Idea on replacing Cap Zone system

[Rabid Penguin]

This thread inspired me to post an idea I've been thinking about for months regarding how the game is played.

Firstly, get rid of Cap Zones as we know them entirely. Replace them with "Areas" and "Objectives".

HOW IT'S PLAYED.


Areas:

1. Maps are divided into Areas of varying size depending on how built-up or open they are. Take Pavlov's for example. The huge open field behind C would be one area, yet each floor of each building would be separate areas.
2. Each team would start with one starting area on opposite sides of the map, all others start neutral.
3. An area is initially captured when you have troops in an area and the enemy does not. Number of troops required to control an area is about 15% of your team (rounded up). For example, on a 32-player server, each team has 16 people, therefore 15% of 16 is 2.4, therefore you need 3 people to control an area and make it friendly territory. On a 64 player server, each team will need 5 players to control an area. With only a few players, you'll only need one. This will demand and encourage squad-work but also make it possible to play with few players.
4. If you capture an area and then move onto another area, the first area stays friendly territory until captured by the enemy.
5. When the enemy moves into a friendly-held area with enough troops to capture it, it becomes contested. So long as any friendly troops remain in the area, the enemy cannot capture it until they kill them all or drive them out. Once they do though, it's captured instantly.
6. Players can choose to spawn in any friendly-controlled area that does not border an enemy or contested area.
7. A modification to force respawn would allow the Commander to force everyone to spawn in a certain area, to allow him to mass a counterattack or defence where it's needed.

Objectives:

1. Objectives are key points on the map, similar to what the current Cap Zones are.
2. When you control an area that contains an objective, your entire team is rewarded with points bonuses. (ie +1 point per objective for every action - so if you hold 2 objectives you get +2 points).
   1. A practical example: without any objectives you get say 1 point per kill, 5 points for helping control a neutral area and 10 points for helping capture an enemy area.
   2. Control 2 objectives, you get 3 points per kill, 7 points for capping a neutral area and 12 points for capping an enemy area.
3. Objectives would also be strategically important, ie highly defensible, or have a dominating position over the map.

Victory conditions:

1. Capture 75% or more of the total number of areas. (instant win, round ends).
2. Bring the enemy team down to 0 reinforcements and wipe them out (instant win, round ends).
3. Control more than 60% of the total number of areas when the round time expires.
4. Have the most total team points, if neither team controls more than 60% of the areas when the round time expires.

I hope this hasn't been confusing. Discuss!

[Proud_God]

Just a question, would the zones cover the whole map? Cause I don't think that would work, as you would constantly be running to the next zone to cap, while the enemy is doing the same. Ie: too much reward in running all over the map.

[Rabid Penguin]

Originally Posted by Proud_God

Just a question, would the zones cover the whole map? Cause I don't think that would work, as you would constantly be running to the next zone to cap, while the enemy is doing the same. Ie: too much reward in running all over the map.

Well yeah, once you cap an area you move onto the next one, but once both you and the enemy end up in the same area you have to fight over it, so if you move on then you'll be giving that area to the enemy.

Each area isn't going to be too small either (possibly what I said earlier about each floor of a building being a separate area wouldn't work, i may edit that). For a small map, like Apartments, you might only have 6-8 areas, and for a large one like Mamayev-Kurgan or Red October Factory, 15-20, so there's not too many areas to try to control.

The areas would be set out so each team can't just avoid and circle each other; I see it as basically a way of creating a "front line" from one side of the map to the other. You'd have to capture areas progressively, slowly moving your front line forward. You could end up with salients and cut off squads in a friendly territory completely surrounded by enemy territory.

Basically, think of how Risk works. Another way to look at is similar to how the online campaign mode is intended to work, but within a map rather than map-to-map.

Here's a quick hypthetical game:

Each team spawns at opposite ends of the map and moves forward toward the centre, capturing areas as they move through them uncontested. Eventually both teams will run into each other near the middle of the map, creating a frontline.

Then, by using teamwork and tactics, you push your frontline forward by moving into the enemy-controlled areas and killing him, thereby capturing that area.

This could even be a new game type. Call it "Frontline"

[Proud_God]

I think that gametype would be perfect if we are able to have 150 vs 150 matches. With our current player size, I still think you have too little men to cover all that ground.