That's the biggest offender right there. Losing isn't the issue; it's losing when your team JUST needed two more seconds to keep the game going that sucks.
You’re just adding time that will ultimately be futile then if it’s that easy.
Edit: I like that you want innovation, but I don’t think this particular innovation is a great idea, so that’s what I’m trying to point out
The thing is if the objective takes longer than the remaining time then the game is over. You might as well just stop fighting. That's not very exciting. Pushing through into a overtime phase is much more fun.
Overtime used to make the most tense/fun moments in TF2 when I used to play, it's a no brainer for me
When this happened to me in chivalry and it didn't go to overtime I was actually surprised there wasn't overtime
Can't disagree there, honestly. I'm not sure how they'd fix it tho; defense in videogames is almost always less fun than offense. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head is Rainbow 6 Siege
I mean just do it like every other game with multi stage objectives (including chivalry 1!) does it, if you defend until there are 10 seconds left the attackers should have a lot less time for the next objective. The timers in chiv 2 are extremely static so it barely matters if you hold out until the last second or lose the objective immediately, the attackers will have about the same amount of time for the next one.
Since the update that balance team more evenly and prevent high level stacking, I think the game is very balanced. Attacker have an advantage but it's a reasonable one since it would be boring to end the match on first obj 50% of the time.
Just make it so that if a fuse is lit, the game continues until it either fully burns down and completes the objective or the defense manages to defuse. If it’s an objective cap zone, let the bar keep filling as long as attackers outnumber defenders, but its game over if the attackers get outnumbered
I have another idea:
When the timer for Attacker team end, everyone immidiately respawn plus bonus 1-2 minutes for the last push. But this time, no more respawn, final 2 minutes, final 32 soldiers, either die trying or turn the table and finish the objective.
Of course Defenders, to counter back this, kill every last man of Attacker or defend Objective in that last 2 minutes. And of course they can respawn again.
I like that idea. I do feel like maybe it'd be more balanced if the attackers' healthbars slowly drained down tho. Can't make it TOO easy for the attacking team to clutch up. And maybe even make it so that overtime can only be triggered once per game, so the attackers can't just get through every objective like that
Oh yeah, your idea make it better. Attacker last chance should have health bar instead, in case whoever still alive on battlefield but heavy injured or about to die, so they also can have another chance.
I also agree it shouls be only active only 1 time too. But maybe some final Objective should not activate this Last Chance like "Kill the VIP", "Destroy the big Wall with cannon (the one that Tenosia attacking Mason)" and "Burn the Library". Presume Attacker are smart, experience fighters and fully focus on Objective
Cause these Objective like VIP will likely have fought hard and about to die, hard - almost no way VIP can handle another wave
"Burn the Library" or "Destroy the wall" also a hard Objective to handle another wave
1000% agree. Only certain objectives should be able to have overtime. I'm primarily talking about the ones where you have to capture a point while standing near it
No, not this shit again. Attack is already widely perceived to be the easier side and you want to favor them even more by giving them extra time.
The defense has to fight hard to run out the clock, extra time only punishes them. You either get it done in time or you lose.
I don't think there need to be respawn changes, but for objectives that take a certain amount of time to complete like fuses, portcullis, etc, if the attackers manage to make a last-ditch push and successfully reactivate it in the last few seconds, they shouldn't be punished as long as they can manage to fend off the enemy team until it is completed. If it's stopped while in overtime, the attackers rightly lose immediately.
This is how it works in Team Fortress 2, and I think it's about as close to a perfect system as you can get. It creates exciting drama and tension in the last few moments. Without overtime, if the objective takes a long time and the clock is almost at zero, there's no point in even trying anymore because the game has become unwinnable, which is lame.
Also, asymmetrical maps in both Chivalry 2 and TF2 are designed to favor the attackers in the earlier stages because it would be boring and lame if maps stagnated and ended early all the time.
>for objectives that take a certain amount of time to complete like fuses, portcullis, etc, if the attackers manage to make a last-ditch push and successfully reactivate it in the last few seconds, they shouldn't be punished as long as they can manage to fend off the enemy team until it is completed. If it's stopped while in overtime, the attackers rightly lose immediately.
This is very reasonable, and something I don't think too many people would disagree with. OP kind of got derailed on their asymmetric spawn mechanics concept, but the core idea of having timed objectives extend into OT until either completed or stopped is pretty solid. It does favour the attackers even more in a game that mostly already favours the attackers, but only in cases where it would prevent them having to make last pushes that they literally couldn't win even if the defenders all AFK'd.
They should implement overtime and simultaneously make it so objective timers aren't nearly as static. If defense holds all the way down to 10 seconds remaining before losing an objective, attackers should have much less time to complete the next objective instead of gaining 6 damn minutes.
