Mackuss Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) It's a win win for everyone. Please show your support for this in this thread. If you don't support it - you need to reconsider. Then reconsider again and again until you agree. 1 - It would (more often than never) get rid of the stooges that are never there for objective anyway and just care about "their mean DPS brah". 2 - Those that care about objective would be left to play together. 3 - Might even be fun. I might even play it. Taken from a later post:"That's where it's left up to the developers to make it interesting in the level design. Quite honestly - I think a Team Death Match is where a development team could get extremely creative - MORE creative than objective based games. In objective based games, you can choose any objective you want, but you're limited in how you design the level because in the end, you have to make it feasible to do the objective. In a team death match - you could have insanely strange levels where walk ways are giving out from underneath people - or a giant ring that slowly slowly collapses a layer every 3 minutes - eventually creating a pretty tiny HELL BASH. And with all these knockbacks - it would turn into comedic fun that's just a blast from beginning to end (and if it was annoying, well, you simply wouldn't play the particular WZ). It would also probably psychologically bring back the desire for world PvP - as essentially, that's what it is (just with intimately crafted maps)." Edited January 8, 2012 by Mackuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 6, 2012 Author Share Posted January 6, 2012 Bump! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stabstabstab Posted January 6, 2012 Share Posted January 6, 2012 It'd be nice, but it would start a rage of QQ because people would learn who is really over powerd.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 It'd be nice, but it would start a rage of QQ because people would learn who is really over powerd.. I don't know, the community's pretty persistent. They'll find out one way or another. (and they have already). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beelzebubs Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Healers win! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juicenewtonz Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 I'd like it, but i would think it would be easy to cheese with mass healer / tank lineups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaGun Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Ummm... all the WZs are basically Team Deathmatch. you cant capture objectives unless the enemy players are dead, and you can't hold them if your own players are dead. IE the main thing to do is to kill the enemy as much as possible, with very minimal strategy applied only for the purposes of maximizing the efficiency at which your team can get back and forth to different objectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmaska Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Totaly lame idea, there needs to be something new. Sick of the same ole stuff. Next thing you know there will be rich baddies paying for good player to carry them, to pretend to be bad azz. Sound familiar? There should be serious rewards for killing in the world, and a small loss for ganking lowbies. Anything but a wow makeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 Ummm... all the WZs are basically Team Deathmatch. you cant capture objectives unless the enemy players are dead, and you can't hold them if your own players are dead. IE the main thing to do is to kill the enemy as much as possible, with very minimal strategy applied only for the purposes of maximizing the efficiency at which your team can get back and forth to different objectives. /facepalm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) Totaly lame idea, there needs to be something new. Sick of the same ole stuff. Next thing you know there will be rich baddies paying for good player to carry them, to pretend to be bad azz. Sound familiar? There should be serious rewards for killing in the world, and a small loss for ganking lowbies. Anything but a wow makeover. Sick of the same old stuff? Uh...there's never BEEN a team death match....so how could it be old? That's where it's left up to the developers to make it interesting in the level design. Quite honestly - I think a Team Death Match is where a development team could get extremely creative - MORE creative than objective based games. In objective based games, you can choose any objective you want, but you're limited in how you design the level because in the end, you have to make it feasible to do the objective. In a team death match - you could have insanely strange levels where walk ways are giving out from underneath people - or a giant ring that slowly slowly collapses a layer every 3 minutes - eventually creating a pretty tiny HELL BASH. And with all these knockbacks - it would turn into comedic fun that's just a blast from beginning to end (and if it was annoying, well, you simply wouldn't play the particular WZ). It would also probably psychologically bring back the desire for world PvP - as essentially, that's what it be (just with intimately crafted maps). Think the obstacles in Huttball on steroids. Honestly, I think the possibilities are endless. Edited January 7, 2012 by Mackuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knifewrench Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Ummm... all the WZs are basically Team Deathmatch. you cant capture objectives unless the enemy players are dead, and you can't hold them if your own players are dead. IE the main thing to do is to kill the enemy as much as possible, with very minimal strategy applied only for the purposes of maximizing the efficiency at which your team can get back and forth to different objectives. If your team is able to pound the other into submission, why shouldn't you be able to clear it? But that's not the only way... I've been able to cap nodes and assist others by locking down defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twuz Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Open world PvP is where you can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crovyn Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 It's funny how some people who would SCREAM "NO!" if someone mentiones Arena like this idea since Team Deathmatch IS what Arena is. We could also have a 4v4 "Team Deathmatch" not just 8v8. I am all for it!! (doesn't matter if you call it Team Deathmatch or Arena), I simply love that style of gamplay so many seem to be afraid of) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 7, 2012 Author Share Posted January 7, 2012 It's funny how some people who would SCREAM "NO!" if someone mentiones Arena like this idea since Team Deathmatch IS what Arena is. We could also have a 4v4 "Team Deathmatch" not just 8v8. I am all for it!! (doesn't matter if you call it Team Deathmatch or Arena), I simply love that style of gamplay so many seem to be afraid of) No. there is no respawning in Arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 Open world PvP is where you can do that. It would be like that on steroids! