3 replies to this topic

[TygerLily]

Overview
The outer edges of the map contain Activation Points. The inner region of a map contains Resource Nodes. Resource Nodes grant Resource Points at a certain rate based on the number of Activation Nodes a team controls. First to 2000 Resource Points wins.


Gameplay
Neither team starts with control of any Activation Points or Resource Nodes. All Points are captured in the same manner as current (11/12/2015) mechanics.

A Resource Node grants 1 RP per second per Activation Node.

Example: if you control 2 Resource Node and 3 Activation points you will gain 6 RP per second.

Example: if you control 3 Resources Nodes and 1 Activation point, you will gain 3 RP per second.

Example: if you control 5 Resource Nodes and 0 Activation points, you will gain 0 RP per second.

An Activation Point grants 5 Resource points every 30 seconds.

There are 5 Resource Nodes and 5 Activation Nodes.


Role Warfare
The distance between the Activation Points on the outside out the map rewards fast Mechs contesting the edges.

Smaller area of operation to control the inner Resource Nodes rewards slower and bigger, or “brawlier” Mechs contesting the middle.

The reliance on controlling both the outside and inside areas places an emphasis on spreading the force a little bit and rewards communication.

Edited by TygerLily, 12 November 2015 - 01:08 PM.

[Hexidecimator]

Interesting concept, I wonder if having 4 AP (Activation Points) would work better since most maps are square or rectangular in design? Meaning you could have a point in the North, South, East and West of every map, while still having the same traditional 5 cap points (Resource Points) inside the map.

The reason I bring this up is that with a fast mech, i.e. Locust, you could cap 3 AP, and one single Resource Point to acquire points faster than the other team, while never truly engaging the enemy. With four Activation Points, even a fast mech would have to expose itself to some kind of engagement to cap 3 out of 4 AP, which would lead to better balance of the game mode.

I like the concept though and it would be more unique than our current Conquest mode.

[bar10jim]

Intersting idea. but as long as we have mode voting, we'll never get to play it.

[TygerLily]

bar10jim, on 13 November 2015 - 10:08 AM, said:

Intersting idea. but as long as we have mode voting, we'll never get to play it.

Not to derail the thread but...the reason no one votes Conquest is because it plays too similar to Skirmish. If it were desirable mode then we'd see it more!