Akvod said:
Because in an objective based game, we need to have infantrymen defending the crates up and close. Also, I have a theory of diminishing marginal kills with snipers, sure they might kill more if they have 2 snipers, but 3? 4? ESPECIALLY if they're from the same spot and POV. At least spread out more and cover all the angles. |
Oh I see. That brings us to the topic of objective based gameplay. Thankfully BC2 is an objective based game rather than a frigging DM, but now that you mention winning, I actually don't care if my team wins in BC2. This must be a big flaw in the game design with Battlefield games, because I couldn't care less about winning. The only thing I watch is my own stats. For me it feels, and it is sad, that it's just two groups of soldiers killing each other and activating/deactivating these explosives at some random objectives - which feels very artificial. And after each round it switches, so all of a sudden I'm American defender again after being Russian attacker.
I come from Enemy Territory (the original and Quake Wars), the master of objective based gameplay, and there it actually feels meaningful to try to make your team win.
So at this point I'm hoping for clans to give the motivation to really play for the team.
And this comes from a huge team-player. It's really a pity, because I totally love the feeling when you are in your little squad of 3-4 guys doing things together.
Thoughts?