Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
_HELLDOG_

New Battle Types??

Favorite Battle Type (or future)  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you enjoy more battle types added to MM or keep the few we have?

    • I ONLY enjoy the capture and kill strategy in all the PVP maps.
      0
    • I would love to see more battle types.
      27
  2. 2. What types of battle(s) do or would you enjoy the most?

    • (Standard) 2 Caps, 24 Players, 2 Teams
      13
    • (Epicenter) 1 Center Cap, 24 Players, 2 Teams
      6
    • (Domination) 3-5 Caps, 24 Players, 2 Teams
      17
    • (Deathmatch) 0 Caps, 24 players, 2 Teams
      13
    • (Citadel) 1 Cap "Naval Base" held by team 1 defending against team 2, 24 Players
      19
    • A battle type that was later added in the comment section.
      5

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

41
[WOLF8]
Members
90 posts
1,973 battles

I've been thinking recently about how the game can get somewhat monotonous at times.  Cap then kill, or kill then cap, or cap AND kill at the same time.  Other than PVE scenarios, every map has always consisted of kill points and cap points.  I'm curious about what the community would enjoy other than caps in some maps.  Feedback please, maybe we can open up different types of battles soon.  Personally would enjoy a battle with equal teams battling until the last one standing wins.  Game timer can stay at 30 mins and the team with the most kill points win.  Maybe to prevent camping and hiding the entire match in an attempt to secure a win, you only get full credits and XP if you win by killing the other team in its entirety.  20% reduction in credits and xp if win is secured by time limit???  Let me know what your favorite battle type is or would be in the poll.  Maybe Wargaming can get in on this...  

 

Side note, I think adding a no cap "battle royale" would encourage a different type of gameplay.  Instead of everyone spreading all over the map or splitting into two teams to cap 2 areas, everyone may stick together.

Edited by Helldog318

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[TF16]
Members
825 posts
4,709 battles

Do you mean Epicenter instead of Encounter?  Encounter is a Tanks game mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[TF16]
Members
825 posts
4,709 battles
4 minutes ago, Helldog318 said:

Thanks for that catch.  :) Edited

 

Sounds good!  I mean Encounter would be neat.  Reds start at SE of map, Greens at NE at map.  Middle West is the sole cap point.  Or something to that effect.

Edited by Sock5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,547 posts
9,796 battles

I was thinking of another battle mode: Casual Encounter Mode.

Both teams would mingle, chat, show off their ship's camo, play follow the leader etc. No shooting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,665
[TBW]
Members
6,305 posts
11,856 battles

Epicenter on Ocean map. I would like to see different numbers of players. I have seen 12 v 12 over 6,500 times already.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[WOLF8]
Members
90 posts
1,973 battles
2 minutes ago, STINKWEED_ said:

I was thinking of another battle mode: Casual Encounter Mode.

Both teams would mingle, chat, show off their ship's camo, play follow the leader etc. No shooting. 

That battle mode is already available. Its called forums.  :cap_book:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,665
[TBW]
Members
6,305 posts
11,856 battles
2 minutes ago, Helldog318 said:

That battle mode is already available. Its called forums.  :cap_book:

Yes, but he said no shooting. Shots, have been fired, in the forums.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,547 posts
9,796 battles
2 minutes ago, Helldog318 said:

That battle mode is already available. Its called forums.  :cap_book:

Or perhaps Camp WOWS mode where your team sits at base eating sandwiches and donuts while observing the enemy doing the same from afar. Oh wait, we already have that. It's called Tier 10 Random Battles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
3 minutes ago, Helldog318 said:

That battle mode is already available. Its called forums.  :cap_book:

NOPE there is a lot of shooting on the forums

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
2 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Yes, but he said no shooting. Shots, have been fired, in the forums.

You beat me to it LOL:cap_haloween:

Edited by Chaos_EN2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[WOLF8]
Members
90 posts
1,973 battles
4 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Epicenter on Ocean map.

 

The sky would be darkened from all the shells.  Absolute chaos!  I love it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
Just now, Sovereigndawg said:

I +1nd you for thinking like me.

LoL you know us old sailors think a like a lot LOL:cap_haloween:And that is why I gave you one back, Shipmate.

Red Light District :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,547 posts
9,796 battles

On a serious note, we should get historical. I'd like to officially propose The Battle of Waterloo battle mode.

