Multiple Sequential Objectives

[Quaker]

In the spirit of adding more depth and variation to gameplay, is it feasible for the developers to consider trialling on a couple of the larger maps multiple sequential objectives?

By that I mean having a new objective pop-up for the attacking side after the first one is taken. So you might have to take two or three objectives within the time limit instead of just one.

And to make gameplay even more variable, perhaps at least one or two of these objectives could be random in terms of where they appear to avoid any ‘pre-camping’ of objectives and to keep the game fresh.

[SwingKid148]

That is the battle map, where the whole 4km by 4km map will be playable. :cool:

https://www.warofrights.com/Fieldreport41

Point 9.

[Hinkel]

In the spirit of adding more depth and variation to gameplay, is it feasible for the developers to consider trialling on a couple of the larger maps multiple sequential objectives?

By that I mean having a new objective pop-up for the attacking side after the first one is taken. So you might have to take two or three objectives within the time limit instead of just one.

And to make gameplay even more variable, perhaps at least one or two of these objectives could be random in terms of where they appear to avoid any ‘pre-camping’ of objectives and to keep the game fresh.

Larger maps with multiple objectives is indeed planned for the Historical Battle mode. But to be honest, that battle mode is not a huge priority at the moment.
But I have to admit, being a Lt. Colonel of the German Volunteers and taking part in events, I would like to see some larger skirmish maps with multiple objectives myself :)

[Quaker]

But I have to admit, being a Lt. Colonel of the German Volunteers and taking part in events, I would like to see some larger skirmish maps with multiple objectives myself :)

Same here. Skirmish mode will probably always be the main form of the game. So let’s make it more tactically intricate.

There’s lots of scope to deepen the gameplay and having 2-3 sequential victory objectives in Skirmish mode could be one of the mechanisms to achieve this.

[Soulfly]

Very much what was already said. I must admit that I liked the "War (objective mode)" in CoD 5 where the battle was raging back and forth between the objectives until the last one was eventually taken. So, not multiple at one but one after the other.

[Sox]

Larger maps with multiple objectives is indeed planned for the Historical Battle mode. But to be honest, that battle mode is not a huge priority at the moment.
But I have to admit, being a Lt. Colonel of the German Volunteers and taking part in events, I would like to see some larger skirmish maps with multiple objectives myself :)

You could test a variation using Bloody Lane for example. Add three capture points, let's call them Assault Points, right flank, left flank & centre but not actually IN the lane itself. Make it so that these three Assault Points have to be captured, and held, for a certain amount of time. Once these three assault points have fallen then, and only then, the main capture point (the one as it stands now) becomes available to be taken.

[EneCtin]

There are variants to that. On the Sunken Road map [edit: that was Roullete Lane], for example, 3 objectives, the small house, the barn and the mansion on the hill. At the start of the match, each team rushes to capture the closest objective and moves further to contest the middle objective. A tug of war ensues, first team to hold all 3 objectives for x minutes wins. No need to capture them in a linear fashion A then B then C, whichever way you do it works, if you hold them for enough time you win.

[Galahad]

There are variants to that. On the Sunken Road map, for example, 3 objectives, the small house, the barn and the mansion on the hill. At the start of the match, each team rushes to capture the closest objective and moves further to contest the middle objective. A tug of war ensues, first team to hold all 3 objectives for x minutes wins. No need to capture them in a linear fashion A then B then C, whichever way you do it works, if you hold them for enough time you win.

They would have to do away with the whole attack and defend parts of the map then no? The way the ticket system works now would severely hamper that I think

[EneCtin]

It could work, I think, at least for a test run. The 3 objectives makes for an unstable situation (aka interesting gameplay) when each team has but 2 companies for economical line fighting (2 points can be contested in a economical way, assaulting the third will be skirmishing, costly or ramboing, extremely costly). Also, splitting your force can leave you at a disadvantage against a massed enemy. So, the game would favour confederate maneuvering tactics more than the static union line thing.

[Vankovski]

You could make composites of each of the three assaults throughout the day by stitching together Miller's Cornfield/Dunker's Church/ West Woods, Pry Ford/Roulette Lane/Sunken Road, and Burnside's Bridge/Otto&Sherrick. Capping the initial skirmish point would open up the next, could even have two next to each other and you have to cap both before the next set unlocks.

[Matt(Fridge)]

You could make composites of each of the three assaults throughout the day by stitching together Miller's Cornfield/Dunker's Church/ West Woods, Pry Ford/Roulette Lane/Sunken Road, and Burnside's Bridge/Otto&Sherrick. Capping the initial skirmish point would open up the next, could even have two next to each other and you have to cap both before the next set unlocks.

This!!! Makes perfect sense.

[Matt(Fridge)]

Same here. Skirmish mode will probably always be the main form of the game. So let’s make it more tactically intricate.

There’s lots of scope to deepen the gameplay and having 2-3 sequential victory objectives in Skirmish mode could be one of the mechanisms to achieve this.

Historical Battles is planned to be the main mode of the game. They have said that numerous times. Skirmishes will probably be a close second though