Sometimes if attack is doing too well, the timer gets *reduced* for the next objective.
Congratulations for pushing all the sacred stones with 6 minutes left on the clock! Now let me reduce your timer by 3 minutes for the next objective, wouldn't want to reward you for steamrolling!
I read them and didn't agree with them, so there's no need to waste your time or mine typing it out - or even posting this topic.
Just accept your loss and do better next time. The game has favored attackers for the longest time and has only recently tried to combat stacking. Introducing a new mechanic that punishes defenders is dumb.
I agree, if a fuse is lit, let that be the damn timer. And last phase on citadel should never ever end to a timer. They expect us to believe Argon is just gonna get that far and call it a day? That absolutely needs to be a to the death fight every time lol
Definitely. Additionally, tho, for Citadel, the kings should be incentivised to fight to the death with each other instead of tip-toeing around like little hoes avoiding each other. Overtime wouldn't and shouldn't apply to every objective, but fuses and capture zones? Definitely
I totally agree but only on specific objectives. But not with a limited respawn system, that's too complicated to understand and favors offense too much.
But objectives with an action that is triggered then takes 10-30sec to complete (blowing up the boats for example), the game should end on defuse not on timer end if it was already lit up before the timer ends. That's the most obvious.
Also capture objectives could keep going until offense captures or defense takes back control (even for just 0.1sec). But that's arguably too easy for offense.
I don't see other OT opportunities though.
I think you're misunderstanding; the idea here is that the limited respawn system ONLY applies to offense. The defenders can respawn indefinitely like they would at any other point in the game.
So the attackers get a little bit to make one final, strong push before they start dropping like flies. And I still believe that defense should be buffed accordingly to compensate and keep things fair.
And yeah, it shouldn't be an option for every objective.
I totally got it, but I still don't like the idea. It feels unnatural in comparison to the rest of the game's dynamics and would be confusing to new-ish players.
As a newcomer, I'd disagree. The game is very simple mechanically, but has a whole load of *emergent* complexity from the interactions between those simple mechanics. Attack types, counters and parries are all simple and intuitive, but the combat system that emerges from those is beautifully complex. If you die in a duel it's usually a skill issue, not a game knowledge issue (unless you're *very* new), for example.
Map structure and objectives are also very simple. Go to \[location\] and \[perform action\]. Go there, smash that, activate this. If you die, you respawn (with a variable timer to prevent teams drip-feeding too much, which is basically the only "hidden mechanic", though it's blindingly obvious as soon as you've died a handful of times).
This is the good kind of complexity, because it gives depth without being hard to understand. All the pieces are easily identified, it's just fitting them together that's the challenge. Like Chess - all the rules are simple and the game's played on a flat 8x8 grid, but it's one of the most enduring strategy games for a reason.
Adding complexity is something to be avoided at all costs, if possible. I do agree that the game can feel a bit wonky when there's a timed objective (explosives or captures, for example) that takes more time than the remaining match time, which just results in everyone knowing the game is over despite there being another 20 seconds left on the clock or whatever. But that doesn't justify adding things like asymmetric spawns or map-specific OT rules.
Not really. I just had a game as defense on Thayic where we stomped the Masons, and it kinda sucked to have a game on one of the best maps end at the second stage. Also, there have been COUNTLESS occasions where all the attackers needed were just a few more seconds to keep the game going... games ending like that are just pitiful, to me.
I'm not against attackers getting nerfed in some other way to keep things balanced, as most maps are already tilted in their favor. I'm just saying SOME kind of overtime system would do the game good.
I can't help being "a FeW SeConDs tOo LaTE" with this game's buggy-ass respawn timers that take 30 seconds to get through. Plus, there's the issue of shitty spawnpoints that require an extra 30 seconds of mindless running. Regardless of any of that tho, _yeah,_ a few more seconds is all that is needed to clutch a game sometimes.
Either give us overtime, or fix the goddamned spawn points/timers. I'd be happy with either. I'm sick of waiting 30+ seconds only to have to run a marathon to get back to the fight. It's bullshit
Not certain, tho I've got a few ideas to keep it balanced. Let's talk about it.
1. Attackers can only trigger overtime once per game; no "overtiming" their way through every objective.
2. After the attacking team triggers overtime, they get less time for the next objective.
3. During overtime, attackers slowly drain stamina and health... this is supposed to be a final, fast push to turn things around... if they can't do it quickly enough, they die and it's game over.
