About the Teamwork mechanism



  • The first thing that comes to everyone’s mind when they think about a medieval FPS is this if it involves battle cohesion, fighting tights to tights with your friend and playing in basic formations.
    I talk from my experience :
    All my friends reaction are : ‘‘you mean you can play in huge battle formations and charge at an enemy position?’’.

    Globally, this can be resumed into this question : How does teamworks works?

    what mechanism will you favor? How will you make teamwork easy and spontaneous?

    -first : Will there be assist kills point. It’s the best way to ensure that there will be cooperation melee wise. Otherwise it’s an all men for itself melee, where everybody tries to steal each others kill.

    • second : I heard there will be reward for helping accomplish common objectives. Good. For example, will you get as much point simply by helping at the ballista, even if you don’t make as much kills as a knight on the fields?

    • Third : will you make something to facilitate cooperation in melee. And see players fighting tights to tights just like back then.
      To do this would mean DISABLE TEAM WOUNDING. Instead simply making your attacks bounce off your ally without any harmful effects - this could still be put into use in combat, because if you accidentally hit a friend instead of your enemy, you’ll be at the same disadvantage as if you missed your swing entirely, leaving you open for your enemy to slice you up. It would also encourage people to place there attack properly and actually use their brain instead of spamming that LMB.

    • Four : In game voice chat. A lot of popular multiplayers do this. It works pretty well, and allows you to plan tactics and work with your other team mates even if you don’t know them. No need to be on the obscure teamspeak (most gamers don’t spontaneously use it, even when the server has a teamspeak server).

    • Last : a commander or a squad system with squad leaders. Commander would be the best, just look at battlefield or natural selection : it’s what makes these games amazing team experiences.
      THe commander mode don’t needs to be complicated, he only order around and recommend some formations to people on the battle.

    These were just 5 suggestions. Now There are many other ways to do this, and I believe you guys know them better than me.

    I’m addressing to you guys at thorn banner this simple question :
    '‘what teamwork mechanism will you implement?’

    I believe it’s a central question, one that most people ask themselves when they hear about this kind of games. The answer can almost be displayed on your website.

    cheers :D



  • The point system isn’t set in stone yet so I can’t comment on what the devs have planned for Chivalry, but in AoC the point system was hugely biased for doing objectives. You got 2 points for a kill, 1 point for a kill-assist; defenders got bonus points for kills or assists near objectives and attackers got huge point boosts for completing primary or secondary objectives.

    Friendly fire will be server-side but I guarantee you the majority of competitive and clan servers will be friendly fire enabled because the game is designed around it. Friendly fire actually promotes good group tactics and smart play; without friendly fire the game devolves into gangbang spamming. It also seriously hurts immersion to have FF off.

    Fairly sure ingame voice is built in to the engine the game is based on but not 100% certain.

    For the last suggestion there are assassination maps that has one player on your team play as an important figure (I.E. a king) with the other team’s primary objective being to kill him; it’s somewhat similar, I think.

    But most of all I can assure you Chivalry is a hugely team based game without even needing to implement mechanics that heavily reward teamwork. Maps are designed to gravitate the players towards the objectives so that most of the fighting will take place around them, while at the same time leaving multiple routes for flanking tactics and whatnot. A lot of maps have objectives that you can’t take alone and require a concerted effort from multiple players to finish, and I think every single map has at least one objective that has multiple sub-objectives that can be completed simultaneously, meaning the choice of splitting off and trying to complete as many as possible vs. grouping up and making a concentrated push on one at a time comes into play as well. Even the predecessor AoC was very team based with some maps like Siege being difficult or impossible to rush through without teamwork. And of course, the core of the game is combat, and it’s always easier to take one guy out with two ;)



  • Thanks for the fast answer man :D

    You reassure me on some point, especially the objectives, although some stuff still remain to be answered.

    Even if the map clearly orients you toward the objective, the battle will still look rather chaotic. The best way would be to add either a squad leader system where the squad leader can somehow guide his squad into a formation, or a commender system.

    If you want to know what I mean by commander, take a look at the game natural selection 2, you will understand.

