Hello, new to the forum. Besides the point, Here would be two new Gametype ideas and one idea if there were to be more than one gametype Gametypes: Multi-team Crossfire. 4 teams of three. Your team is forced to attack the team to the right of you and defend from the left. After you beat this team, you have to beat the team across from you(If still alive). If only two teams are left, they fight against each other. What i mean is you can attack the bots of the other teams and their turrets too, but can't damage their Moneyball if it is not the team you are supposed to be attacking. Map Map ideas would be Grenade III adding two bases on the sides and removing the left bot spawn. More Action, one annihaltor for all teams. No more than two of the same classes. No support hack on RockIt turrets( Yes, I know i play support myself at points, but for these short attack lanes? Would not work out) Colors: Orange, Blue, Green, and Black?) I do not know if your system is ready for that, Uber? Problems: Simply Rage Quiting Other one: CTF MNC style. Two teams of six. 3 captures win. One moneyball for each team. Inside the Moneyball is the flag. Once a flag is captured, the team who had their flag captured is rewarded a new one. The other one, if damaged, will stay at that same health. Moneyball's shields do not recover after your team has 1 capture ( I mean, 3 captures?). 20 Minute time, 5 minute overtime . Flag can not be captured if the other team has your flag. Problems: Unbalanced teams. Now here is something if there would be more than one gametype. Let people vote on a map, not vetoe the current one. Also, let them vote the gametype, after that(25 seconds for each) If tie, whichever one had those votes first goes. you can only change your vote once. After playing a certain gametype and map, do not offer them in the rotation until you have played something else. Please Leave your ideas and changes to mine, greatly appreciated
A CTF gametype would be fun, but I'd hope it would be single-flag CTF to make things more interesting. Other gametype ideas, though? Blitz Duel: Two opposing teams in Blitz mode compete to survive longer than the other. They can't attack each other due to a giant glass wall that nothing can even be lobbed over, but the Annihilator is place along the wall and they can spend money to send more of their class' associated bots to pester the enemy team. That's all I've got.
Could you explain the Blitz Idea more. And the one Flag CTF, you mean like the flag would be where the annihalotor is? But awesome idea.
Think about it like this...You're paying a good game of Scramble Blitz mode when all of a sudden...! BOOM! The other team hits the Annihilator and all your pros and turrents take damage just as soon as the rival team's Assaults spawn a few waves of extra Buzzers to wipe out your whole team for a moment. They taunt you from their complete safety on the other side of the glass wall, then your team spawns multiple "bonus" waves of Gremlins for the grievous insult... Something like that. Of course since camping the Annihilator would be an obvious tactic that would be abused, it'd require new arenas that put the Annihilator a good ways away from the action so anyone camping the Annihilator would actively be putting their team at a disadvantage. How does that sound?
I'm really looking forward to a CTF (Capture the *) type gamemode. However, something I would really like would be the option, for hosting/hosts, to turn off bots and allow for a larger amount of players. 6v6 seems really small, though it matches the amount of different classes, it would be nice to have up to 12v12, or even 16v16. Another gametype that would be very fun might be Conquest where each team, two teams total, must battle over different areas of the map and control them. Each team gets a number of resources that are based off of how many points they are in control of and how many times their players have died. EDIT: Oops, bumped a semi-old thread. Hope this doesn't stir up too much of a fuss as I couldn't find any more recent threads pertaining to this issue.