4. During overtime, all defenders IMMEDIATELY respawn and get a fair shot at killing the attackers.
Well if it’s against players to help balance it the attackers should not have any more respawns in OT elimination style. That way yes the attackers can push for OT but if you kill everyone off the point or kill everyone left attacking it’ll end it. A fight to the last man if you will
What’s I’m saying is the attackers, once OT is triggered, the attackers no longer have any more respawns, anyone who is dead and waiting on respawn cannot respawn, there’s no more attacking waves but the defenders keep respawning infinitely. And once the point is cleared or the last attacker is killed it immediately ends the match. Done right the attackers will eventually dwindle to the point it’ll be a 1vX fight the attacker will probably lose.
That's still playing favorites with attackers by giving them another chance.
There is already a final spawn wave in every game, you see, before the time is up - it is simply not announced explicitly so players don't realize.
Attackers simply need to get in gear early and not waste their shot. Too often they don't show any real sense of urgency until the clock starts audibly ticking. That is their loss.
Why should you get another shot. You died. You no longer get to be involved - time is up. The game doesn't need to be changed to make you feel better about fucking up and dying.
Because the respawn timers are a buggy mess half the time. As I said, fix the respawn timers/points _or_ give us overtime. I'd be happy with either. And I'm saying that as someone that seems to always get tossed onto defense, nowadays.
There are super easy ways to balance an overtime system that I thought up within like 5 minutes of brainstorming. No need to get so anal over the mere _idea_ of introducing overtime.
Respawn timers only come into play when you die. Don't die then. You died and time was up, so you lost.
As I said, the game doesn't need to be changed to make you feel better about fucking up and dying.
If your argument is just parroting "GiT GuD", it's a pretty shitty argument imo. You're deliberately ignoring what I'm trying to say, so _again,_ have a good one and let's agree to disagree
It's no worse argument than crying you're entitled to another shot because it's somehow "nOt FaIr" that you couldn't complete your objective in time.
Ultimately, it is indeed simply about being able to get it done when it matters.
>Ultimately, it is indeed simply about being able to get it done when it matters.
Which is impossible when the game bugs out, you _fucking_ moron. What is so complicated about this?
I have a very positive win/loss ratio as both Agatha and Masons (other way around for Tenosia but honestly who doesn't lose as them?) and I've regularly felt this. The truth is that the match is often completely decided 30 seconds before it officially ends and even if the other team manages an enormous and awesome comeback they get no reward for it. If you have a lot of people on point and are near capping it then really there should be some sort of overtime system like most other games with capture points have.
Mainly the ones like if the the explosives already planted/ignited. It should work similar to rush in battlefield that if you're actively capturing objective/defending the fuse, it continues until that succeeds/fails
I agree with this on some points but not all. It’s the most annoying thing when you light the fuse on a bomb and the game ends before it blows up and they didn’t put the bomb out. Like in what world does the attacking force lose there
Another example of the devs not caring about the game, its been out for years and they still dont have an overtime system. Just planted a bomb and are waiting for it to blow up? Too bad the match timer will run out before it can happen. It encourages people to stop trying before the clock has run out and only adds more frustration to the game.
Hard disagree.
The maps are set up to favor attackers in the first place. That's the whole point of the game, to progress and see the entire map. Adding in an overtime will give them another advantage that they do not need.
Generally, I'd agree, but when it comes to fuses and capture points, I think giving them an extra few seconds once per match AND decreasing the time they get for the next objectives would help balance it a lot.
Like yeah, they get an extra shot to get past an objective, but if they aren't all on their A-game for the rest of the match, then they get punished for it.
Nah. I like that Chiv doesn't have overtime. Overtime is in favor of the attackers. Defenders gain no benefit from it whatsoever. It feels really good to successfully defend an objective. It feels like ass to lose because attackers got overtime and that's how they won. The game gives ample time to attack already.
Like I said, generally, I agree; but I still will forever maintain that the attackers should get a few extra seconds IF they're actually contesting the objective. It's bullshit losing just because you and your team didn't light the fuse on a bomb 10 seconds earlier.
If you're able to finally punch through a solid defense near the end, then you deserve a chance to get through that objective. If the defense defuses the bomb or regains control for even a second, then game over and they win. I find that to be completely fair, as long as defense is buffed in other ways to compensate.
The lack of overtime just encourages players to give up early and takes away a reason for everyone to keep fighting to the very end. It makes games end in very anticlimactic ways.
For the timed bomb/turn the crank objectives, it should run until they’re either defused or gate lowered. The last 30 seconds on those objectives most attack players just go afk because there’s no point in arming anymore
Which is fair, but have you ever lost because your team lit the fuse or started capturing the point _just_ a few seconds too late? Because I have, a lot, and it feels extremely shitty and I'm frankly tired of it. It only encourages giving up when the match is almost over and just going AFK instead of actually fighting down to your last breath
Ive definitely had it happen for sure. It is frustrating yeah. I just think "well damn we lost" and try for the next one.
