June 1, 2005 at 5:27 pm #3442
Feature requests in no particular order…
1) Wagering. At start of round let users place bets on who will get the most kills, who wins the round, etc. This adds a dimension to the game where you may maneuver to get Player X into a position to win, even if it means ignoring your own survival.
2) Location Selection. At start of round, users pick where on the island their tanks will be positioned. Players choose blindly and all is revealed when play begins.
3) Line of Sight. You only see tanks and terrain that are within your field of vision. Introduce new reconnaissance tools to be purchased that reveal the map to you. Give all tanks a very basic replenishing reconnaissance tool. Make fuel replenishing, or start tanks with lots of fuel, thus making tank movement a much bigger part of the game.June 1, 2005 at 8:16 pm #18405
your first idea is cool, but it is not new. I have wished for this feature for a while now. 😛 Wagering makes EVERYTHING more fun 😉
your second idea is well, a bad idea, for various reasons i dont care to go into. 😕
your third idea is also cool, and original as far as i know, it would requrire a mod guru to take the time to do though i suppose, I think it should be one of the options of the new tank technologies i would like to see 😀 A whole new series of options that you can add to your tank, after choosing appearance you select a tank based on the following hypothetical properites
Weapons set: (insert idea)June 1, 2005 at 9:25 pm #18406
The first idea would be interesting, with all the truces and double crosses and WMD’s flyin around, it could prove to be an interesting method for going from dead broke to rich and famous, or rich and famous to dead and broke. 🙂
In an offset way to call your kills would be interesting, most likely a pool style method where – you just need to call “PERSON” to die, anyone else is bonus. But if you kill everyone except that person – or someone kills person before you, everything else was for nothing :).
Seond idea, could be either quite interesting or quite disasterous. I think what Boy was suggesting at was how on a 12 player game, 10 people could have selected a nuke sized location and the other 2 be in different corners. Can we say DH? Or some people would choose remote locations on a map that are next to impossible to hit. But yet is that not the fun and strategy behind this style?
The third idea goes both ways for me.. I have to admit its quite interesting way of advancing the challenge of picking your targets, but on a personal level I may not enjoy such gaming due to the much longer time it requires in the form of moves/turns so people are able to find targets kill targets and limit it down to 1 survivor.
Boy, unless your looking to see most of the scorched population all use the same unit model, I’d think that idea is not so hot. People will merely choose the ideal “best” unit it will almost become a standard to use that unit. Besides what would you say to those penguin lovers when you make their unit weak as can be? 😆 (Example aside, yes someone will feel left out because their tank wasnt as great as the next).June 1, 2005 at 10:05 pm #18407
I forgot my fourth idea…
4) Assigned Targets. At the start of a round, assign each player a target. You must kill the assigned player first, then proceed with the next assigned person. Targets might be assigned randomly, or matching skill rankings, or matching rank in the current match. I just think it would be a fun variation. If you match noobs with noobs, it lets them survive a little longer. Meanwhile, experts will shield up, knowing what’s ahead of them.
2) Location Selection: Yes, some players would pile on top of each other and get toasted in the first shot. That’s good for a laugh. When positioning your tank you would consider wind, vantage point, and what you think everyone else will do. This magnifies the psychological factor of understanding your opponents. Again, it would just be a fun variation. A server full of idiots will soon get the point of not picking the best strategic position.
**Maybe a randomization feature should be added where round 1 is Assigned Targets, round 2 has Location Selection, etc. Let the sysadmin decide whether every round will play by the same rules as the preceding round.June 1, 2005 at 10:06 pm #18408
I guess i was not clear. I did say after selecting appearance, you get to choose technology. Technology would not alter the looks of the tank. Yes, care would need to be taken to ensure that each tank was competitive, of course there will be “better” ones, but with enough options the comarisons become blurred, just think in terms of like MarioCart, Each car has its weakness, you sacrifice acceleration for top speed… etc 😀June 1, 2005 at 11:18 pm #18409
I think the assigned targets idea is awesome!
like, maybe you could have an assigned target you need to kill before you kill other people (or if they die from another players actions or their own actions it counts). and then you can kill whoever. but if you kill someone else before your assigned target it could be like negative money and -kills like killing yourself. that would encourage precise strikes at first, and would also make people think twice before they lob that funky or DH into a crowd on the first move.
this of course really changes the game, so maybe it’s more like an alternate server idea. sounds fun though. i’m also not sure how it would work if there’s an odd number of people… but i would guess that the person who is at the bottom of the score (usually the least threat) could just get a freebie and be able to target anyone from the start so that no one has two people assigned on them.June 2, 2005 at 3:38 am #18410
Indeed, choosing who attacks who could be defined by kills and/or rank.
The game irronicly already plays like that in a way, say Thorr and I were in with 4-5 misc players, maybe those misc players are upper ranked players like yourselves, maybe their newbs.. regarless:
It might (consistantly?) say thorr and I should be attacking each other first, because we’re in first/second place (pending on time of day). While the misc players are told to off each other.
I wouldn’t suggest negative scores however, because if you launched a funky bomb at your designated target, TECHNIQLY offed 2 other players first, THEN your target… your still one negative. Yet you got your target. (so maybe some smart-logic is nessessary, or again just null and void the prior kill?).June 2, 2005 at 2:11 pm #18411
Sounds like a great idea for another tournament… hmmmmmJune 3, 2005 at 2:36 am #18412
**Maybe a randomization feature should be added where round 1 is Assigned Targets, round 2 has Location Selection, etc. Let the sysadmin decide whether every round will play by the same rules as the preceding round.
This kind of reminds me of an idea I pitched about a year ago that never went anywhere. Check out item #14 in this post. Not quite the same, but a similar concept of having custom rulesets defined on the server that can change gameplay from round to round to make things even more interesting and fun.. Gav, I recall you just saying something about wanting to add some gameplay enhancing features to the next version. Perhaps this might be one to explore? 😛June 3, 2005 at 3:13 am #18413
Ya, alternating rulesets, or players voting for maps, etc. The thought came to mind because this is what a lot of first person shooters do to add a little variety to gameplay.
One more idea…
5) Tidal Waves. OK, perhaps it’ll never happen, but I’d love to see a nuke explode in the ocean, creating a wave surge that causes damage to low-lying tanks.June 3, 2005 at 1:59 pm #18414
5) Tidal Waves. OK, perhaps it’ll never happen, but I’d love to see a nuke explode in the ocean, creating a wave surge that causes damage to low-lying tanks.
Ummm, can I say, Gambling and …………TSUNAMI!!! what could be more exciting? I risk all my money on, say, Ebonite accidentally killing himself with a missile (odds 200:1), I lose, but he does too cause he bet 200,000 that there would not be a tidal wave!
Sleestak, is now on the commitee for fun ideas and vices we hide from our wives.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.