Team Objective, and why it is dreadfully boring



  • First off, let me just say that I love this game. Seriously, I have 66 hours in Chivalry, and was a long time Age of Chivalry player as well. I LOVE the combat in Chivalry, by far the best thing that the game has going for it. Since the combat is so good, it makes modes like Free For All a delight to play. I love smashing heads and stabbing people, its great fun.

    That being said, I feel like the combat being the focus of the game hurts it at times. I can’t help but feel like every time I play Team Objective mode, it boils down to “which team is better at the combat”, rather than “who is better at finishing the objectives.” The problem, as I see it, is that a lot of the objectives have no tactical play associated with them. There are SOME that offer neat tactical decisions (the back route on Hillside to stealth light the signal fire, the back route on Stoneshill which gives you another way to enter the village, and being able to attack the farm objectives in any order on battlegrounds for example), but for the most part, it becomes a case of mashing your team against the objective and hoping you can kill enough of them so you can finish the objective/move the pushable forward.

    Basically, I wish that TO maps had more tactical options, because too often when my team is losing, I feel like there isn’t anything that can be done to turn the tide. Sometimes you get a lucky wipe of the other team, clearing them off the objective for long enough for you to take it, but this hardly feels like a tactical decision. I would like to see more things like the catapults on the last stage of Darkforest. Being able to use the catapults to take down the walls and give your team easier access to the royal family is a really cool tactical play that can be made. More maps with more options like this would be great.



  • You’re right, something more interesting than flooding the objective and hope you can out-frag the enemy would be nice.
    Also a few of the maps seem very defense weighted, at least I rarely see anyone winning the map where you push the bombcart to the gate, and it’s often rare to have the king get killed in his throneroom unless the king player is dumb and runs off.
    This could perhaps be a question of team sizes though, it seems to get easier to defend when you have 16 people to do it with.



  • There are certain objectives where I agree with you on this, for example all pushables - in AoC, it was all about tactics when pushing and defending (you had to first dislodge anyone in the push zones, and then defend the push zones etc, and one guy could push a wagon by himself even if surrounded and the enemy team wasn’t doing anything about it), now it’s just everyone stand around the cart and fight while it moves with the larger surrounding team deciding if it moves or stops and I still think it’s too TF2ish for me and less down to the roots of the game.

    I also want to see the Hillside trebuchets objective replaced with carriable explosive barrels rather than stand there like a dummy and watch a bar fill up.

    On the whole though, most objectives are an improvement over AoC I think, just the odd one that took a step in the wrong direction.



  • It seems to me that in nerfing how the objectives get done VS the story type of the objective is what has helped kill this version of the game. What I mean by this is that, while the story of the objectives is entertaining, actually doing them is dumbed down to standing there while a timer goes off.

    In AOC many of the objectives, you actually had to do something to get it to work like hold a gate open, actually push something from the exact location where you would push something. It also required teamwork forcing one or two team members to do one thing so others could do another. And, before they nerfed it, you could actually move objects like barrels, boxes, tables, chairs to build barricades. You could also turn most ranged weapons against the enemy like catapults 360 degrees and have accurate aiming where the current versions of the cat is very wonky providing you can even get on it on the first few time you hit E and not very accurate having to count clicks and guesstimate. The Balistas are no better as the animations and mobility are also shaky and inaccurate.

    My other major critique to doing objectives is that the jump squat was completely removed making it useless to try and get on top of rocks, walls, carts and the like. While you can get to some things it is still very limited and glitchy where you can easily get caught onto objects. Thus making three dimensional flanking virtually impossible.



  • Personally I think TO is amazing and by far the most fun game mode of the game. I love each of the objectives, though some can be frustrating due to balance rather than badly designed objectives. Like killing the king. Amazing objective, but balance makes it frustrating in public games.



  • Some objectives I think need tweaking because they do just become zerging. I agree entirely with Martin that the cart pushing objectives would be much better from a competitive standpoint if they worked like they did in AoC. Also, I really miss pushing the rams with the handles, it actually felt more like you were pushing them rather than just standing behind/beside them.

    There are also some that you absolutely need to just zerg rush clusterfuck fight on, and it really doesn’t come down to strategy so much as the attackers waving over and over until they finally win a fight by a big enough margin to complete the objective. Stoneshill is the worst offender here IMO - after the first objective, the entire map is like this. Whatever team holds the ram camps on it as the other team waves until control shifts, and then you swap; and the gate is so defensible even if you win the melee battle by a wide margin you still have to deal with the archers and siege on the wall. And then there’s the king, where you have to win with enough players/HP left to kill the best player on the enemy team playing a class with knight armor and triple HP, and do it fast enough that the defenders don’t respawn since they spawn right on top of you.

    Still, the TO mode is great even for these flaws. We just need more TO maps, and thankfully there’s already one being added, with most of its objectives being pretty dynamic save for the last one which is the last objective of stoneshill in reverse - though it seems like the defending team won’t spawn right on top of the throne this time, so that’s good. Tweaks to existing maps can always be made as well, such as those that were made to Hillside to make the trebuchets easier. It’s an ongoing process and it’s definitely headed in the right direction.



  • I like TO because it’s hard. You are not guaranteed to win regardless of whether you pull some tactical trick out of your hat - the skill of the other team can always be an equalizer. There is no way to hide, and you cannot, as you seem to want, avoid exposure to combat while tackling objectives. If you don’t enjoy a good uphill slog in the mud against insurmountable odds, TO isn’t for you. The worst matches are those where the objective is reached quickly, the best require a continuous push. FFA bores me after two minutes.



  • @Sir:

    I like TO because it’s hard. You are not guaranteed to win regardless of whether you pull some tactical trick out of your hat - the skill of the other team can always be an equalizer. There is no way to hide, and you cannot, as you seem to want, avoid exposure to combat while tackling objectives. If you don’t enjoy a good uphill slog in the mud against insurmountable odds, TO isn’t for you. The worst matches are those where the objective is reached quickly, the best require a continuous push. FFA bores me after two minutes.

    I don’t think you quite understand what I meant. I don’t want TO to be easy, and I don’t want to avoid combat, I just want objectives to have some tactical decisions. Throwing the whole team at an objective and hoping you kill enough of them to move it forward gets pretty boring after a while, and if your team is not as good as the defending team at combat, it becomes essentially impossible to do any objective. The key here is choice. I’d like to be able to recognize that if my team isn’t going to wipe the enemy, we have some tactical options on how to approach. Like I mentioned in the OP, the last objective on Darkforest is a good example. You can put someone on the catapults to take down the walls and make it harder for the defenders to funnel you in, and stop the Agatha archers from having as many good vantage points.


Log in to reply