1. In my experience they mostly Attack. Since that's the key to win the campaign. (I also played mostly on the Ruskie Realism server)
2. I don't agree with that.
3. That's the idea.
Multiplayer Campaign WOOOOOOOOT!
- Thread starter SturmRatt -Turhake-
- Start date
2. I don't agree with that.
3. That's the idea.
![[40-1]MORD](/data/avatars/s/34/34566.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
1. I noticed something opposite - winning team pushes to victory by capturing more sectors.
2. IMO attacking team has opportunity to choose where they want to play so its advantage not disadvantage. Some "unbalanced" sectors have 2nd better balanced map added for attackers to choose.
3. Once again when I played it didn`t occur - round winners preferred to attack with only couple votes to defend
FallenFighters is still attack/attack map as always but for purpose of campaign one team is called defender and second attacker.
Probably a differnt bunch of players from when I was playing then. When I was on the German team was getting steamrolled every battle (even normally easy mode maps like defending on Red October), and the Russian team eventually just sat back and defended; forcing us to drain manpower until we couldn't attack anymore. Worst yet my team kept choosing the most dreadful attacking maps (ROFactory, Spart, Commisar). I doubt the experience would of been as bad if the teams were more equal in skill or had the good sense to avoid the really bad maps.
Also I noticed you guys stopped running customs , I guess that's because of the bug where a lot people will just crash when they a custom they don't have gets chosen.
Still this is already a sort of meta developing for the MC, and it will be interesting to see where this all goes.
The difference between assaulting ROfacotry or Commisar's House on Classic sprint speed/stamina and Realism sprint speed/stamina is world apart, that's all I will say. I've finished 2 campaigns so far, and very very rarely do I see attackers taking territory on a Attack/Defend map, most of the pushing is done of Attack/Attack maps.
Last edited:
Yeah, the times I've played so far, the winning team has gone on to attack whether its my team or the enemies. You probably just got a bunch of bad or lazy players
That is a shame, because as you can see it seems to be getting quite a bit of attention here on the forums and with servers running it. As far as expectations, it seems to be mostly positive reaction here.
I can certainly understand that, but in reality, lets not make such a big deal about it. Its certainly not a big enough reason to put off releasing this wonderful mode (yeah yeah after you get done dealing with RS). There are always players that will voluntarily switch sides in Campaign mode just as in normal Territory mode.
That said, it would be nice if a DEV or anyone else with some inside info, could pass along some hints and guidelines as to what everything does in this mode such as Combat power etc...
I have seen the future of ROHOS and (its not RS) its Campaign mode!!!
I really like the campaign as mentioned, but things are missing from the campaign. I will admit to liking how Advanced Squadleader's Red Barricades dealt with many issues.
(1. Deleted)
2. "We have captured the kitchen, but the enemy still holds the living room and bathroom" is completely missing. Clearing entire maps is much too clean. The campaign should rotate around caps, not maps. So more a modified CD than a TE. Which is dev bandwidth lighter anyway.
3. The campaign needs balancing features. The more re-enforcements for each area held is just stupid. Neither Germany, nor the USSR were relying on the industrial might of Stalingrad oblast to fuel their war machines.
In simple terms, the side losing the most tickets in a battle would tend to see more re-enforcements released to replace losses.
4. A stalemate (cut loss) trigger is needed. The attacker must be able to say "well, we have taken the caps we can, lets stop now".
==============
It sort of follows from above that I believe campaign should remember caps taken, not maps taken. So a revamped CD approach rather than a map approach.
Rattenkrieg is caps basically.
(1. Deleted)
2. "We have captured the kitchen, but the enemy still holds the living room and bathroom" is completely missing. Clearing entire maps is much too clean. The campaign should rotate around caps, not maps. So more a modified CD than a TE. Which is dev bandwidth lighter anyway.
3. The campaign needs balancing features. The more re-enforcements for each area held is just stupid. Neither Germany, nor the USSR were relying on the industrial might of Stalingrad oblast to fuel their war machines.
In simple terms, the side losing the most tickets in a battle would tend to see more re-enforcements released to replace losses.
4. A stalemate (cut loss) trigger is needed. The attacker must be able to say "well, we have taken the caps we can, lets stop now".
==============
It sort of follows from above that I believe campaign should remember caps taken, not maps taken. So a revamped CD approach rather than a map approach.
Rattenkrieg is caps basically.
I've tried this new campaign mode yesterday and its awesome. There's a lot of potential in it. I think the better custom maps should be added to territories.
Also a suggestion:
To make things more interesting certain classes or weapons could be tied to specific zones. Or there should be a minimum requirement of territories held to unlock for example the mkb42. This strategic interface is super awesome btw.
Also a suggestion:
To make things more interesting certain classes or weapons could be tied to specific zones. Or there should be a minimum requirement of territories held to unlock for example the mkb42. This strategic interface is super awesome btw.
There are allready custom maps on the campaign server (at least the russian one), after the team voted which te to attack they got to vote again which map (gumrak and bridges, fallen fighters and gumrak station for example) thats really cool!
Yes, we run Custom Maps on our classic campaign server too and we love it!
Simply add the maps to the sectors in the ROGame.ini as a server admin.
Though it was mich easier in the old webadmin with the campaign map cycle.
Simply add the maps to the sectors in the ROGame.ini as a server admin.
Though it was mich easier in the old webadmin with the campaign map cycle.
Yeah this is what I was talking about with somebody else. Most people aren't going to stick around for the whole campaign mode to be played through so it needs a little revamping. I think making it CD with some revamps would be great.
I know this'd upset the History guys because of the time-spans between battles taking place etc, but having an intertwined Rising storm/HOS multiplayer campaign could be fun.
Hmmm, not what you said, but what its about.
Just occurred to me that Campaign mode might interfere with TWI's Rising Storm plans.
If everyone is so busy enjoying Campaign mode on the Eastern Front, what might that do for sales of Rising Storm? On servers where random maps are played (non-campaign) its OK, but RS maps certainly wouldn't fit in with the Eastern Front campaign feel.
Could be part of their reason for Yoshiro suggesting no one play Campaign mode...
Don't know if it's technically possible, but a short term solution could be to create a seperate RS campaign that gets run in turns with the HOS campaign... on one server.
Of course, that would drive people who don't own RS to go look for a server which runs HOS campaign exclusively.
Of course, that would drive people who don't own RS to go look for a server which runs HOS campaign exclusively.
Oh my.... You could be on to something there. But then, isn't the health and future of RO2 the highest of priorities at all times?
Good points all the same.
People who don't own rising storm won't be booted from the server if a rising storm map get's loaded.
It has been already confirmed by the devs, everyone who owns RO2 will be able to play RS, only with certain limitations, like class selection and such.
Buts its unlikely you will see Rising Storm maps be added to the Stalingrad Campaign map.
For all we know, when Rising Storm comes out, TWI may have finished the Campaign mode for both ROHOS and RS... or the updates themselves may break the mode altogether and then we can't play it.
For all we know, when Rising Storm comes out, TWI may have finished the Campaign mode for both ROHOS and RS... or the updates themselves may break the mode altogether and then we can't play it.
Exactly, and I wouldn't want to play 4 maps in a row where I'm severly gimped by those limitations.
I really hate all this silence, would it hurt if a dev showed up to at least say that they can't comment on this right now?! Are you there TWI?
In previous threads they have stated that there were issues with balancing teams. When playing a long game mode like MC people generally want to stick with the team they chose - but when one team is clearly getting steam rolled or people start leaving, it becomes necessary to autobalance teams and apparently people weren't too happy about it.
But again it would be nice to have a newer response to address the renewed popularity for it in the community.