    To summ it all, I want to be able to see shield wall in any random server I connect on, without having to join a specific clan/event.
    Shield wall, shiltron (didnt spell that right i think)…

    Overall, I want to see some mechanism that facilitate these formation to be spontaneously made amongst players.

    As for the build in voice chat, it would be cool to see the devs make a statement about that.



  • I do think your wishes are only dream.

    This is a problem that affect all Multiplayer FPgames, the lack of coordination on random servers.
    Even if a squad system is added (which I would absolutely HATE), with sqaud commander and all, you will hardly ever see formations (if they happen to be efficient, else…) because most people won’t bother. They will not listen the commander because they want to be free and do not see why they should obey this random guy, they will not bother because they just want to hack someones arms off, etc.

    Most players will not do this, but not because of the lack of a gameplay mechanic, but because organisation is needed, and without someone they respect (personnal knowledge, acknowledged skill superiority, or very nice behavior), they will not abandon their freedom to play the game the way they want. And unfortunately, on most servers, the maximum of people you could get to join your dream will never be enough to actually make it different from random 3-4 people fighting together on an objective.

    From my view there are only a few ways to get what you wish to get :
    -join a clan (not the best IMHO)
    -find a server with lots of regular players that have a will to cooperate
    -create events on a forum and a server where people are only allowed to be organized

    Now, I also dream of camaradery and instant organizations on random servers for the good of the team… but it’s not going to happen a lot.



  • Yeah don’t think formations are going to happen in this game, besides the odd exception. You might be able to coordinate attacks and whatnot with teamspeak but other then that everyone is going to be more interest in murder and corpse mutilation.



  • @Jihell:

    I do think your wishes are only dream.

    This is a problem that affect all Multiplayer FPgames, the lack of coordination on random servers.
    Even if a squad system is added (which I would absolutely HATE), with sqaud commander and all, you will hardly ever see formations (if they happen to be efficient, else…) because most people won’t bother. They will not listen the commander because they want to be free and do not see why they should obey this random guy, they will not bother because they just want to hack someones arms off, etc.

    Most players will not do this, but not because of the lack of a gameplay mechanic, but because organisation is needed, and without someone they respect (personnal knowledge, acknowledged skill superiority, or very nice behavior), they will not abandon their freedom to play the game the way they want. And unfortunately, on most servers, the maximum of people you could get to join your dream will never be enough to actually make it different from random 3-4 people fighting together on an objective.

    From my view there are only a few ways to get what you wish to get :
    -join a clan (not the best IMHO)
    -find a server with lots of regular players that have a will to cooperate
    -create events on a forum and a server where people are only allowed to be organized

    Now, I also dream of camaradery and instant organizations on random servers for the good of the team… but it’s not going to happen a lot.

    clans are boring…

    anyway, a commander or squad leader system can work if well implemented. Dont believe me? take a look at the game natural selection 2, or just play any battlefield.
    You will see random people cooperating and following a random leader.

    Why ? Because it gives them advantage. It gives them reward.
    You just have to make it so it’s advantageous to hear the leader (bonus point, boost…).

    It’s true however that an in-game voice chat is the best for the cohesion. All the modern multi game have included it, and it works wonder.
    Teamspeak or ventrilo only work when you are with your friend or in a clan.

    An in game voice chat works wonder amongst random people. And if at some point everyone agree to make a shield wall, then you will see random people spontaneously making one.
    You just have to add a mute function for the admins if someone talks too much.



  • Great, on my opinion a Voice chat would be a good thing, since typing can be just too slow in a battlefield take for example me playing warband sometimes.

    Le me : loo krigh behid yuo
    le team: le fuq you saying?
    le ninja: Le backstab art most jelly

    Memes aside, my only wonder would be which word we could use instead of squads, in spanish we have a word for a group who follows a low rank leader, such as a knight, lets see if it has a translation…nope.avi

    The idea of team bases objectives and assists is good, hope we see something similar implemented.



  • @Darkcerve:

    Great, on my opinion a Voice chat would be a good thing, since typing can be just too slow in a battlefield take for example me playing warband sometimes.

