So how DO you win a game?
- Thread starter skewp
- Start date
It's very simple. Attack-defend maps either attackers cap everything and win or they lose.
Attack-attack maps side who has most objectives wins. There cannot be ties, always uneven number of objectives afaik. If there are ties, teampoints chooses the winner. If that is tied too, then remaining reinforcements.
What is confusing to some people it seems is how you get a "you lost" message on winning a round. You won the round, but lost the game. As in, it's now 1-1 but enemy had more teamscore - you lost even though you won the last round. It even shows wheter the message is about a round or the game. With a bit of attention and using the grey mass between your ears you could've figured this out yourselves - it was pretty clear to me.
Attack-attack maps side who has most objectives wins. There cannot be ties, always uneven number of objectives afaik. If there are ties, teampoints chooses the winner. If that is tied too, then remaining reinforcements.
What is confusing to some people it seems is how you get a "you lost" message on winning a round. You won the round, but lost the game. As in, it's now 1-1 but enemy had more teamscore - you lost even though you won the last round. It even shows wheter the message is about a round or the game. With a bit of attention and using the grey mass between your ears you could've figured this out yourselves - it was pretty clear to me.
Considering half the time it launches into a new round before the old one even ends, can you really blame people for having a hard time noticing details?
Who wins if it's best of 2 rounds and they win one each? Total teampoints of both rounds put together?
If it is this simple there are certainly bugs going around.
Another annoyance is the lockdown counter only appearing every 60/30 seconds when it's usually more relevant than the time remaining counter.
Last edited:
So, does anyone have a list of the deciding control points on attack-attack maps? I know that on Pavlov's House it's the 9th of July Square (point C) and on Barracks it's either the NCO Barracks or the Infirmary.
Either it's a bug, or the Axis won the previous round, and the match ended 1 v 1, with Axis winning on team points.
Translation: Run and gun ftw.
Not sure if we should call the game Reds of Duty or Call of Orchestras.
Lets just call it Red Orchestra 2 and stop comparing it to call of duty which is a completely and utterly different type of FPS than this...please...
EDIT: I've played every cod that ever came out. Thoroughly.
Right, that game is just run and gun. This game is currently more gun and run. Totally different tactics.
I am interested in your alternative. Stay in spawn and pick off the few enemies you will see? If you actually get bored crawl forward, but stay alert to never enter a cap zone, as it it's far too dangerous in there!
You may be right, because I think I remember you blowing me up with Arty on that very match I'm recalling.
Moving under cover, suppression fire, flanking fire, take objective, set up defensive positions, defend.
Or, we could just run around and shoot things until we die, then do that again until one team wins for some reason. It's fun and just like real combat. Men, we are launching Operation Barbarossa tomorrow. Everbdoy rush M0zk0w cap z0n3!
When I feel especially goofy I tend to join Cod4 softcore servers and just run around with my ak47. The amount of glitching spots, movement tricks and wallbangs I know in that game is ridiculous. In TDM's I frequently get 5:1 K/D's (if not more) on raging little kiddos who run around using martyrdom, juggernaut and all those other things 'similar' to RO2. Oh I almost forgot ACOG quickscoping.
How you can even think of comparing those 2 games to one another eludes me. But you are of course entitled to your opinion.