Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Team Deathmatch

  1. #1

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592

    Team Deathmatch

    Trusty and Fancy, how difficult would it be to introduce a team deathmatch mode into the game? We take the capture points out of the game, use some of the more open maps without clear defensive points(such as west woods, the cornfield, etc,) and just allow lines to batter at each other and whittle away the other teams tickets?

    I'd really like to see some "accessible" maps for unorganized weekday play. The current structure is stale and bleeding alpha testers as defined defend strategies begin to become meta(maps such as bridge crossing and Burnside,) and I feel like this may be an easy, simple way to spice things up. It also opens up the possibility of more "layers" for each map in skirmish mode.

    Or, if that's too simplistic, we could do a Domination type mode where we add two more points to a single map(Burnside works for this,) and test a multiple capture point map? With Burnside it could be the current Confederate point, the bridge, and the Union side of the bridge, just right of the bridge by the fence. It's not historically accurate, but with this mode we have two strongly defendable points and one very, very sketchy bridge point.
    Last edited by LaBelle; 11-19-2018 at 06:21 AM.
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  2. #2
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Thank you for the suggestion.

    We’d like to implement TDM where fitting. The skirmish areas portraying the more chaotic parts of the battles with no real defenders such as Miller’s Cornfield and Also Maryland Heights as it was a relatively small skirmish taking place on a huge area. Having it TDM would make it somewhat more of a hunt for each other which we’d very much like to see tested.

    That being said, the attack and defend skirmish mode is currently what we are focusing on with the introduction of end game events shortly and overtime mechanics in the near future.

    - Trusty

  3. #3

    USA Major

    Shiloh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Shepherdstown, WV
    Posts
    715
    I have to admit I've been a bit disappointed over the last few weeks. Twice the Union has lost very close matches (Pry Ford last weekend and Piper Farm last night) after the Confederates had abandoned the field and retreated back to spawn to preserve tickets knowing we didn't have time to cap. I don't fault anyone for those tactics as they won both maps and that's what the goal is but the Union also clearly held the field because of those mass retreats and isn't that how most victories were determined in the Civil War and other wars for that matter?

    The side that holds the field at the end historically wins.

    It's the current 'victory deciding' parameters that encourage those tactics but abandoning the field to win a map should not be encouraged in this game moving forward in my opinion as it goes against any logic historically.

    I'm open to some of LaBelle's ideas for gaining variety on these maps but do understand that it walks a fine line with being historically accurate to the battle.
    Last edited by Shiloh; 11-19-2018 at 03:58 PM.

  4. #4

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592
    We're currently charging Confederate infantry over a bridge nearly 200 yards long without cover to take a city that was shelled into submission in real life. Historical accuracy be damned, it needs to step aside for a few weeks.

    The retreating back to spawn to save tickets is not a tactic I enjoy. It can win a match for you, but it robs the fun from the game. We're Alpha testers: Our goal right now is to test game features and maps, and to build hype for the game. If players come in and see one side just falling back to spawn to hide behind a fence, that doesn't get the blood pumping.

    My idea with the multiple points, such as placing a point right on Burnside Bridge and a third on the Union side of the river on the fence line they currently hold, encourages back and forth charges over the bridge. The bridge is angled enough so that it forces both teams to engage in CQB to dislodge the enemy and capture. The Confederates have a longer approach to their first point, but much more cover to utilize in a defense. This long approach forces them to utilize their flags and keep them alive, unless they want to burn time and reinforcements trying to take back their side of the river. The Yanks have a much shorter route to their first objective, and by proxy to the bridge, but they're running over open field to do so. If they lose their first objective, they'll need to fight in a direct assault, or utilize the foliage on their river bank to retake their point.

    It forces both teams to push, give ground, fall back, retreat, and push again. No more camping spawn, no more Alamo last stands for 45 minutes. Make it so holding two points makes the enemy bleed morale("Oh no we're losing ground AND we're dying, I'm so demoralized") and I promise you we see a rise in population, popularity, group play outside of companies, and a decline in the current, stale meta.
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  5. #5

    CSA Major General

    Redleader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Kingdom of Belgium
    Posts
    456
    The things we thought of where :

    • Multiple 'cap' points -> Capture one and move to the next.
    • Multiple 'cap' points -> Multiple ones that can be contested that dwindle tickets (which will you defend/attack)
    • Switching attack/defend : system like 'verdun' -< both sides have a change to attack/defend a certain point.


