Mordhau

Frontline Rework Ideas

Conscript 4458 6140
  • 8
  • 19 Mar
 vanguard

Just to make it more clear what I mean with the map being way too small and the objectives uninteresting/boring:

20190318212825_1.jpg

See this capzone, its fucking huge, look at the possible entrances to it, here you have 4, 3 on the surface and one underground, its the south part of the objective, the yellow arrow is where I'm looking from:

20190318212651_1.jpg
20190318212700_1.jpg
20190318212631_1.jpg
20190318212648_1.jpg

This here is also a entrance, on the map it is exactly where the yellow arrow thingy is:

20190318212608_1.jpg
20190318212604_1.jpg

On the center of the objective, you have a bridge that leads to a big gate:

20190318212711_1.jpg

Then North, you have more 3 entrances:

20190318212748_1.jpg
20190318212754_1.jpg

So, in Mordhau where both teams are attacking, this would mean that whoever holds this huge point has many places to watch out, which is fair for the team attacking this objective, and at the same time would have a defensive advantage due to the geography of this place. Inside of it, there is plenty of places where interesting firefights happens and many places where traps can be placed, look:

North side of the objective:
20190318212814_1.jpg
20190318212840_1.jpg

South side:
20190318212946_1.jpg
20190318212851_1.jpg

See, this is what I mean. It's a interesting place in itself. This is why I suggest that Frontline maps gets bigger, so the objectives can be bigger too and more interesting to fight on.

Places with tunnels, where 2 handed weapons would legit have trouble going on and buildy dudes can trap the fuck out of it but shields/1h and ranged stuff have a clear advantage; walls where archers can camp but be flanked due to the fact that there are many entrances to it and its hard to properly cover them all. And most importantly, imho, objective big and interesting enough to be contested. In the Frontline map we experienced, the objective is just a small circle on the ground, it is way too small imho, very clusterfucky and uninteresting. Literally a mark on the ground. Make so idk, a whole farm is a contested area you know, the whole military camp, that whole river that cuts the map in the middle be one big capture point etc. Like, in Rising Storm, this whole building here:

20190318211805_1.jpg

Is a capzone. Huge firefights happens inside of it, Vietcongs can trap the fuck out of it, Marines can make great use of their flamethrowers and granade launchers. The objective forces players to use the tools the game gives to them. In mordhau, could translate to objectives where the calvary has to do a decent job, or archers are more important in its defense while some other objectives, buildy guys are essential to hold it etc. In the end. think that just like Rising Storm 2, there will be 32 people on each team, this is a fuckload of people and that map we tested will be a goddamn clusterfuck with no manuever space or strategic team choices.

This is why I also think that buildable/deployable spawn points would add A LOT to this game mode, this way the team can choose to reinforce the north/south side of a objective by spawning their teammates closer to it. Make it destroyable, so cavalry or sneaky fuckers can disrupt enemy reinforcements.

I fear that Frontline might become just a bunch of individuals doing whatever the fuck they want without a single resemblance of organization or team effort, literally, a clusterfuck of 64 players. And it can be so much more, can be the main game mode even. A clusterfuck is fun, but not for a long time, it's like chv's dinninghall tdm with 32 people.

I hope its clear tbh. Other than this, the map does looks fucking amazing, the atmosphere and all the rest is 10/10, I just think that gameplay wise it isn't there yet.

Knight 513 1031

I was originally all-for the two-sided nature of Frontline, but after playing it all day I understand the advantages of TO's linear system, because it's hard to realistically "undo" certain things after they've been accomplished, requiring the events leading up to the final objective to have little to no impact. You can't unkill the peasants.

What I think they should experiment with is having a variety of vehicles at the team's disposal that they can use to get through their enemy's defenses, like pushable seige-tower spawnpoints, cannons/trebs (could vary from map to map) to break down certain sections of the curtain wall, creating rubble that you can climb over into the castle, battering rams or bombs to destroy gates, ladders you can prop up, pushable cover for the attackers. It would be a true test of teamwork where a good team would be able to use all of these options to their greatest effect. Defenders would be able to repair any destroyed gates should the attack let up for too long and destroy the battering ram, forcing the enemy team to wait for another one. The seige tower could have a limited number of spawns before it stops working. Horsemen could sally out and kill the people operating the seige equipment or carrying bombs, requiring their teammates to protect them if they want to win the match.

