New Game Mode(s)

[Samual]

- Introduction -
Recently i've been pondering over the idea of creating a new game mode for Nexuiz. Mainly from ideas other people have been giving me for predator type game modes. Today, I want to overlook these ideas and see which ones you like most. Since there are several variations of each of these game modes, I would like it if you comment and vote for which game mode you like best. After all, it's the communities choice whether they want to play it or not. So lets begin, shall we?

Note: Don't post or vote if you don't have anything constructive to say please.

- Proposals -
#1: Head Hunt / AKA Juggernaut
Although rather simple, this is my favorite of the ideas as it presents a fair game, whereas some of the other ideas are ruined when pinned with an odd number of players. As for execution, this is generally how the game mode would work: There is a player labeled as target (randomly) at the start of the match, this person is the target of all other people in the server (non-targets). Non-targets have the goal of killing the target, and when they do they become the target and the original target becomes a non-target (Sort of a tag game). As for scores (These are subject to change), when a non-target kills a target, he gets 10 points. However, when a target kills a non-target, he gets 20 points. But this is where it gets interesting: Targets have more health (25% more) than non-targets (Due to disagreement, i've decided this could be controlled via a cvar). Of course the game mode would go until X score. Now the thing that makes this better than most the others is that it's always fair, even when there is an odd amount of people. I still don't know how weapons would be managed, so post your opinions on weapons.

#2: Assassination
This is how it works: Every person is assigned their OWN target. Targets are chosen in a "wait your turn" basis, so if you die you have to wait for someone else to die in order for a target to free up. This makes the game unfair if you have an odd number players, as you'll have to wait for someone to leave or someone to join before you can play. I don't like this method, but it's open for discussion.

#3: Zombie / AKA Assimilation
Essentially, there are two teams.. Zombie, and non-zombie. The teams are split evenly as best as possible, and zombies have the same attack power as non-zombie (Still debating this... do they have melee? Special weapons? Etc). Using this method, when a zombie kills a non-zombie, that non-zombie becomes a zombie and joins the zombie team. In the same way, when a non-zombie kills a zombie, the zombie becomes a non-zombie. (Or does it just die? Debate!). I like this method, but it could be unfair at points because zombies COULD have different attacks.

#4: Zombie Master / AKA Infection
This is where things get complex..... The idea was presented by morphed, and is a pretty darn good idea. Essentially, at the beginning of every match/round, one person out of the game is picked as a "zombie master" - This zombie master has stronger stats (We need to think up some good defaults!!!). And when he kills a non-zombie, that non-zombie becomes a zombie slave. Zombies win by making all non-zombies into zombie slaves. However, non-zombies win only by killing the zombie master, as zombie slaves don't turn back into non-zombies. (Confused? Good.. This is a fantastic idea.. suggestions welcome, and all the things I said are pretty changeable)

EDIT: All of these could be played in rounds.... This way matches don't end too quickly.

These are just some ideas that we have thought of, and i'm interested in taking a look at them and asking your opinions about them..

- Development -
Since most of these game modes are REALLY good, there has been discussion about not only making one... but 2 or 3. I support this... although I'm probably going to do most if not all the programming for these game modes. The problem is i'm not entirely sure how to make a full game mode yet. Because of this, don't expect these game modes to be showing up immediately.. Possibly 2.6, MAYBE 2.5.3. Thanks to Blub though, i'll probably be able to use his Git repo instead of SVN to update it, this way we don't break SVN when messing with things.

[Blµb]

I wanna vote for #2 and #4

[MaKR]

#1 - This idea is great, could be worked with a bit though. I heard mention of "kill the fc" where everyone kills the fc. The downside I see to this scoring system is that if based on kills while the target may be difficult to make equal, as dm would be far more balanced of a match while the same people will become target time and time again (I'm guessing this as a rune-type game where whoever has the target rune is the target). This could be improved if scoring was based on carry time as opposed to kills - more of stealing the flag and keeping it. Undoubtedly the target will have to kill to stay alive, so it's more like inverse tag.

#2 - This is far too unbalanced, and I think a real scoring system would be impossible to agree on.

#3 - Doesn't sound too intriguing, and is more like a tdm where death causes you to switch teams.