    Now it usually comes down to 'break the enemies morale' & 'conserving tickets' which kind of break game dynamics, off course the question would be if that is intended ?

    ideas like DM (deathmatch)/ Battle royale system is nice … but due to slow reloads (unless pistols) it might be very different.

    Other ideas :
    • Having Skirmish servers & Line battle servers : same maps are more convenient to certain modes then others. (some like skirmish/some like big open maps)
    Last edited by Redleader; 11-19-2018 at 07:15 PM.
    I write for my personal account and from personal experience, unless stated otherwise.

  6. #6
    Moderator

    CSA Major

    Leifr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,268
    I'm under the impression that the first of those two points will certainly be appearing in the later 'Historical' game mode on the larger complete Antietam map. Whether or not folk can wait that long is another question, I would agree that something needs to change soon.

  7. #7

    CSA Captain

    Saris's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    South East Texas
    Posts
    1,294
    Quote Originally Posted by LaBelle View Post
    Trusty and Fancy, how difficult would it be to introduce a team deathmatch mode into the game? We take the capture points out of the game, use some of the more open maps without clear defensive points(such as west woods, the cornfield, etc,) and just allow lines to batter at each other and whittle away the other teams tickets?

    I'd really like to see some "accessible" maps for unorganized weekday play. The current structure is stale and bleeding alpha testers as defined defend strategies begin to become meta(maps such as bridge crossing and Burnside,) and I feel like this may be an easy, simple way to spice things up. It also opens up the possibility of more "layers" for each map in skirmish mode.

    Or, if that's too simplistic, we could do a Domination type mode where we add two more points to a single map(Burnside works for this,) and test a multiple capture point map? With Burnside it could be the current Confederate point, the bridge, and the Union side of the bridge, just right of the bridge by the fence. It's not historically accurate, but with this mode we have two strongly defendable points and one very, very sketchy bridge point.
    Good Idea Labelle! Hopefully if this is implemented it will freshen up the game for many people
    Texas Poppin B
    My Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/c/SarisTX

  8. #8

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Leifr View Post
    I'm under the impression that the first of those two points will certainly be appearing in the later 'Historical' game mode on the larger complete Antietam map. Whether or not folk can wait that long is another question, I would agree that something needs to change soon.
    It needs to happen soon, even if it's just one map, for one server.
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  9. #9

    USA Major

    Shiloh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Shepherdstown, WV
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by LaBelle View Post
    The retreating back to spawn to save tickets is not a tactic I enjoy. It can win a match for you, but it robs the fun from the game. We're Alpha testers: Our goal right now is to test game features and maps, and to build hype for the game. If players come in and see one side just falling back to spawn to hide behind a fence, that doesn't get the blood pumping.
    I couldn't agree with you more. I would never personally order my guys to do that and I feel deflated when an opponent can run away and still win. I would propose that when an entire team vacates the map like that the victory is given to the other side. We're supposed to be fighting afterall AND testing and to have a hard-fought map end like that just plain stinks for everyone and is a hollow victory in my opinion.

    For any of you who have played Rising Storm 2 with multiple capture points I believe that's what LaBelle's talking about. It wouldn't be unlike an actual battle. For example Burnside Bridge was a primary objective but once that was taken then the Union moved to take Otto and Sherrick Farms and the surrounding areas then finally toward Sharpsburg before being pushed back by Hill at which point they retreated for the most part back to the bridge.
    Last edited by Shiloh; 11-19-2018 at 07:19 PM.

  10. #10

    CSA Colonel

    LTC Philip A. Work's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Austin Tx
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by Leifr View Post
    I'm under the impression that the first of those two points will certainly be appearing in the later 'Historical' game mode on the larger complete Antietam map. Whether or not folk can wait that long is another question, I would agree that something needs to change soon.
    I agree sooner rather than later. Skirmishes have always felt like a shoebox shooter with muzzle loaders. We need space to maneuver and dynamic objectives not just a repainted capture the flag.

    Texans Always Move Them

Posting Permissions

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