What is SD opinion on the lack of excitement in objectives?

(Glottis-3D) #1

This is obvious. The only exciting object is a docrun in bridge alt. Because it didnot suffer from classless castration (being classless by nature) and because layout is very nice.
Other than that all the objects realy lack the excitement, that we had, when there was a risk to lose an object guy. Just like in docrun, the object is the person. Thats why it is adrenaline-filled.
If SD, you want to hook players, you realy need to find a solution. There was a suggestion of 2-class system, that involved all mercs, and that could please both - the object oriented and frag oriented players.
Ofc, we can have all maps a doc runs, but this is just wrong and limiting.
Or, we can go back to class system, just make it extended.
Inferno suggested an obj-tool, that you can take and become the object guy.

The thing is, that current system is boring.

(stealth6) #2

MOBA’s only have 1 map and they do fine. /s

(Anti) #3

I agree they’re not as exciting as they could be right now, but I very much disagree it’s down to missing class limits on objective types.

Most of it comes down to timings, i.e. some doc runs are too short, transmit times are way too short, re-spawns and travel times don’t create the gaps in combat in which to attempt plants/defuses, C4 fuse times limit the number of defuse attempts to too few etc

Good example of how an objective should feel for tension and excitement is the doc run on Island in ETQW. It’s a long route, it requires solid team work to get it to the dish and it has a transmit time at the end that leaves you vulnerable to attack unless your team clear the room first and then cover you.

They’re all things we’re currently aware of and are looking to fix.

(prophett) #4

Island is a great example. Also, when a doc run is interrupted by the defenders and returned, you could make a decision to defender the docs, or defend the secure point (or send some to defend and /kill for a coordinated fall back to the transmitter)

Reversing the doc run on Chapel could make it more exciting (and reducing it to a single doc run). Steal the docs from the current secure point and run them back to the Chapel to secure. The EV could blow open the doors to the Chapel like it used to.

A flanking route from the final defender spawn to somewhere up near the Chapel (or road leading to the Chapel) would need to be added in as well. This would also make the Chapel relevant again (and not just eye-candy).

(tokamak) #5

Island works because of the enormous amount of oversight you get as a defender. Attackers are running up a hill and it’s hard for attackers to slip past the net. For defenders this means there’s less risk in venturing outwards than in maps with dense geometry.

This is only true for the status quo. Any newcomers won’t suffice with the standard Dota map. There would be no reason to quit LoL. Even Dota2 isn’t doing that well and they’re backed up by Valve with Steam. Imagine. All the other MOBAS have to come up with something new to be noticed. SMITE succeeded at that by adopting an MMORPG style of control. HotS will be a classic MOBA but relies on completely changing the maps with sophisticated WoW style dungeon encounters that the teams need to battle each other around.

ETQW shook things up with extremely fun toys and unique map elements (Slipgate, EMP cage, huge underground facility) that really meshed well together. It rewarded creativity.

I agree this true for main objectives. But for side-objectives there definitely was a deep gameplay element in the class limits. In W:ET there was this recurring cat and mice game between covert ops and engineers around forward spawns. This worked mainly because of the class limits. It took a single class to sabotage and another single class to repair. There’s not even one ‘side objective’ class, there’s two for different tasks. That’s asymmetry in a game with (almost) symmetrical teams. It isn’t even tied to attackers and defenders because the forward spawns worked both ways.

And as far as side objectives go, there’s always the possibility to mix it up. Some side objectives work for all classes, some are exclusive, some work for a selection.

DB even has the opportunity to make a side objective respond differently depending on which merc interacts with it. The same objective could adopt a different function depending on whether it’s hacked or repaired. Same for damage. An objective damaged by air support could (mal)function differently from an objective damaged by a HE charge which could (mal)function differently from weapon damage, could (mal)function differently from being hacked.

A HE charge could obliterate an object. A hack could make the object swap sides, an air support could remove the top while weapon damage only takes away the cover but leaves the base skeleton intact (so that it remains impassable).

Lots of different outcomes. A nightmare to balance but incredibly satisfying and personal for the players that work hard at obtaining mercs.

I think a fun way to do a test run for that is the constructed bridge at the start of white chapel. It’s not a very important side objective so you can use it as a test-dummy for all kinds of different merc-sensitive interactions.

  • Air support blows holes in the flooring making it difficult to cross over (like Fuel Dump’s bridge)
  • An HE charge blows the thing entirely and permanently (the map isn’t supposed to last that long anyway)
  • Weapon damage slowly withers away the cover plating (that can be repaired again)
  • Hacking the bridge (from either side) electrifies it for the opponent team until the other team damages the electric device.

All these things connect the merc to it’s environment and make the player feel like they’ve earned themselves something more than just a new skin and a different weapon. They’ve actually acquired a specific key to the map’s geometry that not everyone else has.

That’s what makes F2P players tick.

(Glottis-3D) #6

Reversing a WC docrun is a n1 idea.

Nevertheless, docruns are easier to make exciting. How a simple repair/hack/C4 object is going to get tension. Best examples - sewer hack object, ark laser object, ark or area22 c4 objects.

(tokamak) #7

Sewer was brilliant because the objective could be defended from inside the mesh of the gate.

(Glottis-3D) #8

@tokamak. I thought similar. A door can be opened mechanically, blown by c4 or hacked. With different outcomes. Like hacking a door, lets you hack further objects in the map, and destroyed door doesnt let you to do so.