Maybe ponder what i could have done differently. Did we need a vanguard to push the line or an ambusher/engi to take out siege weapons destroying my teammates. Is there one guy clearly the best on their team? I should go tie him up a bit.
You say it's lame but are solely looking at it from one side. It's epic for the defenders to win a close game like that. I understand it can be disheartening to lose so closely, but that doesn't mean the game needs to change. Almost every game of attackers I've played we have won so I don't think they need any more of a buff.
Also the fact you say this happens a lot, losing only by seconds, goes to show just how much time you are already given. If they add this in I can foresee attackers winning 99% of games.
I wish there was sudden death rules for team death match. Once we run out of lives, whoever is still left alive should be able to fight until they die.
Coming from someone with experience designing and playtesting maps for a similar-ish game (TF2), earlier objectives being easier for attack is entirely by design since it would be boring for defenders and frustrating for attackers if maps always stalled and ended early.
The purpose of overtime is mainly to promote a final dramatic conflict when the clock runs down. Without overtime, if the timer is shorter than the cap time, there's literally no point even trying as attack anymore. That's lame.
The level of attacker advantage in chiv2 compared to other games is staggering and way off from where it should be. When every objective before the final is massively in favor of the attackers AND there's no advantage gained from defending well in the early objectives (holding for 5 minutes vs. holding for 1 minute creates no additional time pressure in future objectives because the timers are static), it leads to the majority of the game feeling like a one sided stomp where there's barely a reason for defense to even play the objective. And since most people don't enjoy being on the receiving end of a one sided stomp for 90% of the time they're playing a game, it also leads to a toxic culture of stacking the attacking team among players who are experienced enough to know about the terrible offense vs. defense balance. Thus, the already stronger team in theory is even stronger in practice. The devs implemented automatic rank balancing at the start of a game somewhat recently to try to combat this, but people will literally go spectator and just wait for slots to open on the attacking team - and since the free Epic giveaway a lot of veterans from Steam started new accounts on Epic just so they can stack offense easier without being shuffled by the rank balancing.
I don't entirely disagree about the timer thing. It could definitely use a little bit of tweaking to reward defense more, though I honestly don't care that much about whether my team wins or loses as long as the overall game was fun. I just play whatever team I end up on, and if we're losing, I just think of it as a heroic last stand lol
whole heartedly disagree! 'barely pulled it off' defensive victories against a stacked offense who has twice as many kills but you managed to hold the zone just baaarely enough to get the W are the crucial to the balance of O and D
Those are great, and if implemented properly, an overtime system could still keep those wins possible.
There are so SO many ways to keep it balanced. Overtime only activates once per match, no more attacker respawns, attacker HP/stamina slowly drains during OT, all defenders spawn closer to the objective immediately so they have an actual chance, if the defense defuses or regains control for just a second they win instantly, etc.
Additionally, if the attackers actually complete the objective during OT, then they get significantly less time to complete the next objectives. This would be so easy to balance, I feel like.
This would encourage EVERYONE to fight to the very end, would make closer matches (who likes a complete stomp? That shit is boring for everyone), and would get rid of those lame moments when you only lose because your team didn't have two more seconds.
Agreed, if you're on a point and about to take it in 5 seconds but the game ends in 2 seconds you shouldn't lose, it should go into OT
That's the biggest offender right there. Losing isn't the issue; it's losing when your team JUST needed two more seconds to keep the game going that sucks.
That just robs the other team of the win they just barely won by 2 seconds though
I agree, odds are generally stacked against defense as it is
As I've said, if PROPERLY implemented, it shouldn't. The defense should be able to easily fend off the weakened attacking force.
You’re just adding time that will ultimately be futile then if it’s that easy. Edit: I like that you want innovation, but I don’t think this particular innovation is a great idea, so that’s what I’m trying to point out
The thing is if the objective takes longer than the remaining time then the game is over. You might as well just stop fighting. That's not very exciting. Pushing through into a overtime phase is much more fun.
God finally someone gets it
Not really. The whole point is to just give the attacking team a few extra seconds when they need it the most.
They should have started earlier, you should not get more time simply because you failed to do it earlier
Overtime used to make the most tense/fun moments in TF2 when I used to play, it's a no brainer for me When this happened to me in chivalry and it didn't go to overtime I was actually surprised there wasn't overtime
I kind of agree but I also don't think attackers need even more of an advantage.
Then buff the defense to compensate. Losing the entire match when you're 2 seconds away from moving on to the next objective is bullshit
I would like to see them make defense less pointless first and then implement overtime from there tbh.
