https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj9RJtstww4
I'm making a 3-team mobile TPS with PUBG Mobile-style controls, where you fight over a constantly moving control zone (like WARDOGS, not a battle royale). Feedback on the concept?
Hi! I'm a solo dev working on a mobile TPS prototype (gameplay video attached). The controls feel like PUBG Mobile, and the game mode is a zone-control fight, similar to the PC game WARDOGS.
This is NOT a battle royale. In a BR, the circle shrinks until one team is left. Here, the circle (the "control zone") keeps moving around the map, and three teams fight over it.
Core rules
3 teams. I'm convinced 3 teams are far more interesting than 2. Third-partying and temporary "2 vs 1" situations create a lot of mind games.
The team with the most players inside the zone earns points every second.
The team that controls the zone the longest wins.
A match lasts 10 minutes.
TPS camera, like PUBG Mobile. Gyro aiming is supported.
Current numbers
Map: 600m × 600m
Control zone: 100m diameter
Zone movement (current prototype): the full path is decided at match start, and the zone moves non-stop at about 1 m/s. The upcoming path is shown on the minimap.
Team size: currently testing 4 per team. I'd like to go as high as mobile devices and servers can handle, ideally 8–12 per team (24–36 players total).
Stacking death penalty
When you get killed, you get a penalty timer. While it runs, you don't count as a player inside the zone, even if you're standing in it. The penalty stacks with each death (+15s or +30s per death).
Players with a large penalty can't help capture the zone. So they'll probably switch to hunting enemies and reducing the other teams' headcount instead. I think it's interesting that this naturally splits players into roles: zone holders and fighters.
Respawns
Each team's respawn point is at one vertex of an equilateral triangle around the map center. The respawn points slowly rotate around the map.
What I'd like your opinion on
1. The overall concept
Does a 3-team fight over a moving zone with PUBG Mobile-style controls sound fun? Any red flags?
2. How should the zone move?
Right now it moves continuously. Alternatives I'm considering:
(a) Keep moving continuously, all the time
(b) Stay for a while, move, stay again, and repeat
(c) A mix of both
3. How much of the future path should be shown?
In a PUBG-style TPS, the defending side has a big advantage. Holding a building and waiting for enemies is very strong. So I think showing where the zone is heading creates the most interesting decisions: rush ahead to the next area, take the buildings there, and ambush teams arriving late, or stay and fight for the current zone. Random movement would mostly reward luck. How far ahead should the path be revealed? The whole match? The next 30–60 seconds? Only the next stop?
4. Match length
Is 10 minutes too long or too short?
5. Long walks back vs. the value of a life
Walking from the respawn point to the zone feels pretty tedious. But if respawning brings you back too fast, dying stops mattering. Options I'm considering:
Let players pick a respawn point anywhere on the map, except near the zone
Keep fixed respawn points and add faster ways to travel (vehicles, etc.)
Which sounds better? Other ideas are welcome.
6. The stacking penalty
What do you think of using a stacking penalty to create roles? Is 15s or 30s per death more reasonable? Should there be a way to reduce the penalty (decay over time, kills that remove some of it, etc.)?
7. Player count
Which sounds more fun: 4v4v4 or 8–12 per team? What player count fits this map and zone size?
Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!
PUBG Mobile TPS + Wardogs
1. The overall concept
Does a 3-team fight over a moving zone with PUBG Mobile-style controls sound fun? Any red flags? => Yes it does.
2. How should the zone move?
I believe the zone should be static and move to one of several predetermined areas randomly.
3. How much of the future path should be shown?
I could imagine a future path that is not shown at all and all teams have to rush after zone A has been taken, which would allow combat while traveling to the next spot.
4. Match length
Is 10 minutes too long or too short? => Sounds good.
5. Long walks back vs. the value of a life
I think there should be a death timer penalty that could stack: 10 seconds, 20 seconds, 30 seconds etc. Then you would respawn a few meters from the current zone. There should be a pause when changing the zone, otherwise someone who timed their death correctly would be moved directly to the next zone, giving them an edge.