(PixelTwitch) #9

Personally I feel that one of the main reasons comes down to telegraphing…
It pretty much feels like waiting most of the time…

I imagine stuff like on the train yards first capture point (not saying I like them) it would be so much better if it simply had a chopper dropping off a container onto the bridge and lining it up while players fight on the bridge. Personally I want to see the hacking come back and just be more planned out… I think certain mercs could have done with the hacking device they can place or others have to do it by hand (all be it a little faster).

but hey >.<

what do I know :smiley:

(tokamak) #10

Yes. And note that this is not the same as some physics-related damage. That would be impossible to balance. Just diversified interactions, different mercs changing their environment in different ways.

(Glottis-3D) #11

I am all for changing enviroment. The more ways to do it - the better!

(BomBaKlaK) #12

+1

and Just get rid of capture zone !!

(DJswirlyAlien) #13

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;505849]Personally I feel that one of the main reasons comes down to telegraphing…
It pretty much feels like waiting most of the time…

I imagine stuff like on the train yards first capture point (not saying I like them) it would be so much better if it simply had a chopper dropping off a container onto the bridge and lining it up while players fight on the bridge. Personally I want to see the hacking come back and just be more planned out… I think certain mercs could have done with the hacking device they can place or others have to do it by hand (all be it a little faster).

but hey >.<

what do I know :D[/QUOTE]

Are you talking about hacking/bomb defusal mini games like in the Mass Effect series?

(Glottis-3D) #14
  1. Then how are you going to make ppl (mostly newcomers) play the much weaker mercs? (Engineers).
  2. How do you like that medics try to repair things (because they can) and it takes so long, that everybody rage starting from this very medic. ‘If i can only repair for this much time, why i even able to do so?’ This is kinda logical question.

The only way to make engies matter is make them much better in obj, and this takes us to medics, repairing for hours.

(prophett) #15

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;505849]Personally I want to see the hacking come back and just be more planned out… I think certain mercs could have done with the hacking device they can place or others have to do it by hand (all be it a little faster).
[/QUOTE]

I would love to see a console of some sorts over around the MG building where you have to interact with a terminal to receive a hack code, then you would need to go to the bridge/track controls to enter that code. The defense could potentially counter this by choosing to “reset” the code in the mg building upon respawning, or just kill the guy hacking on the bridge.

Trying to brainstorm more interesting objectives :confused:

Almost anything is better than a capture zone…

(Glottis-3D) #16

[QUOTE=prophett;505889]I would love to see a console of some sorts over around the MG building where you have to interact with a terminal to receive a hack code, then you would need to go to the bridge/track controls to enter that code. The defense could potentially counter this by choosing to “reset” the code in the mg building upon respawning, or just kill the guy hacking on the bridge.

Trying to brainstorm more interesting objectives :confused:

Almost anything is better than a capture zone…[/QUOTE]
Capture zones will be gone for sure, if we come up with more ideas like this. Two-step objects are realy demanding. And give n! More tactics for both attack and defence.

But with current layout in TY none will work. Not enough space. MG house will need a second floor (with computer), and it should be 15-25 meters furthger from console.

(prophett) #17

[QUOTE=krokodealer;505890]
But with current layout in TY none will work. Not enough space. MG house will need a second floor (with computer), and it should be 15-25 meters furthger from console.[/QUOTE]

For sure - An alternate to building up could be to also build down; tunnels, sewers, underground bunkers. Another plus is that an underground bunker with access from each side would create an alternate route :slight_smile:

When I get off work i’ll try to get this idea on paper with an overhead view of that map with my proposed idea.

(Glottis-3D) #18

I think of getting firewall off in the mg-house. And letting the hack to be done. So that attacking team has to be in both places to win this object. And defenders can decide whether to wipe the firewall mg house or the train console

(onYn) #19

There are 2 answers for that question, like for almost every topic regarding this game.

For pub play it´s mostly the flaws you experience on the maps itself. It´s not like the objective itself is something that can be so super exciting, but the way you can go there, how and with which class and weapon you go there, what you can do until you reach the objective (like take a spawn, kill enemies that pushed out too fast, maybe build some secondary), attack and defend it, is what makes it interesting. And since the current map design makes (in terms of spawns also the gamedesign itself I guess…) almost all of those decision-making useless while sending you the same tight, tubish routes from point a to b again and again it gets boring quickly.

For comp play it´s also the same like it´s for pub play. But in addition, on a strategic and team play level class specific objectives would just require even more proper decision making and various tactics to do or defend objectives.

For me one of the main rules (if not THE main rule) for a game that is fun and motivating me for a long time is a game where I can do a specific thing in many ways (like an objective in this case). And even tho I probably usually stick to one way to play, and one route I am going, just having the possibility to switch things up whenever I or my team needs it makes a game so much more fun, and allows you to dive into it so much easier.

(INF3RN0) #20

Performing the obj has always been by far the least exciting part of any SD game, so I pretty much agree with what Onyn said. There’s a pretty major misconception that pressing a button is somehow more exciting than standing in a circle. They both are meh… which is why doc runs feel the most exciting since ‘doing the obj’ is the least inhibiting. I do think that objs can be made to be much more exciting, but they’d have to break some major ground and make ‘doing the obj’ a much more involved and unique experience. Honestly I’m surprised they’ve changed so little since ET considering they ought to be one of the first things that deserves innovation.