most teams do not even try to win

[Sir Reginald]

with the point system and weapon upgrades most people do not even try to win maps
the main point of the game has come down to camping and getting your points
winning and losing does not matter
alot of the maps get really boring everyone just camps till the last min of a maps then try to cap
simple put there has to be a reason to WIN

Military tactics, the way the cap zones are set up and the point system are set up it makes tactics next to useless
it makes running cap to cap the best way to get points taking away from tactics
Alot of the maps have some good tactical play but few use it because of the way the point system is set up
to use tactics on alot of the maps takes you away from the Caps (point zones) so few people use tactics because it losses them points

THEN THERE THE WHOLE; THERE NO REASON TO WIN THING

 

[KaB]

Port this idea to the Beta section.
There, everything is set up in order to reinforce the community, so the unlock screen at the end of the match might be removed and manually displayed at the end of the match. It will allow us to talk back in the chat as we use to do in old games and forget this stupid unlock feature which is only here to help retarded kids thinking they're good.

Also I think there won't be any unlocks in Rising Storm.

 

[RAF_Pstyle]

with the point system and weapon upgrades most people do not even try to win maps
the main point of the game has come down to camping and getting your points
winning and losing does not matter

if this is the case, then people are idiots and need to learn some math... because the easiest/ fastest way to earn points is to cap (and get kills in/fom capzones).

 

[Gudenrath]

Also I think there won't be any unlocks in Rising Storm.

No unlocks in classic either.

 

[Goten]

if this is the case, then people are idiots and need to learn some math... because the easiest/ fastest way to earn points is to cap (and get kills in/fom capzones).

+1.

You can get somewhere between 3 to 7 points killing someone from/in a cap-zone and 10+ points when you cap but campers will camp forever. They prefer having 30 points at the end of the match as long as they could hide somewhere trying to make some kills.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I think most players do try to work as a team, even if they don't communicate directly with their other teammates.

However, we have all seen those other players who will sit back and are only interested in sniping or shooting others, or players who take the Squad Leader position and avoid using any kind of orders or artillery. We know who they are because we spec them when we are waiting to respawn and they either never move or just act counterproductive to their class.

I avoid the word camping because if you are on the defense, camping is a viable action

 

[how2skate_com]

I wouldn't blame the unlock system completely for this. It's also that people like to kill lots and feel like a hero.

You could hide the amount of kills in the player list, but even that won't fix it.

 

[MarioBava]

Camping behavior has almost nothing to do with the unlocks system and it was always an issue with public servers in Ostfront, too. Camping is actually a pretty bad way to level up.

 

[tixhal]

camping = tactical waiting

 

[mrPuma]

I`d like to play for win, but very few times teams win a match by taking all the cap zones. Usually every1 just tries to bleed enemy tickets and win that way. The way some of the maps are setup cap zone wise, its nearly impossible ti win by capping all the zones, as the map has multiple entrys to the capzone its impossible to cover them all.

sparta is the most linear of all the maps and matches play out all the same:

axis attack and take capzone after another, but in the final zone they bleed out of tickets and allies take back housing block 1 and 2. after that every 1 waits for the timer to zero because some1 is afk in the axis spawn

 

[Serathis]

I have always figured kill points are that: kill points. You get 1 for a kill, no matter what. Did you mean you get more XP for cap kills and such?

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I have always figured kill points are that: kill points. You get 1 for a kill, no matter what. Did you mean you get more XP for cap kills and such?

I believe it does. Being in an objective gets you more points as does killing a person that is in an objective also does.

 

[tixhal]

you even get a bonus if you protect your squad- or teamleader. but iirc those points go towards honor, weapon xp is 2 per kill or something.

 

[Mayhem220]

I've got tired of spamming my team mates to get in cap zones. It's nice when they listen but more often than not you get ignored.

The other day I had enough and started shooting the ones who wouldn't advance. They were warned that I wouldn't accept anyone disobeying orders yet still did nothing.

 

[Cat_in_da_Hat]

I think the human to bot ratio is also a factor in motivating people. This evening I had one of the most depressing gaming sessions. It was 15 human and 17 bots and the map was Grain Elevator.

Without boring you - Axis took the first cap but then all the axis human players decided to camp up the back and let the bots battle for the next cap.

The allies also had most of their humans up top sniping and they just needed one SMG down on the deck to fix up the attacking axis bots. Very very sad.

I'm a server operator (Aussie / NZ) and respect that bots can help seed servers, but from what i experienced tonight, I am questioning the use of bots at all. It just felt rotten at the core tonight and it was on the server I manage for the guys out here.

Maybe some old fashion server marketing is needed instead of bot spamming. Or perhaps, and this will floor people that know me, maybe TWI needs to look at how similar scenarios are managed in real world economies and it regulates server hosting.

And to that end, i said it will floor you as i am so liaise fair in life and business, why should every server operator have the game.

TWI should charge a server hosting fee or issue a license based on region. Just for ranked servers.

It will funnel players and at the end of the day I think everyone will be happy (except those server hosts that don't get a license).

There are lots of holes in my idea but I think it is worth examining. I am liaise fair with most things but I just feel some regulation on server supply could be a good thing, or not.

 

[RAF_Pstyle]

I've got tired of spamming my team mates to get in cap zones. It's nice when they listen but more often than not you get ignored.

The other day I had enough and started shooting the ones who wouldn't advance. They were warned that I wouldn't accept anyone disobeying orders yet still did nothing.

My rather juvenile tactic is to drop smoke in front of the worst offenders. Kinda funny actually too. Obviously I don;t do it for legitimate snipers and one-off campers, but when people refuse to advance, they lose their sight lines courtesy of my smoke nade.

But I figure, if I'm playing commander the least bad thing I can do is drop smoke on them.....

 

[melipone]

I think its a mixture of things really:

Lack of clear victory conditions. In Ostfront you either are on defence or attack. If you fail to take everything as attackers you lose. Fail to defend for the full time as defenders you lose. In RO2 it doesn't seem as clear what is really required of the player to win, and you can get some strange losses that don't seem to make sense. The "required objectives" on the map doesn't seem quite accurate sometimes

Lockdown to some extent. It can make it anti climactic or make it feel unrewarding. The constant changing of the time remaining can also make people end up not careing about the timer

Optional teamwork, or game mechanics that don't encourage people to stay together. Go on the beta and see people making group movements due to reduced stamina, people get into a position after sprinting then gain stamina back together before moving on. Being unable to go straight to iron sights while sprinting also helps with this. Slower, more methodical gameplay encourages people to play together

RO2 Playerbase isn't necessarily comprised of tactical FPS fans due to the gameplay and the fact so many already wrote the game off as a tactical FPS.

Levelling, unlocks and stats make people think of their long term stats rather than the short term victory of the match. People aren't necessarily all on the same page in terms of their reason for being on the server

Easy come, easy go death system. People should care more about dying

Lack of clans so fewer people who actually want to work together, less people using voice comms together

Lack of ingame voice commands. You should be able to communicate as well as you can in Ostfront, at least give us an "I need help at"->"X cap zone" or make the "i need help" command show the position in text

 

[Mekhazzio]

In my experience, most people making this complaint don't quite understand what's involved in the process of winning in the first place. Cap zones are all well and good, but the map does not begin and end at them, and weapon fire certainly does not. For most objectives on most maps, the terrain that is most critical to applying or preventing force to a cap zone is nowhere near that cap zone. The actual cap zone itself is often just a formality to take care of once the real fighting is decided.

Take Grain Elevator B, for example. The cap zone for B is terrible for offensive pressure. It's an open building with little internal cover and combat in there tends to result in one for one trading with the defense rather than actually gaining any advantage. The strongest area of advantage for the offense in taking that cap is not the cap zone, it's the large area in front of the grain dump chute & the office building in front of that. Offense needs to at a minimum, avoid completely losing that area, to secure its flank against a multitude of serious threats. Offense also has huge incentive to completely hold that area, because it cuts off direct defense reinforcement into B, has line of sight on the sheltered rear edge of the cap zone -and- allows insertion into the elevator building with all the many uses that provides. The important fighting for B takes place in that courtyard and around the concrete building out there, not anywhere in B itself.

Sure, you'll occasionally find someone who truly is being completely useless, but that's typically just because they're either still learning how the maps flow or are just bad at the game in general. They're going to be just as useless no matter what they're doing, so there's no point in harassing them. Welcome to multiplayer gaming. There's always going to be some percentage of the population that makes bots look good.

 

[mrPuma]

someone said that the victory conditions are hard to understand, and i fully agree.

 

[Cwivey]

I just had a rather good game on a server where the Russians launched a mass attack on objective D on RedOktober, utillizing the broken down ware houses to the West. Saw about 12 of them all in a nice group, attacking as one, covering eachother, smoking the place to hell. Shame for them I was on the covering that side with an MG (8 amazingly satisfying kills), but they would've easily taken D in seconds with team movements like that. In the end, the round went to the time limit, with just objective G left and 0 reinforcements on both sides. A good game all round for both sides, and our own defense was guided with little input from anyone, the occaisonal report on enemy soldiers and which objectives are going, but no actual orders.

Of course, you're going to find little gems like this in online play, but then you're also going to have to wade through a some terrible team-play as well. It's a multiplayer game, it's quite normal.

Don't forget that constantly going on and on and on at your team is in no way a good way to get them moving; sugest, guide but don't order. Or if all else fails just do what someone mentioned in here, throw smoke in their faces so they get the message.




Also, can I ask what is hard to understand about the victory conditions? On attack / defend maps, it's the exact same as RO:OST (Minus the lockdown part, but that's esscentially just a shorter time limit).
The other TE map type it is simple too, just control the most objectives to win (Or infact capture them all for a faster win), if you both control the same amount of objectives, it goes to team points instead.

Why do you find it somewhat confusing?