    Le me : loo krigh behid yuo
    le team: le fuq you saying?
    le ninja: Le backstab art most jelly

    Memes aside, my only wonder would be which word we could use instead of squads, in spanish we have a word for a group who follows a low rank leader, such as a knight, lets see if it has a translation…nope.avi

    The idea of team bases objectives and assists is good, hope we see something similar implemented.

    Yeah everything would be summed by a voice chat. It’s a must really. It’s 2012, now every successful multilayer game include an in-game voice chat. It helps so much for the coordination, and it makes every game you stumble upon more organized and fun.



  • @akarnir:

    @Darkcerve:

    Great, on my opinion a Voice chat would be a good thing, since typing can be just too slow in a battlefield take for example me playing warband sometimes.

    Le me : loo krigh behid yuo
    le team: le fuq you saying?
    le ninja: Le backstab art most jelly

    Memes aside, my only wonder would be which word we could use instead of squads, in spanish we have a word for a group who follows a low rank leader, such as a knight, lets see if it has a translation…nope.avi

    The idea of team bases objectives and assists is good, hope we see something similar implemented.

    Yeah everything would be summed by a voice chat. It’s a must really. It’s 2012, now every successful multilayer game include an in-game voice chat. It helps so much for the coordination, and it makes every game you stumble upon more organized and fun.

    And every successful multiplayer game with voce chat is invadade by russians screaming to eachother in their orcic language, not giving a shit about that there are 14 other players on their team who don’t understand what they are saying and who are just annoyed by them.



  • @Fuhrerjehova:

    @akarnir:

    @Darkcerve:

    Great, on my opinion a Voice chat would be a good thing, since typing can be just too slow in a battlefield take for example me playing warband sometimes.

    Le me : loo krigh behid yuo
    le team: le fuq you saying?
    le ninja: Le backstab art most jelly

    Memes aside, my only wonder would be which word we could use instead of squads, in spanish we have a word for a group who follows a low rank leader, such as a knight, lets see if it has a translation…nope.avi

    The idea of team bases objectives and assists is good, hope we see something similar implemented.

    Yeah everything would be summed by a voice chat. It’s a must really. It’s 2012, now every successful multilayer game include an in-game voice chat. It helps so much for the coordination, and it makes every game you stumble upon more organized and fun.

    And every successful multiplayer game with voce chat is invadade by russians screaming to eachother in their orcic language, not giving a shit about that there are 14 other players on their team who don’t understand what they are saying and who are just annoyed by them.

    That’s an over-generalization. Most of the time, voice chat works ok. If it didn’t worked, It wouldn’t be implemented in every successful multilayer game.
    And anyway, there is a mute function you know. And in extreme cases, you can just disable voice chat.
    As long as it’s something you can disable, I don’t see why people could be against it. Especially since there is an in-build voice chat in the unreal engine, which means it would be easy and quick to implementing.



  • @Fuhrerjehova:

    @akarnir:

    @Darkcerve:

    Great, on my opinion a Voice chat would be a good thing, since typing can be just too slow in a battlefield take for example me playing warband sometimes.

    Le me : loo krigh behid yuo
    le team: le fuq you saying?
    le ninja: Le backstab art most jelly

    Memes aside, my only wonder would be which word we could use instead of squads, in spanish we have a word for a group who follows a low rank leader, such as a knight, lets see if it has a translation…nope.avi

    The idea of team bases objectives and assists is good, hope we see something similar implemented.

    Yeah everything would be summed by a voice chat. It’s a must really. It’s 2012, now every successful multilayer game include an in-game voice chat. It helps so much for the coordination, and it makes every game you stumble upon more organized and fun.

    And every successful multiplayer game with voce chat is invadade by russians screaming to eachother in their orcic language, not giving a shit about that there are 14 other players on their team who don’t understand what they are saying and who are just annoyed by them.

    As Akarnir says, you can mute them. And as you play the game, you will find some favourite servers where people will be friendly and whatever they have to say will be relevant (at least most times :P)



  • SO thorn banner dudes, Do you plan to give us an in-game voice chat?


Log in to reply