Campaign-style skirmish (attack vs defense)

[Arreon]

I really enjoy the idea of being able to tactically destroy an enemy base in the campaign, but I also want to be able to play with the enemies' kind of base setup. So, my idea is to create a new kind of skirmish mode (I'm referring to skirmish and mayhem).

The skirmish mode I'm thinking about will feature two or more opposing sides. The players will have an option to choose an offensive style of gameplay, or a defensive style. This will hopefully mimic the campaign style of the Project destroying a Collective base, or the New Paradigm defending their bases from the Project. The characteristics of both styles is as follows:

Offensive - The idea is that the offensive player will have a smaller base, but with less restriction on the quantity of units and things like factories, power generators, cyborg factories, things like that. There is no restriction on the number of defensive structures.

Defensive - Much like the campaign setup. Think of it as playing as the Collective, or Nexus. They may have one or more base, whereas the offensive may only have one, but the defensive player has a greater restriction on the number of units and support structures they may have. There's no restriction on the number of defenses, though.

To at least try to make things fair, here's some suggestions on how the bases should be built, the restrictions of both sides, and other things:

Offensive:

10 trucks maximum
Smaller base with less defenses
Starting force - maybe up to 10 combat units
up to 4 factories
up to 4 cyborg factories
up to 4 VTOL factories
up to 5 repair bays
all other structure limits are the same

Defensive:

5 Trucks maximum
Larger or multiple bases with more defenses
Starting force(s), depending on the size or number of bases
up to 2 factories
up to 2 cyborg factories
up to 2 VTOL factories
up to five repair bays
all other structure limits are the same.

It is up to the mapmakers to decide what type of defenses they want to put in, where to position the bases, but it is up to the players what stating forces they want. The starting forces will be selected with a power limit. The retail version of warzone had a starting force option.

So what do you guys think? Feel free to offer *constructive* criticism.
On a side note, this may give the developers nightmares because of the reworking of the maps to position the bases and defenses and everything.

[Kacen]

I'm kinda neutral on this idea in general, but if anything shouldn't the defensive side have more trucks? Maybe the offensive should have a limit on trucks, in fact.

And perhaps the offensive should have defenses limited.

[Arreon]

I'm kinda neutral on this idea in general, but if anything shouldn't the defensive side have more trucks? Maybe the offensive should have a limit on trucks, in fact.

And perhaps the offensive should have defenses limited.

True, but think about it. If the defensive side had more trucks, then that would give them an unfair advantage, because they have more defenses, if the limit was bumped up to 10, then the offensive side would have to build more defenses than the defensive side would, and also, the defensive side would have more trucks to spare for building oil derricks on the map.

And there was no limit on how many structures you could build on the campaign, so long as you had the power for it. So why should that change? The offensive do not start out with nearly as many defenses as the defensive, anyway.

The defense issue would really become a problem if the defensive had a lot of artillery (howitzers, Ripple Rockets, etc.), giving the offensive a lesser chance of survival once the defensive truck puts up a sensor near the offensive base.

Also, the offensive side do have a limit on trucks. In the regular skirmish, the limit is 15. The offensive side will only have 10 at max to work with.

[Corporal Punishment]

How about the conditions for winning the match? If one side is annihilated, the case is clear. But does the attacker get a time limit? This way the defender could win without running a counter attack.

[Arreon]

How about the conditions for winning the match? If one side is annihilated, the case is clear. But does the attacker get a time limit? This way the defender could win without running a counter attack.

That too can be a possibility. Depending on the map size and level of defenses the defensive side has, it could fluctuate a lot. Although there should be an option to choose how much time the offensive player should have to defeat the defensive. Like a choice between 30 minutes, an hour, or an hour and 30 minutes. Something like that.

[Zarel]

Um... isn't this what Per's Challenges system is? Or am I missing something?

[Arreon]

@ Zarel: If you'll show me the thread where Per's "Challenge" system is, maybe I can spot differences.

I've never heard of the above challenge system before.

[whippersnapper]

@ Zarel: If you'll show me the thread where Per's "Challenge" system is, maybe I can spot differences.

I've never heard of the above challenge system before.

you can check-out Per's "Challenges" Here:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3477

Regards, whip