6. The stacking penalty
Kills could remove part of the death timer yes.
7. Player count
That depends on the map size. You could have a 4v4, 8v8 and 12v12 modes.
takahasix wrote:
What I'd like your opinion on
The overall concept
Does a 3-team fight over a moving zone with PUBG Mobile-style controls sound fun? Any red flags?
Red flags are that the game style has been done by billion-dollar projects and multimillion dollar projects and smaller high-profile industry fan projects.
Make it if you want for a hobby project, but don't count on commercial viability. There is a lot of competition who have done it amazingly well, you're not in an open field but a very crowded one.
For questions 2-6, playtest your ideas and see what works well with your potential customers. I can only tell you from the games I have experience with, and your game is going to need to be different from those. What works great for one game may work badly for another. You may discover that specific detail and nuance to what you're making matters in the decision for each one of them.
7. Player count
This one is more about market research and your specific players rather than your game.
You need enough players to keep games filled, or players need to come to play in their own pre-made groups. That's easy for a game that has many hundred thousand concurrent players, not so much for a game that is obscure.
Riccardo Rivera wrote:
Thanks for your comments!
The idea of moving to the next zone once the current one has been captured is really interesting.
Unlike in an FPS, players waiting in ambush have an overwhelming advantage in a TPS, so this might lead to strategies like giving up on capturing the current zone and betting on the next one by getting there early.
It might also be possible to adjust things based on how the match is going to give the losing teams an advantage. However, that kind of adjustment might be unpopular in a competitive game.
I want to capture PUBG Mobile’s tense, drawn-out cat-and-mouse feel, with an emphasis on footsteps and third-person perspective. I want to make a game where you can win even if you’re not good at direct gunfights.
I also thought reducing the penalty through kills was a good idea.
In fact, without something like that, the penalty might just keep stacking up and become a drag. I’d like to find a good balance.
At the moment, I’m thinking of the penalty as a period during which you can respawn immediately and keep fighting, but you don’t count toward your team’s player count inside the zone.
There are various ways to penalize getting killed: a period when you can’t participate at all, a period when you count toward zone control but can’t shoot enemies, or a period when you can shoot enemies but don’t count toward zone control. Whatever form the penalty takes, I want it to add strategic depth and make a wider range of skills matter, so that players other than those with great aim can win too.
The map I’m currently building is 600 m × 600 m.
I’m aiming for a larger map than the typical multiplayer maps in games like Call of Duty Mobile.
frob wrote:
takahasix wrote:
What I'd like your opinion on
The overall concept
Does a 3-team fight over a moving zone with PUBG Mobile-style controls sound fun? Any red flags?
Show more
Red flags are that the game style has been done by billion-dollar projects and multimillion dollar projects and smaller high-profile industry fan projects.
Make it if you want for a hobby project, but don't count on commercial viability. There is a lot of competition who have done it amazingly well, you're not in an...
Thanks for your comments!
As you pointed out, being able to consistently fill matches is an important issue.
If I can’t consistently get 36 players online at the same time, with 12 players on each of the three teams, this project will probably be a failure.
Fundamentally, I think that means I need to create a satisfying gameplay experience that the major titles don’t offer.
What I’m aiming for is a game that emphasizes scouting, ambushes, and positioning through footsteps and a third-person perspective, where players can contribute to their team even if they aren’t good at direct gunfights.
The map has plenty of hiding places, so if you aren’t confident in your gunfighting skills, simply staying hidden inside the circle is also a contribution.
When moving from the old circle to the new one, I also want to tune the balance between the chance of being spotted by an enemy and the chance of successfully moving while staying hidden. I think the distance at which footsteps can be heard and the size of the circle are important here.
I want a player waiting around a corner to be able to beat a skilled player who moves around making footsteps and firing their weapon.
At the same time, I want to introduce movement that prevents everyone on all three teams from just staying hidden indefinitely.
But then that raises the question: why not just play PUBG Mobile in third person? I may need to put what I’m aiming for into words a little more clearly.