#4 - I'm imagining the best way to pick the zombie master is start out regular dm-style, then 1st to 1 frag becomes zombie master. Their stats go up and health jumps back to start, if not 50% higher, and their ammo comes back. They could possibly even get new weapons without getting pickups. (possibly even all weps?) If the zombie master kills all humans, then they win, and whichever 1 human kills the zombie master wins. Sounds kind of like a dm combined with lms, I like this a lot.

[Samual]

#1 - This idea is great, could be worked with a bit though. I heard mention of "kill the fc" where everyone kills the fc. The downside I see to this scoring system is that if based on kills while the target may be difficult to make equal, as dm would be far more balanced of a match while the same people will become target time and time again (I'm guessing this as a rune-type game where whoever has the target rune is the target). This could be improved if scoring was based on carry time as opposed to kills - more of stealing the flag and keeping it. Undoubtedly the target will have to kill to stay alive, so it's more like inverse tag.

#2 - This is far too unbalanced, and I think a real scoring system would be impossible to agree on.

#3 - Doesn't sound too intriguing, and is more like a tdm where death causes you to switch teams.

#4 - I'm imagining the best way to pick the zombie master is start out regular dm-style, then 1st to 1 frag becomes zombie master. Their stats go up and health jumps back to start, if not 50% higher, and their ammo comes back. They could possibly even get new weapons without getting pickups. (possibly even all weps?) If the zombie master kills all humans, then they win, and whichever 1 human kills the zombie master wins. Sounds kind of like a dm combined with lms, I like this a lot.

All of these except #3 are DM.. #3 would be a form of TDM.

[Flying Steel]

I would like to suggest another gametype- Survival.

All players and server bots spawn on the same team and can't respawn.

"Hordes" of enemy bots spawn on the other team and respawn unlimitedly.

The players are ranked by how long each survived, or if more than one survived for the same amount of time in the case of the server using a set timer for the match, by how many kills the survivors got.

When the game is played on a ctf or onslaught map each team spawns at its base while on any other map everyone spawns randomly.

#3: Zombie
Essentially, there are two teams.. Zombie, and non-zombie. The teams are split evenly as best as possible, and zombies have the same attack power as non-zombie (Still debating this... do they have melee? Special weapons? Etc). Using this method, when a zombie kills a non-zombie, that non-zombie becomes a zombie and joins the zombie team. In the same way, when a non-zombie kills a zombie, the zombie becomes a non-zombie. (Or does it just die? Debate!). I like this method, but it could be unfair at points because zombies COULD have different attacks.

It sounds like the best way to do this zombie mode is for there to be no designated "zombie team", instead every time someone dies he goes over to the other team and the game is over when everyone is on the remaining team.

And then players are scored individiually based on how long they were on the winning team for. So no matter what side you are on at the moment, you want to stay alive as long as possible and give the team you are currently on the best chance of success possible.

So that way it should be a very fair game.


And I vote for both of these suggested gametypes!

[Sven]

dont read but all all sounds interesting

[Samual]

I would like to suggest another gametype- Survival.

All players and server bots spawn on the same team and can't respawn.

"Hordes" of enemy bots spawn on the other team and respawn unlimitedly.

The players are ranked by how long each survived, or if more than one survived for the same amount of time in the case of the server using a set timer for the match, by how many kills the survivors got.

When the game is played on a ctf or onslaught map each team spawns at its base while on any other map everyone spawns randomly.

#3: Zombie
Essentially, there are two teams.. Zombie, and non-zombie. The teams are split evenly as best as possible, and zombies have the same attack power as non-zombie (Still debating this... do they have melee? Special weapons? Etc). Using this method, when a zombie kills a non-zombie, that non-zombie becomes a zombie and joins the zombie team. In the same way, when a non-zombie kills a zombie, the zombie becomes a non-zombie. (Or does it just die? Debate!). I like this method, but it could be unfair at points because zombies COULD have different attacks.

It sounds like the best way to do this zombie mode is for there to be no designated "zombie team", instead every time someone dies he goes over to the other team and the game is over when everyone is on the remaining team.

And then players are scored individiually based on how long they were on the winning team for. So no matter what side you are on at the moment, you want to stay alive as long as possible and give the team you are currently on the best chance of success possible.

So that way it should be a very fair game.


And I vote for both of these suggested gametypes!

Ehh... The idea you suggested sounds tricky at best (And impossible for me to do).. And we probably aren't going to do the assimilation/zombie game mode. I mean the change you suggested to it sounds like LMS in and of itself.

