Tripwire Interactive Forums

Go Back   Tripwire Interactive Forums > Red Orchestra 2 / Rising Storm Forums > RO2/RS General > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 04-12-2012, 01:01 PM
captain pain captain pain is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 198
Default

I'm nearly always at the top of the scoreboard because I play aggressively and get in a cap zone nearly every life. My shooting skills are decent, but positioning yourself well is all that matters.

That's the thing I don't understand about 'camping' in RO2 -- you wind up sitting far away, not doing much, and not getting many points. It's not like there's any real risk of running out of reinforcements 99% of the time, and your deaths aren't displayed. All that matters is getting in the cap and taking it. Getting enormous amounts of points is a side effect.

And to top it off, it's way more fun.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-12-2012, 01:19 PM
Tea and Crumpets Tea and Crumpets is offline
On Vacation
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Trumpington Manor
Posts: 242
Default

Killing a person in an objective while being in an objective gets you double points if I remember correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-12-2012, 01:28 PM
=GG= Mr Moe =GG= Mr Moe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newton, NJ
Posts: 9,185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwivey View Post
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.
Nice. A well placed MG on the flanks can be highly effective, doesn't even have to be in an objective.

Still, it is nice to see a group of players moving and coordinating like that mentioned above, even if on the other team
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-12-2012, 03:37 PM
Catalavos's Avatar
Catalavos Catalavos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Reginald View Post
Military tactics, the way the cap zones are set up and the point system are set up it makes tactics next 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
+1

I've been spending a lot of time thinking about how the design of a map can go a long way to encourage tactics and cooperation between team members. As they stand now, the stock maps are designed to be both fun and balanced and are meant to be won or lost in about 15 minutes. To counter these theories of design, I offer the following hypothesis:

Linear objectives and time limits lead to stale, predictable maps where there is no element of surprise or ability to exploit tactical advantage. Furthermore, this repetition renders communication unnecessary because at the beginning of a match all players already know where the enemy will be attacking from, where they will be attacking next and exactly which paths they will use when moving from objective to objective.

I, for one, would like a little more variety and challange. To these ends I offer these ideas:

-What if there were some maps that were designed to be REALLY difficult? Maps that were biased in favor of either the attacker or defender?
-Maps with multiple (more than 2) spawn points to choose from at the beginning of a map so that the enemy didn't know exactly where you were attacking from every time?
-Include an objective that existed for no other reason than to act as a rally point to get the attacking team together to prepare for an assault on a particular target.
-Maps with only 1 or 2 objectives per team or a map where every objective was re-captureable?
-Maps where objectives do not necessarily need to be captured in order.
-Maps with no time limit, only limits to reenforcements.
-Limited re-spawns on a per-class basis so that you would eventually run out of commanders or squad leaders
-Get rid of the icon that shows when the enemy is capturing an objective

Maps like this would certainly not be well-recieved by most but I think that they would help to satisfy those players who want something different; something more demanding of skill and maturity. In addition to presenting more of a challange they would also be less predictable (which could certainly discourage camping and 'nade spam).

How do you guys feel about this?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-12-2012, 03:51 PM
Gudenrath's Avatar
Gudenrath Gudenrath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tea and Crumpets View Post
Killing a person in an objective while being in an objective gets you double points if I remember correctly.
That is true. And it will get you to advance faster in Honour and Role lvl. But players who think like that are mostly only interested in leveling their guns, and for that, a kill is a kill (well, actually its 2 for the levelling, but lets not complicate things). Telling them that there is usually more enemies to kill in the cap zones doesn't seem to help in my experience, unfortunately.

All too often when reinfs are 0 and you are forced to spectate those sad players camping, still haging in or around the first spawn, trying to snipe regardless if they have an actual sniper rifle or a mg, bolt or even an smg. They couldn't care less about the objective.

Last edited by Gudenrath; 04-12-2012 at 03:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-12-2012, 04:02 PM
Bauer Bauer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 408
Default

Please, stop blaming this on the game. Military tactics may be fun for you, I and a handful of other people, but the reality is that "fun" means different things to different people. And to a lot of them, it means being "an army of one" and worrying about their KD ratio.

