A moving King of the Hill is a game type we have talked about. We like the idea but one concern is that it might end up just being a moving dogpile where the whole team is fighting the entire enemy team, making the whole experience a cluster on one point. What do yall think?

 

Good luck with the cooking Rasen!

 

Tbh a massive dogpile would be fun the odd time. The 7v8 fights in voidstar have their moments the same way the solo fights in novarre / alderaan have theirs.

 

Ah yes Murderball! I like this game mode but as you alluded to it suffers from the whole team pocket healing one person and turtling.

 

How would turtling be prevented? How do we keep the crystal moving around? How do we make healers not OP in this game mode? For example, what if you couldn't be healed (like when you are in the Arena sudden death Acid Cloud) while you carried the crystal, good idea? Bad idea?

 

If you couldn't heal you'd die in seconds really so ... I dunno, could add an absorb shield to eat through before you start losing health or something? Killing an enemy increases the shield duration?

 

 

 

I'd love an alteraac valley style wz. Im guessing the game just isn't really built for that though and in practice it'd be lousy. Having lots of npc's running around in a moba style wz could scratch the itch though.

 

I'd like a more inimate wz though. Something a bit smaller maybe. A dogpile wz thats kind of chaotic would be good

Thanks for this thread btw, its a nice idea.

The MOBA idea would obviously be popular and interesting. I also think that NPCs would make things interesting.

First, my favorite aspects of the the current Warzones:

 

Novare Coast: The best part of this map and set of mechanics is the ability to be losing and then at the last minute, recap a node, resulting in a 2-0 victory. Basically, I like how this game is never decided when it starts, and it is always possible to get a win regardless of how bleak the outcome is (assuming relatively equal teams).

 

Voidstar: I like how this match can be a bunch of damage. I like how defenders on this match will (usually) end up getting lots of action due to the close proximity of the doors themselves.

 

Huttball: My favorite Warzone, by far. The sheer differing amount of things you can do to aid your team, or simply just have fun on your own, is quite awesome.

 

Civil War: I like how this map can become stressful as the defenders (the team with 2 nodes) have to react to the movements of the opposing team (assuming each team is relatively equal). There becomes an ebb and flow of the movements that is rather fun to predict and execute.

 

Ancient Hypergate: I really like this map, probably my second favorite. I enjoy having the option to score points 2 ways. 1 with objectives, and the other with simply killing. I think this map and set of mechanics caters to the most people possible; the PvE crowd, the Warzone crowd, and the Arena crowd.

 

Arenas: Honestly not very fond of the arenas as a whole, but I live them. My favorite part is that we get more than just 1 chance to win the game.

 

Bottom Line... I would say my request for whatever this new game becomes are:

 

1) ...For it to have options. I hate being forced to use the same strategy over and over. I guess this is why I like Huttball and Ancient Hypergate.

2) ...For it to not only have options for playing (winning), but also a rotating (random) set of winning conditions so the same match happening back to back would be somewhat rare.

3) ..For the new game to ALWAYS be possible to win regardless of the current outcome. Civil War has a mathematically consistent ability to basically be done and over once a certain point has been reached. I would rather it be "it can still be anyone's game" type of scoring similar to Novare Coast, or more realistically like Hypergate.

4) ...If the new game requires people to guard a node, then that job needs to be something other than just sit and wait. I honestly have no idea what that could be, but something. Perhaps interacting with, or even mounting, a turret and using that to aid your team from longer-distance whilst still "guarding" the node.

5) ...I would prefer the map to be a bit on the smaller side too. (Just think, that means less development time which = less money). I tend to spend a bit too much time just running from place to place. If not smaller, than there needs to be a way to "warp" to another spot on the map via interacting with some sort of gate.

 

Those are all of my ideas. I hope you find them informative and helpful. I also hope my post serves to keep things positively motivated and not a bunch of negativity. You guys who are the devs have improved upon launch-pvp-status tremendously. Keep it up! Which by the very nature of this thread, means that you are, or at least intend to.