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xVexillex Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 I wouldnt really have an objection to this... lets face it, many of us dont give 2 ***** about the "objectives" in regular games anyways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 I wouldnt really have an objection to this... lets face it, many of us dont give 2 ***** about the "objectives" in regular games anyways You are one of thousands upon thousands I bet. Honestly, I bet it's the majority of the player base that PvPs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaze-Yama Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 This could be a new warzone type but I wouldn't want it to be its own game mode. It would be interesting to have a set respawn limit of like 100 or 200 and whoever kills enough of the enemy team first gets to win. Maybe combine this with alderaan type of match where getting kills takes a point off of the total in addition to holding the turrets. That was how Star Wars battlefront did it where getting kills and holding objectives both contributed to decreasing the reinforcement count. This way even the zerg players that all they care about is getting kills would still contribute to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xVexillex Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 You are one of thousands upon thousands I bet. Honestly, I bet it's the majority of the player base that PvPs. not gonna lie... I dont get any joy out of capping a flag or defending a node, I pvp to KILL PEOPLE... its why I miss daoc so so much... the entire game revolved around killing people to raise your rank, sure you could do objectives (keeps relics) but at the end of the day your goal was to gain realm points (like valor) and you did that by killing players from other factions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) This could be a new warzone type but I wouldn't want it to be its own game mode. It would be interesting to have a set respawn limit of like 100 or 200 and whoever kills enough of the enemy team first gets to win. Maybe combine this with alderaan type of match where getting kills takes a point off of the total in addition to holding the turrets. That was how Star Wars battlefront did it where getting kills and holding objectives both contributed to decreasing the reinforcement count. This way even the zerg players that all they care about is getting kills would still contribute to the team. Well it being just a WZ is the point. Just like the others are "types" in their own right. You can argue semantics all day, like "well, killing is an objective so it's objective based" which, conclusively is still true - but that's why I think it should just be among the choices they give us as the game gets older. Such as "Oh, I feel like capturing flags right now" *clicks Warsong Gulch* "oh, I feel like holding an item for as long as I can" *clicks Black Garden* "I feel like straight up killing on a team" *clicks ____________* Edited January 8, 2012 by Mackuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowflab Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 "I feel like straight up killing on a team" *clicks ____________* WoW Arenas... No thanks, it creates a divide in the playerbase like no other feature in MMOs. For a reference point of just how toxic it can be to a gaming community go visit the WoW forum for a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 14, 2012 Author Share Posted January 14, 2012 WoW Arenas... No thanks, it creates a divide in the playerbase like no other feature in MMOs. For a reference point of just how toxic it can be to a gaming community go visit the WoW forum for a day. uh...what are you talking about? I know arenas are toxic to MMOs. But so are making objective based BGs the only available BGs - toxic to the team play atmosphere. The only people that have fun in them after the fact are the ******* aren't there for the objective, and people doing ranked premade BGs. If that's the end result, they shouldn't even have randoms be an option. As....clearly a team death match is different than arenas in the most obvious ways that even a baby could differentiate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talkative Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 A team deathmatch warzone wouldn't be bad at all, though, and takes minimal dev time. 8v8 would make for interesting straight up battles, particularly if the objective is to outlast your opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackuss Posted January 14, 2012 Author Share Posted January 14, 2012 A team deathmatch warzone wouldn't be bad at all, though, and takes minimal dev time. 8v8 would make for interesting straight up battles, particularly if the objective is to outlast your opponents. Ooo, an outlasting sounds good. More replies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astarica Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Just agree to leave the ball in the middle in Huttball and you got a nice deathmatch map. Heck, you don't even need the other side to agree if you're stronger. Just score say 3 goals and stop getting the ball. They'll most likely notice that you've no intention of scoring more good and deathmatch is good for them too (more medals) assuming the teams are not incredibly lopsided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts