What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
I think most would agree that the new war types, while being a fun change in gameplay, don't really work well when player numbers get low. During small wars teams can't cover all the objectives and so have to ignore some. For S&D that means each team bombing points on alternate sides of the map with minimal combat (travelling to defuse is too slow), whoever plants most efficiently wins. For CTF you see a similar trend of people being unable to defend all 3 flags, so each team ends up running a single flag back to base uncontested for the whole war.
Both of these turn the gameplay into a jogging simulator rather than an MRP war. Couple that with the losing team getting zero campaign points and people stop bothering to run objectives once their team is far behind.
To resolve this I'd suggest applying the same lane system as conquest wars when generating the objective points. I.e. if the server is quiet you have a single offensive and defensive objective in these wars. This should focus and intensify combat and provide less of an advantage to whichever team has greater numbers.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- Teams always able to reasonably defend their objectives.
- More combat during wars.
- Less time spent running across the map.
- New war types feel less quiet during small wars.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- Focus on a single objective may encourage camping.
- A single unfairly placed objective could destroy balance. Consider spawning 2 flags in a single objective zone if it's a 1 lane war.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I hope this wouldn't be difficult to do and it might help to liven up small wars. Right now they're a bit dull.
I think most would agree that the new war types, while being a fun change in gameplay, don't really work well when player numbers get low. During small wars teams can't cover all the objectives and so have to ignore some. For S&D that means each team bombing points on alternate sides of the map with minimal combat (travelling to defuse is too slow), whoever plants most efficiently wins. For CTF you see a similar trend of people being unable to defend all 3 flags, so each team ends up running a single flag back to base uncontested for the whole war.
Both of these turn the gameplay into a jogging simulator rather than an MRP war. Couple that with the losing team getting zero campaign points and people stop bothering to run objectives once their team is far behind.
To resolve this I'd suggest applying the same lane system as conquest wars when generating the objective points. I.e. if the server is quiet you have a single offensive and defensive objective in these wars. This should focus and intensify combat and provide less of an advantage to whichever team has greater numbers.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- Teams always able to reasonably defend their objectives.
- More combat during wars.
- Less time spent running across the map.
- New war types feel less quiet during small wars.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- Focus on a single objective may encourage camping.
- A single unfairly placed objective could destroy balance. Consider spawning 2 flags in a single objective zone if it's a 1 lane war.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I hope this wouldn't be difficult to do and it might help to liven up small wars. Right now they're a bit dull.
Upvote
0
Donator