Here's the basis for my idea: A new KotH style map with a SWTOR inspired twist to keep it from devolving into teams ramming head first into one another over and over. Map layout is going to be a key for this one so I will add a sketch when I get some free time at work, but basically it's a three tiered pyramid leading to two unconnected scoring platforms at the highest tier. Teams score points based on the difference in number of players in each zone. So if you have 4 players in the zone and the other team has 3 you score 1 point per second or few seconds depending on what the score limit is/how you want scoring to be handled. The platforms are elevated to encourage good use of knockbacks, pulls, physics etc.. The platforms should be around 20 meters apart allowing for some interaction (ranged dps, leaps, crossheals etc.) possible, but getting close to the edge puts you at higher risk of being knocked off. The added facet that makes this more than just a two point KotH is that there is a Huttball placed on the ground floor. A player holding the Huttball gives their team a multiplier to all points scored while they hold it (say double points). If a team is brave enough to take the Huttball into a scoring area they will gain an additional scoring multiplier (maybe triple or quadruple points). This will force teams to balance between going for the Huttball and keeping players in the scoring zones, as well as provides a comeback mechanism that allows teams to go all in on getting the ball in the zone and getting that big multiplier. The close platform location also allows for passing of the Huttball between the two platforms which is a nice side effect. Like I said,the layout is very important since you don't want to make turtling the ball too easy, but I think this is a solid concept to start with. Let me know what you think and I'll continue to make changes as I come up with them.

Just more huttball maps.

Hello Devs!!!

 

Ive always have had this idea for a warzone, a capture the flag warzone;

 

-Basic notion of the game is that there are two teams that spawn on opposite ends of the field, near their teams flag

-field is split into two halves, with each halve being conisiderably different than the other (one half is forest with dense brush, while the other is volcanic, with deep ridges similar to those on oricon)

-Ceartain benefits are given to team members who remain on their teams side of the map, such as access to mounts, turrets with long range aoe abilities, and other such advantages that help make defending easier and capturing more of a challenge.

-To pick up the other teams flag, it is simple as clicking the huttball, no channel of sorts.

- Handing off of the flag is a stationary, uninteruptable cast to a team mate within 10m of you.

- Winning team is the first team to get their flag back to their own base.

- field is considerably large, to make for longer, more strategic gameplay rather than point and shoot.

 

I like this idea for a game, one of the major dissapointments in warzones is tanking, and tanking in this type of game would be essential. Personally, id rather this be non hutt related. Rather, for it to be along the story of two teams of choice warriors are chosen in a show of strength twords the opposite faction. Something like that!

Another thought just popped...

 

I would be all for the Old-School Ilum, but scaled down to an 8v8 setting in size and scope.

 

I'd like to think that this would be at least a possibility on the table as there is data already in-game (or at least was). Instead of developing it from scratch, there is a base of data to work from already.

 

(I claim no programming skills, so if the above looks noobish... well... then it is)

Warzones that have a higher potential for last minute turnarounds should definitely be a thing. Civil War and Novare are far better than Voidstar for that reason as past a certain point, it becomes practically impossible to lose a Voidstar while there's always a last for a last minute comeback if your team plays above and beyond in a Novare.

 

New planets- Smaller scale maps. Tantive IV is a good idea. Team deathmatch, maybe? Hypergates equivalents without pylons?

 

NPC or even player controlled turrets (maybe with knockbacks or unique attack bars) sound like a good idea, if a bit gimmicky.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Ugolino

Assault on Korriban... or Tython

 

Inside ruins or temples. Temples on Korriban especially have large rooms, lots of pillars for LOS and corridors that could lead to objectives. Corridor stalking would also be an interesting profession for stealth classes.

Looking at how this thread has simply exploded, the Devs definitely got what they wanted.

 

And a note to you as well -- Please PLEASE take down all the information you guys see. There is a whole lot of great content in this thread just waiting to be extracted! It can be very easy to lose track of it all. I do hope you all have devised a way to take down this data and organize it into something tangible to work with.

Bottom Line... I would say my request for whatever this new game becomes are:

 

1) ...For it to have options. I hate being forced to use the same strategy over and over. I guess this is why I like Huttball and Ancient Hypergate.

2) ...For it to not only have options for playing (winning), but also a rotating (random) set of winning conditions so the same match happening back to back would be somewhat rare.

3) ..For the new game to ALWAYS be possible to win regardless of the current outcome. Civil War has a mathematically consistent ability to basically be done and over once a certain point has been reached. I would rather it be "it can still be anyone's game" type of scoring similar to Novare Coast, or more realistically like Hypergate.

4) ...If the new game requires people to guard a node, then that job needs to be something other than just sit and wait. I honestly have no idea what that could be, but something. Perhaps interacting with, or even mounting, a turret and using that to aid your team from longer-distance whilst still "guarding" the node.

5) ...I would prefer the map to be a bit on the smaller side too. (Just think, that means less development time which = less money). I tend to spend a bit too much time just running from place to place. If not smaller, than there needs to be a way to "warp" to another spot on the map via interacting with some sort of gate.

