Anvil Game Studios

Author Topic: Mechnical issues with (Coastal) Siege and how it could be fixed  (Read 351 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline vvdp

  • Landsman
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Light Infantry > Riflemen
  • Faction: French Empire
  • Nick: MMcMuskettiface
Mechnical issues with (Coastal) Siege and how it could be fixed
« on: November 26, 2017, 05:47:36 pm »
Having played Holdfast for the last couple weeks i noticed a bit of a flaw in the way Siege modes are conducted .

In my experience so far, the winner is mostly determined by how many people run out of the defensive point to charge the attacker and waste lives. Now you could just say "my team sucks" and wait until people get it. But this phenomenon is fuelled by the issue that on certain maps (like the desert fortress map), defending one point is objectively better than the defending the other (or both!). So people just bleed respawns on the defending the "bad" point and i have even seen smart teams keeping from capping points just to farm kills.

It's easy to say "noobs" or "my team sucks", but relying on players to just sit on the point is unrealistic. Waiting for the enemy takes a while and players want to do SOMETHING so they rush out and get shot in the open. This exemplifies the fundemental flaw of the Siege gameplay mechanics: maximizing ones own gameplay enjoyment is to the detriment of the team.

So how do we fix it? I don't think chnaging the timer or respawns is a solution. You could equalize the win-rate but it would not fix the underlying problem. Instead i would offer a couple of small,  implementable solutions:

1. Incentivise forward defense. It sounds counterintutive but now there is a reason to rush out rather than sit on the point. You could for example place a relatively exposed cannon in de middle of the desert fortress map which the attacker can use to pound the fort from relatively close range. This gives the defender a better reason to rush out and keel it out of the attackers hands.

2. Change (optional) defense points. Only maintain a single defense point as not to confuse the player and make optional defense points worth defending (like how the cannon in the previous solution would be an optional defense point).

3. Make capped points non-retakable. This might be a controversial one but it is in the spirit of guiding the player. Making points non retakeable de-incentivises the small trickle of players that would rush out and try to retake it.

One map already does almost all of these things already. The map where the french defend a mountain ruin has two side-objectives which are worth holding and players naturally fall back to the main point once both optional points are overrun.

I would like to hear the community's feedback. What are your experiences with (coastal) Siege and what small implementable improvements do you propose?
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 05:50:12 pm by vvdp »

Offline Saris

  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • Texas Poppin B
  • Faction: French Empire
  • Nick: Saris
Re: Mechnical issues with (Coastal) Siege and how it could be fixed
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2017, 08:51:36 pm »
Not being able to retake a point it the worse idea in my opinion, you should allow the defenders to retake parts they lost if they beat back the attacker.

Offline WaylanderGR

  • Petty Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Vive l'Empereur! Regular of the 51st Rgmt of Foot
  • Faction: French Empire
  • Nick: dovahkiin
Re: Mechnical issues with (Coastal) Siege and how it could be fixed
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2017, 08:43:20 pm »
i say limited lives like nw, it worked there so why not here?
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." -Napoleon Bonaparte