I wouldn't want territory to switch sides like countdown. The main reason for me is that sometimes it takes a round to "warm up" or learn the enemies' tactics. If the first round goes poorly for allies, maybe the next round goes better because the team rallies around a good strategy they learned from the first round. Or this can even happen on an individual level. If I have a bad round, I like to get the chance to improve on it from the same side of the map. That's a biggie for me. I wouldn't like to switch sides, especially when the battlefield situation doesn't make sense for it (my side has no objectives, but suddenly we are defending those objectives??)
what I wouldn't mind is if the maps chose sides per match, randomly. Some matches Allies are starting behind pavlov's house, other matches behind the Voyentorg. But sides would stay the same for the whole match. That would be ok, a good idea, even.
Going further, I'd even like a "mini-campaign" match where between rounds possession of the objectives are preserved so that the battle evolves in rounds/stages over the course of the match. But that's another idea.
what I wouldn't mind is if the maps chose sides per match, randomly. Some matches Allies are starting behind pavlov's house, other matches behind the Voyentorg. But sides would stay the same for the whole match. That would be ok, a good idea, even.
Going further, I'd even like a "mini-campaign" match where between rounds possession of the objectives are preserved so that the battle evolves in rounds/stages over the course of the match. But that's another idea.
Upvote
0