 

This! And I can't stress the importance of point number 4 enough. In CW, AH, NC and to some extent Voidstar you need to have atleast one team member stading around doing nothing for most parts of the match. This is in my opinion poor game design.

Breach-and-clear base raid scenario.

 

Two home rooms in a contested section of CZ-198 connected by a series of rooms and corridors, with two or three total possible paths between them. (Possibly include a large central room for bigger skirmishes.) At various choke points there are force fields which can be disabled by standing and channeling at a control panel (similar to the doors in the Aurora Cannon heroic in Section X). The object of the match would be to breach the enemy home room and destroy their macguffin.

 

This set up would require and reward sophisticated tactics and responsivity. Stealthers would be less valuable on their own, as they'd need a partner to open doors for them; however, they could be surreptitiously inserted into a room to assist in future assaults. The nature of the map would necessitate working in squads of at least two in order to clear through the doors, while the multiple avenues of assault would discourage a team from simply throwing all 8 people at one door.

Its not guarding the flag carrier, someone is going to sit back and be guarding your flag the entire round.

 

uh...and the other team will be coming for it...that's the point of the game. In domination games...the other team doesn't have to attack an off node if it controls 2. The other team HAS to attack the flag room in CTF.

Is every dev from Texas or something?

Rob Hinkle keeps saying this aswell.

 

I know I am

 

But in all seriousness I would like to see something where players are controlling a battle, taking nodes and sending npcs at each other in a dota fashion only in swtor, we can even have generals as targets. So npc kills, boss kills while fighting other players, I would NOT like to see players getting in stupid tanks and fighting each other as seen in wow, we need to stay very far from that kindof mess. I know what I just described is found in some fashion in other games but the more unique to star wars the better, when I try to recruit RL friends I tell them about huttball and they are almost always intrigued cause lets be honest huttball is sweet.

 

I have been super pleased with the direction the game is going but its been said a thousand times, cross server queing needs to happen, i know its been shot down but if swtor wants to climb higher in player numbers i feel this should be a priority.

 

And lastly I will say PAZAAK...GIVE ME PAZAAK

I appreciate you asking Alex...

 

My favorite map, going all the way back to beta, has always been Voidstar, I love the progression type map combined with the attack/defend mechanic. Since that's my favorite, here are my suggestions:

 

• Fleet type setting (invade)

• Attack/Defend mechanic

• Less "guarding" would benefit ANY design - nobody joins a PvP queue hoping they get to guard

• Single click objectives that don't require "guarding" afterwards

• Less spread out objectives that encourage teamwork (again, similar to VS)

• Huttball type "traps" in WZ's that aren't Huttball (player activated?)

 

PLEASE give us more than a map a year Alex...the current rate of development is outrageously slow. Re-skin if necessary...we need variety, not an intricate story to accompany the WZ...just new maps.

 

I agree with this 100%. I'd love to see an invasion / defend scenario of each other's fleet stations or a vanguard vessel like the Ziost Shadow. Modified of course for PvP purposes.

My attempt:

 

 

Since Huttball usually turns into deathmatches, why not create a ground death match map (Similar to the GSF mode). Here is the Map for it - Death Match Map

 

 

• A - Starting Zones for each team
  
• B - Buffs (Speed, healing, Damage, Damage Reduction)
  
• C - "Safe Zone"
  
• D - Acid Field (Similar to Huttball)
  
• E - Traps (Similar to Huttball)
  

 

 

 

 

 

A - Self explanatory.

 

B - Speed, damage, and healing buffs are already in game. Add in a new buff for damage reduction. If a player chooses to get that buff, he/she will trade in offense for defense. He/she will lose 50% damage output but will gain 50% damage reduction for 10 seconds. (Another idea I had was the player will lose 50% healing done to them for 50% damage reduction, but that seems a little extensive). Now, if you have a damage reduction buff, you can't pick up another buff for the duration of the time. If the numbers are too high, we can adjust.

 

C - Safe Zone. A player can enter the safe zone whenever that player is low on health, but once in that safe zone, he/she can't heal, DPS, use a medpack. Basically, he/she will become a liability for their team. It will work the same as as the starting zone. He/She must leave it after X amount of seconds or be disqualified from the match. If a player decides to attack someone, and then fall back into the safe zone, he/she will lose 10% health every 5/10 seconds.

 

D - Acid fields - Similar to Huttball fields

 

E - Traps - Similar to Huttball traps.

