Page 1 of 20 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 193

Thread: Fresh Idea for skirmishes

  1. #1

    USA Brigadier General

    Maximus Decimus Meridius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,555

    Fresh Idea for skirmishes

    Dear developers, dear community.

    Many of us have been with WoR since spring 2017 and have been involved in all development steps since the beginning. We are only a relatively small community, especially the alpha testers, but we try to contribute as much as possible to the game and development. It is a pity, however, that many of the 7000-8000 players with Alpha access are no longer really reached by the game and even some groups of players (companies) have either withdrawn or switched to stand-by.

    The reason for this is the (naturally justified) slow development of the game and the emerging fatigue of the skirmish mode. In this case we don't want to talk the developers into it and we have full understanding for the hard work they do update after update. The latter, however, should not leave the Devs cold, because with the Skirmish the indispensable foundation stone for the whole development is laid. Of course our players feel the same way and that's why we want to do our part to solve the problem.

    The aim of this initiative is to provide the Devs with powerful concepts from the community with which the skirmish mode can not only be stabilized, but also upgraded for the benefit of all current and future players. Another step would be to inspire the people who have already lost interest in the game.

    This would be possible due to the following concept: The skirmishes are now very repetitive and familiar. The defending team has a superior position (usually represented by a fence or wall) on most maps, resulting in a bloody, demoralizing race of the attacking team. The very restricted character of the current skirmish maps prevents the tactical development and exploitation of all tactical possibilities.

    A very large part of the community would like to have slightly larger maps or other possibilities to give the skirmish rounds more tactical depth. I.e. dynamic capture points.

    This is not possible on the Hagerstown Turnpike or Sunken Road maps. Either because there is little space on the maps, the defender can shoot into the attacker's spawn (Hagerstown) or because the defender only needs to occupy two positions to control the map. Thus, there can be no tactical depth, at least no more than "all together attack at point X", which is not worthy of this wonderful game.



    (At the moment the US troops are always visible and without cover, which is very frustrating for them)

    However, size is not a solution. Hookers Push or Millers Cornfield are big maps, but their full potential is not used. In the case of Hookers Push, the attack will be the same as gathering at the spawn and marching through the middle over 2/3 of the field. The whole fight takes place somehow only in the last third of the map, which is a pity.



    (Variant 1: A central capping point at the other end of the field)



    (Variation 2: a side capping point at the other end of the field to bring the focus of the fights into different areas of the map during the battle.)

    Here our proposal would be to add more capture zones to the large maps to give the rounds more dynamics and flexibility.

    For example, another cap point could be in front of the field, which must be taken first. Only when this point is captured, it is possible to conquer the next one.
    It would be possible to give the defenders a small time frame in which it is possible to recap the point, if this does not happen, then the area cannot be entered by the defenders and the focus shifts back in their direction and the first point is lost for the remainder of the game. Maybe the point will act as a new spawn point for the attackers.

    Another advantage of multiple capture zones is that players can see progress in combat and can directly see their actions making a difference in the battles because of the dynamic feature of the multiple cap zones. The morale display and its function is great, but too abstract to enhance immersion. If the "front line" keeps moving forward or backward during the battle, the players get a feeling of success or even tactical achievement.

    Overall, it would bring fresh slate into the skirmishes, which has already become routine and rather boring for many players. Most are waiting for the big battle mode to release (the entire map would be to huge at this stage). To shorten the time until then, to keep the testers active and to bring back inactive testers, this would be a simple but effective possibility in the eyes of many of the community.

    War of Rights is known for its great attention to detail and its exemplary implementation of historical accuracy. Which has motivated many to want to get involved but the general vibe from the community these days has shown drastically that the player activity has decrease because of the repetitive side of the current skirmish mode. A small change that could make a big difference is just having a more dynamic skirmish game by just adding progressive cap points. Another idea may be that if CG developers donít want to change the current historically accurate maps then consider adding in other alternative history maps in which the concept of progressive cap points can be used or even utilization of different areas on the maps can be used.

