napbc.freeforums.org

Hello all, I'm not sure how much interest there is in this, but I'm having some serious problems....it's one of those things that sound fine in theory, but then all sorts of snags appear as you work though it.

I'm now thinking we need to make it "Objective Battles" only, and not attempt to link them - it's too difficult.

The objectives are also a problem, if you have to few then all the actions takes place in a small area, too many and people will get confused and not know if they captured them or not. I have amended the basic idea somewhat and will update and post the new inforimation IF there is any interest in this, if not I'll put it on the back burner for now.

As a one off battle it could work, there would be an attacker (10,000 and 20 units) and defender side (9,000 and 18 units) with objects to capture - and hold in a time limit of 45 minutes.

I do think this is worth a try, but only if we have 4 or 6 people prepared to make the effert.......I'm inclinced to not bother for 1v1 as almost everyone likes 2v2+ better.

New idea to follow later - if it's wanted.

Sounds good but since you are taking part on the club idea you can
pause when ever it suits.
And for any problems ingame with objectives:
Whenever there is time,why not talking about it in steam group?
Less posting since we can concentrate on results and hearing
all opinions we can also get new ideas.
1 2vs2 less and by that solving some probs.

But again,we all have more or less time so no need to hurl anything
out just to present it,game publisher already do and we know the result

The more I think about this the more I think this could solve the problem we are talking about with no one wanting to attack some times. I will now post the FULL new idea for you all to take a look at, see new topic.

I think it is a great idea Gunner.

With so much going on right now it is difficult to keep the interest.

I would say to start it off simple first. Perhaps with only 3 max objectives. Encounter only with equel points.

I would like there to be a rear objective for both armies to represent the importance of keeping the lines of communication open.

I would also say that objectives can only be held by formed infantry (skirmishers can hold buildings)

just some ideas

Thanks Grog, you do know the objectives change with the number of players in the batte ?. That idea to have some in the rear area's is brillent, I will make a note of that for the next one.

It's going to be hard enough to work out who holds what, so I'm not going to worry about what type of unit is involved - any will do.

"It's going to be hard enough to work out who holds what, so I'm not going to worry about what type of unit is involved - any will do."- Gunner

I agree, Gunner. Working out who holds the objective will be the difficult bit. Thats why I think the restriction to infantry might make it easier.

Not only would it be easier to count the units within the objective but I think cavalry have always had difficulty holding objectives. Perhaps Dismounted dragoons might be allowed??

Also the last minute dash with cavalry onto objectives ( especially opponents communications) might be discouraged.

Anyway, I'm sure game testing would help us get it right.

Good point Grog, perhaps ANY Infantry unit, any size may be the way to go.....the Cavarly can take it (perhaps) but the Infantry have to hold it, even if it's one poor little 50 man unit !. That would also help keep armies well balanced as if you get too many Cavalry you won't be able to hold the objectives.

One important thing to remember here, you DON'T have to take every object, that is NOT the idea. If team A control 2 and team B control 3, then that is good enough to win, even if there are 12 objectives in total.

It takes a bit of getting used to, but if one team put any their energy into defending only 2 objectives, that leaves the other side free to concentrate on the OTHERS.....so the fighting should (in theory) become a battlefield wide battle, rather than all heaped together on one flank - as can often happen now, as the rest of the battlefield "does not matter"....in this it will matter, different parts of the map will all have there own values as objectives which can be taken and held if the other side abandon them.

I'm thinking of making the objectives a bit bigger like above, or perhaps even bigger, the reason for this is Grog might well be right, it could be hard to tell if the objective is held or not. With larger area's (12 per battle regardless of number of players) it should be clear if they are under control or not, if disputed neither side owns them.

It will be all about which to try and defend/attack as it will not be possible to attack/defend them all. This should lead to movement with some prupose and not all into one hill of "red" line area......if your whole army sticks together you will not be able to control enough objectives - still more work to be done, watch this space !.

This is proving to be a lot harder than I first thought - again !.

I have posted something new under the Empire General Chat forum, that might be a whole lot easier and better than this somewhat complex idea.

This looks good and if u could get it right it may well work to break deadlocks