Asymmetry and Multiplayer Thread - Vector Thrust

One thing that's always fascinated me is the concept of asymmetry in multiplayer. It can come in many forms, like unit types allotted, numbers of players, strategic advantage, etc.

I'm currently sorta tired from the monolithic posts I've been making to the hyperrealism thread (more like the why isn't X popular and why X is thread as it stands), so I can't really think of any interesting scenarios, but if anyone is interested, please feel free to post an asymmetrical game mode!

I'm not sure how this works but:
-Team deathmatch (preferably with attacker/defender role and a target a team have to destroy/protect), with team A has access to more advanced planes, but limited to gun only while team B only limited to weaker planes but can use any available weapon.

Most of the SP missions in flight games are asymmetrical scenarios (The team that has to escort a group of vulnerable bombers or surface ships is almost certainly at a disadvantage.) The countdown mode I suggested (where you spawn once per objective) would work well for escort missions (now the attackers don't have unlimited planes either) but it doesn't solve every problem with asymmetry, especially when there are some planes that inferior planes probably can't hit at all.

Class-based multiplayer could also give the teams the ability to tweak their class distribution-a small team defending an underground would most likely choose nothing but fighters (and maybe an AWACS for decoys) but the larger attacking team would need to fill many of their slots with heavy bombers to complete their objective, limiting the number of fighters the defenders would have to face.

There's also the cost battle system someone suggested where you aren't trying to be the last one standing but to cause the most damage with unlimited respawns. Your F-22 could cut a swath through the enemy fishbeds but if some lucky MiG shoots you down it would put them a lot closer to winning.

Also, what about missions with 3 teams? If voice chat is supported it would open up many opportunities for diplomacy and backstabbing (you may need team 1 and 2 to unite to destroy team 3's stronghold but team 1 and 2 have other mutually exclusive objectives to complete) as opposed to winning through raw firepower and reflexes. However, you would have to anticipate a lot of metagaming (i.e. "never ally with team 2 because it guarantees them a win later.")

TBH Asymmetry is really hard to balance when the planes have so many stats. It's not just a matter of damage and hitpoints, just think of how hard it would be for an F-4 to even get a lock on an F-22. But I'll still try to make asymmetrical missions once I get my hands on the final game because that's pretty much the only way to have setpiece missions in multiplayer. The way star wars battlefront 2 does the original trilogy levels just isn't interesting, the rebels and the empire are evenly matched and their tanks and starfighters are similarly armed.

Edited by: bornloser

Hey! Asymmetric multiplayer sounds pretty interesting!

Class based multiplayer, on my fist impression it might be hard to archive because some aircrafts have multiple roles. And even if works, it will be more like an imposed limitation (like a team can only select up to 1 multirole, 2 fighters, 1 interceptor) that actually a new gameplay dynamic.

As for the cost battle system that is exactly the way I’m aiming for the multiplayer modes, but it will still be optional to make the standard (not unit dependent) matches.

The hard part will be to balance the appropriate cost for each units, but to be more accurate ad consistent it will probably be computer generated considering all aspects of the units (and if needed tweaked later on).

But going back to Asymmetric multiplayer, I think it should be portrayed by the matches take place in different context, like fighting in the territory of one team and they have radar and Sam support, but the other team at earns 3x more points.

Not sure whether this still counts, but:
Youtube.com
Independence Day-style battle where it can be played either as PvE or PvP, the aliens have an overly huge city-destroyer UFO thing that acts as alien spawn point and has to be escorted into the indicated waypoint while destoying all human bases to win, while the humans have constantly spawning ground units (SAMs, etc) to aid in defense. Oh, altitude restriction is activated obviously. Every plane, including the aliens' only can fly below the alien ship itself.

The UFO-carrier thing only can be harmed from human land-based artilleries (which is your priority to protect, aside the city itself), nukes (some planes/bombers can carry nukes), and bonus point for able to search and destroy shield generators scattered around its body. Once the human team deal enough damage, the UFO-carrier thing will perform desperate attack by firing the main gun that capable of wiping out most of the city in one shot (remember! Human team have a city/facilities/etc to protect, if the damage reaches 100% the the team loses!) but takes lots of time to charge, let's say 2 minutes each shot. In this final phase, the UFO-carrier's main gun is actually its main weak-spot, which has to be destroyed in order to defeat the alien team. However, there are a lot of AA/missile turrets around it and for some reason, only standard missiles that works on it. The alternative is the most dramatic way, by kamikazing your plane into the gun (thus re-enacting that one final scene in the movie). Bonus point for showing a slow-motion instant replay scene afterwards.

timeSymmetry wrote: Hey! Asymmetric multiplayer sounds pretty interesting!