    I thank the many people who helped me to formulate and work out this proposal, so I do not claim to be the author, it is rather a proposal of many from the community to the developers for their great game and its community.

    a special thanks goes to Ross for his correction of my english text.

  2. #2

    USA Lieutenant Colonel

    Ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    England
    Posts
    54
    Great suggestion there Max and totally agree with the Idea of have a fresh new game mode which involves dynamic capture points. Also maybe if the developers don't want to add a new game mode in to the current maps like a dynamic capture point then the idea of having a fresh new map from a different part of the Maryland campaign (like south mountain) could integrate this concept.


  3. #3

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    558
    No new maps. I want the ability to raise and lower my game volume, and polish on existing features in the game. No new content; polish what we have.
    Currahee!

  4. #4
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    4,927
    Hi there!

    Thanks for the feedback and suggestions - much appreciated.

    It very much sounds to me like what you are suggesting is basically Historical Battles: https://warofrights.com/KickstarterUpdate3 although possibly at a smaller scale.


    It is certainly something we'll consider (taking a moving front line, multiple cap zones, moving spawn points, etc) into the skirmishes game mode when Historical Battles have been deployed. Skirmishes were always meant as the "quick action" of WoR hence the size of the playable areas (excluding Hooker's Push). If anything, as you rightly point out, simply increasing the size of the skirmish areas will not change a whole lot in terms of how fighting is conducted around the capture zone.

    I would like to challenge you in regards to your example of Hagerstown turnpike - I've seen several excellent flanking moves there during the alpha. It is possible with a good team and a bit of luck.

    In short; we don't want to alter skirmishes so much that it will hardly be different than Historical Battles but we will consider bringing certain elements from Historical Battles into Skirmishes when Historical Battles is developed and being tested out by you guys based off of your feedback.

    - Trusty

  5. #5

    USA Brigadier General

    Maximus Decimus Meridius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,555
    but it's a long road until we can get the Battle Mode right?

    it's hard to hold people active which you may have also noticed in the last stress test which it was hard to hit 100. some months ago we were happy to be the last of 150.

    Some fresh wind would motivate people to stay and keep testing.

    A lot of people appreciate drilling more than skirmishing which should be like that (even if I like it as a company commander ^^ )

    EDIT:

    to Hagerstown

    yeah of course its possible but it can be very frustrating as a union guy because you are visible and under fire since spawn. It's hard to rally the men and coordinate.
    Last edited by Maximus Decimus Meridius; 07-05-2018 at 10:02 PM.
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=522&dateline=14500460  02


  6. #6

    USA Major

    Shiloh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Shepherdstown, WV
    Posts
    669
    I like the idea. It could even involve varied capture points/spawn points that randomize and force commanders to have to think their way through a map and with wider map configurations to allow for more dynamic flanking maneuvers providing the attackers with more opportunities. The idea is that no one would know anything about the map we were about to play regarding spawn points and capture points until the beginning of the match.

    Right now the Union is at a disadvantage on most maps, our approaches to attack are well know, our movements are in plain view and the defenders know exactly where and how to defend.

  7. #7

    USA General of the Army

    Bravescot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Perthshire, Scotland
    Posts
    3,002
    I'm fully behind what Maximus has said here. I am honestly board of War of Rights as it currently stands and I was hoping two week away might make me feel like playing again when I got back. I was mistaken. Hagerstown is a boardinng map along with many others. The open Union points where we have 0 cover (Miller's Cornfield and Hill's Counter Attack) to hold the points on suck.

    I don't' know about the rest of the USA side but the 42nd is running out of steam the way there maps have been chosen and put forwards to us. 90% of the time the USA side during events has a large amount of CSA guy's playing on it a second the USA is just not fun. More and more people would rather be the CSA sitting happily behind a stone wall shooting down others as they come at them rather than be the USA throwing themselves at that stonewall.

