2k4 to make it less horrible). This is what contributed to 2k* being the least popular game in the series.

                      The game is being made by Epic and not Digital Extremes. Warfare is going to rock and the game is going to rock.
                      DE did NOT make UT 2003/4. They just made some maps. I don't know how you could think Epic didn't make their own game :/.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I do like vehicles, but I hope they only put a small amount in warfare. The tanks in AS-RobotFactory were fine because you needed them in order to get the objective, the ion tank in glacier was fun at first, but now it's just ****ing annoying tbh. The car in junk was fine as that's what 'made' the map ofc.
                        Now in all of those there's a rly small amount of vehicles used in the map. For some reason I'm imagining warfare having about 5 vehicles on each team for several objectives. I know warfare is not AS, but I also rly hope it stays much closer to AS than ONS (since there is still an ONS in the game).

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Worst idea ever.

                          If you can't use both vehicles and weapons as the situation requires, don't play a mode that has both.

                          If you only like vehicles play vDM or whatever crazy **** people will come up with. If you only like weapons, play TDM/CTF.

                          It's as retarded as suggesting that TDM maps have enclosed areas where you can only use the Instanoob gun and there are no pickups of any sort...

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Epic should focus on providing maps with varying playstyles. Let the community agonize over which is best.

                            UT2004 has only three types of ONS maps: small with good flow (Frostbite, Primeval), big with good flow (Dawn) and big with **** flow (all others, with default link setups). That's not a great deal of choice.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Ummz you guys are like a link behind right?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X