Although this is ambitious for the stage of development they're in and I can't garuntee how successful this idea would be. The safest choice for Trit is to convert their frontline maps into a linear thing like Chivalry's TO. It's a tried and true formula that has kept us playing chiv for years, even when a player had no interest in mastering the game's combat.

Knight 663 1431
  • 19 Mar
 das

Chances are the maps will release rather similar to where they are today. I wouldn't hold hopes too high for the NEAR future/release.

HOWEVER, that doesn't mean they can't get updated drastically in the future, or that future maps won't feature much more TO-esque objectives and dynamics with the addition of being symmetrical rather than pure attackers vs defenders. Team Fortress Classic changed immensely when teleporters were added to the Engineer class on Steam, years after its 1998 release, and this addition followed with Team Fortress 2. Natural Selection 1 and 2 are some of the most dynamic FPS games ever due to their RTS hybrid focuses, and they underwent massive map and gameplay changes every other patch. Dynamic and player-planted/squad-based spawns would be incredible and allow groups of friends to play very tightly. I love playing duos and trios with in Chivalry pubs (thanks Diamond markers) and pulling off stunts and side flanks that none of our other 14 teammates are doing. Where Team Fortress and Natural Selection have futuristic teleporters and alien gorge tunnels to fulfill the role of "if you've earned it, spawn directly into the action instead of walking-simulator-2019'ing for a minute", Mordhau could have buildable camps and tents with a high raising flag that also creates a presence in the enemy's own map/spawn selection screen. How to balance and determine who gets to erect such camps? That's an interesting question.

As I've mentioned in my MOBA examples in other posts, even symmetrical game modes if well designed tend to have a natural attackers vs defenders ebb and flow to them even without explicit turns being written as such. When poorly designed or balanced, they lead to a snowball the entire game with an unrealistic ability to comeback or a complete stalemate in the middle where it is disadvantageous to approach (BAD!!!) or extremely tedious to make any progress (BORING!!!). Summoning a hulking battering ram with tons of health would be akin to capturing a Boss mercenary in Heroes of the Storm - technically you can ignore it, but practically speaking it usually enforces an attackers vs defenders scenario with attackers escorting the Boss and defenders defending against, well, the Boss. This comes with subtleties too such as the defenders still dedicating one hero to backdoor push, or the attackers split pushing instead of going all-in on one lane. There are also other interesting extreme scenarios like base races, maps with two Boss mercenaries where both teams take a Boss near the same time, and desperate times when you can capture the Boss but still need to defend so urgently that you can't escort it so it merely only buys time rather than lay waste to a lane.

Count 725 2841

I would REALLY like to see something similar to the Squad Leader systems of Squad / Red Orchestra.

Instead of using target marking such as in games like Red Orchestra where you are required to have to have direct Line-Of-Sight and mark via binoculars, instead allow direct map marking. However limit marking ability to a set radius of the SL's position (50m for instance.) One map mark at any given time.

Example SL options:

  1. Primary weapon
  2. Secondary
  3. Tertiary
  4. Fists
  5. Spawn Tool (Banner or Toolbox with deployable tent)
  6. Horn (Used for most SL specific abilities)

Here is a quick example visualization off the top of my head as to how something like this might work in Frontline for players not familiar with this type of game mode:

Squad Leader opens his map

What an SL player model looks like in 3rd person while doing this
medieval-man-holding-scroll-isolated-white-47049433.jpg

What the map looks like to the SL

mapblank.jpg

He places a "Move Here" marker and a "Special Attack" marker
mapmarked.jpg

He hits "6" which pulls out his horn. He is shown something like these options:

  1. Trebuchet Smoke Barrage - 2 Min cooldown (10 or so smoke "bombs" to cover an advance / etc.)
  2. Ballista Stone Barrage - 2 Min cooldown (5 - 10 sec barrage of fist sized rocks raining down in a 10m radius)
  3. Trebuchet Fire Barrage - 3 Min cooldown (Ye Olde Napalm / good for area denial)
  4. Arrow Volley - 3 Min cooldown (continual 5 - 10 sec barrage of arrows raining down in a 10m radius of the marker)
  5. Ballista Volley - 5 Min cooldown (5 sec of a highly damaging volley of ballista bolts)

He hits "4".

