• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The reason behind all the griefing...

Omar The Insurgent

Grizzled Veteran
Mar 23, 2006
255
109
I consider myself an Red Orchestra veteran. Having played it since mod days, playing RO1 and all its mods probably for hundreds of hours over the years I must say that Red Orchestra 2 is VERY hard if your goal is to top the scoreboard.

I am not talking about anything specific like type of weapon you use(AVT vs MKB argument). I am talking about being able to position yourself in a way that you dominate the incoming enemy reinforcement. Finding that perfect spot and routine is extremely hard.

In all other games that get mentioned in comparison to RO2, I feel this is not the case. In those games, you can more easily outgun others, maybe the maps have simpler layout or something. I remember when playing either one of those games, even from the beginning, I could map the situation in my head and get the perfect cover. In RO2, just when I think that I'm safe, I get sniped from a narrow visual corridor trough which an enemy saw me.

People are probably not effective to a degree that they have been in RO1, or in other games, and coupled with the fact that this is very innovative FPS, I can see why it got some mixed reactions from the public.

Atleast remember that this is a game that gives you so many opportunities to win, but you must outthink the enemy first.

If you still think its the MKB's fault let me say this: It certainly has the upper hand over any bolt action rifle, but out of many times you got killed by it, how many times would outcome be the same if it was any other weapon?
 
I am talking about being able to position yourself in a way that you dominate the incoming enemy reinforcement. Finding that perfect spot and routine is extremely hard.

Don't think so. Let's take Spartanovka f.e. All you have to do is storm the gullies, cap the church and then you have four blocks to take. You only need to concentrate on one flank and frag enemies while you're in cap zone. Imho these team points for fragging in cap zones are bull. You can instantly dominate the score if you're good with your gun. In RO2 we have very short rounds, but people gain up to 200+ team points. That's weird compared to RO. In RO2 you need to collapse from one object to the other - no problem with K98 + MG 34 on the back because of stamina boost ;). In RO, every single action was more like a heroic deed. The objects weren't set close together, you really had to fight your way to them. The RO2 maps are more or less "steplocked" tunnemaps like in Bad Company 2. Let's wait for bigger combined maps with transporters, but: Ferrari or Porsche, anyone?
 
Upvote 0


Agreed, and I think that's why I love it so much. Yes it has a fault or two and some rough edges, but it reaks of potential and the gunplay is very nice indeed.

You need to play with a genuine fear for your virtual life, and that creates so much immersion and tension it's hard to describe ;)

Very well said m8!
 
Upvote 0
In RO2, just when I think that I'm safe, I get sniped from a narrow visual corridor trough which an enemy saw me.

It's because of the extravagant details most of the time and the smaller maps with 64 players. It's almost like an illusion. Bushes, flower buckets, trees, leaves flying around, hand barrows etc. And don't forget the "zoom" feature. Plus, short after release there's a big difference between players and players. Some are new and some played so long, that they actually gained advantage over others concerning map knowledge. I think this is the main reason for feeling overwhelmed in RO2. Situational awareness plus gravity becomes nonsense here.
 
Upvote 0
Pish - it's easy to dominate the scoreboard in RO2, your score is determined by the amount of teamwork you contribute: Capturing objectives, killing enemies while in objectives etc. Just like it should be. In RO1 it was much more work, now you even get points for being in a cap zone as it is taken - something I long wished for in RO1. It's all good.

I find it pretty simple to be on top of the scoreboard by playing the game like it should be played. And I play as rifleman only -not that it stops me from picking up the occasional PPsh ;)
 
Upvote 0
I disagree, i come high, sometimes top, of the scoreboard a lot in RO2, and i don't think its because im amazing, its just when you learn the levels, the weapons, and where to throw grenades, smoke, etc its pretty easy. Camping helps a lot too. Although this may be because ive played it way more than some of the people im playing against.

But I never do as well in say BC2, or CS, which ive played a lot more. And you cant really camp in BC2 for long.
 
Upvote 0
My problems are too many weapons that didn't even exist during the battle of Stalingrad, or existed but in such tiny numbers weren't used, massive bugs and bad optimization.

