Scenarios like Dustbowl

[Garthilk]

I'm going to use a map in Team Fortress 2 as an example, Dustbowl. In the map, players must push to acquire an objective. There are multiple routes to the objective and the defenders must keep the opposing team from the objective. If players capture the objective, the defenders fall back and now must defend a new objective. Think of it like Normandy invasion.

I wonder, would you enjoy a map where in Normandy like defense and offense. Whereby, the offense has a difficult position to start out in and must progress to a defensible position.

[Arctos]

I would personally, I think you would be better off with an example of AV from WoW more people might know what it is, but there you took a certain point then when you died you went there and it was closer to the final objective.

I like those battles because you have to split resources to defend what you took already and to take the next one.

[StabbyMcGee]

I've always been a big supporter of games like One-Flag CTF, or a game where the defenders hold the highground, or a strong defensive position, while the attackers have to breach them somehow. It's more engaging then the same-ole, some old. A dustbowl styled map (design wise) would be badass.

[Axxar]

Sounds fine to me. It would be great if the objective makes sense in the context of course instead of being some silly object that doesn't really belong there nor makes sense fighting over (like a flag).

[Feigro]

Absolutely. I love what Mythic is doing, but from that fansite gathering there does seem to be a bit of rehash in the ideas. First we've got a 3 point capture scenario, then bomb run scenario.. and over here we have a 3 point capture scenario with a bomb run. Not to mention our standard death match (which is great), and of course, our standard death match, but with trolls (seems like a stretch for an idea). Additionally, the few times people have suggested maps styles like "enemy territory" scenarios, where you need to assault an area your enemy defends, Mythic seems to stare with a blank face.

So I'd like to see as much variation as possible in gameplay, not just the maps we play on.

[Lord Doomblade]

Absolutely. I love what Mythic is doing, but from that fansite gathering there does seem to be a bit of rehash in the ideas. First we've got a 3 point capture scenario, then bomb run scenario.. and over here we have a 3 point capture scenario with a bomb run. Not to mention our standard death match (which is great), and of course, our standard death match, but with trolls (seems like a stretch for an idea). Additionally, the few times people have suggested maps styles like "enemy territory" scenarios, where you need to assault an area your enemy defends, Mythic seems to stare with a blank face.

So I'd like to see as much variation as possible in gameplay, not just the maps we play on.

Also keep in mind that they *may* be wanting to hold their most badass cards close to their chest... so close to release they can get everyone super whipped up by listing some new creative scenarios.

Or maybe not...

[QuantumTheory]

I'de love to see Orcish D-Day, with the Orcs playing as Americans and maybe 10 good old Dwarfs Defendin' a position, except that we Dwarfs would win, naturally. Would be quite fun.

[Elethil]

I pray Mythic is creative with their senarios and have many differnt types! Wow has absolutely no creativity when it comes to there battle grounds. First we have a full out capture the flag. Then a capture point type bg. Then when they finally put in a new bg what do they do? combine both capture the flag and capture point into one battleground!

/sigh

[Fiss]

I enjoy creative scenarios, however, would love for there to just simply be a large map with a lot of people killing each other...simple. There were no goals and no limit or reset. People join as people leave and when people get bored of killing they move on as others take thier place. We get too creative with the scenarios we loose sight of the goal of many...to kill. I hated being a flag runner in WoW as I will assume that i will hate it in WAR if implemented. With that being said, I don't see why they cannot add creative scenarios in the game so long as they don't loose sight of the larger picture which is to kill people...at least for some. :cool:

[StabbyMcGee]

I'd like a large, previously breached fortress. Tall stone walls, with a larger central building with wide windows allowing defenders to rain down hell on the assault team. Now, the defenders only just got to the position, and because of that there are numerous ways in. There's a crack in the back wall, bring an explosive and there's your entrance. You can smash down the front gate, which is the most direct and fastest approach. There's a tunnel about a quarter mile away from the keep which is cracked open, revealing a maze like sewer system which opens up all over the keep, allowing for a stealthy, but slow approach. The defenders have sent a messanger out, and you have to act fast. Take the keep before nearby reinforcements arrive, or be slaughtered.


^ My dream scenario.

[Lord Doomblade]

I'd like a large, previously breached fortress. Tall stone walls, with a larger central building with wide windows allowing defenders to rain down hell on the assault team. Now, the defenders only just got to the position, and because of that there are numerous ways in. There's a crack in the back wall, bring an explosive and there's your entrance. You can smash down the front gate, which is the most direct and fastest approach. There's a tunnel about a quarter mile away from the keep which is cracked open, revealing a maze like sewer system which opens up all over the keep, allowing for a stealthy, but slow approach. The defenders have sent a messanger out, and you have to act fast. Take the keep before nearby reinforcements arrive, or be slaughtered.


