[Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent   [Hottest Topics] Hottest   [Login] Login
New Game Mode idea
Forum Index » New Feature Request
[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline

[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline
Hi,
First I would like to thank you for this wonderful game. Best strategy game and about the only game I play on the iphone on a consistent basis. Since there is little chance to come back once a person's base(s) are captured, I have an idea for a different game mode: games with set income amount, but you have to take over ALL of the other player's bases to win. So for example, a map has 5 bases, each player gets a steady income of 450 each turn. Taking over a base does not increase/decrease your income, but you have to take over ALL 5 of your opponent's bases before you win.

I thought this would be an interesting alternate mode for the game. What do you think? Perhaps an update with this mode if you think it's good...or Uniwar2?

Thanks!!
-reallyfun
Solitary

Messages: 273,
Joined: Aug 24, 2010,
Offline

Solitary

Messages: 273,
Joined: Aug 24, 2010,
Offline
Complicates things when selecting matchups and will allow games to drag on for ages once they are already technically lost xD. Once you start capping people's bases you're normally ahead anyways in terms of unit power so the new game mode would in reality just make things easier to be annoying if people wanted to stall losing their points.
[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline

[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline
  Solitary wrote: Complicates things when selecting matchups and will allow games to drag on for ages once they are already technically lost xD. Once you start capping people's bases you're normally ahead anyways in terms of unit power so the new game mode would in reality just make things easier to be annoying if people wanted to stall losing their points.

No. The closer you are to winning the harder it gets as you have to defend more bases with the same amount of income. Makes winning the game or to come back from losing a lot more strategic. It's a test of real skills. Besides, the more games modes that are well implemented, the better for the games appeal...hence, more people will buy.

With that said, you don't have to play in the said mode if you feel like it confuses you or causes you to lose more games.
DelnarErsike

Messages: 5,
Joined: Oct 29, 2010,
Offline

DelnarErsike

Messages: 5,
Joined: Oct 29, 2010,
Offline
The problem is that while comebacks would be much easier, this would create a continuous back-and-forth between two sides and games would last forever.

I like the idea, however, so I'll toss in my idea of how to remedy the issue: instead of requiring all bases to be captured, each turn every player gains "victory points" for every base they own. Different maps would have different settings for the amount of victory points gained for each base, and when creating a map for this mode, having an odd number of bases is a must. The first player to reach a certain amount of points wins. Income is constant, and the game won't last forever, as if the losing player just turtles, the winning player will still win. Constant income also makes healers even more important, and depending on the income of the map, could provide a huge advantage for Khraleans and/or a huge disadvantage for Titans.
[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline

[Avatar]
reallyfun

Messages: 29,
Joined: Jun 14, 2009,
Location: California, USA
Offline
  DelnarErsike wrote: The problem is that while comebacks would be much easier, this would create a continuous back-and-forth between two sides and games would last forever.

I like the idea, however, so I'll toss in my idea of how to remedy the issue: instead of requiring all bases to be captured, each turn every player gains "victory points" for every base they own. Different maps would have different settings for the amount of victory points gained for each base, and when creating a map for this mode, having an odd number of bases is a must. The first player to reach a certain amount of points wins. Income is constant, and the game won't last forever, as if the losing player just turtles, the winning player will still win. Constant income also makes healers even more important, and depending on the income of the map, could provide a huge advantage for Khraleans and/or a huge disadvantage for Titans.

Thanks for the input and I like your revision to the idea as well. I think the main point of the original idea was to have a constant income so that the losing player/team won't automatically lose(at least 99% of the time). I also think that as long as the income is the same and constant, the balance should be OK because the more expensive a unit, the more powerful it is generally.
Solitary

Messages: 273,
Joined: Aug 24, 2010,
Offline

Solitary

Messages: 273,
Joined: Aug 24, 2010,
Offline
No, it would make no difference at all reallyfun xD. The focus on the game already is killing units and all your game mode suggestion would do is exaggerate that and making capping bases pointless, I've never captured a base if I wasn't also ahead on units. All you'd end up doing is using the base as terrain and keeping a 100 credit unit on top of it while you push the rest of them as capping it would take a unit out of your army for no gain.

It just seems like quite an irrelevent change given the larger problems we face with the game.
Forum Index » New Feature Request
Powered by JForum 2.1.9 © - 2020-04-14 v124 - UniWar website