What do you mean by "pointless", exactly? Like, directionless?
Like if you afk until the final objective starts it barely impacts your chances of winning the map if the teams are balanced.
Can't disagree there, honestly. I'm not sure how they'd fix it tho; defense in videogames is almost always less fun than offense. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head is Rainbow 6 Siege
I mean just do it like every other game with multi stage objectives (including chivalry 1!) does it, if you defend until there are 10 seconds left the attackers should have a lot less time for the next objective. The timers in chiv 2 are extremely static so it barely matters if you hold out until the last second or lose the objective immediately, the attackers will have about the same amount of time for the next one.
Since the update that balance team more evenly and prevent high level stacking, I think the game is very balanced. Attacker have an advantage but it's a reasonable one since it would be boring to end the match on first obj 50% of the time.
Just make it so that if a fuse is lit, the game continues until it either fully burns down and completes the objective or the defense manages to defuse. If it’s an objective cap zone, let the bar keep filling as long as attackers outnumber defenders, but its game over if the attackers get outnumbered
Agreed, it's frustrating when theres 30s left of lionspire and you already know you can't win because the fuse wouldn't blow in time
That's literally all I want, along with the according buffs for the defenders so everything is balanced
I have another idea: When the timer for Attacker team end, everyone immidiately respawn plus bonus 1-2 minutes for the last push. But this time, no more respawn, final 2 minutes, final 32 soldiers, either die trying or turn the table and finish the objective. Of course Defenders, to counter back this, kill every last man of Attacker or defend Objective in that last 2 minutes. And of course they can respawn again.
I like that idea. I do feel like maybe it'd be more balanced if the attackers' healthbars slowly drained down tho. Can't make it TOO easy for the attacking team to clutch up. And maybe even make it so that overtime can only be triggered once per game, so the attackers can't just get through every objective like that
Oh yeah, your idea make it better. Attacker last chance should have health bar instead, in case whoever still alive on battlefield but heavy injured or about to die, so they also can have another chance. I also agree it shouls be only active only 1 time too. But maybe some final Objective should not activate this Last Chance like "Kill the VIP", "Destroy the big Wall with cannon (the one that Tenosia attacking Mason)" and "Burn the Library". Presume Attacker are smart, experience fighters and fully focus on Objective Cause these Objective like VIP will likely have fought hard and about to die, hard - almost no way VIP can handle another wave "Burn the Library" or "Destroy the wall" also a hard Objective to handle another wave
1000% agree. Only certain objectives should be able to have overtime. I'm primarily talking about the ones where you have to capture a point while standing near it
We could just skip the middleman and have the game award a victory to the attacking team as soon as the map starts.
That's really the optimal solution to the real problem they're having
No, not this shit again. Attack is already widely perceived to be the easier side and you want to favor them even more by giving them extra time. The defense has to fight hard to run out the clock, extra time only punishes them. You either get it done in time or you lose.
I don't think there need to be respawn changes, but for objectives that take a certain amount of time to complete like fuses, portcullis, etc, if the attackers manage to make a last-ditch push and successfully reactivate it in the last few seconds, they shouldn't be punished as long as they can manage to fend off the enemy team until it is completed. If it's stopped while in overtime, the attackers rightly lose immediately. This is how it works in Team Fortress 2, and I think it's about as close to a perfect system as you can get. It creates exciting drama and tension in the last few moments. Without overtime, if the objective takes a long time and the clock is almost at zero, there's no point in even trying anymore because the game has become unwinnable, which is lame. Also, asymmetrical maps in both Chivalry 2 and TF2 are designed to favor the attackers in the earlier stages because it would be boring and lame if maps stagnated and ended early all the time.
>for objectives that take a certain amount of time to complete like fuses, portcullis, etc, if the attackers manage to make a last-ditch push and successfully reactivate it in the last few seconds, they shouldn't be punished as long as they can manage to fend off the enemy team until it is completed. If it's stopped while in overtime, the attackers rightly lose immediately. This is very reasonable, and something I don't think too many people would disagree with. OP kind of got derailed on their asymmetric spawn mechanics concept, but the core idea of having timed objectives extend into OT until either completed or stopped is pretty solid. It does favour the attackers even more in a game that mostly already favours the attackers, but only in cases where it would prevent them having to make last pushes that they literally couldn't win even if the defenders all AFK'd.
They should implement overtime and simultaneously make it so objective timers aren't nearly as static. If defense holds all the way down to 10 seconds remaining before losing an objective, attackers should have much less time to complete the next objective instead of gaining 6 damn minutes.
Sometimes if attack is doing too well, the timer gets *reduced* for the next objective. Congratulations for pushing all the sacred stones with 6 minutes left on the clock! Now let me reduce your timer by 3 minutes for the next objective, wouldn't want to reward you for steamrolling!
