"Battlegrounds" map is missing a final objective



  • To be on par with the other objective maps, it seems to me that there is something missing from Battlegrounds. After the wall is breached by the bomb cart, shouldn’t another objective take place inside the castle?



  • It really does need something to “wrap up” the objective. Every other objective has a kill the king/family or thwarting an enemies army which offers let’s say final closure on the objective.

    With Battlegrounds…
    Burn all the crops and farms! - What a major inconvenience.
    Blow up a door! - Success, they’re screwed now… lets leave them shall we?

    It really should have another objective, I’d say raising a flag to show that Agatha has regained control of the city, is a good idea.



  • There is an explosion and you go flying off like Team Rocket. I’d say that’s an adequate finale.



  • The agathains plan that day wasn’t to take the city. Bit to starve it. And blowing up their gate now would mean a far easier fight in the streets later.

    A whole new map could come from battlegrounds. An urban TO map to take back the capital city.



  • TB mentioned earlier that they will never change the objectives of the existing TO-maps. But I agree, Battlegrounds would be better with a third objective.



  • If Battlegrounds gets a 3rd objective, the 2nd objective needs to become much easier and shorter for Agatha.



  • Its not missing its censored. What follows after the gate is open could be adequately described as “rape and pillage” with a little bit “wipe out the last resistance”.

    Maybe we will have an “Extended Battlegrounds” custom map.



  • If you stop and think about it what you’re actually doing is burning the crops for the land you’re about to take over. Seems kind of counter productive, doesn’t it?



  • Feels like rather than adding a 3rd objective to Battlegrounds, they just made Citadel.

    I like Battlegrounds the way it is, though; the length of the second objective makes it the most dramatic in the game, in my experience.



  • @quigleyer:

    If you stop and think about it what you’re actually doing is burning the crops for the land you’re about to take over. Seems kind of counter productive, doesn’t it?

    Actually, Battlegrounds is originally Agathian territory. They’re taking it back from Masons. Just like Hillside.



  • @SOC:

    @quigleyer:

    If you stop and think about it what you’re actually doing is burning the crops for the land you’re about to take over. Seems kind of counter productive, doesn’t it?

    Actually, Battlegrounds is originally Agathian territory. They’re taking it back from Masons. Just like Hillside.

    So they’re actually literally burning their own crops then?

    So you only win if you lose haha.



  • Indeed… it’s lacking the stage where the masons/agathian sit down together and formalise the surrender of the masons….

    then they probably get drunk… wait… maybe aocffa-tavern_p is the missing stage? :O



  • @quigleyer:

    @SOC:

    @quigleyer:

    If you stop and think about it what you’re actually doing is burning the crops for the land you’re about to take over. Seems kind of counter productive, doesn’t it?

    Actually, Battlegrounds is originally Agathian territory. They’re taking it back from Masons. Just like Hillside.

    So they’re actually literally burning their own crops then?

    So you only win if you lose haha.

    I think the idea is to make sure they’re held off inside the walls for a long siege without any extra resources.



  • @SOC:

    I think the idea is to make sure they’re held off inside the walls for a long siege without any extra resources.

    More than anything this is silly banter from me (not trying to boil anyone’s nerves here, just chatting with people that have the same interest) but:

    If the crops are outside they’re already lost and can and would easily be used by the invading army when the besieged army holes up inside. If the Masons were given fair warning of the approaching army they would surely already pick the crops, clear out the granary, and get everything within their walls.

    And knocking down the gates with the bombcart doesn’t really seem to help with the idea of a long, drawn out siege, as the army is now attacking the walls. In a long siege you just kind of camp outside (I know there’s a camp at Agatha spawn 1) and raid their incoming supply lines to maintain your own host, right?

    I always thought this objective was a little funny and any way I think about it it doesn’t work. It’s not like a huge deal, it’s just a game objective and I’m not suggesting it be changed or anything. I just think it’s kind of funny and I’ve always been a little confused by it.



