Page 1 of 1

Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 5:54 pm
by dakky21
THIS WON'T be official battle royale application, but for a normal map.

I came to idea to make a map based on Tribal War - Florida... with one different rule - you have your "protected" start spot, but you lose if you lose all your territories in the open spot.

Something like this - rough sketch

Click image to enlarge.
image


So you get random deployment in the wild (green) and one starting territory (red) which has auto deploy and can't be attacked. Losing condition is not having any troops in the green.

I guess it could work for all type of games. Tell me what you think of gameplay, then I can attend to making graphics.

Of course, in the green field, everyone can attack everyone.

Re: Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 6:53 pm
by dakky21
Better version... LOL, this could be a draft already ;) :shock:

Image

Re: Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 7:08 pm
by dakky21
And yeah, shields can attack any green terriotory one way. But if someone eliminates you from the green part, you're dead.

BTW

bonuses:
hold 5 battleground territs for +1
hold 6 battleground territs for +2
hold 7 battleground territs for +3

etc. or something like that. No regions.

Re: Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:50 am
by iAmCaffeine
What's the point? Seems way too small.

Re: Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:18 am
by dakky21
The rough draft is just an idea. So the idea is to have a lot of places where all can fight and attack each other (like on Colosseum but without the audience part). But this map would be for ordinary 2-12 players, not for a real battle royale. So if in 12 player game everyone get 3 territs in the middle, looks it would work with 36 spots. Just thinking if that concept would work?

Re: Battle Royale v.125

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 4:36 pm
by iAmCaffeine
Okay, now I have a rough understanding of how it would work. It seems a bit vulnerable to first round eliminations? I could be wrong.