when I first heard about lockdown I though it would be an interesting idea and probably good. After playing the game for some 50+ hours I am at a thoroughly different opinion.
But first the basics for those who do not know why it was introduced, the idea was to alleviate loosing teams from having to take a horrible beating.
Now in list form, all of the ways I believe lockdown goes too far or has negative effects.
Attack by Attrition:
I have been part of a number of games already where the defenders are putting up a massively impressive defence, yet bleeding their tickets while doing so. The game then ends in a lockdown when the attackers had anywere from 10 all the way to 80 or 100 more tickets. Anyone can see where this would end up going if there was no lockdown, the attackers would win by killing all of the enemies, not taking the terrain.
Solution: Lockdown does not come into effect until the defenders have atleast 20 to 30% MORE respawn tickets then the attackers.
Endless Assault:
I was just playing a round of red october factory, we took obj A with some 45 seconds left till lockdown, however this only bumped the lockdown timer back to 2:30. We booked it to the welding shed and took that in 60 seconds. The lockdown timer STILL did not reset, and we had only 1:30 to take the next objective. On that we were unable to clear the axis out and cap in time. Lockdown timers forcing the attackers to change their strategy is ridiculous, especially when that strategy was winning all along.
The difference between a stalemate and a route
I think I really actually enjoyed some of those battles in Ost where every inch was worth a quart of blood, because that was the currency paid. They were not pitched battles for either side, but just struggles for both teams. A good match of wits, cunning, and ability that makes any objective difficult to take.
And then there were the maps you were on that were Route's, an absolute ****festered slaughter. However these were usually due to imballanced teams, or some fundamentally flawed map ( some of those customs were wacked ). This makes me wonder why TWI spent the time designing and coding the Lockdown deliverable into the complete product if the special case it is designed to stop is just that, a special case.
I dislike lockdown because it removes the opportunity to have long drawn out battles, instead increasing the temp. Why if we are just going to finish this map then play it all over again, why not let us enjoy our battle?
solution: I would like to see lockdown become a server configurable feature that admins can turn on and off. Lockdown itself should be tweaked so that it is a bit more generous and turns off after a location has been capped, and it should also only ever fire in the case when the attackers have less reinforcements then the defenders by a decently sized margin.
Discuss.
But first the basics for those who do not know why it was introduced, the idea was to alleviate loosing teams from having to take a horrible beating.
Now in list form, all of the ways I believe lockdown goes too far or has negative effects.
Attack by Attrition:
I have been part of a number of games already where the defenders are putting up a massively impressive defence, yet bleeding their tickets while doing so. The game then ends in a lockdown when the attackers had anywere from 10 all the way to 80 or 100 more tickets. Anyone can see where this would end up going if there was no lockdown, the attackers would win by killing all of the enemies, not taking the terrain.
Solution: Lockdown does not come into effect until the defenders have atleast 20 to 30% MORE respawn tickets then the attackers.
Endless Assault:
I was just playing a round of red october factory, we took obj A with some 45 seconds left till lockdown, however this only bumped the lockdown timer back to 2:30. We booked it to the welding shed and took that in 60 seconds. The lockdown timer STILL did not reset, and we had only 1:30 to take the next objective. On that we were unable to clear the axis out and cap in time. Lockdown timers forcing the attackers to change their strategy is ridiculous, especially when that strategy was winning all along.
The difference between a stalemate and a route
I think I really actually enjoyed some of those battles in Ost where every inch was worth a quart of blood, because that was the currency paid. They were not pitched battles for either side, but just struggles for both teams. A good match of wits, cunning, and ability that makes any objective difficult to take.
And then there were the maps you were on that were Route's, an absolute ****festered slaughter. However these were usually due to imballanced teams, or some fundamentally flawed map ( some of those customs were wacked ). This makes me wonder why TWI spent the time designing and coding the Lockdown deliverable into the complete product if the special case it is designed to stop is just that, a special case.
I dislike lockdown because it removes the opportunity to have long drawn out battles, instead increasing the temp. Why if we are just going to finish this map then play it all over again, why not let us enjoy our battle?
solution: I would like to see lockdown become a server configurable feature that admins can turn on and off. Lockdown itself should be tweaked so that it is a bit more generous and turns off after a location has been capped, and it should also only ever fire in the case when the attackers have less reinforcements then the defenders by a decently sized margin.
Discuss.
![2Lt.Horvath [6th AB]](/data/avatars/s/36/36264.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