This happens:

And then this happens on his marker:

Knight 513 1031

I talked to the developers, and it seems that things will be more-or-less the same, but they're willing to experiment with push/pull intermediate objectives. My hope is that there will be creators in the community eager to replicate Chivalry's maps as soon as the tools are made available to them, and we'll see which format works better.

As for your suggestion Lobster, I really don't like the shooter influences i'm seeing.

Count 725 2841

@FaffyШaffy said:
I really don't like the shooter influences i'm seeing.

Something like this would certainly be more interesting to me than having to play within the current small radius linear cap zone system.

These additional attack methods are also likely to be a bit more accurate of how medieval conflicts actually played out.

Could it use some tweaking? Certainly, but it would at least keep things more interesting by allowing non-linear conflicts. IMO the sides of the map could certainly stand to be expanded a bit and more heavily forested as well for flanking / hiding spawn points, etc.

Knight 210 998
  • 1
  • 19 Mar
 Corsario

Something fails when hyped players lose attention in less than 30 mins of gameplay. It happened to me, but also to some other players I know.

We need secondary objectives that give meaning to what's happening on the map and that are key to advance forward and divert players' attention.

For example:

1. Indispensable objectives:

  • make the bombcart that Free Guards use to blow up the siege towers, a pushable that follows an alternative path to the main capture zones

  • make another pushable with a wagon of firewood that the Iron Company will use later to grab the torches from (instead of those - easy-to-find / difficult to protect- pyres on the last objective).

or

2. Dispensable objectives:

  • Iron Company could pick up ladders from the river bank once the "River" zone is captured to place them on the wall, instead of being already there (the last obj could still be accomplished by destroying the doors etc)

  • Free Guards .. (I'm still looking for a mirrored idea)

Knight 182 464
  • 19 Mar
 Duckalot

What if both teams had, somewhere close to their main spawning area, cages with PoWs(prisoners). If the opposite team opened those cages they'll get tickets back.

Count 1458 937

Capturing players would be an interesting new mechanic and add a little more depth than trying to kill the enemy. Would take superior melee skills to not kill an opponent and perhaps gain some bonus for you team capturing players.

Knight 513 1031
  • 20 Mar
 FaffyШaffy

@Lord Commander Guts said:
Capturing players would be an interesting new mechanic and add a little more depth than trying to kill the enemy. Would take superior melee skills to not kill an opponent and perhaps gain some bonus for you team capturing players.\

How would that even play out?

Knight 3 23
  • 20 Mar
 Baglady

I can definitely empathize with the "half-baked" vibe a lot of people seem to be gleaning from our brief foray into Frontline mode. I'm glad, however, that the devs will be disregarding most of the spergish shit that people have been suggesting about squads and archer volleys and other Battlefield garbage.

Mordhau endeavors to be an excellent melee/medieval combat experience -- a refinement of the progress made by similar titles in this very narrow genre. Cluttering the gameplay with all sorts of asinine dumbfuckery detracts from what makes the game stand out and misses the point. Looking at games that have proven longevity shows that placing a flavorful, thematic spin on simple concepts as well as a focus on tight and reliable core gameplay keeps players coming back. Every chunk of auxiliary horseshit that you ham-fist into the game is going to take away from that.

A great point was made about the difficulty in creating meaningful and thematic game modes in a "tug-of-war" system. You can't undo most of the cool shit that occurs in a game like Chivalry. Hence, we're stuck with immersion-breaking, boring, colorful, aethereal circles haphazardly zig-zagged on the map, and that kinda blows. I supposed some objectives could be retooled to work neutrally -- perhaps a map could include some sort of neutral payload-type objective -- but even that would be iffy.

I'm mostly hoping that Camp is just a boring map, and that the other stages (Grad, that snowy one, and the one with the creek that they showed us for 5 seconds in a dev blog) are better. One of my primary issues is that the final objective on the red(?) side was pretty god damn boring. Sieging the camp was alright but blowing up the towers was a bit lame. If we're only going to have one destructible set-piece on each side, make it something incredible. Go all out. Have us blow open a dam and flood a town, or destroy a temple, or torch a village.

Perhaps the solution would be to create a separate, castle siege type game mode that employs a few more props and interactive components compared to frontline.I don't know. I might play the game as is, but the public will get bored quickly enough and I'd hate to see this game fizzle out.

Conscript 74 107
  • 20 Mar
 KineticWolf

I think Frontline could be refined, but I'd prefer a Castle Siege mode in addition. If the player population is healthy, it could make for a great addition. One team defends the castle, the other team assaults it. Can't go wrong with that formula imo.

