One life total war

[Soviet]

You guys want fear of death? You want the rifleman you just killed with an mg to not ressurect and know exactly where you are? You want massive battles?

Enter one life total war.

One life per player, but the server queues up the entire online RO population of 300-400 people. 8 seperate waves of 50 players.

This will never happen. But it would be oh so cool.

 

[Solo4114]

Right, and when you die, you have to delete all traces of RO from your computer forever.

 

[Manstein]

it would be a pretty interesting concept IMO, even better if you could actually line up several servers in a row, hell even a loop, where you get 1 life before you automatically switch servers to a new map

 

[fOgGy]

I like the idea of servers linking up together creating 100-400 player battles but not the one life concept.

 

[A-tree]

Its gonna be boring for the guy who dies first.

 

[U3BAPuHCKUU*_4yBAK]

Interesting idea, though it would plays more like Counter-Strike, when people camping from their respawns and defence changed roles with offence opposite how it was designed by a mapper (cs_mansion, cs_italy.. anyone?)

 

[Manstein]

Its gonna be boring for the guy who dies first.

Not if you are automatically moved to a new server and map as soon as you die.

 

[MrT785479]

Yeah, and then people with terrible comps would be screwed. 5 min loading times between lifes, sounds like fun times.

 

[sander]

You already only have one life in RO, after you died you'll go in a other soldier who is coming fresh into the battlefield.

 

[Tomcat_ha]

Bit like what you have on some il2 servers death kick but expanded?

What would be more logical is a ban for the entire round or ban for the entire map.

 

[Manstein]

Yeah, and then people with terrible comps would be screwed. 5 min loading times between lifes, sounds like fun times.

Yeah, and then we'll shoot down every arguement for better gameplay options with hardware complaints

I didn't say it had to be mandatory, sheesh

 

[odin1899]

Isn't this idea otherwise known as Wordwar II Online?

 

[Rak]

You already only have one life in RO, after you died you'll go in a other soldier who is coming fresh into the battlefield.

With the exception of there would be another "you" in 12 secs if you die, and your telepatic knowledge of the guy who killed "old you".

I like the idea, but it's really hard to do.

 

[SchutzeSepp]

i used to play on s&d servers 24/7 in COD2, where you had one life every round.
but rounds were limited to 10 minutes, so with a bit of skill you manage to stay alive long.
AND such a system makes other players spectate you, and they will discuss about the best tactics and get organised for the next reinforcements.

but here in RO this could maybe work when like 4/5th of the soldiers of one team are dead, then all the others respawn in.
but this wont work on many maps.

and the attackers would need to respawn in faster (like when 1/2 is dead) and the defenders less fast (about 4/5th) because obviously you need to create the illusion that there are more attackers.

 

[Solo4114]

"One life" options works better as a mutator. The problem I have with it in any serious fashion is that it turns matches into simple deathmatch rather than objective based.

 

[Manstein]

If you wanted to just limit to 1 life per round, and not have new waves of people spawn, you could design maps with that in mind. Having only 1 or 2 objectives would make the defenders hold their ground and the attackers move in, lowering the time limit would hasten them.

Come to think of it, if you only had 1 life, then there would be no spawn areas, and thus the entire map could be accessible at any time.

"Isn't this idea otherwise known as Wordwar II Online?"

Well no, not exactly. Instead of the entire theater being active at any one time, in a system with multiple servers connected, it would be more like only spawning in an active battle.

 

[Ron]

How about???

How about???

I was paintballing there recently and the orgainisers had a game where the defenders had one life and the attackers multiple, the objective of the game was for the attackers to achieve the objective(insert idea here) in the shortest possible time and the defenders try and delay them.
Once the attackers achieved the objective the roles were reversed and the winner was the side who achieved the objective in the quickest possible time while of course the other side did their best to delay them with one life.
Of course you could have a timelimit of 5 mins so the attackers wouldnt mess around , any thoughts anybody it works well as a paintballing game also it would create the illusion of a small group of defenders battling against the odds against overwhelming numbers.

 

[slyder73]

You guys want fear of death? You want the rifleman you just killed with an mg to not ressurect and know exactly where you are? You want massive battles?

Enter one life total war.

One life per player, but the server queues up the entire online RO population of 300-400 people. 8 seperate waves of 50 players.

This will never happen. But it would be oh so cool.

Armed Assault has 100 player servers, and also a one life gametype. After you die, you can wait anywhere from 20 to 30 minutes sometimes for a map to end and the next round to start. It's one of the biggest complaints and sources of frustration for that game. I like the way Red Orchestra does it with reinforcements. I know I for one would rather spend more time playing that waiting.

 

[Solo4114]

My thoughts exactly. Hell, I hate CS:S and waiting up to 6 minutes to "respawn". I prefer a respawn mechanism like we have in this game.

 

[DingBat]

Armed Assault has 100 player servers, and also a one life gametype. After you die, you can wait anywhere from 20 to 30 minutes sometimes for a map to end and the next round to start. It's one of the biggest complaints and sources of frustration for that game. I like the way Red Orchestra does it with reinforcements. I know I for one would rather spend more time playing that waiting.

20-30 minutes!?!

I know some people like ArmA, but that just makes it a no-sale for me.

Fear of death is a nice goal, but it's in direct contention with attention span. Now, I sometimes think I'm ADD, but expecting me to sit around for half an hour to play again seems a bit, er, optimistic.

Personally, I think one of the best things to happen to RO recently is the development of the "mega-maps" like Leningrad, Smolensk, etc. That would never happen in a game that implemented the "one life" concept, even if you were switching people from one server to another. Why? Well, what would be the point? What's the point of creating a grand scale experience in a map that will only be experienced by players in 5 minute chunks, if that?

I'll trade that fear of death thing for a Gorlitz type experience any day of the week and twice on Sundays.