Watching the RTX video, I noticed that the woman standing behind the podium stated that one person learned to stay second place through out the Regicide game until the very end when they take the king down and become the winner. I took what she said as essentially that Regicide is broken, that there is no incentive to be the king until the very last moments of the game, and that people who understand this will exploit the game play along this line. If there is no incentive to be king throughout the game, then the game is broken.
But that’s just it, the incentive is that the king wins the game. The risk with being second is that 1. third might be close enough that if they get the kill, they win the game 2. following that same logic, second place isn’t guaranteed that kill in any way.
I’ve experimented with gametypes like this before (well, as close as you can get in Reach) and it really is fun, as the guy in the lead now has to work for that lead instead of getting to keep it with minimal work. It also rewards good positioning, helps teach map awareness, and levels the playing field so you can’t just run around stomping on everything or stealing kills to win like in H3 Lone Wolves and Reach’s Rumble Pit.
Regicide is a FFA Slayer-kind game, everyone kills everyone, the difference is that 1 guy has a special reward if you kill him, if you kill any other player but the king each kill will give you 10 points, if you kill the “king” you will get 20 - 35 points and you become the “king” after killing him.
Nothing fancy really
> Watching the RTX video, I noticed that the woman standing behind the podium stated that one person learned to stay second place through out the Regicide game until the very end when they take the king down and become the winner. I took what she said as essentially that Regicide is broken, that there is no incentive to be the king until the very last moments of the game, and that people who understand this will exploit the game play along this line. If there is no incentive to be king throughout the game, then the game is broken.
>
> Thoughts?
Someone has to be the king.
And the incentive to being the king is that the king wins the game.
Good point man. Although Regicide still sounds fun to me, and I will probably play it even if 343i doesn’t do anything to fix it. I think the best option would be to give extra points or medals for being the king and for getting kills as the king. Kind of like a juggernaut could get a medal for a spree. But instead of just getting medals for sprees as the king, give medals for say every 30 seconds you stay king. And maybe give a few more points or something for every kill you get as the king.
I understand the game, the incentives, etc. I understand strategy and gamesmanship.
For flag, your incentive is to grab the flag.
For bomb, your incentive is to carry the bomb to the enemy base.
For territories, your incentive is to get into the territory and take it.
For Slayer your incentive is to slay.
For KOTH, your incentive is to stay in the hill.
For Odd Ball, your incentive is to hold the ball longer than others.
For Infection, your incentive is to remain human and rack up points.
For Regicide, is your incentive to be the lead? According to the video, probably not. That is why I think it is broken. It seems that her comments were VERY counter productive for advertising H4.
> Watching the RTX video, I noticed that the woman standing behind the podium stated that one person learned to stay second place through out the Regicide game until the very end when they take the king down and become the winner. I took what she said as essentially that Regicide is broken, that there is no incentive to be the king until the very last moments of the game, and that people who understand this will exploit the game play along this line. If there is no incentive to be king throughout the game, then the game is broken.
>
> Thoughts?
For starters, that lady is bs angel, she is a part of the waypoint team, and she was talking about david ellis, the content producer, and what she was talking about is not a broken game. Why would she mention that if the game was broken? 343i has been great watching what they say and letting info slip out when it needs to. This is a strategy but it still requires skill to do. You need be able to maintain second place which means keeping yourself above everyone but the king. On top of that, you need to be near the king to ensure you get the final kill and not someone else.
Ok, perhaps I should not have said her comments were counter productive. But it seems like an unintuitive game at the very least.
But it was her comments about that tactic, “dirty, not nice” that got me thinking it was an exploit and that it would lead to a lot of people feeling frustrated when they play that game with people who have figured it out, sort of like how people camp in Sword Base when playing infection.
At least that was the clear impression I was left with, and thus this thread…
Your incentive is that people will come for you and if you can play it smart and keep your cool you will be able to rack up points pretty quickly.
In a traditional FFA you get the lead and that’s it, in regicide you have to keep focused or players may catch up pretty quickly. Just like the instant spawning in slayer, it is to speed up the game and keep up the pressure.
> Regicide is a FFA Slayer-kind game, everyone kills everyone, the difference is that 1 guy has a special reward if you kill him, if you kill any other player but the king each kill will give you 10 points, <mark>if you kill the “king” you will get 20 - 35 points and you become the “king” after killing him.</mark>
> Nothing fancy really
Actually the king will always go to the leader. If those 20-35 points put you in the lead, then you will become king. If those 20-35 points dont put you in the lead, you will not become the king even though you killed the leader.
That’s if you do kill the king. It may be a stolen kills by someone else. Also, killing the king doesn’t always guarantee you 1st place, even if you are in 2nd.
There are SO many variables when playing regicide that sitting back and killing the king to hit the score cap and win is far from a sure fire method. Players who are consistently slaying opposing players and the king, but only getting enough points to stay in second place won’t have any advantage over players who are just straight up slaying everyone at every opportunity. From what I’ve heard, I doubt being the king is a death and respawn sentence. The way the game likely flows is that most players are coming for the king. During their vengeful quest, they are likely to meet other peons and fight along the way. These opportunities likely present free clean-ups for the king, just as often as the king gets “team-shot” by a bunch of peons. if this is not the case, I am sure 343 would have / or will add king-traits that make it a fair or roughly fair for king vs peon scoring. IE the king should not change hands 20 times in one game. An ideal gametype would feature better players fighting for king, just as in FFA, the lead doesn’t change hands 20 times a game. Its likely the better players (or ones who are having a good game) stay in the lead.
343 will have thought about regicide enough that as it is played, a player who achieves king won’t die repeatedly until kingship changes hands… that would be pointless. Runaway kings should occur fairly often, being too far ahead in score to win the game.
> Regicide is a FFA Slayer-kind game, everyone kills everyone, the difference is that 1 guy has a special reward if you kill him, if you kill any other player but the king each kill will give you 10 points, if you kill the “king” <mark>you will get 20 - 35 points and you become the “king” after killing him.</mark>
> Nothing fancy really
Wait… But what if the King has 200 points and the second place person had 150 points. When the second place guy kills the King, he will have 170-185 points, meaning the guy killed (King) would still be the King when he respawns… right?
It’s an FFA game. There really isn’t much to prove or to strategize in FFA because of the sheer number of variables in each engagement that are beyond your control.
That being said, I’m not a fan of regicide as it seems to penalize players for winning, or rather granting an advantage (the availability of bonus points on a kill) to players who are losing. The winner isn’t consistent in FFA anyway, because you can get lucky/unlucky and have far more varied outcomes even with a decent discrepancy in actual skill. Yet this gametype seems like it only provides more random outcomes by giving everyone a chance to gain extra points and assault the player who is winning in droves.
I like standard FFA slayer or King. Although I actually think I would prefer Infinity in FFA over standard in FFA because power weapons are a completely random draw in a skilled FFA game (whoever spawns closest to each in most cases, such as that top mid sniper spawn on Reflection in FFA) and at least Infinity would offer some degree of individual control. I don’t like Infinity for Team though, just this.
I would have preferred a combo of Infinity and Regicide for FFA and to leave Team alone.