No islands. Ships are lined up 12 across on both teams, they can only travel at 1/4 speed with turning disabled. Shooting commences as soon as enemy ships are in range and the battle ends when one of the team's ships are all destroyed. Oh yes, each team assigns a DD as their drummer. 

 

Edited by STINKWEED_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[WOLF8]
Members
90 posts
1,973 battles

I wonder if Bastion will ever return. I realize a lot of people absolutely hated it but it's another game type added to the mix.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[KEK]
Beta Testers
50 posts
3,713 battles

Honestly, just to see how it'd work I'd like to see 3 & 4 team battles, just to see how that would play out.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
4 hours ago, Sock5 said:

Do you mean Epicenter instead of Encounter?  Encounter is a Tanks game mode.

Actually, there was an Encounter mode in WoWS, early in its history.  Think of it as similar to Eipcenter, but with a single cap, not 3 concentric rings.

 

4 hours ago, Sock5 said:

 

Sounds good!  I mean Encounter would be neat.  Reds start at SE of map, Greens at NE at map.  Middle West is the sole cap point.  Or something to that effect.

I've been suggesting this for a while.  It wouldn't work well on every existing map, but there are some where it would work nicely.  Here are two existing maps where it would work out well.

Hotspot: spawns in the NW and SW, cap where the "C" cap currently resides

Ocean: spawns in the NW and SW, cap in the middle of the east side of the map.

 

It should work out well on the 2 port maps used in Operations.  Just put the single cap deep in the harbor area and the 2 spawns as far apart as possible outside the harbor.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
3 hours ago, Jack_Stewart said:

Honestly, just to see how it'd work I'd like to see 3 & 4 team battles, just to see how that would play out.

Honestly, I'm not a fan of this.  I prefer more rational modes that would be marginally justifiable historically.  I can think of no historical example where forces of 3 or 4 different navies engaged in this sort of silly free- for all.  This is entirely too gamey for my tastes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
3 hours ago, Helldog318 said:

I wonder if Bastion will ever return. I realize a lot of people absolutely hated it but it's another game type added to the mix.  

I'm not so sure that I'd call it another game type.  It was more of a variant of Domination, but with bases around the caps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
4 hours ago, Helldog318 said:

 

The sky would be darkened from all the shells.  Absolute chaos!  I love it!!

They already tried this in another form.  The mode was called Zone.  The problem with it was that there were too many draws because the mode wrongly didn't use any domination points for ships sunk, like we see in Domination or Standard modes.

I would do Zone a little differently.

1. Having a ship in the zone allows you to start to gain capture points on the Zone.  

2. But if the enemy puts a ship in the Zone, all progress on gaining cap points stops.

3. BUT if one side or the other has a 1 or more ship advantage on the number of ships in the zone, they gain cap points.

4. As normal, doing damage to any capping ship causes it to lose already gained cap points.  (However the current system for this is modelled is fine by me.)

The whole idea behind these rules, particularly rule #3, is to force the teams to put an increasing number of ships into the Zone if they want to at least stop the other team from gaining points, or start gaining cap points for your team.

5. And the end goal is to try to capture the Zone, though if you sink all of the enemy's ships, you'd win as well.

6. There would be normal "domination" points for sinking ships so that if time runs out on the battle and the Zone has not been captured, victory is determined by which team has more domination points, same as is already normal in Standard mode.

 

The idea of this mode is to force a brawl.  Note that I am not a player who is always looking to brawl like some do.  But it is an idea for something different.  I think that these rules, perhaps with some polishing, would work fine.  Would the players like it?  That's a different story.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
281
[JFSOC]
Members
908 posts
2,583 battles

 I think an interesting set of variants would be having battles where the teams are deliberately mismatched.  Not so much in numbers, but in ship types.  For example a team with carriers, cruisers, and DD versus at BB / cruiser heavy force (CV vs. Surface Action Group).  Make the map large enough to give the carriers room to maneuver and evade, but only at the expense of longer flight times for their planes (meaning fewer attacks) if they do that.

Or, battles excluding BB and CV like the ones that the US and Japanese engaged in off Guadalcanal repeatedly.

Another would be to arrange the map so the two sides don't start lined up facing each other.  By varying the starting points you get unexpected variations in play, plus the players can't consistently count on where they or the other side will start.  That means you have to have better tactical skills to choose your actions rather than play largely by rote.

Of course, the more brutish simply destroy the other team should be an option seeing as how many battles already go there with both sides largely ignoring other objectives.  While I'm not a big fan of the demolition derby type game, there are enough players who are it should be an option.