 

 

 

 

 

• Each team starts with 0 points.
  
• Player Kills = 1 Point
  
• Trap kills = 2 points
  
• Acid Kills = 3 points
  
• Timer is 12 mins. Whoever can collect the most points wins.
  
• 8v8
  
• Done on a Tatooine Map.
  

 

Edited April 1, 2014 by Celwinn

Too jaded to believe this thread will matter.

Name: Boarding party!

 

Players: 12 vs 12

 

Style: Small objectives

 

Very similar to Battlefront, both Republic and Empire have a capital ship on each end. Each faction has a support frigate currently engaged in close battle. First round is one faction attacking another factions frigate via boarding party. You would take a fighter (or transport, mechanics would work like speeders in current warzone) Invading boarding party has to destroy core components of the ship to invade the enemy's capital ship.

 

If a capital ship of a faction is destroyed (Or damaged badly enough) the faction whom lost their capital ship must claim the enemy's ship to restore communications for evacuation.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Honestly the game mode is probably horrible but at least if its space and boarding enemy ships I am all good. Take a look at the picture I created. Mind the horrible photoshop skills.

 

http://postimg.org/image/t5cx3ipbp/

Make a Free for All map (FFA) and see how your devs do playing it. It should also have a Korriban look to it.

Infinite carnage basically.

 

I like this. But also I like the idea of an 8v8 TDM with infinite respawns on a 10min timer. Most kills wins. This would essentially give us an instanced "Open World PvP" mini game.

Here's something for the wall of crazy.

 

We have GSF and ground combat, but the two are not tied together like they are in e.g. Star Wars Battlefront. Starting off in a ship hanger, boarding assault craft, heading over to an opposing ship, boarding it, sabotaging from the inside, manning turrets, etc...awesome! However, I get the feeling that it may require loading screens to go from ground to GSF and vice versa...which would suck.

 

Here's another idea: what about having some sort of turrets in a warzone that can be captured by either side and manned?

 

How about some sort maze component? Of course, the maze would have to change so that it is either fresh every time you run the WZ or have it change dynamically during the warzone. To what end? I'm not sure...

 

P.S. I would personally prefer having community reps that tell us the hard truth rather than ones that don't say anything at all. I like these types of threads. I would hope that all the rage produced in the other pvp FAQ thread is not too much of a deterrent from posting. However, it would have been nice to present that information with at least some positives. It felt fully negative.

 

Constructive criticism is a good thing. What often goes on around here is destructive criticism on the players' part. I really hope that changes.

@ DEVS:

 

I just read about 90% of this thread and am quite impressed. Since the people that read and post the forums are generally the more "loyal" player-base... Perhaps this should be the pattern of how to deal with this thread:

 

1) Allow it to grow until you guys feel you have exhausted the mainstay of ideas from the general population.

 

2) Gather ALL the data and put it into a spreadsheet of some kind.

 

3) Compare spreadsheet to what you guys have already developed in your back rooms.

 

4) Confer and decide upon 5-8 viable options that appear to be doable within the constraints you set for yourselves.

 

5) Next, and this is IMPORTANT, set up a way to allow us, the player-base that you have asked, to actually vote on what we want to see next.

 

6) Online voting can always be "skewed" on your end to show results that you want, but it will get us involved more, and without the need to post something lengthy on the forums, we can just click a button to vote on what looks best, would allow you guys to get the most amounts of yays/nays for as close to a proper statistical analysis of the responses as possible. More people responding = more data= a good thing.

 

--You guys have opened up Pandora's Box, but in a good way. Gather the data, keep the trolls' responses to a minimum (delete the negative posts that offer nothing), and keep the communication going!!!

Any kind of map that has constant action i.e. Huttball with offense and active defense.

 

and/or

 

A map that has an odd number of teams.

Capture the Flag.

 

Two bases.

 

Each having a flag inside it.

 

Team must capture enemy flag and return it to their base (friendly base).

 

Simple.

 

Awesome.

Fight in replicas (i.e. same art assets) of the player housing. partly this is just evil marketing to get more exposure for your housing. But partly it is how indoor paintball has a different feel to outdoor paintball.

 

Take an elevator to an one of three to six floors, clear the floor, get the Important Click, etc. Extra credit if we get to trash the place.

Scale.

 

For the love of god add some scale already.

 

In a controlled environment you can push teams to 10v10, surely. Then just shamelessly rip off Arathi Basin for a start. Please please please no more of the 3 equally spaced out node races different only in the capture mechanic on a map you can run across in 90 seconds.