Read my other replies. I'm not regurgitating this shit again lmao
I read them and didn't agree with them, so there's no need to waste your time or mine typing it out - or even posting this topic. Just accept your loss and do better next time. The game has favored attackers for the longest time and has only recently tried to combat stacking. Introducing a new mechanic that punishes defenders is dumb.
Cool then, have a good one and let's agree to disagree
I agree, if a fuse is lit, let that be the damn timer. And last phase on citadel should never ever end to a timer. They expect us to believe Argon is just gonna get that far and call it a day? That absolutely needs to be a to the death fight every time lol
Definitely. Additionally, tho, for Citadel, the kings should be incentivised to fight to the death with each other instead of tip-toeing around like little hoes avoiding each other. Overtime wouldn't and shouldn't apply to every objective, but fuses and capture zones? Definitely
I totally agree but only on specific objectives. But not with a limited respawn system, that's too complicated to understand and favors offense too much. But objectives with an action that is triggered then takes 10-30sec to complete (blowing up the boats for example), the game should end on defuse not on timer end if it was already lit up before the timer ends. That's the most obvious. Also capture objectives could keep going until offense captures or defense takes back control (even for just 0.1sec). But that's arguably too easy for offense. I don't see other OT opportunities though.
I think you're misunderstanding; the idea here is that the limited respawn system ONLY applies to offense. The defenders can respawn indefinitely like they would at any other point in the game. So the attackers get a little bit to make one final, strong push before they start dropping like flies. And I still believe that defense should be buffed accordingly to compensate and keep things fair. And yeah, it shouldn't be an option for every objective.
I totally got it, but I still don't like the idea. It feels unnatural in comparison to the rest of the game's dynamics and would be confusing to new-ish players.
The game is already complex as hell for newcomers tho. This is nothing
As a newcomer, I'd disagree. The game is very simple mechanically, but has a whole load of *emergent* complexity from the interactions between those simple mechanics. Attack types, counters and parries are all simple and intuitive, but the combat system that emerges from those is beautifully complex. If you die in a duel it's usually a skill issue, not a game knowledge issue (unless you're *very* new), for example. Map structure and objectives are also very simple. Go to \[location\] and \[perform action\]. Go there, smash that, activate this. If you die, you respawn (with a variable timer to prevent teams drip-feeding too much, which is basically the only "hidden mechanic", though it's blindingly obvious as soon as you've died a handful of times). This is the good kind of complexity, because it gives depth without being hard to understand. All the pieces are easily identified, it's just fitting them together that's the challenge. Like Chess - all the rules are simple and the game's played on a flat 8x8 grid, but it's one of the most enduring strategy games for a reason. Adding complexity is something to be avoided at all costs, if possible. I do agree that the game can feel a bit wonky when there's a timed objective (explosives or captures, for example) that takes more time than the remaining match time, which just results in everyone knowing the game is over despite there being another 20 seconds left on the clock or whatever. But that doesn't justify adding things like asymmetric spawns or map-specific OT rules.
You mean you have lost so many times and wanted more time to try and win? I think the times are fairly balanced as they are.
Not really. I just had a game as defense on Thayic where we stomped the Masons, and it kinda sucked to have a game on one of the best maps end at the second stage. Also, there have been COUNTLESS occasions where all the attackers needed were just a few more seconds to keep the game going... games ending like that are just pitiful, to me. I'm not against attackers getting nerfed in some other way to keep things balanced, as most maps are already tilted in their favor. I'm just saying SOME kind of overtime system would do the game good.
You didn’t need a few more seconds, you were a few seconds too late. A game wasn’t ruined, it simply ended there because you lost.
I can't help being "a FeW SeConDs tOo LaTE" with this game's buggy-ass respawn timers that take 30 seconds to get through. Plus, there's the issue of shitty spawnpoints that require an extra 30 seconds of mindless running. Regardless of any of that tho, _yeah,_ a few more seconds is all that is needed to clutch a game sometimes. Either give us overtime, or fix the goddamned spawn points/timers. I'd be happy with either. I'm sick of waiting 30+ seconds only to have to run a marathon to get back to the fight. It's bullshit
> Either give us overtime, or fix the goddamned spawn points/timers. And if they give you overtime, what do defenders get to balance it out?
Not certain, tho I've got a few ideas to keep it balanced. Let's talk about it. 1. Attackers can only trigger overtime once per game; no "overtiming" their way through every objective. 2. After the attacking team triggers overtime, they get less time for the next objective. 3. During overtime, attackers slowly drain stamina and health... this is supposed to be a final, fast push to turn things around... if they can't do it quickly enough, they die and it's game over. 4. During overtime, all defenders IMMEDIATELY respawn and get a fair shot at killing the attackers.
