Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Why Halo's Objective Gametypes Suck - Part 1 | |
| Posted By: Apirishin <apirishin1@gmail.com> | Date: 3/19/12 9:39 a.m. |
In Response To: Why Halo's Objective Gametypes Suck - Part 1 (RC Master) I've alwways thought that the biggest "problem" with objective gametypes, at least when it comes to going in with random players that don't corrdinate their tactics in any way, is that there are just way too many possibilities for what to do when the game starts. Rush the objective? Rush on foot? Rush with vehicles? Go for power weapons? Slay? Hang back and defend. Leeroy Jenkins's it all the way to the other side of the map? As you mentioned, it's unclear whether attacking or defending should be the goal at any one point in time (unless you're communicating, etc.), but I would extend that line of thought one step further, too. It's unclear exactly what to do or what I should do in this particular case when we're attacking or defending, though it is usually a bit clearer if either attacking or defending have been clearly established. The whole exercise becomes somewhat open-ended without clearly defined mini-goals for what to do to achieve the overall goal of planting the bomb, pulling the flag, or defending against such. Sometimes these things just happen naturally/organically, which is always a pleasure, but most of the time you end up with as many strategies as you do players on the team (to say nothing of other gametypes like KoTH or Oddball). Contrast this with BTB Territories, specifically when four territories have already been captured and there is only one remaining. Everyone knows what to do (you're either attacking or defending, with no back and forth within a given round), and your options are sort of limited to achieve the objective of capturing or defending the final territory. If you're defending, simply kill anyone that goes into the last remaining territory, and try to set up an extended perimeter to deny access. If you're attacking, get into the territory and also try to set up an extended perimeter to deny the defenders easy sight-lines and shots on target. It really can't get any easier than this, but when there are multiple territories to defend/attack, even adding that minial layer of complexity makes things much more discombobulated (yes, again, unless you're talking/coordinated, etc., or there is a big skill gap between teams). I think that added layer of complexity that comes with objective gametypes (and no clear way to deal with them without playing with a coordinated team) is what keeps many players away from the playlist. I generally agree with the other points you make about pacing and kill griefing. In terms of strategy, I remember seeing a vid where one of the players gave good advice: in objective games, first you slay, then you grab the power weapons for map control, and only then do you really go for the objective. When I find myself getting curb-stomped by full-party teams in BTB, they're usually following this formula.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |