EA’s Star Wars Battlefront games have seen a lot of good,
even if there’s glitches within the gameplay. Last time in Equipping Ideas I
talked about mechanics, which leads the way into modes. Galactic Assault is a
fun mode, though with command posts there’ll be a few changes. Heroes vs
Villains is also going to see a change. Then there’s conquest and my new mode.
For Galactic Assault, each team has two permanent command
posts that always move with the phases. A third would appear when needed. The
two that are permanently on the field hold only ground forces. That third
command post holds all vehicles including the transports during transport
defence phases. No starfighters will be available in Galactic Assault. There’s
conquest for that.
In terms of phase switching, the defender’s CPs will move
as soon as a phase shift happens, with the attackers having their CPs move
after thirty seconds. When the phase includes a transport defence over a large
area, the command post holding the vehicles will remain in place throughout the
entire phase, but the other two will always move once the transport reaches a
checkpoint.
The objectives remain the same, though I’ve got some new
ones to add to freshen the mode up and make sure it doesn’t get as repetitive
in objectives as some maps were [Death Star II I’m looking at you]. Transport
defence, hack, capture and hold, set charge and hold, and destroy objectives
will still be within the mode, with four new ones being added [with an extra
one or two possible through DLC maps as destroy was with Crait].
Retrieval would involve the attackers fighting through
the defence to pick something up then bringing it to their base. Critical
Target would have the attackers needing to take out an important NPC [or more
than one in some cases]. Withdrawal would turn that around with the attackers
needing to defend numerous AI targets as they evacuate to a transport. Final
assault will always be the end phase of the maps it gets placed on, as the
defenders will get a reinforcement count of 100 with the attackers having to
deplete that using whatever reinforcements they’ve managed to keep throughout
the other phases.
Hero modes have been a bit of a mixed bag with EA’s
Battlefront, with Hero Hunt being an impossible win against someone who can
effectively use a hero. Heroes vs Villains – the main draw of hero-based modes
– was quite fun in the first EA Battlefront, though the second reduced that fun
slightly with the target system [though the rules are changing next month].
While I haven’t been on Hero Showdown, it offered a more confined experience
with only four players. Hero Starfighters held a system similar to that of the
2015 version of Heroes vs Villains.
It’s difficult to really implement a balanced heroes
mode, as the balance of such modes is in the heroes themselves. Heroes vs
Villains could become great again with whatever changes DICE bring, but I’ve
got a bit of a change to bring myself. I’m not ever going say bring it back to
how it was in Pandemic’s Battlefront 2, as that time has passed [though it
would be fun to see how it would play with EA’s systems].
Rather, the game would be a 10vs10 match, with each
person randomly spawning as a hero, and upon death are respawned as a new hero.
There’d be a point count that would increase by one upon each kill, with a set
amount of points to reach. For those who would rather not deal with the
randomness of such a system, there would also be a ruleset that allowed for the
choice of a hero, but once defeated you cannot spawn as that hero again.
There’s also a new hero mode I just want to mention,
inspired by the 2015 Heroes vs Villains and Ewok Hunt. It would be a 5vs5 mode,
with era-locked heroes. One side plays as the heroes, with the other being the
opposing grunts. The heroes have to survive being hunted for ten minutes. If a
hero is defeated, that player becomes an opposing grunt, working to take down
the rest of the heroes. If even one hero survives, they win.
With those modes out of the way, it’s time for conquest.
There’s a concept that the original Battlefront 3 was working towards in that
space and ground were interconnected. A player could start on the ground, hitch
a ride in a ship, take it up to space and roam around, then enter the enemy
cruiser and blow it up from the inside, using an escape pod to head back down
to the ground and finish up the battle.
Elite Squadron recreated that concept as best as it could
for the hardware it was on, reusing a lot of what that Battlefront 3 was meant
to be. Whether through the hardware limitations or a lack of balance, that scenario
I just said is pretty much a sure-fire win in Elite Squadron. It’s been almost
ten years since that release, and such a concept can be done a lot better.
The maps themselves would be less symmetrical than those
of Elite Squadron. And rather than just one central point of ground-to-space weaponry,
there would be three. They’d be less powerful than the orbital cannon of Elite,
but you’d still be as protected while using it [not very]. Cruisers up in space
– one for each team – will have cannons of their own to blast those on the
ground. Both will also be able to swat at starfighters.
