too many win/lose conditions ?

[luciferintears]

out of all of those #4 is hands down the dumbest; how do you win a battle by scoring?

Unless i missed the part in history class, when there would umpires on the sidelines keeping track of score during stalingrad.

Either you win by capturing the territory you were supposed to, or you dont. Its about as binary as it can get

 

[GRIZZLY]

out of all of those #4 is hands down the dumbest; how do you win a battle by scoring?

Unless i missed the part in history class, when there would umpires on the sidelines keeping track of score during stalingrad.

Either you win by capturing the territory you were supposed to, or you dont. Its about as binary as it can get

I missed the part in history class where they mentioned Stalingrad and I went to one of the "top 100" public schools in USA

But yes.... 3 and 4 are directly detrimental to gameplay and team cohesion

 

[how2skate_com]

I played a lot of games already, and I still don't have a clue how to actually win the game. I try to kill as many as I can while capping/defending points, but it's all very random and unorganised.

 

[AntoxaGray]

out of all of those #4 is hands down the dumbest; how do you win a battle by scoring?

Wait, you can win battle by givng machinegunner ammo? Never seen this win condition mentioned anywhere in the game.

 

[Gudenrath]

It's giving failed attacks an E for effort and taking away a quick win from the defense just because the attackers were trying.

I don't see what is wrong with that. An incentive for trying is often what is needed to get a team going.

Also when playing as a defender I don't particularly care for the quick lockdown wins. I don't feel the joy of victory as I would from a hard earned round where a steady effort was needed to push back the defender.

Especially so because I have experienced plenty of times in RO1 where the attacking team was a failure during the first half of the round, but suddenly get their act together and become a real challenge, and may even have won the round.

That to me is what it is all about, a challenge. Easy rounds are the most boring, and to be honest makes me feel a bit like I have wasted my time.

 

[Johnny Utah]

I'll have a swing at explaining the win conditions in place now (Most are probably fairly obvious ).

For the SKIRMISH / BATTLE styled maps (Pavlovs House, Red Barracks, FallenFighters), capturing all the objectives will result in a victory for that team. If the timer runs out, the team with the most objectives held will win. If the number of objectives held by both sides are the same, the winner will be decided by team points (EG Red Barracks, Axis have the Infirmary and the Allies have the CO Barracks).


Tell me if I've missed any. xP

This isn't necessarily true (might be a server setting). For example, playing as Allies, if you take D on Fallen Fighters and hold it for even just a few seconds, all you need to do for victory is hold C until the game time runs out (regardless of reinforcement state). And victory is NOT determined by team points. That's why I always tell folks to dump their bodies into C, then D (you can completely ignore B and not cap it until whenever it's convenient).

Also, some servers seem to settle SOME maps' matches as a tie with points deciding winner. Example, Soviets win, then Axis win...match setting is set to 2 rounds, so it's a tie...but then the server settles the tie by choosing team with most points. Doesn't matter if the soviets BARELY lose the second round, it all boils down to total points.

It can be very confusing...perhaps it's because of the labile server settings (a good thing), but then we should *know* what those settings are so we can determine win conditions by a process other than trial-and-error.

SOLUTION: While waiting for respawn, add text showing Map Settings (how many rounds per match? 1, 2, or 3? Which round are we currently in? Are ties settled by points or territory held -- even if temporarily as in my example with fallen fighters-- ?

 

[Mormegil]

I'd like to see lock-down "pause" if there's an active cap. If the lock-down count-down is up, and the cap is stopped, defenders win.

Does nobody else remember those boring games in RO1, where they / you never cap the first objective? Gotta sit there for 20 or 30 minutes waiting?

 

[Johnny Utah]

I'd like to see lock-down "pause" if there's an active cap. If the lock-down count-down is up, and the cap is stopped, defenders win.

Does nobody else remember those boring games in RO1, where they / you never cap the first objective? Gotta sit there for 20 or 30 minutes waiting?

Agreed, I suggested this elsewhere...simply pause lockdown timer when the cap is actively progressing (i.e., the icon is shifting to the attacker's color...even if that pauses halfway due to even force ratio, then the timer should continue)

 

[Tummel]

Also, some servers seem to settle SOME maps' matches as a tie with points deciding winner. Example, Soviets win, then Axis win...match setting is set to 2 rounds, so it's a tie...but then the server settles the tie by choosing team with most points. Doesn't matter if the soviets BARELY lose the second round, it all boils down to total points.

This solution to decide ties when server forces maps to be exactly 2 rounds long always favors the attacker if the map is of type ATTACK / DEFEND. This does not happen in SKIRMISH / BATTLE type maps.

Why? Because the attacking team always scores better as they gobble up points when capping whereas the defending team is denied that privilege.

So, if you playing as defending side, a tied round nearly always is won by attacking team.

Even if it makes map take long, I'd prefer 3-round games with ATTACK / DEFEND type maps. Of course, 1-round map gives clear result, too.

 

[Crusher]

Lockdown is the main reason why I don't play this game
Yes it does eliminate long battles, I've seen the russians lose in Commisar's house on the last 2 caps because the lockdown timer ended. If it wasn't for that they might've won. Besides because of lockdown no one uses long thought out tactics anymore. In RO1 in stalingradkessel I would flank the enemy to take out the sniper building which normally houses around 3-4 germans who shoot over long distances. It mostly didn't work from the first try and every time I wasted a few minutes but when i reached it I helped my team progress much easier, besides it was fun to shoot all those unexpected germans in the back. If it was an RO2 map I would just rush to the next objective head first.