  • It’s not just battlegrounds. There isn’t any map that makes sense as a whole, at least in the way you would expect things to happen irl. It doesn’t really matter much. I find it doesn’t really make the game any more/less fun, just stupid.

    If you don’t manage to kill 40 peasants nobody cares about, regardless of how many opponents you kill, you can’t attempt to break down the doors and kill the king.

    Having multiple citadel enterences, siege units positioned by the defenders to attack their own inner walls, the king’s last defense in a room with extremely weak defense.

    Destroying trebuchets to stop ship destruction, followed by destroying said ships. All preceded by signaling said ships.



  • @dpunk:

    It’s not just battlegrounds. There isn’t any map that makes sense as a whole, at least in the way you would expect things to happen irl. It doesn’t really matter much. I find it doesn’t really make the game any more/less fun, just stupid.

    If you don’t manage to kill 40 peasants nobody cares about, regardless of how many opponents you kill, you can’t attempt to break down the doors and kill the king.

    Having multiple citadel enterences, siege units positioned by the defenders to attack their own inner walls, the king’s last defense in a room with extremely weak defense.

    Destroying trebuchets to stop ship destruction, followed by destroying said ships. All preceded by signaling said ships.

    There’s 2 sets of ships. The agathain transports and the mason warships. They light the fire to single he ships that they are at the wall and it needs to be destroyed. Once that happens the warship that blew up the wall gets sunk. The trebs need to be destroyed before the transports can proceed. Once that’s done the mason warships though outnumbered block the only entrances to the inner port. The transports would have to come in 1 by 1 anyway and get obliterated by the fully armed warships. The agathains wouldn’t have many battle ready warships as they didn’t think they would run into any resistance. So troops on the ground have to deal with them.



  • well then, I suppose that map does make some sense.



  • @lemonater47:

    The agathains plan that day wasn’t to take the city. Bit to starve it. And blowing up their gate now would mean a far easier fight in the streets later.

    A whole new map could come from battlegrounds. An urban TO map to take back the capital city.

    I don’t think either side have a plan. Look at the Darkforest map. “Let’s take the fort! By poisoning the waters, releasing them into the town’s water supply then rather than slowly poison and starve the inhabitants to leave a skeleton town behind, we shall charge in and take it immediately!” Seriously, why even bother to poison it?!

    Uhh… back on topic. Yeah, I have always wanted to see what would happen after the bombcart blew on the city gate. Even if they refuse to add/change old TO maps/objectives, I really hope for a map where you are slugging it out in city streets.



  • Battlegrounds and Stoneshill follow this pattern: First destroy the granary/village to make sure there is lasting damage in case the final push fails. The time limit implies that a extended siege is no option (there might be an army on its way).

    Darkforest seems to me like they only wanted to poison the river but then they realized “Hey, there is a camp - lets investigate.” The Agatha announcer does imply something like this (the fact that he shouts doesn’t really help though).

    Hillside makes sense but there are some odd things:
    (1) Why doesn’t the order try to destroy the pyre keeping it from getting burned.
    (3) The Mason Order could just use the ballistas themselves or destroy them (probably the latter as they were meant to shoot ships - but the other ones).
    The some logic applies to the Citadel Ballistas once captured by the Agatha team.

    Citadel… well… Citadel is just poorely designed. In fact its designed to look cool but thats about it. Its not a fortress but a barely fortified prison. However there might be some logic involved: The “king” is most likely a decoy (if Malric was so stupid to reside there the Order would not be able to gain that much influence) and the place does seem quite a bit away from civilisation (its next to an active vulcano after all). A perfect lure for an Agatha army that wants to kill Malric so badly.



  • @afiNity:

    TB mentioned earlier that they will never change the objectives of the existing TO-maps. But I agree, Battlegrounds would be better with a third objective.

    R.I.P. Pre patch treb 3. You were always my favorite, so difficult, yet so rewarding to destroy.


Log in to reply