Dynamic War Progression System Idea


Poll: Implement a dynamic war progression system similar to the example?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes
15
83.33%
No, stick with the current gameplay
3
16.67%

Total
18 vote(s)
100%
* You voted for this item.
[DEFN] Sentinel  President 2 Dec 19 at 8:31pm Edited
#31
Reviewed/Many core ideas added to developer roadmap

"There are plenty of maps on the workshop that are designed perfectly for this." Lol, no. Most maps that don't have much camping are not vehicle friendly. And if they're vehicle friendly, theyre often extremely easy to camp or to exploit. That quote in itself should show everyone your true colors. You are not at all in the loop of this community or the affairs of the past 2 years. You can ask any member of the community who's been here longer than 7 months and they'll tell you how many maps I've looked at and tested with players: a whopping 2000. I will not deny that this would be great in theory; it's a great idea. In fact, I absolutely agree with you that running in and dying over and over gets stale really fast. But your suggestion has an abysmal way of suggesting it. I know you're a great guy and are passionate and thoroughly believe what you're saying Fruit; but don't pretend you know the server as well as you say you do. Regardless, I WILL be taking what was posted here into account, because it contains some good ideas.
[DEFN] Pyro Shark  Head Gamemaster VIP 4 Dec 19 at 1:38am
#32
+1

i feel like it'd be a *lot* of work for Sentinel and we'd probably have to hire a dedicated map development team in order to suit CvR's map styles.

If we DID pull it off it could
1, give GMs an actual good job to do rather than just do some events with no real permanent rewards that people tend to forget like a day later
2, a reason to come onto CvR to be apart of like a mass wave of people and a sense of community
3, ways for NCOs/COs to interact more and plan deployments better and having strategy
4, some good lore behind this so it'd be pretty cool yeah.

i like it, i just feel i'd be a lot of work for Sentinel to do.
Destitute the :dab:  Affairs Counselor VIP 4 Dec 19 at 5:03am
#33
My main gripe still remains to be the amount of maps we'd need for a system like this to work. It's near impossible to predict who'd win the current map, and thus there would be two possible situations that would arise as a result of that.

Situation 1: After the faction wins, there would have to be a waiting period in order for the next map to be completed.

Situation 2: Two maps would have to be created that would be accounting for who wins on the current map. Wasting dev-time and resulting in a map being wasted. This one I believe to be incredibly unlikely due to pragmatism, but it was just for consideration.

Yeah that's all i got for now.
Fasko  Infrastructure Supervisor 5 Dec 19 at 1:13am Edited
#34
+1
Gr8 concept, & love the forward thinking. That's hot.
The only reason I'm not neutral is because you're explicit about the entire suggestion not being implemented, just what works. That being said, Sentinel will be grinding maps for the next couple years to achieve anything as detailed as your graph. A simplified system would be nice tho.

Sentinel already said his peace apparently so I think this thread is donezo but idk. (Whoever moved it to Reviewed didn't lock it so)
  • 21 participants


  • Forum Jump