The cruisers can be controlled by a person to place them
in a new position. While being controlled, shields recycle faster [think on
Pandemic’s Battlefront 2 and repairing the shield generator of a cruiser to
restore its shields] and weapons have more power. The cruisers can be boarded by
the enemy team when the shields are down, where they can then go for the power
core [which will have more health than what they did in Elite]. Critical
systems on the cruisers can be attacked to reduce its shield capacity and
reduce the usability of it. A destroyed command bridge will stop someone from
taking command, destroyed engines will stop it from being moved, and a
destroyed sensor relay will reduce the effectiveness of the weaponry.
If you’re inside the cruiser and want to get out, there
are starfighters in the hangar that – while you cannot pilot directly – are
able to be used to select what you want to go out in. Heading into a hangar
will automatically pull you out of the starfighter once just within it. And
while you cannot land on the surface of the planet, you can exit from it and drop
to the surface. Or you could go from cruiser to planetfall in a pilotable – or
at least semi-controllable – escape pod.
And all these transitions won’t result in a cutscene.
It’ll be instant. A chaotic battle on many fronts and not a transition scene in
sight. And as much as DICE like to keep these fights 20vs20, a large mode such
as this really needs 32vs32 players. And only one hero per side, that can be
stopped depending on which command post they came from. One hero per command
post, and if that command post is taken by the enemy, the player as the hero is
instantly defeated. Hero starfighters are separate from this, but can only be
used as long as the communications array is still functioning. Again, only one
per side.
The winner of the mode will be the team that reaches the
set point total. Each kill is worth a point, with a starfighter kill worth two.
A hero kill is worth three, and it also counts if they get defeated through a
command post takeover. Taking a command post is worth five points, reducing the
shields to zero is worth ten points, and destroying a critical system is worth
twenty points. Destroying the power core gives one hundred points, so it’s
worth trying to go for it. The command posts in space then disappear as the
cruiser is destroyed.
On the ground, along with those three command posts with
the ground-to-space weaponry attached, each team has two command posts to call
their own. A forward base and a main tactical base. The forward base acts as a
regular command post for that team to easily get into the action and can be
taken by the enemy team. The tactical base is different in that it is powered
by its own shield and has its own power core to be taken out. Once it is, that
tactical base can no longer act as a command post and the team that destroyed
it gets 100 points to their total.
By having these connecting systems, each area of the
battle is still important. In Elite Squadron, it always felt that the best
strategy to any match was to take the orbital cannon and wipe the shields of
the enemy cruiser, then board it, destroy the power core, then shoot back to
the surface in an escape pod and wrap up the ground battle. With what I have
said, I would hope that the ground and space engagements are equal in their
opportunity and that the strategy isn’t as straightforward.
Planetary Warfare is the name of a mode I have been
toying around with. It would feature three or more maps based on the same
planet that are able to be travelled to on the spawn screen. There’s two
versions of it I have been flitting between. I gave a bit of development to
both of them, so that I could present them here.
First, though – why not just one large map instead of
several smaller ones? Each map would be in different areas of the planet – so
with Naboo you would have Theed, the plains, and a Gungan city. There would
also be a starfighter map included. Second – what are these two versions? The
first would be an open conquest across the maps. The second is a more objective
based version with attackers and defenders. Both versions would use a perk
system that makes the maps valuable to control.
The open version would have a reinforcement count for
both sides, with each map having five command posts. One that is team-locked
and three open. By controlling the majority of the command posts on that map,
your team would get an active perk. The perks in this version are designed to
keep your team active for longer by increasing the health each unit has along
with a reinforcement boost for as long as you control it.
The objective-based version would be like Galactic
Assault, except all phases would be active at the same time. The defenders
would have all the perks to start with, designed to help them keep the
objectives safe. They would be active only for that map. The attackers would
have a reinforcement count, which would be boosted by fifty for each objective
won. If the defenders lose a map, that perk is lost, and the attackers gain a
perk that will help them across all maps.
The only thing I am uncertain of is how balanced they
would be. There’d be a cap on the amount of players in each map, but even then
I’m not certain how effective in terms of fun the mode would be. Perhaps if the
concept was put into action, changes could be made to evolve it into something
great.
It’s clear that I put greater focus onto conquest than my
own mode, but I feel there isn’t really much that I can talk about with it as
it currently stands. But conquest would be the main attraction of this third
Battlefront, as it certainly allows for the most open warfare to take place.
Whenever and whatever this third Battlefront is, I hope
it can see a great improvement over what the two previous games have given. Not
to say they weren’t good, but there’s always room for change and betterment.
Equipping Ideas to EA's Battlefront - Part 1 / Part 2
Equipping Ideas to EA's Battlefront - Part 1 / Part 2
No comments:
Post a Comment