Another interesting variant would be a game in which the play runs continuously for a longer period.  That is additional players are fed into both sides showing up at the edge of the map.  There is no win-lose per se but rather you get a score based on your individual performance.  You could even re-enter the game in a new ship.  Maybe make such a match go on for 30 to 60 minutes of play.

This sort of game might even have more than two sides in it...

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[WOLF8]
Members
90 posts
1,973 battles

@Crucis  How would you feel about the "Citadel" game type I mentioned above in the poll?  Essentially it would be similiar to Defense of Naval Station Newport except as PVP?  Of course the game mechanics would need to be changed somewhat to adapt to that playstyle.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
1 hour ago, Helldog318 said:

@Crucis  How would you feel about the "Citadel" game type I mentioned above in the poll?  Essentially it would be similiar to Defense of Naval Station Newport except as PVP?  Of course the game mechanics would need to be changed somewhat to adapt to that playstyle.   

You're describing what people think of as Assault mode, a term and mode from WoT.  I'm not sure that I'd like it because I don't like being penned in.  I like having room to maneuver, to shoot and scoot.  That said, the two existing harbor maps from Operations mode are pretty good, though probably best sized for mid tier battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,257 battles
1 hour ago, Murotsu said:

 I think an interesting set of variants would be having battles where the teams are deliberately mismatched.  Not so much in numbers, but in ship types.  For example a team with carriers, cruisers, and DD versus at BB / cruiser heavy force (CV vs. Surface Action Group).  Make the map large enough to give the carriers room to maneuver and evade, but only at the expense of longer flight times for their planes (meaning fewer attacks) if they do that.

Or, battles excluding BB and CV like the ones that the US and Japanese engaged in off Guadalcanal repeatedly.

Another would be to arrange the map so the two sides don't start lined up facing each other.  By varying the starting points you get unexpected variations in play, plus the players can't consistently count on where they or the other side will start.  That means you have to have better tactical skills to choose your actions rather than play largely by rote.

Of course, the more brutish simply destroy the other team should be an option seeing as how many battles already go there with both sides largely ignoring other objectives.  While I'm not a big fan of the demolition derby type game, there are enough players who are it should be an option.

Another interesting variant would be a game in which the play runs continuously for a longer period.  That is additional players are fed into both sides showing up at the edge of the map.  There is no win-lose per se but rather you get a score based on your individual performance.  You could even re-enter the game in a new ship.  Maybe make such a match go on for 30 to 60 minutes of play.

This sort of game might even have more than two sides in it...

 

 

A.  Mismatched teams.  This sounds like a loser to me.  A good player in a CV can totally dominate a battle.  So, sorry, this isn't a mode that I'd like to see, and I'm generally fairly open to listening to new ideas where modes and maps are concerned.

B. Battles excluding BB/CV.  A few months ago, I suggested a mode that I sorta called cruiser mode, where you'd have PvP battles between teams made up of nothing but cruisers and destroyers, but with smaller teams, like maybe around 7-8 per team.  I still think that it'd be a good idea.  it'd be good for those cruiser players who constantly gripe about getting trashed by BB's.  It might be a little rough on some destroyers.  But on the whole there ought to be a semi-historical feel to such a mode, since so many historical battles in WW1 and WW2 were just cruiser/destroyer actions.

C. I wouldn't mind seeing more variations of how existing maps are used.  It gets sorta boring always setting up in the same places, because battles almost always tend to play out the same way.  It would be nice if there were something like 3 or 4 variations of each map, where the caps and spawns were in different locations so that the "same map" could play differently based on the locations of the caps and spawns.  The problem I see with this though, is that so many of the current maps are so darned fine tuned to their layout with a string of islands in a band between the two teams, that there seems to be little that could be done to create good variations.

D.  There's a reason why there isn't a "kill all enemy ships" mode.  If you remove an alternative way to win, players on teams that are trailing will see no hope of victory and may just quit the battle, rather than fighting to the bitter end.  It's necessary to keep an alternative method of winning other than just killing everyone.

E. The final one seems rather silly to me too.  I don't like games with respawns.  I didn't like the modes in WoT that had respawns.  Also, the fact is that battles in WoT or WoWS (and I assume WoWP) are essentially steel cage matches with a fixed number of units per team and a fixed length of battle.  That's the WG model.  They want to keep up a constant churn of relatively quick battles.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×