Looking for a new server idea | Warband Hunger Games

Would you like to revive Warband Hunger Games?

  • I do.

    Votes: 27 60.0%
  • I don't.

    Votes: 18 40.0%

  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .

Currently viewing this thread:

Cray-Z

Recruit
Greetings, dear users and players. So, as at the moment I'm not holding any active server, I'd like to fix it. I'd like to do something new, or simply revive some of the old projects. At the moment, I'm thinking about reviving my old project "Warband Hunger Games," but I'd also like to hear your thoughts about it. Maybe someone will have a better idea?
 

xxbunglexx1

Banned
Battle Royale Module - Hunger Games has been revived multiple times before. There is always initial enthusiasm that inevitably dies out.
 

Cray-Z

Recruit
Lil Riccii said:
Battle Royale Module - Hunger Games has been revived multiple times before. There is always initial enthusiasm that inevitably dies out.

I was thinking about warband battle royale a lot, and yes, probably I will do it.
 

Greedalicious

Grandmaster Knight
WB
Mainly its the time between games that make people not want to play Hunger games, once people die they have to wait up to 10-20 min before they can play again. Smaller maps and once you die you get put into a different map would kinda solve that, still not a perfect system though. Would probably need a decent amount of modding.
 

Alyss

Grandmaster Knight
I think  hungergames server die because of the admins. I was banned for teaming when I saw that the opponent in front of me had a better gear and ran.
 

xxbunglexx1

Banned
Teaming shouldn't be considered problematic, it adds an interesting dimension to these survival themed modules as to trust another individual becomes a large part of the game-play. It might seem a little basic to reference the actual Hunger Games film but if I remember correctly, the candidates from each subservient district teamed with one another at the beginning to ensure their survival. I believe OGL's point is outdated, they fixed the hunger bug a long time ago although I may be wrong. I'd like to reinforce Greed's point, the time between each game outweighed the enjoyment of the gameplay. I suggest a smaller map to be used and a weekly tournament to keep players enthralled. I'd happily help to organise, stream, fund and propagandise these ventures. But to conclude, a Battle Royale game mode would garner a lot more attention than a refurbished Hunger Game's module.
 

Cray-Z

Recruit
There was an incident, when 15 players teamed. It was looking just like battle, not actually survival games.
 

OurGloriousLeader

Grandmaster Knight
Lil Riccii said:
Teaming shouldn't be considered problematic... believe OGL's point is outdated, they fixed the hunger bug a long time ago

Of course it's problematic, it's a small scene and one server, if people are just going to go on TS and work together until they're the last alive nobody is going to join and play solo. It's not an equal battle royale if there's always going to be large groups of pre-organised teams and it's not like it's an interesting, spontaneous alliance of people choosing to work together to survive. It's just friends all joining at the same time. Completely goes against the idea of a battle royale.

The hunger thing was not a bug either, but the thing that encouraged people to fight (win before you die of hunger). It was the version of the moving circle in Arma/Pubg BR games, but not as effective. I believe they changed it to you having a minimum health instead of dying? Can't remember. Either way it wasn't very fun.
 

Kragen

Grandmaster Knight
WB
Teaming should not be allowed imo and the hunger system was a good idea but very poorly implemented.
 

xxbunglexx1

Banned
OurGloriousLeader said:
Lil Riccii said:
Teaming shouldn't be considered problematic... believe OGL's point is outdated, they fixed the hunger bug a long time ago

Of course it's problematic, it's a small scene and one server, if people are just going to go on TS and work together until they're the last alive nobody is going to join and play solo. It's not an equal battle royale if there's always going to be large groups of pre-organised teams and it's not like it's an interesting, spontaneous alliance of people choosing to work together to survive. It's just friends all joining at the same time. Completely goes against the idea of a battle royale.

The hunger thing was not a bug either, but the thing that encouraged people to fight (win before you die of hunger). It was the version of the moving circle in Arma/Pubg BR games, but not as effective. I believe they changed it to you having a minimum health instead of dying? Can't remember. Either way it wasn't very fun.

I regularly played on the Hunger Game's server, I witnessed player's teaming in pairs on various occasions. I can't say that I've ever lay witness to 'large groups of pre-organised teams' which suggests I didn't play as much as I thought. I also didn't realise that the hunger mechanism was used to speed up the rounds. Originally, the amount of HP that was removed from a player's health bar as a result of the hunger mechanism was disproportionate. They fixed this imbalance punctually. If a Battle Royale module was developed correctly, it would alleviate the problem of player/server inactivity. I agree that the hunger mechanism was unpleasant and should not be revived. I believe it would be presumptuous to suggest the use of a circle identical to those in mainstream Battle Royale games as I have no idea how hard it would be to develop. I suggest the use of a much smaller map for the time being, multiple servers (that I'd happily fund) and a thorough admin team that can actively spectate the servers and punish teaming.
 

Fietta

buıʇʇǝs uoıʇɔǝɹıp ʞɔɐʇʇɐ
Section Moderator
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
If you're a good player in warband you normally win as a solo anyways, I never had problems with groups, just means I get more loot.
 

Alyss

Grandmaster Knight
Fietta said:
If you're a good player in warband you normally win as a solo anyways, I never had problems with groups, just means I get more loot.
2v1 is simple but when you win 2 times in a row all the serv start teaming against you. I was in a 1v15 once :sad:
 

Nexoner

Sergeant Knight
WBNWVCM&BWF&S
I always wanted to make a mode like in "Heroes&Generals", where you need to capture the points by turns, moving farther and trying to get the main enemy point, but in the Warband's mode "Conquest" it is impossible to make, because the spawns are randomized for both teams. They are not devided for teams like in "Team Deatchmatch".
I made some big maps specially for it, but in vain. And they all has been removed (lost), but I am ready to make them again, if this mode will works.
 

Apfel

Knight at Arms
Nexoner said:
I always wanted to make a mode like in "Heroes&Generals", where you need to capture the points by turns, moving farther and trying to get the main enemy point, but in the Warband's mode "Conquest" it is impossible to make, because the spawns are randomized for both teams. They are not devided for teams like in "Team Deatchmatch".
I made some big maps specially for it, but in vain. And they all has been removed (lost), but I am ready to make them again, if this mode will works.
In NeoGK there is a system with multiple flags, you have to conquer the first after that you can get the second, i dont know if you can add more flags than 2 but if you really want to do this and try this you should contact KingArthur whos in charge of this mod
 
Top Bottom