There isn't much more you can do to this game to FORCE people into tactics, and if you do, then guess what's going to happen? Even more people will stop playing it.

It's not the unlocks. It's not the points. I can recall countless times we've had these issues even in RO1, and there were no unlocks there.

Do you want to be a part of the solution? Play on the same server, with the same people, and SHOW people how to play. Educate them. And eventually, you'll have regulars who just get it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Reginald View Post
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

[snip]
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-12-2012, 10:43 PM
NoxNoctum NoxNoctum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,965
Default

A server on DH used to have no scoreboard at all on top of no deathmessages, it was great, you saw a lot less of this and in general it just felt more real.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-12-2012, 11:35 PM
jackrabbitslim7 jackrabbitslim7 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 71
Default

The maps don't last long enough, rushing for the objectives is as stupid as camping. We need to find a balance, it's also ridiculous when people just run to the objective and start the meat grinder.

Normally the attacking team should position itself in front of the obj, lay down a ton of suppressive fire and attack only when the enemy is effectively suppressed. For now it's all about individual initiatives. But in definitive I would say that it depends of the team sometimes your team is nice and aware of the tactics and sometime you are surrounded by a bunch of lone wolves.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-12-2012, 11:43 PM
mrPuma's Avatar
mrPuma mrPuma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwivey View Post
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?
well i havent played roost or anything else, so i dotn know about those. The problem with win conditions are they`re inconsistency. Our team might have half of the cap zones and more tickets left and we still loose. Its hard to know what exactly you must do in certain situations like the above.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-13-2012, 12:45 AM
echutter's Avatar
echutter echutter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Wausua, Wisconsin
Posts: 366
Default

I'm not saying you're beating a dead horse, but you're beating a dead horse.

I play to have fun. Sometimes I get pissed and shoot friendlies when they are incompetent. But for the most part I have fun.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:30 AM
Sir Reginald's Avatar
Sir Reginald Sir Reginald is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 310
Default

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tactics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...l_unit_tactics
Maybe this will help
Alot of people do not seems understand the word tactics
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-13-2012, 05:55 AM
RAF_Pstyle RAF_Pstyle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Reginald View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tactics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...l_unit_tactics
Maybe this will help
Alot of people do not seems understand the word tactics
Sure, if you want to lose a map, use "wikipedia" derived tactics. Wait for all 12 guys in your platoon to get into a lose line with 5m spacing. Start marching down the road slowly, using your point-man to spot enemy positions and call them back to the platoon so you can set-up the appropriate MG position/ enveloping fire and cover squad advances on the enemy.

Meanwhile, the other team have spawned a bunch of dudes who have sprinted to the cap-zone, taken it and are scurrying about behind you taking the next cap. 30 seconds later, the map ends.

There just isn't time in the game for the employment of "real" tactics. All you can do, is employ in-game teamwork, tailored for the game environment - not stolen from a Wikipedia article that applies in a completely different context, that being the real world.

Alternatively:
Maybe people just don't give a crap about "tactics"?
Game: entertainment.
War: not so much.

Game: die, respawn.
War: die.......
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-13-2012, 07:52 AM
MarioBava MarioBava is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 810
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAF_Pstyle View Post
Start marching down the road slowly, using your point-man to spot enemy positions and call them back to the platoon so you can set-up the appropriate MG position/ enveloping fire and cover squad advances on the enemy.
RO2 maps don't depict this phase of operations, so it's a poor example. At the start of an RO2 map engagement has already started. True, it is only a game; for example it's slightly unrealistic because you start this situation without benefit of true recon (still, you know where the enemy is going to come from even if you don't know exact positions); it's not like you're walking down the road and suddenly it's a surprise that there are Ruskies around the Church in Spartanovka... nor do you have time for it because combat has started, and some things like demolitions seem like they are done on a hyper time scale. But it's a combat game not a general military game.

