• 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/

'Proper' campaign maps

kapulA

Grizzled Veteran
Jan 4, 2006
2,236
401
33
Croatia
Since the belated advent of the campaign mode into RO2/RS I notice it has gained considerable popularity, up to the point that most populated servers now run it as default (at least according to my observations).
The thing though, that prevents me from getting a better feeling of immersion & authenticity, is that the teams' spawns on maps are simply 'switched', when a team other than the default one is attacking (think Iwo where the Americans are defending, from Japanese bunkers and with Jap fixed MGs, against a Jap attack coming from the beach filled with US Amtracks or Commissar's House with the Germans attacking from the Russian 'base').
So in the interest of a more authentic campaign mode, I feel it would be beneficial to actually create a 2nd version of the maps in which the attackers (the defenders on the 'default' map) attack from their own side of the map, in a counterattack-like scenario. For example, if the Japanese team is attacking on Iwo, the map would play out with the Americans being in possession of all the caps and the Japs would have to take them in the reverse order of the default version where the US are the attacking team, effectively meaning they would win once/if they pushed the Marines back into the sea. Of course, this would mean that you'd have to make some edits to the default map, such as new, hastily-prepared positions (slit trenches, fixed MG nests etc) facing the opposite direction from the default version, and put some time into balancing the new version of the map, but in my mind it would be infinitesimally more realistic and authentic than the current version.
Nothing kills my immersion more than spawning in US Amtracks as a Jap on Kwajalein and then proceeding to assault the Japanese bunker and trench lines which are now held by Marines with flamethrowers... :rolleyes:
 
This would mean revamping all maps, the map system, the campaign mode and more. It's a really hard task to balance normal maps and make them fun and it is nearly impossible to make them balanced to make your idea happen. I doubt that this will be the case in the future. I highly doubt it.

My personal wish would be dropping the idea of a campaign completely and focus on other more important things like the gameplay itself but thats just me.
 
Upvote 0
What? You'd 'just' need two slightly different variations of the same map, which could (I hope, at least) be stored in the same map-file and activated via script, depending on which team is attacking... This is 2016, some love for the mapping aspect of the game is long overdue, imo. And personally, I'm not that big a fan of the campaign mode either, but I'd prefer to see it done right, rather than the same lazy teamswitch shtick that we have atm...
If there's a plan to include the gamemode, I hope it will be improved, if not like my suggestion then at least in some other meaningful way, as at this time it just strikes me as an almost-hackjob.
 
Upvote 0
God I hope this happens, I rarely play RO2 anymore because the only servers that are populated are campaign servers. Not saying Campaign is bad, but all the immersion gets thrown out the window. Like on Maggot Hill, I just can't get into it when I see the japs defending a hill covered in American equipment with a big ol' star spangled banner on the top
 
Upvote 0
To the original response, though: balancing a map is really hard to do right in the first place. Taking the same layout and balancing it both ways would be seriously hard. One of the things we considered in the first place is simply to have two different maps. For example, was playing as Japanese attacking Iwo last night - which is obviously "odd". What we had thought of was creating a second map to represent that Campaign area and use that instead. But that means creating twice as many maps. And then setting them in the "wrong" location or something.

All of those things could be done - some of it is just hard, time-consuming... go ask any of the community mappers!
 
Upvote 0
To the original response, though: balancing a map is really hard to do right in the first place. Taking the same layout and balancing it both ways would be seriously hard. One of the things we considered in the first place is simply to have two different maps. For example, was playing as Japanese attacking Iwo last night - which is obviously "odd". What we had thought of was creating a second map to represent that Campaign area and use that instead. But that means creating twice as many maps. And then setting them in the "wrong" location or something.

All of those things could be done - some of it is just hard, time-consuming... go ask any of the community mappers!

Yeah, it is, it's quite fun. Sometimes I like doing it more than playing the game! You guys have a team, unlike us individuals, so what may take you a decent amount of time to finish, will be quadrupled or more for one person.
 
Upvote 0