Class based multiplayer, on my fist impression it might be hard to archive because some aircrafts have multiple roles. And even if works, it will be more like an imposed limitation (like a team can only select up to 1 multirole, 2 fighters, 1 interceptor) that actually a new gameplay dynamic.

I was relying on opportunity costs, especially for missions that would require bombs too big for a warthog or frogfoot to carry, or that would require you to drop paratroopers to capture a position.

There's also another asymmetrical mission that could work:
Team A has to attack a heavily facility. Lots of ground targets at least one of which is only accessible through a tunnel. Team A has a selection of stealth planes (defined by the mission as fighters with a radar cross section below a specified value) to choose from, and limited respawns.
Team B, on the other hand, has inferior planes (3rd-4th gen) which may be selected randomly to keep them from spamming the same plane all match. They also have unlimited respawns. Both teams respawn in waves.

Team A must use their limited chances to to attack the facility, disabling radar installations and air defenses and taking advantage of the number of vietnam-era planes taking up space in Team B's fighter screen. Team B must use teamwork, data sharing, and maybe a few support aircraft to make the most of whatever planes they are assigned, until Team A runs out of F-22s/YF-23s/PAK-FAs.

I get the feeling that map design can be just as much a component of asymmetric multiplayer as classes.

Of course, since the main units in the game are modern aircraft, landscape has a sensibly lessened impact on the gameplay. Even the exaggerated cliffs of War Thunder wouldn't do quite as much, since we have the fantastic thrust to weight ratios of modern fighters making it possible to climb way out into the great blue yonder.

That said, mountains, tunnels and buildings can exert a pretty big influence on how players approach attack and defense. For example, a match with a single high value ground target would play differently if it were in the center of a city, rather than at the top of a mountain, even without the support of friendly SAMs.

______________________________________________________-

Now that I'm a little recovered from my midterms, I'll post one of my original asymmetric concepts.

I'd been thinking about how match making would work for the multiplayer, since there will obviously be players who are grand at flying, and those who are not so stellar. There's the easy method of segregating players by ranks, but I thought there had to be a method that allowed both to share the same space. What would be a game mode that would make it possible for both to be entertained while in a match? Keeping the advanced players from boredom and the nooblets from rage-inducing frustration. So far, my ideas never got refined enough to solve that issue, but a game type emerged out of thinking about it.

Point Defense--

The defending team is guarding a high value target at the center of the map. The attackers will be of relatively fewer in number, and will have the choice of spawning in at any direction a set distance from the target. At first, I imagined that the attackers would have access to either higher tier aircraft or aircraft with stealth in order to balance the difference in numbers.

They high value target is covered by an armor plate with a very high health value, necessitating lots of damage be done before the target can be attacked in earnest, a subterranean ICBM battery. It would probably be helpful to have an indicator for the health value of the armor plate while it is still active, so that players on both sides may change their approach according to how healthy the armor plate is.

As an alternative method of attacking the silo, there are a number of tunnels with entrances far enough from the target that it would take about 30-45 seconds to fly at 1000 kph from the defender's spawn point. Any attacking aircraft will be auto detected upon entering the tunnel. There are smaller tunnel entrances that lead in from closer to the defender's position, but they lead into the tunnels so that aircraft can only fly towards the entrances, and not to the battery. These entrances all have grills that must be destroyed before entry is possible, with notifications on screen and on radar indicating the state of each. The grills need about seven seconds before an aircraft can go through, otherwise they will do damage to an aircraft flying through them.

The attacking team will be composed primarily of stealth units while the defenders have access to any non-VLO units. The general ratio of aircraft will be 1:2 in favor of the defenders. The ground units will primarily be a large number of AA and SAM units on the defender's side. The attackers will have friendly cruise missiles targeted at the plate in waves. Points are awarded according to how important they are to the mission to incentivize objective based play instead of kills. Destroying AA and SAM will give attackers equal points to shooting enemies down, while defenders will get more points for shooting down aircraft nearby defense areas.