Jump to content


Free for All


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

onderschepper #1 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:10 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • [BOF] BOF
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

The addition of a Free for All mode could be an interesting change to the dynamic to throw people out of their comfort zones and encourage changes to well established strategies.

 

Obviously the positioning of players on maps would have to be kept to the peripheries or spaced in such a manner that does not allow direct line of sight from the get-go.

 

As for lurky durky campers, they would run the same risk as found by their peers in FPS games, whereby one shot would reveal their location to an unseen enemy who could then navigate around and behind them.

 

As for OP players, there have been many occasions in FPS FFA where temporary unspoken alliances have formed to take down someone dominating the match - once eliminated those alliances end in an all out brawl.

 

I have had a five year hiatus from online gaming and thus I am not entirely familiar with the modern dynamics, but I see no verifiable reason a mode of this sort could not be implemented in due course.

 

Just a random musing.



Jazzy_Jeff #2 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:19 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 18578 battles
  • 144
  • [-CUTE] -CUTE
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011
Most games already feel like a free for all. Do you see many teammates?

arthurwellsley #3 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:25 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 54060 battles
  • 4,018
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View Postonderschepper, on 30 May 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

The addition of a Free for All mode could be an interesting change to the dynamic to throw people out of their comfort zones and encourage changes to well established strategies.

 

Obviously the positioning of players on maps would have to be kept to the peripheries or spaced in such a manner that does not allow direct line of sight from the get-go.

 

As for lurky durky campers, they would run the same risk as found by their peers in FPS games, whereby one shot would reveal their location to an unseen enemy who could then navigate around and behind them.

 

As for OP players, there have been many occasions in FPS FFA where temporary unspoken alliances have formed to take down someone dominating the match - once eliminated those alliances end in an all out brawl.

 

I have had a five year hiatus from online gaming and thus I am not entirely familiar with the modern dynamics, but I see no verifiable reason a mode of this sort could not be implemented in due course.

 

Just a random musing.

 

NO

 

WG tried this on Common Test awhile ago. A form of Battle Royale. Each of the 30 tanks for themself, and last tank standing wins. I played it a few times on test and quite frankly it was rubbish.

 

The best thing to do was to take a fast medium or TD, run to the edge of the map, and hide in a bush. Wait until at least 15 players were dead, and then start picking off the remainder. The gameplay was horrible, and I am glad this mode existed only on Common Test and then got canned.



onderschepper #4 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • [BOF] BOF
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

For maybe the first ten seconds of a match, unless it is a one in one hundred team who actually seek to cooperate and Plough the Road as one force.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #5 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:28 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34103 battles
  • 4,434
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

Every game would turn into a 15 minute campfest as every player vies to be the last to make any kind of move for fear of being seen, interspersed with 10 secs of fire whenever someone gets bored. 

 

Fun dynamic gameplay I'm sure. 

 

 



onderschepper #6 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:31 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • [BOF] BOF
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

View Postarthurwellsley, on 30 May 2019 - 03:25 PM, said:

 

 

The best thing to do was to take a fast medium or TD, run to the edge of the map, and hide in a bush. Wait until at least 15 players were dead, and then start picking off the remainder.

 

Sorry just to clarify, how does that differ from Random Battles at present (the scenario sounds remarkably familiar)? :teethhappy:



ThinGun #7 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:45 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 40116 battles
  • 2,586
  • [SHYLO] SHYLO
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014
I can see how it might work with platoons (of three).  But for individuals?  Can't see the attraction, TBH.

dex_1950 #8 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 35576 battles
  • 527
  • [N1GER] N1GER
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014

View PostJazzy_Jeff, on 30 May 2019 - 03:19 PM, said:

Most games already feel like a free for all. Do you see many teammates?

 

this

Japualtah #9 Posted 30 May 2019 - 03:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31788 battles
  • 1,319
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

Don't modern games implement an effective anti-camping mechanism already?

That bubble thingy shrinking over time or something. I don't play those games, every time I'm dead before I even found ammo for my gun, whatever.

 

There are always some dudes on these boards who say 'no' to everything out of principle but the mechanics exist and I don't see why not, how worse than ranked could it be?



wolfsrain #10 Posted 30 May 2019 - 04:12 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 62533 battles
  • 316
  • [LASO] LASO
  • Member since:
    11-15-2010
I think he wants...Battle Royale?!:D

Nishi_Kinuyo #11 Posted 30 May 2019 - 04:25 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 9081 battles
  • 6,271
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Didn't we have something like that already?

That Steel Hunt or Domination thing or w/e it was called?


Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 30 May 2019 - 04:27 PM.


arthurwellsley #12 Posted 30 May 2019 - 04:43 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 54060 battles
  • 4,018
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View Postonderschepper, on 30 May 2019 - 02:31 PM, said:

 

Sorry just to clarify, how does that differ from Random Battles at present (the scenario sounds remarkably familiar)? :teethhappy:

 

In random battles the heavies get to brawl and slower medium and assault TDs have a role to play.

In the Common Test version produced by WG of every player for himself slow vehicles always lost.



Balc0ra #13 Posted 30 May 2019 - 04:47 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 72874 battles
  • 20,713
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postonderschepper, on 30 May 2019 - 03:31 PM, said:

 

Sorry just to clarify, how does that differ from Random Battles at present (the scenario sounds remarkably familiar)? :teethhappy:

 

Where do you think the term 29 vs 1 comes from? Just play randoms.

 

Then again as pointed out above, it's been tested before with various degree of success. Inc a Battle Royale mode, but this game did not need that tbh. 



Bordhaw #14 Posted 30 May 2019 - 06:43 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 14894 battles
  • 4,892
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View Postonderschepper, on 30 May 2019 - 02:10 PM, said:

The addition of a Free for All mode could be an interesting change to the dynamic to throw people out of their comfort zones and encourage changes to well established strategies.

Just a random musing.

 

Sounds like the usual Random Battle mode...



undutchable80 #15 Posted 30 May 2019 - 06:45 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 11703 battles
  • 3,856
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    10-30-2014
A 30 player battle royale on a map size like FL wouldn't work either? Just like similar games, have a timer, bombardement when play area gets smaller and stuff? 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users