I couldn't give a toss about my position on the scoreboard, it's something I don't even notice until after the round has finished.
 
Upvote 0
Pish - it's easy to dominate the scoreboard in RO2, your score is determined by the amount of teamwork you contribute: Capturing objectives, killing enemies while in objectives etc. Just like it should be. In RO1 it was much more work, now you even get points for being in a cap zone as it is taken - something I long wished for in RO1. It's all good.

I find it pretty simple to be on top of the scoreboard by playing the game like it should be played. And I play as rifleman only -not that it stops me from picking up the occasional PPsh ;)

I agree, I don't find it hard at all.
 
Upvote 0
slightly off topic but:

being someone who plays on allies, and having played sparta on axis. This map is by far the most balanced and easiest to start with.

Of course this is in a public style play, where not many people actually communicate, but get the gist, and know how to play it.

As far as competition and ro2, well... its not there yet... I hope soon tho.


Sparta is the saving grace map for twi, its their dust. Now if only fallen fighters were as easy to explain to the pubber....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Pish - it's easy to dominate the scoreboard in RO2, your score is determined by the amount of teamwork you contribute: Capturing objectives, killing enemies while in objectives etc. Just like it should be. In RO1 it was much more work, now you even get points for being in a cap zone as it is taken - something I long wished for in RO1. It's all good.

I find it pretty simple to be on top of the scoreboard by playing the game like it should be played. And I play as rifleman only -not that it stops me from picking up the occasional PPsh ;)



QFT I consider myself only average in this game yet I am often in the top 3 or even number 1 on the scoreboard. And for no other reason than because I get my *** on top of the cap zones an kill the enemies who come into them. You get like 7 times as many points for doing this so beating all the guys camping in windows somewhere to the top of the board is trivial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadrach
Upvote 0
All you have to do is storm the gullies, cap the church and then you have four blocks to take.

When I'm on allies "all you have to do" rarely gets done. I can position myself to dominate the gullies and get multiple kills in safety and then Germans spend half the round trying to cap the first objective.


You can instantly dominate the score if you're good with your gun.
How else would you expect to dominate the score? By being the best at hiding? Bahahaha!


In RO2 we have very short rounds, but people gain up to 200+ team points.
We do? They seem just as long as any other game. About half an hour if both teams are actually reasonably good at the game. Most games end because the time ran out, not because the map was actually won by one team or the other.

The reason you are complaining is because, as a camp and sniper (it's obvious) you want to be on the outside of the zone shooting in. You get "killed in objective" points, but not "killed from objective" points. This means you get a lower score for doing what you do, than I get for doing what I do. That's your fault, not the game's. You know the rules, so get in the zone and you'll rake up points too. Stop crying about the rules and trying to change them. No one cares that YOU suck at the game.

That's weird compared to RO. In RO2 you need to collapse from one object to the other - no problem with K98 + MG 34 on the back because of stamina boost ;).
The game allows people to run for their lives? How unrealistic! It must be changed immediately! How are you supposed to get kills if the enemy can run away? Are you supposed to get up and move or something? Never! That's dangerous!

You're so funny.


The RO2 maps are more or less "steplocked" tunnemaps like in Bad Company 2
Oh bull****. There are other people complaining that the maps are too open with too many ways to get around causing the game to be harder for them to play.

Here is the truth: you suck at the game, so you are essentially inventing reasons that the game is bad. You feel like you're being swamped with attackers, so clearly the map must be feeding them all straight at you. You never think that your style of play means you stay in the same place for far too long, and everyone knows where you are and came to get you. No, it has to be the map design, not the way you play.
 
Upvote 0
RO2 is pretty easy

except when your team is filled with a bunch of noobs =(

When good players are on, I can usually get a coordinated attack of 10+ guys going. "Hey guys, lets hit Objective D *insert situational humor here*"

But on bad teams...I'm pretty sure they dont know what is where. It makes the game much harder when I'm in the cap zone by myself...being the only target and all...I'm not THAT good.
 
Upvote 0