[divVerent]

#1 - Target should not be weaker, but instead shown to everyone (including health) with a sprite and radar. Otherwise nice, but scoring sort of makes no sense.

#2 - As an alternative idea for Assassination, the waiting time can be eliminated by Tribes 2's method: Targets are sorted in a random order (either globally or per player, both would work), and after killing a target, a player gets assigned the next one in his list - until he has killed every other player once. This has the difference that often, you are targeted by more than one hunter, or by none at all, while in UT's Assassination mod, you were always targeted by exactly one hunter. Yet another way to support UT's assassination style is using no waiting time, but not immediately assigning a target after respawn, but giving more score for killing your hunters.

UT's mode would work more like this:

Players: A B C D E, "->" = attacks

Some random pairing at start of match:
A->B
B->D
C->E
D->C
E->A

Assume E killed A successfully. Then E needs a new target, and A needs to respawn. A's previous target, B, is now free, so E will get that one!
A->
B->D
C->E
D->C
E->B

Problem is now that A has no target yet - he'd have to target himself. Also, A has no hunter at the moment. In UT Assassins, A now has to wait for someone ELSE to die, for example B. If you do not want this, you can make A spawn but wait for someone else to die, and then get him as target. During that time, A could be given weaker weapons, but score for killing anyone.

Tribes2's method avoids this problem entirely, but by allowing a player to be targeted by more than one enemy. A viable option, I think. Note that targets are never told who is targeting them (in UT, they are told only upon receiving damage, in Tribes, never at all).

#3 is bad, as once a tiny difference is between the teams, the team difference will increase over and over.

#4 is entirely unbalanced, but could be done the Assault way - each player gets to be the zombie master once, and it matters which zombie master could hold out longest.

[Samual]

#1 - Target should not be weaker, but instead shown to everyone (including health) with a sprite and radar. Otherwise nice, but scoring sort of makes no sense.

Well, we already decided on IRC a few things:
- The target has more health (and possibly gives more damage from weapons) than non-targets
- Target glows (Like if he had strength/sheild)
- When a target dies, a waypoint is spawned at X location for a few seconds explaining this.

#2 - As an alternative idea for Assassination, the waiting time can be eliminated by Tribes 2's method: Targets are sorted in a random order (either globally or per player, both would work), and after killing a target, a player gets assigned the next one in his list - until he has killed every other player once. This has the difference that often, you are targeted by more than one hunter, or by none at all, while in UT's Assassination mod, you were always targeted by exactly one hunter. Yet another way to support UT's assassination style is using no waiting time, but not immediately assigning a target after respawn, but giving more score for killing your hunters.

UT's mode would work more like this:

Players: A B C D E, "->" = attacks

Some random pairing at start of match:
A->B
B->D
C->E
D->C
E->A

Assume E killed A successfully. Then E needs a new target, and A needs to respawn. A's previous target, B, is now free, so E will get that one!
A->
B->D
C->E
D->C
E->B

Problem is now that A has no target yet - he'd have to target himself. Also, A has no hunter at the moment. In UT Assassins, A now has to wait for someone ELSE to die, for example B. If you do not want this, you can make A spawn but wait for someone else to die, and then get him as target. During that time, A could be given weaker weapons, but score for killing anyone.

Tribes2's method avoids this problem entirely, but by allowing a player to be targeted by more than one enemy. A viable option, I think. Note that targets are never told who is targeting them (in UT, they are told only upon receiving damage, in Tribes, never at all).

I don't know which method I like best, actually. But I do like both of those a lot.

#3 is bad, as once a tiny difference is between the teams, the team difference will increase over and over.

I can't say I disagree.

#4 is entirely unbalanced, but could be done the Assault way - each player gets to be the zombie master once, and it matters which zombie master could hold out longest.

Well I actually do disagree here (About it being unbalanced), as the zombie master has special abilities and extra health. The zombie slaves maintain the abilities (To a smaller extent) -- However, have a lot less health than non-zombies.. Which means they die quickly. Also, they do less damage (Or they only have melee attacks?... still being debated)

As for scoring, the idea is that you earn points from the entire thing.. And yes, it does have one round per-person. (Could be a long match if you have 8 people though)

[FruitieX]

#1 and #4, voted #1 though