Knight 210 998
  • 2
  • 20 Mar
 Corsario

@Baglady said:

Sieging the camp was alright but blowing up the towers was a bit lame. If we're only going to have one destructible set-piece on each side, make it something incredible. Go all out. Have us blow open a dam and flood a town, or destroy a temple, or torch a village.

Yes, I also think that we need a final objective that really blasts your mind on each map. I hate comparing Mordhau to Chivalry, but the latter managed to raise the tension on most of the maps' final objectives.

Nevertheless, the "gundpowder barrel" part would feel more appealing if the cart had been previously pushed through the enemy line, with the effort that it takes..

P.S: We need as many interactive siege elements or references as possible. Rams, towers, carts, ladders etc. Those feel really engaging

Mercenary 218 541
  • 20 Mar
 Izıl

BR = way more gold and XP for 1st place, and it should be significant diffrence between 1, 2, 3 and 4th place

FL = Each kill should give 15+ gold, but doing teamrelated tasks (points) should give more gold than it currently does. What would be cool is that people could spend money placing bountys on other players lets say 100 gold.

Dont have much feedback on Horde

Conscript 4458 6140
  • 1
  • 20 Mar
 vanguard

@Baglady said:
I'm glad, however, that the devs will be disregarding most of the spergish shit that people have been suggesting about squads and archer volleys and other Battlefield garbage.

Which is hilarious when you consider that the map we saw has fire boulder volley that is rng on top of that lol.

. You can't undo most of the cool shit that occurs in a game like Chivalry. Hence, we're stuck with immersion-breaking, boring, colorful, aethereal circles haphazardly zig-zagged on the map, and that kinda blows.

I really don't get why they did it like this, other than time constraints, I don't see any reason to make the capzones this simple. It's legit shitty gameplay wise and boring in any other conceivable way, 64 players struggling on a tiny circle on the ground, this bulldoze any resemblance of cool medieval shit.

As I said in my previous post, why can't we have a whole fort as a capzone, or a river etc, why does it have to be a circle on the ground?

68 117
  • 20 Mar
 conny

@vanguard said:

As I said in my previous post, why can't we have a whole fort as a capzone, or a river etc, why does it have to be a circle on the ground?

This in addition to pushing the carts with torches/bombs from base to base before being able to finish last objective. And the cart being unlocked when the team captures 4th flag. Makes the last stand longer

Count 1458 937

@FaffyШaffy said:

@Lord Commander Guts said:
Capturing players would be an interesting new mechanic and add a little more depth than trying to kill the enemy. Would take superior melee skills to not kill an opponent and perhaps gain some bonus for you team capturing players.\

How would that even play out?

knock them down, pick them up which would auto handcuff/disarm, or manually disarm if their life is less than 20% you can just hand cuff as long as they are disarmed?

Knight 3232 6607
  • 21 Mar
 Bodkin

As an alternative to squads and SL putting down spawns, let the toolbox craft "spawn beacons" so engineers can help their team a bit more

Conscript 4458 6140
  • 2
  • 21 Mar
 vanguard

Or, to avoid people ploping down 921874198274 spawn points everywhere, make some special toolboxes on the map that can be picked up by anyone but have limited numbers, and only respawn as a spawn point is destroyed. This could give calvary a cool sneaky function that is to fast deploy one of these behind enemy lines to cause big fuckery on the enemy defenses/reinforcement routes.

I honestly think balistas should work the same way, each side has like 2 or 3 deployable balistas that only respawn once destroyed, and maybe make so it has only like 5 or 10 shots, but ammo for it respawns at X spot on the map, this way you have someone shoting it and a "loader" running around like a fucker feeding it ammo, while also giving a lot of tactical meaning to places on the map where the ammo is located.

These buildable stuff would also increase the meaning of catapults, which now with the game as it is, are basically the ultimate troll tool that people will just shot it in the middle of the little circle of clusterfuck that are the objectives. They could be used instead to take out balista and spawn points in a easier way and from a distance, since commander abilities won't be a thing.

Tiny circle on the ground as objective has to go anyways though, otherwise this is all meaningless because it will be a goddamn clusterfuck of doom anyways. 64 players, think about how many people this actually is. Its A LOT of people.

Knight 513 1031

Oh God please close this thread.