Classes in light of objectives for offense/defence

(Lequis) #1

It has been previously stated by SD that if you lack a certain class, victory is impossible.

However, there are two teams, one of which must reach an objective, the other which must defend it. Does this mean that the defending team has an option of using one class and still clutching (although the opposite may be advisable), whereas offense must have diversity? Or does this mean that regardless of what team you are on, if you don’t use all of your classes at some point, your team will automatically lose?

How exactly did defensive objectives work in ET? (because when I play Cod/Gears/Battlefield, all of them do not have actual defensive objectives.)

I’d imagine defensive objectives just slow the onset of your enemies or seal off certain routes until the offense counters it with another objective (ie blowing up a door/hacking a terminal to reopen any door sealed by an engineer).

[edit:] Can defense stack classes?

(H0RSE) #2

Both sides will need diversity. Say the attackers need to blow a bridge…they need a soldier to plant a charge (engineer in ET) but also, defenders need to be able to disarm the charge. Defenders tend to make the attackers job harder by using classes (setting up a minefield, placing turrets, etc.) At the least I would say it is more relevant on the attacking team, but both sides would do good with diversity.

(Jamieson) #3

This you mention classes and objectives I will add this.

I think its important to get classes/objectives balanced. In ETQW it was very biased towards the strogg on certain campaigns.

E.g Valley, Outskirts, Area 22 vs Querry, Ark, Salvage.

GDF
Valley 1st/2nd objective = engineer Hack = covert, 3rd = Soldier.
Outskirts 1st objective soldier, 2nd engineer, 3rd covert, last any.
Area 1st engineer, 2nd any, last engineer.
As you can see the GDF have to keep switching classes to get the objective done so they don’t stay 1 class long enough to get therewards and unlock the lvl 4 skills.

Strogg.
Querry, Aggressor, any
Ark, Aggressor, Constructor, Aggressor,
Salvage,Aggressor, Constructor, Aggressor,
Strogg stay the same class most of the time and unlock the skills.

Please keep this in mind for Brink.

(Senethro) #4

They don’t need to keep it in mind because unlocks are now permanent. This means xp whoring within a campaign for gain later in the campaign won’t happen.

(MILFandCookies) #5

Lequis - its only impossible on primary objectives to win without a specific class. However on secondary objectives, teams might opt to not run certain classes if they feel they can make up for it in another way. For example a team might choose to not run any operatives for radar, because they feel their comms are just as good as radar. This allows them to have another medic, or another engie sitting on the objective.

On the other side of the coin - the other team can still exploit this class balance by spamming mines all over the map - as its the operatives job to spot them. They can spam turrets knowing they wont be hacked. They can capture command posts knowing, the enemy cant hack them. And possibly a heap of other stuff.

So I wouldnt say its an automatic loss - its about how well a team can exploit the class imbalance. Or how well the other team can use the extra medic/engie/soldier to their advantage.

(brbrbr) #6

SO in short topicstarter mean, thats all calases lack of capability lacking, to make co-operation essential and eventual ?

(Lequis) #7

Hack turrets? You know, if someone had just said that was the alternative to spamming nades I wouldn’t be saying Engie is OP everywhere on the forums. Engie’s turrets have a large counter by Operative, that’s enough for me.

(Senethro) #8

Have you been saying Engie is OP everywhere? I hadn’t noticed but then I would probably have paid as much attention to it as any hyperbolic statement based on near-zero information.

(DarkangelUK) #9

You’re making even less sense than normal… if that’s possible. I’m guessing that means, classes are purposely handicapped to a point that they must rely on other classes and team work to progress? I would’ve that would be inherant of classes in the 1st place, considering a class has specialist abilities, hence their whole point in the 1st place.

(Lequis) #10

Lol, Dark. My first thought was you were commenting on my forum in general. I’m pretty sure half or more of the ET people that comment on/read anything I post think I’m trolling by now because I complain about Engies, Heavy body types and ask really stupid questions…

I read the quote after reading your opening statement.

Nice stuff.

In response to Senethro:

I thought turrets would be 360 degree turrets that fire up and down, have no TF2 uber-medic counter, a slight operative counter (because you need a body to get in the base (and if the enemy camps 8 men in an impenetrable fortress that’s hopeless)), no overheat (which I now know is true), no remote hacking, probable instantaneous bullets that always hit so light body type can’t dodge (which in the case of a clan of 8 heavy engies facing off against 8 lights with any choice of class, would leave no hope(in the offchance that it actually happens)).

And I thought Engies could place 3 landmines each.

That was my, Engies are OP discussion.

I have faith in the counters provided by SD now.

(Jamieson) #11

Yes they do, regardless of whether the xp bonuses are sort term or long term SD should still consider the issue because it is unfair for someone who plays on a particular team to gain xp quicker if they are interested in doing the objective so the team can win.

I would agree that its probably not as serious as the campaign xp system like ETQW but its still soemething that should be fair and equal.

I would like to see equal distribution of players between both teams, ETQW was very strong sided towards Strogg. I know this wasn’t just because of the problem i descirbed obviously other things such as the Strogg defending alot and other factors contribured but SD should still recognise it.