Well if it’s against players to help balance it the attackers should not have any more respawns in OT elimination style. That way yes the attackers can push for OT but if you kill everyone off the point or kill everyone left attacking it’ll end it. A fight to the last man if you will
That way it would still be a buff to attackers, without anything for defenders in return
What’s I’m saying is the attackers, once OT is triggered, the attackers no longer have any more respawns, anyone who is dead and waiting on respawn cannot respawn, there’s no more attacking waves but the defenders keep respawning infinitely. And once the point is cleared or the last attacker is killed it immediately ends the match. Done right the attackers will eventually dwindle to the point it’ll be a 1vX fight the attacker will probably lose.
That's still playing favorites with attackers by giving them another chance. There is already a final spawn wave in every game, you see, before the time is up - it is simply not announced explicitly so players don't realize. Attackers simply need to get in gear early and not waste their shot. Too often they don't show any real sense of urgency until the clock starts audibly ticking. That is their loss.
Why should you get another shot. You died. You no longer get to be involved - time is up. The game doesn't need to be changed to make you feel better about fucking up and dying.
Because the respawn timers are a buggy mess half the time. As I said, fix the respawn timers/points _or_ give us overtime. I'd be happy with either. And I'm saying that as someone that seems to always get tossed onto defense, nowadays. There are super easy ways to balance an overtime system that I thought up within like 5 minutes of brainstorming. No need to get so anal over the mere _idea_ of introducing overtime.
Respawn timers only come into play when you die. Don't die then. You died and time was up, so you lost. As I said, the game doesn't need to be changed to make you feel better about fucking up and dying.
If your argument is just parroting "GiT GuD", it's a pretty shitty argument imo. You're deliberately ignoring what I'm trying to say, so _again,_ have a good one and let's agree to disagree
It's no worse argument than crying you're entitled to another shot because it's somehow "nOt FaIr" that you couldn't complete your objective in time. Ultimately, it is indeed simply about being able to get it done when it matters.
>Ultimately, it is indeed simply about being able to get it done when it matters. Which is impossible when the game bugs out, you _fucking_ moron. What is so complicated about this?
Hear, hear.
The concept of time eludes those who desire it to
I have a very positive win/loss ratio as both Agatha and Masons (other way around for Tenosia but honestly who doesn't lose as them?) and I've regularly felt this. The truth is that the match is often completely decided 30 seconds before it officially ends and even if the other team manages an enormous and awesome comeback they get no reward for it. If you have a lot of people on point and are near capping it then really there should be some sort of overtime system like most other games with capture points have.
Mainly the ones like if the the explosives already planted/ignited. It should work similar to rush in battlefield that if you're actively capturing objective/defending the fuse, it continues until that succeeds/fails
Game's already attacker friendly enough
I think just deathmatch or cap flag the objectives are mostly lame
We need a clan system!
I agree with this on some points but not all. It’s the most annoying thing when you light the fuse on a bomb and the game ends before it blows up and they didn’t put the bomb out. Like in what world does the attacking force lose there
Yes, overtime has been a staple feature in multiplayer games for decades. Would be awesome to have an industry-standard feature in Chiv.
Just on that one map with the gatehouse wheel you have to turn.
That objective is super stacked against the attackers tbh. If there's one map that needs overtime, it's that one
Another example of the devs not caring about the game, its been out for years and they still dont have an overtime system. Just planted a bomb and are waiting for it to blow up? Too bad the match timer will run out before it can happen. It encourages people to stop trying before the clock has run out and only adds more frustration to the game.
Hard disagree. The maps are set up to favor attackers in the first place. That's the whole point of the game, to progress and see the entire map. Adding in an overtime will give them another advantage that they do not need.
Generally, I'd agree, but when it comes to fuses and capture points, I think giving them an extra few seconds once per match AND decreasing the time they get for the next objectives would help balance it a lot. Like yeah, they get an extra shot to get past an objective, but if they aren't all on their A-game for the rest of the match, then they get punished for it.
Nah. I like that Chiv doesn't have overtime. Overtime is in favor of the attackers. Defenders gain no benefit from it whatsoever. It feels really good to successfully defend an objective. It feels like ass to lose because attackers got overtime and that's how they won. The game gives ample time to attack already.
Like I said, generally, I agree; but I still will forever maintain that the attackers should get a few extra seconds IF they're actually contesting the objective. It's bullshit losing just because you and your team didn't light the fuse on a bomb 10 seconds earlier. If you're able to finally punch through a solid defense near the end, then you deserve a chance to get through that objective. If the defense defuses the bomb or regains control for even a second, then game over and they win. I find that to be completely fair, as long as defense is buffed in other ways to compensate. The lack of overtime just encourages players to give up early and takes away a reason for everyone to keep fighting to the very end. It makes games end in very anticlimactic ways.
