On the subject of carrying time over objectives
In Chivalry, if the attacking team wins an objective, the remaining time gets added to the next objective’s time. It seems that Mirage’s objectives and the amount of time you’ll get to complete them will be a bit different, so I expect the time carrying will be different as well. I think TB recognizes that there isn’t enough tension built around the objectives in Chivalry. I think the current time carrying system is just as much to blame here as the objective positioning, difficulty, timer etc.
Le me go over my positives and negatives with the current system.
- Losing defenders still feel like defending is worthwhile. Every second they hold is a second they gain for the next objective
- It gives attackers incentive to finish the objective without wasting time
- Time tends to snowball. The last objective can be upwards to twenty minutes long. Nobody wants that.
Fortunately, each objective has something called a time cap. In Chivalry, these would not even be noticed as they were very high. However, these could be utilized well in Mirage.
What I want to see is the time cap one minute above the objective time, then have the objective time lowered by one minute. This way, only the last two minutes of an objective get carried over. This assures that each objective’s time will remain relatively stable. Here’s an example:
Here are the ways objective A can end:
- 1: The attackers win with more than 2:00 on the clock. They get the maximum time (6 mins) to complete the objective.
- 2: The attackers win between 2:00 and 1:00. They get up to a minute of bonus time to complete the objective, but every second they waste is a second they don’t get on objective B.
- 3: The attackers finish at exactly 1:00. Objective B starts at 5:00, which is the standard time. The playing field is completely even.
- 4: The attackers finish after the 1:00 mark. Every second is now being taken out of their time for the next objective, for up to a minute less than the standard time. This means they have to step up their game in objective B to make up for the lost seconds.
- 5: The attackers don’t finish. They lose.
The benefits of a lowered time cap are: the attacking team never gets ridiculous amounts of time to complete the objective, each objective’s time is consistent, and the feeling of fighting for each second is preserved.
gregcau last edited by gregcau
@Skindiacus I think the main issue is for competitive play when comparing teams, losing the extra minutes makes it hard to compare.
Ideally the objectives wouldnt be easily and very quickly accomplished creating the large extra buckets of time, but that is a map design issue not really a problem with how the time is added.
The other consideration is I’ve joined Dark Forest games where defense is getting pulverized, but rallied around objective C and held out for a long time - so never say its over until the rotund lady sings.