FFA Map In Progress

posted on May 21st, 2011, 12:44 am

I noticed how FFA's are generally not played because it invites turtling.  So, I'm going to create a small FFA map.  This map be a 3-player map and will have 2 resource pairs per player.  But this map has a twist.

Most free for all maps have the resources spaced out so that there are no fleet engagements and each player is pretty well protected as well as the expansions.  On this map however, when you expand, you're likely to be on a parallel course with the enemy constructor.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 2:18 pm

The Map is ready for testing.  It's name is Central Ring.

[Anonymous]

posted on May 21st, 2011, 2:53 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on May 21st, 2011, 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

After further review and testing, the map size will be increased to prevent one yard from covering everything.

Basically, ffa style went from turret race to shipyard race with this map.  Once one player secured the center, it was game over.  That was not my intent at all.

[Anonymous]

posted on May 21st, 2011, 3:21 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on May 21st, 2011, 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Okay, I've updated the map a little and increased it's size.  It is now 4,000 units bigger than it was before.  You will not be able to see all of the moon pairs without a scout, sensor station, or sensor upgrade.  Ready to be tested.

Just to be clear, this map is intended to discourage turtling by putting the moons close together, but not so close that putting a yard between them means that the game is over and you win.

PS:  If I'm sucessful, can you put in the guide on how to create a "fun" ffa map?

posted on May 21st, 2011, 3:39 pm

FFA is just shit because you dont win by good playing. It typically ends with taking strong ppl out first by bashing them...no fun at all...

posted on May 21st, 2011, 3:45 pm

My goal is to create the first FFA map that is fun.  Instead of flaming about how bad they are, why not give me suggestions on how to create such a map?

posted on May 21st, 2011, 4:01 pm

i dont think he was flaming you tcr. but i think the fundamental problem with ffa is that if u attack some other player, you almost certainly leave yourself open to being wiped out by the player you arent attacking.

if 2 players are roughly equal in skill then they will need to have all their forces present to adequately fight each other. so sending half your fleet out to harass 1 player while the other half defends is still very risky.

thats the reason i think so few people play ffa, because once you commit to attacking a player, the other player can come and have no opposition while they stomp you.

in a 1v1 if u attack them, they either have to meet your fleet, or you trade exps. either case preserves a balance.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 5:02 pm

Good points.  But that won't keep me from trying to build a good ffa map.  There has to be some way to balance it.

During the last test, someone tried to build a field of turrets at the spot I was expanding at.  But I already had a shipyard there and another one at my base building ships.  Shipyards always trump turrets and this map was designed to keep it that way.  As a result, I was able to secure the resources but no one else tried to do so, not even after my expansion was destroyed.  I think that the game-play on this map could have gone exactly as planned if no one tried to build any turrets at the start.  I built one turret after I built the shipyard, but I intended for it to be a sensor platform.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 5:33 pm

Here's an idea, what if I overlapped a regen nebula with a damaging nebula and re-aligned the map so that the main base mining and expansions point towards the center.  With somewhat of a mix of overlapped regen and damaging nebulae adjacent to shield disabling nebulae blocking a direct course to the enemy base, but leaving a direct course to the center opened.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 5:58 pm

TCR, it's not the map that is the problem, it's the underlying concept. Changing the map in an infinite number of ways won't change that.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 6:12 pm

The only way I can see a FFA being fun would be to change the nature of it, like Unleash is saying.  Instead of worrying about multiple opponents, make it like a mini tournament.  Let's say you have 4 players.  The map would be set up in such a way that they would be split into twos and each "group" would be far away from the other group.  This would mean you would have a clear opponent that you must first face, and it would be risky to go all the way across the map to attack anyone but your clear opponent, because then your opponent would have a strong advantage.

So now you have a relatively close 1v1 to do first.  Once you're finished with that, you must face the "champion" from the other side of the map, and battle him.  Presumably, you get done at similar times.  This would add some interesting developments.  The first game could be very time critical, and could be about taking out an opponent the fastest way possible so that you can get map control and start attacking the other side before they can finish their game.  Or it could be stated beforehand that you can't affect the other side until they finish, although you can scout and build up your forces, etc.

The idea of having two 1v1s in the same game is actually pretty cool!   You would have a greater chance of using a lot of end game units during the second 1v1, once you control your side.

Discuss!

posted on May 21st, 2011, 6:15 pm

The only way I can see a FFA being fun would be to change the nature of it, like Unleash is saying.  Instead of worrying about multiple opponents, make it like a mini tournament.  Let's say you have 4 players.  The map would be set up in such a way that they would be split into twos and each "group" would be far away from the other group.  This would mean you would have a clear opponent that you must first face, and it would be risky to go all the way across the map to attack anyone but your clear opponent, because then your opponent would have a strong advantage.

So now you have a relatively close 1v1 to do first.  Once you're finished with that, you must face the "champion" from the other side of the map, and battle him.  Presumably, you get done at similar times.  This would add some interesting developments.  The first game could be very time critical, and could be about taking out an opponent the fastest way possible so that you can get map control and start attacking the other side before they can finish their game.  Or it could be stated beforehand that you can't affect the other side until they finish, although you can scout and build up your forces, etc.

The idea of having two 1v1s in the same game is actually pretty cool!   You would have a greater chance of using a lot of end game units during the second 1v1, once you control your side.

Discuss!

i like the idea, but only if the idea of "dont attack the other side til their 1v1 is over" is deleted. because then you might as well just have 2 separate games of 1v1 with cease fires to allow higher tech.

i like the idea of 2 1v1s on the same map. if u delay too long the other side's winner can come annoy both of you or 1 of you lol.

posted on May 21st, 2011, 6:18 pm

@ mals idea
i like it ... definetly like it
would love to see this ingame ... if you need someone for testing im here 

posted on May 21st, 2011, 6:22 pm

Well, it would be their option beforehand (everyone agrees to it if that's the kind of game they want), I was just presenting two ways of doing it.  It would be completely different from 2 separate games because of the force composition you used, which ships ranked up, etc., etc.

Don't get me wrong, I like the time critical idea better as well.

[Anonymous]

posted on May 21st, 2011, 7:37 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on May 21st, 2011, 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hmm.  Double 1v1 game.  Unfortunately, there are no maps set up that way currently, but I definitely like the idea.  Just don't require the other game to finish.  Actually, Nebula Gate comes pretty close to being a double 1v1 already.  Perhaps I could modify that map a little to make it a true double 1v1.  The reason I like FFA's so much is because they last a lot longer than team games, but no one else likes them because they take too long with no action.

That takes FFA's to a whole new level.  I'll definitely try to design my maps this way and test them out.  I'll consider the Central Ring map a failure and design a double 1v1 map and see how it goes.

Thanks for the idea Mal!

EDIT:
By the way, Star Traffic seems to be set up this way.  I may try using that as a test map first.