This is what I had in mind with the TDM style gameplay as well. Both teams moving out to find and fight each other. However, I can see Trusty's point that it may lead to camping the same spots on every map.
What about the neutral capture point then? Placing a point like that somewhere in the centre of the map still forces both teams to move out but still provides some control over where the fighting will happen.
+1, a lot of people on TeamSpeak/Discord/Skype complain about the high volume on the intro/loading screen …
I'm sure it's a great soundtrack and 'CG' likes to promote it … doesn't mean we have to go deaf -< So if you like to keep it, it's fine … just not so loud !
For the other volumelevel, it's messing with the windows 'Volume mixer' to adjust gamevolume against TS/Discord.
Depends on the map imho, on some maps the 'cap' will be rushed/defended hard and on other maps it's not like it even exists.
A) Burnsides : unless 'union' makes it across … no one seems to be bothered about cap -> the currently 'camp the riverbanks and a rare charge' map ends on time (Union) or running out of CSA tickets -> it rarely comes to capping.
B) Piper's farm : as CSA defending that point would mean you're in a bad spot (unless you skirmish), Union knows we are waiting somewhere until the 'cap' is ticking down and that they can expect a countercharge/flanking manouvre -> so yes it's a ticket game.
C) Otto & Sherick farm : bit of the same, mostly it's flanking for Union but if CSA is organized it's like running against a wall … we do have the shooting from the house which would cause CSA ticket loss. -> If Union trying to cap point it's easy to shoot them from the white picket fences.
D) A certain corn map -> CSA can win this in under 8 minutes by 'rushing' cap and holding it, Sure the whole 'defenders spawn at point and can prepare does help Union a bit.
E) Gryst Mill : the building seems to hold a bigger strategic advantage then cap for CSA, again if 'cap' is being captured , CSA organizes a Countercharge.
F) ...
And yes like some Union already pointed out, on some maps we can see as far as spawn and see how everything is organized and adjust accordingly.
I fourth agree with being able to change the volume options in game. The in-game music is WAAAYYY too loud and the in-game voice is usually WAAAYYYY to soft even standing next to someone. (Sorry to any that try to speak in game, sometimes it is rather low to a whisper even standing next to me at times)
As far as the map without a cap point, I think Trusty needs to observe a line battle that is set up with the II Corp. All we do is ignore the cap point... I am highly in favor of a server just for line battles, I am sure Paioletti would far agree. Either side does not just camp in a corner or camp in a fence. Both lines move about in search of the other and slaughter each other. Now I do agree with some comments of this that we should have a few lines but typically most maps are not favorable to multiple lines.
A comment I see in several posts is a timeline. We have not had a timeline of any going-on with CG as far as development. I think the community as a whole needs some road map for development and eventual release to Beta. Dates are always nice to have but I know they are not required. At least give us something like what is being worked on for the next patch, what is being worked on for the next 3 months, 6 months. Keep us in the dark is a great way to exile your testing base.
It's not like we want the Devs investing all of their time in some 'reimagining/transformation', our suggestions are like stated 'thoughts for some fresh wind' … Devs can answer what can be easily done and what not.
Maybe instead on removing cap is removing 'morale' (or get it so high) so certain maps remain dynamic … so if you charge or line up in the open and take losses it doesn't matter --< just getting that strategic point in hands !!
Oh yes and on some maps, removing/remodeling some on those fences/stone walls (I'm sure Poorlaggedman has brought it up before) … stand in the open or get cover … most gamers will find any form of cover (welcome to the 21th century)
Last edited by Redleader; 07-06-2018 at 11:56 AM.
I understand we are spit-balling RedLeader, but I don't know how I feel about taking losses not mattering, then no one will be discouraged to act irrationally with their ticket supply. In my honest opinion, I was just saying that I agreed with removing the cap as an option I hope we explore. But overall I feel adding two caps, one that you have to own first before taking the next, would be a step in the right direction (as mentioned by someone else here before me). Regardless of whether they give us a mode without a point, it will happen either way during our planned Line Battles or in the future on private servers organized between units.
A simple list with features you think they should be implemented for beta like:
feature 1: implemented
feature 2: not started
feature 3: working on
feature 4: comes with next patch
feature 5: on hold. wait for feature 6
feature 6: internal testing/polishing
feature 7: implemented / in review
let us see which steps you take, maybe which problems you have and so on. we don't need a 1 hour video or a post with 10.000 letters.
something like:
"feature 3 is in progress. while working on it i noticed it's a bigger thing than i expected and underestimated it. I have to rewrite 300 code lines (of formation system for example) to make it fit. I will keep you up to date."
2 days later:
"Hey guys,
finally i was able to resolve the issue and feature 3 is now in internal testing phase!!!! YEAH!! if we dont find a mayor problem you can expect it as a patch next week"
This two small sentences would generate interest and if it's a cool feature it would release a hype train. After the patch the servers would be full.
I hate to compare games but the team at SWGEmu develops a spreadsheet to use as a checklist for each upcoming publish. Here is publish 10's checklist:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...gid=1983071807
just saying thats one of the good things about the morale system is that its forces certain tactics to be thought over before its done like if someone decides to charge straight in at the enemy then after that there left with the repercussion that they lost that many tickets charging or they managed to force the tickets down on the enemy's. But the idea of increasing it slightly may be something us as a community we can test to see if that helps. Also maybe the idea to do with having different maps for different servers isn't bad but perhaps it would be easier to add in a map voting system for that purpose.