  8. #8

    CSA Brigadier General

    rbsmith7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    579
    I have a feeling the flag spawning system will add a lot of new energy to the game as it will allow for a much more sustained attack and the flag itself will hopefully be a capturable object, beyond the objective point, worth fighting for.
    An unprofitable servant of Christ Jesus,

    'Fighting' Chaplain Bradley
    Company Tool & Steam Profile

  9. #9

    USA General of the Army

    Bravescot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Perthshire, Scotland
    Posts
    3,002
    Quote Originally Posted by rbsmith7 View Post
    I have a feeling the flag spawning system will add a lot of new energy to the game as it will allow for a much more sustained attack and the flag itself will hopefully be a capturable object, beyond the objective point, worth fighting for.
    All it offers it a new slower mobile spawn. It changes nothing about the maps themselves which seem to be the heart of the issue.

  10. #10

    CSA Captain

    Saris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    South East Texas
    Posts
    1,205
    The repetitiveness of the game is killing the enjoyment of many right now, its always the same map, with the same map rotation, and with the same play styles. Also with the same capture point, the maps tend to blend together. Only when we as a community decided to ignore the point and fight it out at different areas of the map we might not fight over usually is when the game is refreshing and enjoyable to play. Here are some ideas to make the map refreshing, add multiple spawn points that make the location of incoming reinforcements historical accurate. As an example, for Hagerstown turnpike, have half the federal team spawn in the woods west of the road to simulate the confederates getting shot from both sides or split up the confederate spawn for dunker church into two different points in the woods to simulate reinforcements from different areas. Theses are a just a few examples.

    Melee, until we have blocking, charges will be devastating since whoever gets the first stab usually wins. No matter how many times you have to stab somebody, whoever is first wins. With the introduction of blocking into the game, many people will think twice before charging in since the people who will be charged will be able to block their attack if they are ready. Blocking will shift the dynamic of the game to defense since most of the game currently revolves around charging and hoping that you overcome the defenders. The game currently gives the attackers too many advantages over the defenders. The attackers get the ability to move around, flank exposed positions, coordinate attacks, and so on. The the defenders are forced to defend an area that might be a horrible position or possibly a good one(depends on the map, looking at you Hooker's Push and River Crossing). By the time I know which map is next, I can almost assure who's going to win it right after people spawn in. I can bet that the game would be way more enjoyable if I was able to defend myself in melee, instead of hoping to get the first stab. Holdfast: Nations at War, a game in roughly the same state of war of rights, I dont feel too useless in melee there since you can actually block, even if the blocking system is unresponsive and slow. It gives me the chance to live if I was charged.

    Long time to do anything, I cant even recall of how many times I tried to stop reloading in order to defend myself against, you guessed it, a charger. Stopping Reload, different firing stances, equipping/unequipping bayonet, kneeling/standing up, going into and out of melee mode, all of these takes a considerable amount of time that shouldnt. Along with trying to stop reloading, I dont know how many times I watched myself died since I go to kneel yet takes all day to and then proceeds to get shot. This goes with the many advantages people who are attacking has, what is the point of trying to resist when you cant even do anything while getting stabbed twice and just watching yourself die.

    The soldiers dont feel unique at all besides their uniforms and the few units that gets accurate guns like the sharpshooters. How about giving historically elite troops like the Iron Brigade, Texas Brigade, Stonewall Brigade and Irish Brigade unique perks, like faster reloading, or faster melee, nothing game breaking but least gives you the edge over a unit that was green(1/4 of the federals at antietam were raw recruits, they shouldnt be able to go toe-to-toe with a battle hardened confederate unit). Besides the uniforms or guns, there is literally no point in choosing a unit over the other.
    Last edited by Saris; 07-05-2018 at 10:26 PM.
    Texas Poppin B
    My Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/c/SarisTX

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •