Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Bringing in the Numbers

  1. #11

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592
    Like any game, a balance has to be found between beauty, utility, and game play. With wor, beauty and utility are exceeding expectations, but game play is slowly coming around. Like everyone has said already, the shallowness of game play with Skirmishes is starting to show, but... Honestly, I'm happy they're focusing on making the game better performing in this regard. I got picket patrol already, I'm not about to start asking for another game mode
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  2. #12
    I’m yet to play PP. is it proving to be popular in peak time? What % of the community would be playing PP compared to Skirmish?

  3. #13

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592
    No, it's not exactly popular. It's one life, and people hate having to spectate for 15 minutes when they can go and play skirmish. But the battles are tactical, the high risk brings high rewards, and seeing your team win just based through sheer brain power instead of meta is fantastic.
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  4. #14
    Holdfast is more arcade, and it has pretty much the same amount of players, its not how the game is played, realistic or arcade, weaponry from the Civil War era are not that popular, not many people like to stand there and slowly reload for one shot.

  5. #15
    My idea for a more arcade-y mode was that each player would control a line of 5 men, with the middle man being the player controlled character that you maneuver the line with. I think it would be a goofy mode that could possibly evolve into something bigger after the organized community gets it's hands on it. It would also avoid the one-life gameplay that the casual fanbase has demonstrated to steer clear of.

    Edit: Forgot to highlight the main point that playing such a mode would allow for more characters on the field while maintaining the same amount of connections, which could allow for the game to scale closer to the size of an authentic battle (especially in smaller engagements).

    Might be worth throwing a bunch of game mode ideas at the wall to see if anything sticks if/when the devs find time in their cycle to experiment.
    Last edited by Vankovski; 04-12-2019 at 05:39 AM.

  6. #16

    CSA Captain


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    592
    Like a commander battle, but instead of actually controlling the troops they just kind of parrot what you do?
    Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in!

  7. #17
    Yeah but ideally there would also be a variety of inputs such as hold position, fire at will, switching between open and closed order, ordering a rally on PC, etc.

  8. #18
    So, basically bots. That does not address the low player counts though.

  9. #19
    With 5 characters to each player, a 200 man server would look a lot more like an actual battlefield which could draw many more players to the game, thus increasing and addressing the low player count. I'm aware that putting the time into such a system would be costly and that it would be hard to justify creating it without a guarantee that it would actually draw more players.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaker View Post
    I’m yet to play PP. is it proving to be popular in peak time? What % of the community would be playing PP compared to Skirmish?
    I don't like it as much, probably for the same reasons that some do.

Posting Permissions

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