^ My dream scenario.

A scenario like that could be done with an unbalanced number setup, possibly with 1.5 times the attackers as the defenders, but the attackers are working on a timer, with the defenders only having to force a stalemate to win.

[Aqe]

I enjoy creative scenarios, however, would love for there to just simply be a large map with a lot of people killing each other...simple. There were no goals and no limit or reset. People join as people leave and when people get bored of killing they move on as others take thier place. We get too creative with the scenarios we loose sight of the goal of many...to kill. I hated being a flag runner in WoW as I will assume that i will hate it in WAR if implemented. With that being said, I don't see why they cannot add creative scenarios in the game so long as they don't loose sight of the larger picture which is to kill people...at least for some. :cool:

Open World RvR.

[Sturmer]

OP that model has been used in many WW2 FPS games... DoD, Red Orchestra.

Best Scenario type there can be. Mostly because its realistic. And best part is that it can be used in Open World also.

[Riddly]

I hope open world RvR brings more variety because at the moment, the scenario's we've seen in videos are very standard and have been done many times before. I do like the idea of assault style scenarios where one side must assult the other. But unless both sides get a chance to play offense and later defense, people will whine to no end about terrain balance issues.

Capturing and controlling GY's in AV was a cool concept at first because it felt like the battle was progressing, sadly when honor points became more important than winning, this BG became lame as people would go around players instead of fighting them.

[Jegger]

Sounds like a great scenario type to me! Almost like a city siege push in miniature. I've played a few scenarios like this using the TT skirmish rules and it's always a blast, no matter whether defending or assaulting.

[HoramJakChar]

I don't really like instance PvP but this is the kind of Scenario I'd like to do if I had to do one. It has my vote.

[Kinthral]

Sounds like a great scenario type to me! Almost like a city siege push in miniature. I've played a few scenarios like this using the TT skirmish rules and it's always a blast, no matter whether defending or assaulting.
Agreed. I think what makes something like this really fun is that there is a clearly defensible position, regardless of whether or not the objective is a flag or control point. These could mirror the large battle (the zone is being assaulted by X and defended by Y) or the opposite (counterattack by Y). In war, you find places to defend and places that aren't defended, so I don't think WAR should be any different. And since AOE attacks will be spread out across more types (PBAOE, normal AOE, Wave/Line, Chained/Bouncing) it might be more acceptable to have more choke points. There may be possible problems if players get a "blood clot" attitude and don't learn to move up, however.

And I'd love to see linked control points, where you MUST take them in a certain order, to prevent the merry-go-round of spread out control points, or the "take the closest flag to the scenario's objective and then take that before they can do the same" of unlinked linear control points.

I don't like flags, but they are mainly there as a focal point. If you don't use them, then you pretty much have to have some other marker of what you click/where you stand to capture the point, and "make the players learn" would be too confusing. Perhaps the world geometry is to blame, and there is a way to make it clear that there are certain areas to stand in to capture, ie, designing areas that clearly look like points you would want to take in a battle (ramparts, towers, hills, other buildings).

[uzgrod]

i don't know if the scenarios got to complicated they would kinda cease to be fun with thtis kinda gameplay

[Valinox Ruina]

Coming from a huge TFC fan like myself... i would love to see a scenario like dustbowl in some sort of RvR. I doubt it would work open world, so it would have to be instanced... But having some sort of flag that you need to bring to a certain location would be cool. But just having 2 teams of players wouldnt be good enough. 1 team with good tactics can cap in no time if the respawn or somthing is not instant. Like TFC, most of the time on dustbowl there are engi turrets, demo spam, HW spam and stuff like that at choke points that slow the progression of the flag.

I think an instance with NPCs friendly to the defending team that have stuff like seige catas firing or player controlled seige that stays stationary but can switch targeting a ground target on the fly and rain down a barrage of rocks and stuff.

Also, healing would play a huge factor in these scenarios. Unlike in TFC where people cant heal from range... healing would have to be LoS only or it would be overkill. But I would still like to see stuff like dustbowl or avanti... or even somthing like a time attack kind of idea where 1 team has a certain time limit to complete all objectives or they lose the battle kinda thing.

[DarkDweller]

I wouldn't be surprised if Mythic are keeping a few things under their hat.

It sounds like they're having some of their ideas pinched already from rival camps, and the game isn't even out yet.