Lockdown!?
- Thread starter Das Bose
- Start date
I like lockdown. Basically it forces people to attack and not camp. At the same time it prevents a 30 minutes torture if the attacking team is unable to breach.
However I do believe that the lockdown needs to be made a bit more dynamic.
Right now I have seen games end while we were capping. A simple overtime feature could fix this problem.
However I do believe that the lockdown needs to be made a bit more dynamic.
Right now I have seen games end while we were capping. A simple overtime feature could fix this problem.
+1 for that. It's the equivalent of the round timer in BC2 not going off while you're disarming the bomb on rush mode. If you're in there and the point is capturing, the lockdown timer should just freeze!
This.
without lockdown people will just camp for 20 minutes hiding in spawn.
with lockdown people have to attack and if they don't the map will end in 3 minutes as "punishment".
maybe now people still camp alot when on attacking side because some of them dont understand the lockdown mechanic but in time it will be better.
anyway i prefer that the map will end in 5 minutes than enduring 20 minutes of full team camping on spawn and only a few trying to actually play the game.
Realistically in War you have to overcome objectives quickly and keep moving to divide the enemy.
In reality there might be another platoon that needs to be reinforce behind octorber factory and they only have a certian time left before they run out of ammo and there wounded die.
That is why there is lockdown, for realism.
Not so people can sit back and have a old fashinoned show down of rifles...becuase this never occured.
perhaps the commander could have a speech option that only the commander can shout saying we need to take this objective before the enemy gets reinforced or our brothers are overrun. But the control of the warning is completly up to the commander.
In reality there might be another platoon that needs to be reinforce behind octorber factory and they only have a certian time left before they run out of ammo and there wounded die.
That is why there is lockdown, for realism.
Not so people can sit back and have a old fashinoned show down of rifles...becuase this never occured.
perhaps the commander could have a speech option that only the commander can shout saying we need to take this objective before the enemy gets reinforced or our brothers are overrun. But the control of the warning is completly up to the commander.
In fact they even state that during the Soviet campaign mission for the Grain Elevator. The Axis is strapped for time because the Russians have reinforcements incoming.
Yeah, lockdown is very realistic.
- "Alright men, we just need to hold this objective 10 more seconds then the germans will turn around and run away. Trust me on this one!"
The reason germany lost the battle of Stalingrad was because of the lockdown timer. You can find it in every history book
- "Alright men, we just need to hold this objective 10 more seconds then the germans will turn around and run away. Trust me on this one!"
The reason germany lost the battle of Stalingrad was because of the lockdown timer. You can find it in every history book
Yeah, lockdown is very realistic.
- "Alright men, we just need to hold this objective 10 more seconds then the germans will turn around and run away. Trust me on this one!"
The reason germany lost the battle of Stalingrad was because of the lockdown timer. You can find it in every history book
I'd somehow settle for Lockdown if it had an "overtime" mechanic like in Countdown. got to that conclusion after having a desperate fight for the first warehouse in Red October Factory as a Soviet today, we were capping it, at last, quickly, when the lockdown was about three seconds, and the match just ended, just before we had completed the cap.
in my eyes this is an irrational waste of a great map.
like the feature nothing feels as good as holding out as soviet commander with 20 men left against 150 germans and lockdown timer hits 0:00
thats when i light an cigar
Semi-related, I think I've started smoking x2 as much since the RO2 beta started.
Isn't the reinforcement counter already doing what lockdown is supposed to do? When a team plays like crap then it burns all its reinforcments and the game ends before time out. But when a team plays well then it's kinda tragic to lose due to lockdown. An attacking team that camps the entire round is going to lose to the time out anyway (Which is probably a mathematical certainty, because losses per second must be lower on a long range stand off, since everyone's avoiding risks. And that means, a strategy that aims to deplete the defending team's reinforcements by camping, is impossible).
Last edited:
The only reason an assault would need to be accomplished within a time limit is because of imminent threat of a strong counter-attack or changing battlefield conditions (e.g., nightfall). Lockdown ticks one box in that there needs to be a sense of urgency, levied with a measurable mechanical effect, i.e., the game ending, but it utterly fails to embrace why the attackers need to motivate. Argue the whys and wherefores of players refusing to de-camp and get a move on all you like, but there is no reason at all why the game needs to be ended a) so quickly and b) in such an awkward an unsatisfying manner, as is the case with the current Lockdown mechanic.
One way to represent Lockdown more immersively might be to steadily increase the time between reinforcement waves for the attackers, and have this mechanic kick in at the same time Lockdown does now. The important thing to add to this, to instil a sense of urgency on the side of the attackers, would be clear on-screen (and perhaps accompanying audio) warnings that the assault is in serious danger of losing momentum. To add to the threat of a broken assault the defenders could also receive some form of indication that attacking forces are beginning to thin thus may trigger them into mounting a counter-attack. To perhaps bring back a little taste of the gloriously epic struggles that took place in RO1 from time to time, have the attacker reinforcement intervals return to normal as soon as the defenders manage to take back a territory. (Naturally, the game would end when there are no more reinforcements, or the defenders retake the first territory on the map, or the attackers claim the map for themselves in its entirety.)
Other people will no doubt have better solutions but as long as the current deeply unsatisfying and horrendously arbitrary Lockdown system remains in place RO2 battles will continue to end too quickly and unsatisfactorily, for either side.
For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that increasing the time remaining on the current Lockdown system will make the blindest bit of difference to a steadfastly intransigent attacking force; if they won’t get off their arses now then they won’t knowing that they have even more time to stay put.
TL,DR: The bottom line is irrefutable, and it’s that the current application of the Lockdown concept is deeply unpopular so something needs to be done about that.
One way to represent Lockdown more immersively might be to steadily increase the time between reinforcement waves for the attackers, and have this mechanic kick in at the same time Lockdown does now. The important thing to add to this, to instil a sense of urgency on the side of the attackers, would be clear on-screen (and perhaps accompanying audio) warnings that the assault is in serious danger of losing momentum. To add to the threat of a broken assault the defenders could also receive some form of indication that attacking forces are beginning to thin thus may trigger them into mounting a counter-attack. To perhaps bring back a little taste of the gloriously epic struggles that took place in RO1 from time to time, have the attacker reinforcement intervals return to normal as soon as the defenders manage to take back a territory. (Naturally, the game would end when there are no more reinforcements, or the defenders retake the first territory on the map, or the attackers claim the map for themselves in its entirety.)
Other people will no doubt have better solutions but as long as the current deeply unsatisfying and horrendously arbitrary Lockdown system remains in place RO2 battles will continue to end too quickly and unsatisfactorily, for either side.
For what it’s worth, I don’t believe that increasing the time remaining on the current Lockdown system will make the blindest bit of difference to a steadfastly intransigent attacking force; if they won’t get off their arses now then they won’t knowing that they have even more time to stay put.
TL,DR: The bottom line is irrefutable, and it’s that the current application of the Lockdown concept is deeply unpopular so something needs to be done about that.
Last edited:
I understand the reason behind the lockdown feature, It's basicly forcing the attacker to actual attack and not camp that so often happend in RO 1 like for an example Axis are attacking on Basovka and 80% of the team starts to camp.
Do I like lockdown?, no not really it sucks balls.
Do I like lockdown?, no not really it sucks balls.
I have to agree that it has definitely prevented a few good games from RO2 from occurring. I think the ability to just edit the time of lock down rather than getting rid of it would be preferable because there are situations where it has proved useful.
i'd rather play one, epic two hour game then thirty measly games that never got started in the first place due to it being "locked down" before you could even organize.
this brings up another issue for me: almost EVERY time i log into a server, the match ends just after i choose and spawn. bad luck? or because the rounds are so freaking short.
this brings up another issue for me: almost EVERY time i log into a server, the match ends just after i choose and spawn. bad luck? or because the rounds are so freaking short.
As you guys can see its like 50/50 whos likes it. Surely TWI will see this as a move to make it optional so both partys win.
Take a look at this poll to get a rough overlook of how the forum users, who voted there (393), think of. 50/50 is far from it.
Yes, an option would be great.
What if you take 4 objetives (like in Commissars House) and the lockdown still comes up... 4 minutes left... 3 minutes left...