Valid Multiple teams

[Invictus 201]

Hey guys, I just had another idea.  Instead of the standard red and blue teams, how about we make it so that there can be more then 2 teams?  I am not sure if it would create more lag but I think that it would add a new dimension to the game allowing for more fun.  I know that it would be extremely hard to remake all the maps to be for 4 or 3 teams but it was just a thought.  Thanks for reading!

Edited April 28, 2019 by Maf

[Maf 32,300]

Under review
[gmpl] [gmmd]

Edited May 6, 2017 by Maf

[GUARDIAN-4.NG3L 9]

Nah, game will be more harder to play ;(

 

Heyho Community Bros,

 

i got a new idea!

My idea is to have 3 different Teams at the same Battlefield.

For example: Green, Red, Blue

To stop making up teams (red and blue against green for example) i have a solution.

Red team needs: 20 green flags and 20 blue flags

Blue team needs: 20 green flags and 20 red flags

Green team needs: 20 blue flags and 20 red flags

 

The idea behind it?- The game play will be more exciting and varied.

 

Advantage: 1. Fast raising fonds.

2. More fun.

3. The Maps had to be designed new, it would be cool and new, not the same always.

4. More strategically cause you need to defense against 2 teams and also get the flag of 2 teams.

 

Disadvantage: 1. battles would take longer.

2. The fond would be shared at more teams/ players.

 

 

Some rules (just proposal): 1. The fond : Team placed 1. 45%

Team placed 2. 35%

Team placed 3. 20%

2. Making up teams isnt allowed AT ALL!!

3. General Tanki rules.

 

 

I shared my idea, so share your opinion and tell us what you think! What are you waiting for? =)

[Seguin91 0]

but that would only work for TDM and CP

[r_DidYouKnowThat0 1,662]

It can, and would cause a ton of sabotage.

Players on Team A and Team B can work together on purpose to conquer Team C and Team D.

And vice versa.

 

It already happens in DM's. This is on a much larger scale.

[Meowmix56 174]

but that would only work for TDM and CP

Not necessarily.  Maybe you have to get two teams flags to score.  Would make for some long drawn out games. 

 

At any rate it should probably be its own game mode.

[RustyNail 1,538]

It can, and would cause a ton of sabotage.

Players on Team A and Team B can work together on purpose to conquer Team C and Team D.

And vice versa.

 

It already happens in DM's. This is on a much larger scale.

LOL Didn't expect to say that, but it seems you 're right. Co-operation between teams would create great unballance in the game. Pity, for it really is an intriguing idea.

[RustyNail 1,538]

Although, it might work if a 2X2 alliance would be obligatory, which is the same as if a team could divide and create an "internal" competition between its two sub-teams... Victory for the pair of teams, but fund division per team.

Edited August 15, 2014 by RustyNail

[Invictus 201]

It can, and would cause a ton of sabotage.

Players on Team A and Team B can work together on purpose to conquer Team C and Team D.

And vice versa.

 

It already happens in DM's. This is on a much larger scale.

I never thought of it that way when I came up with the idea, very good point.  But in the end, everyone wants the fund and the 2 allied teams will battle each other.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Invictus

[Invictus 201]

Added a poll so that others who don't reply to the topic can submit their opinions. 

[Faced 375]

A green team :P

[r_DidYouKnowThat0 1,662]

@RustyNail: That's basically just a bigger team then, and more complex. Lol.

 

@Invictus_Light: Who said the cooperation only lasted 1 round?

If friends wanted to, they can group together and play in Team A and Team B, assuming there will be 4 teams: Team A, B, C, D.

 

1st Round: Team A Wins.

2nd Round: Team B Wins.

3rd Round: Team A Wins.

4th Round: Team B Wins.

 

They'll just take turns winning, as you can see. So it wouldn't make a difference at all really.

 

And if not, then true, they'll try to back-stab each other, but you still cannot ignore issues such as what I had typed above, and

the whole general idea of  conspiracy within teams, and such.

 

As much as I like the idea, I think it's all  too severe in my opinion and would open a whole can of worms, adding more stress to Moderators as they have to maintain the situation.

Edited August 16, 2014 by r_DidYouKnowThat0

[kayitsiz 621]

We need new maps. And will be very hard.

İt can be very laggy.

[Invictus 201]

I don't know, I just think that there could be a lot of backstabbing. XD

[r_sukhraj200 6]

i thick that is a good idea

[canadarules 1,938]

this is not halo or cod ok

[Invictus 201]

this is not halo or cod ok

I know that, obviously >.<  It's just an IDEA that I had to introduce better and more enjoyable gameplay. :D

[canadarules 1,938]

I know that, obviously >.<  It's just an IDEA that I had to introduce better and more enjoyable gameplay. :D

all the dev's have played cod before..you know that right?

[Invictus 201]

all the dev's have played cod before..you know that right?

And?

[Jabinatorisawesome 72]

Hey guys, I just had another idea.  Instead of the standard red and blue teams, how about we make it so that there can be more then 2 teams?  I am not sure if it would create more lag but I think that it would add a new dimension to the game allowing for more fun.  I know that it would be extremely hard to remake all the maps to be for 4 or 3 teams but it was just a thought.  Thanks for reading!

It would make more lag but just minimize your screen Btw Invictus Nice idea :D

[Jabinatorisawesome 72]

all the dev's have played cod before..you know that right?

what's cod?

[sniper14c 118]

Hey guys, I just had another idea. Instead of the standard red and blue teams, how about we make it so that there can be more then 2 teams? I am not sure if it would create more lag but I think that it would add a new dimension to the game allowing for more fun. I know that it would be extremely hard to remake all the maps to be for 4 or 3 teams but it was just a thought. Thanks for reading!

in capture the flag, who is going to capture whose flag

[RustyNail 1,538]

For big maps only (or even special Quatro maps in the future).

Four teams, four flags, two alliances (2X2 teams).

Each team captures either of two enemy flags.

In the end, all allied captures gather and define the score. Victory for two teams, dividing the funds per team score.

 

Example;

Deep blue team allied with Light blue team (Blue Alliance).

Dark red team allied with Orange team (Red Alliance).

(Set up on the map either side by side or cross set up - that is, allied teams directly opposite from each other)

 

Lets say they play for 20 minutes, unlimited flags.

Blue Alliance

-Team A (Deep Blue) caprures 12 flags.

-Team B (Light Blue) captures 7 flags.

Red Alliance

-Team C (Dark Red) captures 16 flags.

-Team D (Orange) captures 0 (zero) flags.

 

Winner is Alliance Blue with 12+7=19 flags, while Alliance Red captured 16+0=16 flags (although Team C captured the most flags of all).

Battle funds are divided in two steps;

First, each Team is given funds as if it were a sinle player.

That is, as if the battle was between TEAM ALLIANCE BLUE [player A and B] and TEAM ALLIANCE RED [player C and D].

Second step, each Team divides what it gets to its players according to individual score.

 

I'm not good with that kind of maths but it souldn't be hard for TO Devs to implement such a type for dividing funds.

 

In case the battle set up is flag limited then the first ALLIANCE to capture the top number of flags is winner and the battle is over.

 

This idea seems fascinating and it would be great to see it in action.

 

Even if TO Devs decide not to adapt this idea for a map mode, it would be worth considernig for clan tournaments. Givving the oportunity to multiple clans make a cooperative war against other clans.

 

Thanks for reading this, don't forget to upvote if you like the idea.

Edited September 21, 2014 by RustyNail

[Basit_unbeatable 0]

nice idea dude i like it (Y) may the develpor think about it :)

[JJ410 221]

Moved from General