Also, combat tactics =/= slow most of the time. Most of the time it is about doing what you have been trained to do as speedily as possible because the enemy is uninterested in giving you time to "think" (this one always makes me laugh) and poke about. War is slow when you're not in combat. But this is a combat game, not a chess game where you have an alotted time to contemplate your moves and punch a clock after every move. That's why and how you do drills and train. So you can do whatever you have to do efficiently and without needing to think it through. Maybe people equate "tactical" with "slow-paced" because generally players on public servers lack the training that allows them to employ tactical maneuvers with coordinated efficiency. It takes some time, after all, to get a group of guys together who have neither been briefed, never done drills together, maybe even never played together. But whenever you see a good clan gang up on a public server, things move fast...because of their use of tactics, not from a lack thereof. But when guys assume "tactical" means "no running" and "only carefully aimed fire"? Please.

Last edited by MarioBava; 04-13-2012 at 07:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-13-2012, 08:09 AM
RAF_Pstyle RAF_Pstyle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarioBava View Post
That's why and how you do drills and train. So you can do whatever you have to do efficiently and without needing to think it through.
And the drills in this game are:
Get in cap.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-13-2012, 08:12 AM
RAF_Pstyle RAF_Pstyle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarioBava View Post
But when guys assume "tactical" means "no running" and "only carefully aimed fire"? Please.
Who assumed this?
My point is that you don't take game tactics from Wikipedia.
You play the game style that is most effective, or most fun in the game environment.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-13-2012, 11:52 AM
Sir Reginald's Avatar
Sir Reginald Sir Reginald is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 310
Default

each map is diffident, calling for diffident tactics,
and each map can have many different tactics

it is sad posting here , 90% of the people that post do not understand
what was posted
or take one word or line and post about that, leaving the whole means of the post out
It really is sad

Last edited by Sir Reginald; 04-13-2012 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-13-2012, 12:09 PM
RAF_Pstyle RAF_Pstyle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Reginald View Post
each map is diffident, calling for diffident tactics,
and each map can have many different tactics

it is sad posting here , 90% of the people that post do not understand
what was posted
or take one word or line and post about that, leaving the whole means of the post out
It really is sad
It's not that sad... it's the internet.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-14-2012, 03:52 PM
oldblood oldblood is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Default

On a team based objective game I have never seen the point in individual scores, to me it would make more sense to have a team score with just the player who offered most to the team (not all based on kills) and the worst contributing to be highlighted in the end score board.
Lets face it if you want to see yourself as highest killer perhaps you should play TDM,
__________________
i5, EVGA Mobo, 16gig Ram, 560Ti graphics, creative X-Fi sound, Coolermaster Power, OC'd to 4.9 Stable. Win 7 64bit
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-14-2012, 04:53 PM
MarioBava MarioBava is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 810
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAF_Pstyle View Post
Who assumed this?
My point is that you don't take game tactics from Wikipedia.
You play the game style that is most effective, or most fun in the game environment.
I know you think I misunderstood you based on my one line (which was more of a snipe at old school "tactical" server rules than your ideas per se), but my point was that many of the real world tactics and principles you can find on those wikipedia pages can be readily and usefully adapted to a game like RO2, and can help you win rather than cause you to lose as you suggested. The fact that some don't apply to what RO2 depicts highlights the fact that RO2 is a game, yes; but it doesn't invalidate any effort to employ real world tactics in a way that works in the game.

My criticism was based on the fact that you chose as an example a patrol that wouldn't even be used in the real world, much less a game, with actual heavy combat underway which is what RO2 depicts. Was a straw man type of example, and you emphasized a lack of speed vs. the other team who sprints, as if "tactical" always means "slower" somehow, which it really doesn't.

Given all that, I understand we're both on the same page regarding pace; you don't and I don't criticize players for using the full speed of the game possible...I'm just saying that various real-world "tactics" can use speed, and can succeed in this game.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-14-2012, 06:46 PM
ChargerCarl ChargerCarl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 137
Default

I play on 2.fjg's server and i find that both teams almost everyone plays the objective and that, in general, theres a consistently high level of teamwork.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2014, Tripwire Interactive, LLC