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

Game Mode Suggestion

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
499 posts
4,212 battles

Hello there Captains,

I wanted to propose a new game mode that I think would be pretty fun. For simplicity I am calling it World War.

What is this game mode?

Similar to Ranked battles World War would have seasons. At the start of each season you would pick a nation to fight for. For example if you choose British, then for the remainder of the season you can only use British ships. You would then be able to select a different nation the following season. Each nation stands a chance to fight each other nation. This is not an Axis vs Allies mode. 

The games would be held in 3 phases. First phase is Tier 8. Second T9, and lastly T10. The objective is to "capture" maps in sequential order. Map A, B, C, etc. Nations would be pitted up against each other in each season "randomly" during the first season, and then accordingly to their placement during the previous season. For example Nation A wins season one, and Nation B was in 2nd, those two would face each other at the beginning of the next season.

Each Phase lasts a week (or less if that's too long). If Nation A captures Map 1, and 2, but then loses the fight for map 3, the two nations fight AGAIN for control of map 2. Each phase has 5 maps to capture. 

Due to the fact that not all nations have carriers yet, they will be for now excluded from the matches. 

Rewards for winning a season and such could be World War Crates, that have tons of flags, or cammos, and collection tokens and emblems.  

Here's the kicker though. If you sink your T8 Monarch Battleship during a fight, you lose access to that ship for World War mode, for 24 hours. Yeah that might encourage turtle game play, but there will be a retreat zone for each nation on their starting side of the map. Staying in said zone for 25 seconds will allow you to escape with the ship. This makes it so that the battles mean a little bit more and will count to the overall victory score.

Victory Score:
Would be calculated by the amount of territory a nation controls, and the tonnage of ships sunk. With the former weighing more than the latter. 

Anywho, I know it's bare bones here, but that's my idea, and I didn't want to turn this into an essay describing everything in vast detail as no one would read that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[HSD]
Members
296 posts
9,563 battles

The idea has merit as an event. 

I would scrap the idea of locking out lost ships though, would favor the high player population nations more than the low player population nations. 

Also certain nations would need their tech trees filled out, I can’t see British doing well without access to any Destroyers, nor can I see Russia doing well without any Battleships. Faction roles/strengths are another factor but if the event has a variety of modes and mixes them well it could help even it out.

Carriers as you mention are an issue. Perhaps allowing people to sign for a nation but bring a CV, effectively locking them in but allowing maximum inclusion. I admit that it is somewhat an immersion issue though.

Edited by Meatshield_No13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
499 posts
4,212 battles

Oh yeah for sure, some nations certainly need their trees filled out first. I feel though that once there were at least 4 nations with a full tech tree ( or even one that was full minus the carrier) that it could be doable.

The lock out point you make is a good one. Maybe if the population difference was high enough the lesser nation gets a boost to getting their ships repaired?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

Not a bad idea regardless if mode, or event.

Couple of things could be tweaked, but overall gg.

Edited by Wulfgarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
499 posts
4,212 battles

Basically the idea comes from port battles from the original Navy Field, where you would fight for control over the ports for your fleet. Only in this one i tweaked that to be nation control. It was super fun in navyfield, and would be here as well i think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52
[OPGS]
Members
608 posts
4,038 battles

Wouldn't one nation end up beeing stronger than the other because having the stronger and/or more versatile ships? A whole team formed of british cruisers would not be that great...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,824
[SALVO]
Members
17,152 posts
17,812 battles

This idea might work better if it actually was Axis vs Allies.  It would cover up any deficiencies in certain nations' tech trees.  Also, there the Axis side is starting to get better developed, with the Italians in the long process of getting a tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
116
[TURDS]
Members
599 posts
3,992 battles
1 hour ago, Meatshield_No13 said:

The idea has merit as an event. 

I would scrap the idea of locking out lost ships though, would favor the high player population nations more than the low player population nations. 

Also certain nations would need their tech trees filled out, I can’t see British doing well without access to any Destroyers, nor can I see Russia doing well without any Battleships. Faction roles/strengths are another factor but if the event has a variety of modes and mixes them well it could help even it out.

