PDA

View Full Version : MISC. An "up to 4v4" instead of forced 4v4 system.



johnfv
26th Mar 2014, 09:43
Hi,
I searched in the forum, though I couldn't find this suggestion I'm going to propose, or a message popped up that I'm not eligible to read the topic. I hope this is the right section where to write about this.

To the point: The game is wonderfull, frenetic action, balanced classes etc. though lowers the excitement when waiting in the lobby. The chances are that people wait a lot, and the impatient ones leave the lobby within a minute.. maybe two, thus leading to a longer time lost in the lobby.
My idea is to set the 4v4 to a maximum players allowed instead of forced, so that also a 2v2, 3v2, 3v3, 4v3 is possible.
Though it would be unbalanced for the smaller squad, so some buffs could kick in here. I don't know what they could be, maybe a life or a strength bonus.
On the basis of how well balanced the game is now, I'm sure that you developers can find a pretty fun and balanced way to implement this.

What do you guys on the forum think about this ? Any suggestions ?

Thanks for reading, suggestions, & everything else. John ( jfv ).

PWride
26th Mar 2014, 10:57
Interesting suggestion, could be tricky to implement though unless you had different lobbies available with a pre-set team structure (3v3 etc). For example, if I joined a lobby and it got to 6 players and "could" kick in to a 3v3, what would trigger that? What would also stop another player joining and making it 4v3 and us all having to wait for one person to leave or the 8th player to join for 4v4?

Do you envisage a vote system or similar? If we get 6 in a lobby we all get an option to vote on "start game as 3v3?" and if a certain percentage agree the game kicks in to a 3v3 and the server locked so it doesn't become a 4v3 or 4v4?

PencileyePirate
26th Mar 2014, 11:03
Totally agree, but I think they should implement queueing for every other incoming player (to prevent 3v2s and 4v3s.)

johnfv
26th Mar 2014, 11:28
Interesting suggestion, could be tricky to implement though unless you had different lobbies available with a pre-set team structure (3v3 etc). For example, if I joined a lobby and it got to 6 players and "could" kick in to a 3v3, what would trigger that? What would also stop another player joining and making it 4v3 and us all having to wait for one person to leave or the 8th player to join for 4v4?

Do you envisage a vote system or similar? If we get 6 in a lobby we all get an option to vote on "start game as 3v3?" and if a certain percentage agree the game kicks in to a 3v3 and the server locked so it doesn't become a 4v3 or 4v4?

For the reason where a 5 or 7 players ( to wait the 6th or 8th player ) would mean to wait again, I suggested the bonus system.
The vote buttons is quite good, they could add a "Start Match" button, and if the majority click it, the match starts, even with 4, 5+ players.
If well implemented I think that also a 4v3 or 3v2 wouldn't be fair.

I'm not a CoD player, though I seen some friends playing it, and noticed that the match starts even if they don't fill the list.
They ( devs on Nosgoth ) could put a basic 2v2, with a cap to 8 players, use a clock to start the game, during which others can join, and in the meanwhile start the battle. After that, also the possibility to enter midgame, if there aren't 8 players, and automatically join during spawning time, at the beginning of a round.
Also, with this, a small "server list", so you immediatly see where there are more or fewer players ( which could help in inviting friends, if not already implemented, didn't test that ).

I don't think it would be really hard to do the first part, cause it would require to set the minimum to 4 instead of 8, to add a check of players and team numbers when entering, which I think would be a really short function.

Server list would be the hard part, though not indispensable.
For now we could leave out the bonuses to the smaller team, & see how it goes with just the faster lobby thing.

About the life bonus, if there was a 10% bonus, players would have 1155 instead of 1050 hp in the smaller team. It should be tested, though I see it as a fair advantage.


Totally agree, but I think they should implement queueing for every other incoming player (to prevent 3v2s and 4v3s.)

I think that a 3v2 or a 4v3 wouldn't unbalance a lot the game, at the beginning we could live without bonus to the smallest team ( & write it somewhere on the loading screen, so that whining brats don't cry ).

Ygdrasel
26th Mar 2014, 22:14
A 3v3 lobby would be nice. 4v3 can even be done, with a buff going to the 3-player team. 2v2 is too few players.