Conquest gamemode (100% CoD FREE!)

[DarkDXZ]

May have TF2/BF3 inspirations instead.


Right now there are two vanilla gamemodes in AoS - Capture the Intel (CTI) and Territorial Control (TC).
Of course there are several few more, unofficial modes, such as Tug of War, Zombies, Team Deathmatch and more...

But what I want to introduce is a larger-scale version of Territorial Control, called Conquest (C) (for now).

What Conquest is about, you ask?
Let me explain...

Essentially, Conquest is a Territorial Control, but instead of just few control points, the entire gamemode takes place in several MAPS (played one by one, tho). (the maps are either gen'd or chosen upon server startup/gamemode change)
The amount of maps can be changed, from two to...Well, I have no idea...8?

Conquest maps feature Control Points as well, but fewer than regular TC does.

Also, another feature of Conquest - tickets (don't blame me, I know it's BF-related!).
Each team starts with x amount of tickets ( tens or hundreds, maybe even thousands if one would wish) and when a player dies, a ticket is drawn from team's count. When tickets go down to 0 - the team loses.

Maps are saved in their states between matches as they were on the previous one (ie. if a map_1 was wrecked down on the first fight on it, it will be wrecked on the later fight as well).
Maps are played and "assigned" with the following "pattern":

Green -- Green -- Neutral -- Blue -- Blue
On how the maps are played further, let me show an example:
"First, Neutral map is battled over. Blue wins, and thus, the "global map" will look like that now:
Green -- Green -- Blue -- Blue -- Blue
Now, the Blues are battling over the first (from the right) Green map, and Green loses, so the map is now Blue's.
Green -- Blue -- Blue -- Blue -- Blue
Now, the last battle over the Green map takes place. If Blue wins, the entire "Grand match" is over and Blue wins. If Green wins, and let's say they did, the map looks like that now:
Green -- Green -- Blue -- Blue -- Blue
See what I mean?


Further onto tickets - the remaining amount of tickets after a battle is saved with that map ie. the team that won with 245 tickets left will still have 245 tickets in the next battle.
But what if the team that lost one battle on the map (and thus having 0 tickets in there) will have to fight over the place again? Will they instantly loose?
No, they won't.

They can "transfer" tickets from their another map, thus giving themselves some (more?) tickets to fight in the battle, but having less of them in a future battle on the map they transfered the tickets from.

The ticket transfering system could be either a set formula (something like "x players times 10", I have no idea) or based on in-team voting - first over the map for the tickets to be transfered from and then about the amount of tickets to be transfered. (it would have a form of a poll rather than regular voting)
If there were "Tie" results, the voting would start over.


Yes, this IS kinda complicated and confusing, but trust me - you DID see more confusing suggestions than mine.
Plus, I don't think anyone suggested something like that before...Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Tigershield]

I understand what you mean.but i wish control points(taking flags) was more indept.like when you take control point X you can choose what for control point it will be,let's say X will become an ammo station. Or control Point Y becomes a medical station..you build defenses around those control points.

Something like the Company of heroes RTS game.men power,fuel,ammo.

[IrishElf]

I like the basis of the mode, but sorely dislike the "ticket" idea. It seems counter productive to a game that more often than not will be a bloody stalemate for hours.

[Gorman]

We have a similar suggestion (or two) in the LDR clan subforum. The first is for a one off event;

Here's the prototype for our event, should it get approved by the higher ups.

Each team starts with a couple of territories, and each team then submits their choice for the turn to the GM (the guy who runs the event). First we resolve fortify actions, and then attacks. Attacks are all simultaneous, or in the case of 2 teams attacking 1 territory; if it is unoccupied then both of those 2 fight, if it is occupied then we randomly determine the order of the matches.
If a team has no territory it is wiped out of the event. To win you must control all territory!

And the second is a persistent world

Totally using this subforum as a pastebin ;D
Don't have photoshop so didnt make a concept image, but anyway;

Example map


- World map with the each of the maps we host located on it.
- Each location is either no man's land, contested, owned by green or owned by blue. (There is a different Icon for each state - no man's land = black, contested = red, green = green, blue = blue.)
- When the map is being played on it is automatically set to contested, and when the game ends the location is set to either no man's land, owned by green or owned by blue, depending on who wins the game. As you may have guessed, if the game ends in a draw then the map is no man's land.
- We have some sort of leader-board to show which team holds the most territories, and perhaps persistent stats such as the players who fought on each map last time it was contested.

- Gen maps are a bit different since they are random, they could be randomly determined locations on the map, ie not named just random cells on the map. So after a while there are random patches of blue/green all over the map. (if anyone was wondering, named locations would have a border around them so they could be distinguished from the random cells).

- Every now and then we could host special events that give bonuses to the team that wins, or just for funs.

- Have an awesome web interface with some nice javascript to make the world map, to add a sense of metagame (eg SLoW could monitor his favorite territories *cough*tribes*cough* to make sure his team is controlling them. He can't really do anything to influence them, but its still fun).

[DarkDXZ]

Well, I didn't know that then.

Also, I know that idea of tickets may not be good.
It could be purely optional server-side option - if host wants tickets to be on, let him do so.
If he doesn't - nothing stops him to simply not enable them.

Also, Y U NO HAVE POLAND IN THERE? :'(

I guess that it's a good idea then, is it?

[Gorman]

Yeah it is in our private board so you can't see it even if you wanted to :p
Huh there's a poland map???


Anyway, tickets is pretty cool. My only problem is that it makes defending get easier every time if you keep winning, and if you win by a big margin then it should be very easy to win again. It makes attacking quite hard - though it should be hard.
Perhaps something like (for territory control)
- Matches last 60 minutes, whichever side controls more points at that time wins. When the game is fought on that map again the n that team will control the same points.
- If a team controls all the points then next time the attacker will start with just 1 random point.

Perhaps if we continue this we can think of an advantage for each game type -
Intel - 60 minute game time, at the end most caps wins if equal caps then by score (if equal score then it goes to neutral or whoever was defending).
Deathmatch - works as you said with tickets, but just say "lives" or "points" or something instead of tickets :P Didn't really get why they are called tickets...

[Maxxis]

Conquest is a cool idea.
But since the flags spawn randomly, and map making APIs hasn't finished yet... the plans of making a good conquest map rather ...

[DarkDXZ]

Well, they're called tickets, since - when you're going to watch a movie, you have to have a ticket. When they (ie. the cinema) run out of tickets, you can't watch the movie anymore.
But hey, it can always be changed, remember, it's a suggestion.

And for my displeasure, there is no Poland map...
Time to make one.

[Gorman]

I imagined the name ticket was chosen because you need to buy plane tickets to fly your troops to the warzone :P

[DarkDXZ]

I imagined the name ticket was chosen because you need to buy plane tickets to fly your troops to the warzone :P

That could work as well...
Not sure if tickets would play any role in a war, tho.

[Tigershield]

Think about 'ticket'' like a soldier killed in action,he needs to be replaced.

[Stiivais]

Wait wait wait wait...
This new gamemode would be something to replace the most popular (currently) gamemode, which is in the spirit of TF2?
AND this suggestion about a persistent world centered gameplay, which switches servers based upon the results
of individual battles? Like Planetside? A dynamic campaign?
Planetside + Battlefield = New mode of AoS?
*cries deeply*
This might be one of the best suggestions i have seen for a LONG time...
You sir, deserve all of my free internets. ^^

[DarkDXZ]

What are you waiting for then? My current internet is already slow enough, go ahead.
Hey, at least something more exciting than sidearms or medkits, huh?