Carriers as you mention are an issue. Perhaps allowing people to sign for a nation but bring a CV, effectively locking them in but allowing maximum inclusion. I admit that it is somewhat an immersion issue though.

Say sub in classes to fill tech trees. RN capitol ships and Russian DD's, French BB/CA/CL and IJN DD's. Imbalances might not allow for a national restriction on substitutes. I can see RN BB & cruiser lines being very potent running with PADD, the obvious weakness being the DWT as far as DD fights.(& a very smoky battlefield).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,521
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,112 posts
12,671 battles

Sounds better on paper than it would be in reality. The national lines are not balanced for this kind of competitive combination.

Also, a retreat zone at the back of your spawn would encourage MORE camping, not less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
499 posts
4,212 battles
38 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

Sounds better on paper than it would be in reality. The national lines are not balanced for this kind of competitive combination.

Also, a retreat zone at the back of your spawn would encourage MORE camping, not less.

Yes, it would. However, if they did camp near the retreat line, they would lose the battle for the map. Due to capture points. Which would essentially be handing the game to the other nation.

 

 

1 hour ago, Curly__san said:

Say sub in classes to fill tech trees. RN capitol ships and Russian DD's, French BB/CA/CL and IJN DD's. Imbalances might not allow for a national restriction on substitutes. I can see RN BB & cruiser lines being very potent running with PADD, the obvious weakness being the DWT as far as DD fights.(& a very smoky battlefield).

 

Some nations might have to wait to be able to join the world war mode till they have their tech trees more flushed out. I think having BB, CL/CA, and DD lines would probably be the best bar for entry. Since again, the carriers aren't balanced enough for this. Especially not the premium ones. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Crucis said:

This idea might work better if it actually was Axis vs Allies.  It would cover up any deficiencies in certain nations' tech trees.  Also, there the Axis side is starting to get better developed, with the Italians in the long process of getting a tech tree.

I don't agree with you here. Mainly because having it be Nation Vs. Nation makes things a little more interesting. If it were Axis vs allies it would get stale I think. 

I just feel that this sort of game mode would add meaning behind the battles that we fight. Like zomg we have to win this map or we're pushed off for this round. Fight harder guys!  As it is right now, random battles don't really matter if you win or lose the map outside of pride maybe. Or trying to pad your win / loss ratio stats.

With this proposal we would gain a game mode where the meaning behind the maps we're playing holds more ground. There's more reward in feeling accomplished for your valiant efforts. 

Adding more replayability to the game through different modes is something that would keep players playing more often. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,824
[SALVO]
Members
17,152 posts
17,812 battles
3 minutes ago, Drakedge said:

 

 

I don't agree with you here. Mainly because having it be Nation Vs. Nation makes things a little more interesting. If it were Axis vs allies it would get stale I think. 

I just feel that this sort of game mode would add meaning behind the battles that we fight. Like zomg we have to win this map or we're pushed off for this round. Fight harder guys!  As it is right now, random battles don't really matter if you win or lose the map outside of pride maybe. Or trying to pad your win / loss ratio stats.

With this proposal we would gain a game mode where the meaning behind the maps we're playing holds more ground. There's more reward in feeling accomplished for your valiant efforts. 

Adding more replayability to the game through different modes is something that would keep players playing more often. 

It simply won't work until all nations have at least the 3 basic tech tree lines (i.e. BBs, CAs, and DDs).  And some nations will never have those.

Besides, they could start the mode as Axis vs Allies until there are enough nations that have proper tech trees, at which point they could switch over to nation vs nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
499 posts
4,212 battles

That could be a solution to make it work till the trees were more flushed out. 

I just wanted to avoid a situation where it was far too repetitive. Being like Oh we're facing the USN this round, last round we faced the IJN as KM would kinda change your tactics, weaknesses vs strengths sort of thing.  Change things up kind of thing.

Also yeah, some nations like the pan asian line i believe, likely wont have a full enough tree, and thus would likely be excluded from the mode. I don't think that it is detrimental enough to the gameplay to remove those small out-liars from the equation.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×