Objectives accomplished trigger the next objective in the line. What if both teams could accomplish the objective? What if each team has a "base" objective located near their "side" of the map and there is a "central" objective located in the center. All objectives can be accomplished by either side. When you accomplish the central objective, you "push" your way into the other team's "base" objective. If you accomplish the other team's base objective then you win. If the other team accomplishes their own base objective then they push back to the central one. Push from central to enemy base to victory. A 2-way battle. Who needs Team Deathmatch when spawn points are always set up near a dual objective which attracts both sides' offensive tactics?

resistance base objective --- central objective --- security base objective
accomplish the central, push into enemy base.
accomplish enemy base to win.
accomplish your own base to push back.

Maps could be designed to make bases more defensive for that base's and the central area more balanced.

sounds fun. . . what about a duel hack mission where both teams can hack or dehack a central object until ones at 100 and the other is at zero

i think you could do that with enigineers too

think of a long map with bridges broken into 3 parts repair part one move team machine or person and so on and so forth until one is at the ends

making you choose for attack of defend

Sounds kinda like the "War" game mode from CoD 3/WaW.
Still sounds pretty sweet though it would defiantly give the game a more battle for victory type feel.

That's exactly how it is.


Also, another person had a game mode idea here
http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1194017-new-game-type-struggle/
also features dual objectives.

When other people say that they want team deathmatch or even capture the flag in Brink, I say NO. I don't think that Brink is the type of game to have those game types, it's too team based, too objective based, too different than the rest, that's why I like Brink.

But THIS, this is a great idea, I like how it's different but at the same time, doesn't ruin that teamwork objective gameplay that Brink is. Bravo sir, I have been thinking of making a gametype in which both teams attack AND defend, but couldn't quite put my finger on it. Good idea.

Not bad, although when I read the title I thought we were talking about a game mode where there was one moving objective (a repair bot for example) and the team that controlled it moved it toward their goal but if the other team took control then it would move in the other direction toward an opposing goal.

Combat and Goal are separate gameplay systems.

Goal is the game mode, BRINK currently uses Assault game mode (see: unreal tournament)
Combat is a system all its own.

In BRINK, the game mode consists primarily of class-exclusive button-pressing to advance. However, the way this is done is more interesting to perform and varied for each class. it's still like saying "red guy must press red button by holding action for 3 seconds" followed by "blue guy must press this blue button by holding action for 3 seconds" followed by victory. The occasional A-to-B item transportation for all classes as well. The decoration surrounding this simple mechanic is what makes it far more interesting, seem more varied, and fit the story.

Combat systems are a separate matter. "blue man holding action to interact with red man" is not the same as "blue man pressing blue button". In team deathmatch, you would basically have what you already do if objectives couldn't be completed. People would rush towards the enemy spawn and shoot whoever they see while playing in a style they prefer. Teamwork exists without holding action to interact with others, but holding action makes teamwork interactions seem more meaningful and easier to notice (see below for examples of indirect teamwork) Teammate interactions have nothing to do with the objective and work in any game mode you can imagine. Keep all 4 classes and the teamwork is there.



indirect teamwork examples: If you simply have assault rifle and grenades for 2 players in call of duty 2, you could leapfrog ( leapfrog is... one player stays still with ironsights to keep perfect accuracy and covers the other player who sprints forward to advance. The sprinter stops at cover and the coverer becomes the new sprinter. rinse and repeat for infinite safety due to teammate's cover) which uses pure teamwork without ever holding action to interact with each other. Also, one player could throw a grenade into an area while staying away from it. After it explodes, clearing the target area, a rushing player who was standing by could rush in to clear out the area further while the grenadier covers from afar the best they can.

EDIT:

This is also an option that I thought of. However, you'd have to either have all hacking/repairing/explosive objectives or have a robot that can be transported towards either base.

Set it on a monorail track with gates and track switches that can be hacked/destroyed/repaired and have a train car that can be transported to either base, thus allowing everyone to play a part and allowing for more interesting strategic moves.

An Op behind enemy lines could suddenly hack an undefended box and open a path allowing the pusher to go around a heavily defended point. Soldiers could blow doors/bridges, engineers could repair said doors/bridges.

You, sir, are a genius! One cookie for you.

i really like the sound of this and would like to make a suggestion. i would think a good addition to this would be defensive vantage pionts near each of the primary objectives such as bunkers or trenches (each defensive vantage piont would have automatic turrets). This would be a good motivater for a soldier to blast open a side passage, or give an operative the objective of hacking the system so your team controls it, and the engineer repair the MG nests and turrents that guard the main route.

i think adding this would bring more action and a greater focus on what can be done to help your team. What do you think of this idea?

Thanks, I hope it's oatmeal.



I'm strictly opposed to pre set automatic turrets (aside from the spawn guard) under the belief that any position that a defensive team would want to keep me out of should require them to put in the effort

But I love a good defensive fortification, including trenches and bunkers, and some of my favorite games involved fighting my way through those against all odds (lots of WW2 shooters storming the beaches, as well as Quake Wars).