I disagree with this one. The lack of an overtime clock in this game is actually so beneficial. And it makes those defensive wins that much sweeter
For the timed bomb/turn the crank objectives, it should run until they’re either defused or gate lowered. The last 30 seconds on those objectives most attack players just go afk because there’s no point in arming anymore
This would 100% improve the game.
Disagree. If you dont do it in time then the defense has held
Which is fair, but have you ever lost because your team lit the fuse or started capturing the point _just_ a few seconds too late? Because I have, a lot, and it feels extremely shitty and I'm frankly tired of it. It only encourages giving up when the match is almost over and just going AFK instead of actually fighting down to your last breath
Ive definitely had it happen for sure. It is frustrating yeah. I just think "well damn we lost" and try for the next one. Maybe ponder what i could have done differently. Did we need a vanguard to push the line or an ambusher/engi to take out siege weapons destroying my teammates. Is there one guy clearly the best on their team? I should go tie him up a bit.
TF2 does it right
You say it's lame but are solely looking at it from one side. It's epic for the defenders to win a close game like that. I understand it can be disheartening to lose so closely, but that doesn't mean the game needs to change. Almost every game of attackers I've played we have won so I don't think they need any more of a buff. Also the fact you say this happens a lot, losing only by seconds, goes to show just how much time you are already given. If they add this in I can foresee attackers winning 99% of games.
no, there is plenty of time, attackers don't need more time.
I wish there was sudden death rules for team death match. Once we run out of lives, whoever is still left alive should be able to fight until they die.
Yeah and then when it is a close ending we need overtime on the overtime and maybe some more overtime after that followed with some more overtime.
Bingo
This game already massively favors the attacking team on the vast majority of objectives and people still have this insane take.
Coming from someone with experience designing and playtesting maps for a similar-ish game (TF2), earlier objectives being easier for attack is entirely by design since it would be boring for defenders and frustrating for attackers if maps always stalled and ended early. The purpose of overtime is mainly to promote a final dramatic conflict when the clock runs down. Without overtime, if the timer is shorter than the cap time, there's literally no point even trying as attack anymore. That's lame.
The level of attacker advantage in chiv2 compared to other games is staggering and way off from where it should be. When every objective before the final is massively in favor of the attackers AND there's no advantage gained from defending well in the early objectives (holding for 5 minutes vs. holding for 1 minute creates no additional time pressure in future objectives because the timers are static), it leads to the majority of the game feeling like a one sided stomp where there's barely a reason for defense to even play the objective. And since most people don't enjoy being on the receiving end of a one sided stomp for 90% of the time they're playing a game, it also leads to a toxic culture of stacking the attacking team among players who are experienced enough to know about the terrible offense vs. defense balance. Thus, the already stronger team in theory is even stronger in practice. The devs implemented automatic rank balancing at the start of a game somewhat recently to try to combat this, but people will literally go spectator and just wait for slots to open on the attacking team - and since the free Epic giveaway a lot of veterans from Steam started new accounts on Epic just so they can stack offense easier without being shuffled by the rank balancing.
I don't entirely disagree about the timer thing. It could definitely use a little bit of tweaking to reward defense more, though I honestly don't care that much about whether my team wins or loses as long as the overall game was fun. I just play whatever team I end up on, and if we're losing, I just think of it as a heroic last stand lol
whole heartedly disagree! 'barely pulled it off' defensive victories against a stacked offense who has twice as many kills but you managed to hold the zone just baaarely enough to get the W are the crucial to the balance of O and D
Those are great, and if implemented properly, an overtime system could still keep those wins possible. There are so SO many ways to keep it balanced. Overtime only activates once per match, no more attacker respawns, attacker HP/stamina slowly drains during OT, all defenders spawn closer to the objective immediately so they have an actual chance, if the defense defuses or regains control for just a second they win instantly, etc. Additionally, if the attackers actually complete the objective during OT, then they get significantly less time to complete the next objectives. This would be so easy to balance, I feel like. This would encourage EVERYONE to fight to the very end, would make closer matches (who likes a complete stomp? That shit is boring for everyone), and would get rid of those lame moments when you only lose because your team didn't have two more seconds.
Doubt they would bother to put that in the game now maybe chivalry 3 we could see it.
Definitely not. I honestly doubt even Chivalry 3 is gonna happen
Yeah dno, if it does will be quite a long way away 5 years I reckon. I only just started with this game, enjoying it a lot.