I have a problem with Warzone Assault, it might just be me being me but imo it’s a bit unfair on the teams that perform well. I’ll explain:
Losing Team:
Winning Team:
eh?
It is just you because I see no problem. The team that you suggest performs better or well obviously doesn’t out perform the other team. If they are the winning team they will get to the core and destroy the core. The main objective of the game type is to prevent the cover from being destroyed/saved which means that the stats you described above are completely accurate. But only two bases are defended and then the core becomes vulnerable. Either way the game type is functioning how I imagine 343 imagined it would.
The core is meant to be the most difficult. By the way - there is only two bases before the core, not three. If you have a problem with destroying the core don’t rush with captures on base one and two. In my experience rushing with captures end up screwing you over by the time you get to the core because not having a high enough REQ score. Gain as much REQ points you can earn so you can use vehicles and power weapons for the final stage.
> 2533274813162256;3:
> The core is meant to be the most difficult.
in no way is this remotely true. If you have at least 3 people on your team with IQs higher than 50. You can kill the core within 15sec. But then again, relying on ignorant random people to use common sense is far little and inbetween. I left a warzone earlier, where no one understood what to do. We captured the first base and everyone just sat in the base shooting at people at the armory. I was literally jaw dropped by the stupidity.
Warzone Assault is dumb. It doesn’t even have two rounds for attack/defense, instead it just has a new random game.
> 2533274813056574;1:
> I have a problem with Warzone Assault, it might just be me being me but imo it’s a bit unfair on the teams that perform well. I’ll explain:
>
> Losing Team:
> - Captures Base 1
> - Captures Base 2
> - Captures Base 3
> - Doesn’t destroy core
> DEFEAT
>
> Winning Team:
> - Fails to defend Base 1
> - Fails to defend Base 2
> - Fails to defend Base 3
> - Defends core
> VICTORY
>
> eh?
“The problem with Warzone Assault is that there isn’t two rounds” there, I fixed your complaint.
> 2533274850395190;4:
> > 2533274813162256;3:
> > The core is meant to be the most difficult.
>
>
> in no way is this remotely true. If you have at least 3 people on your team with IQs higher than 50. You can kill the core within 15sec. But then again, relying on ignorant random people to use common sense is far little and inbetween. I left a warzone earlier, where no one understood what to do. We captured the first base and everyone just sat in the base shooting at people at the armory. I was literally jaw dropped by the stupidity.
While I agree with the second part of your post I still believe the core was meant to be the most difficult. And from my experience I’ve been in numerous matches where we would stop the attacking team destroying the core. You can kill ‘the core in 15 secs’ but it’s also just as easy to defend it.
OT I dont see a problem with the gametype
My problem with Warzone Assault is that its really unbalanced. The attackers never win a match…
> 2533274813162256;7:
> > 2533274850395190;4:
> > > 2533274813162256;3:
> > > The core is meant to be the most difficult.
> >
> >
> > in no way is this remotely true. If you have at least 3 people on your team with IQs higher than 50. You can kill the core within 15sec. But then again, relying on ignorant random people to use common sense is far little and inbetween. I left a warzone earlier, where no one understood what to do. We captured the first base and everyone just sat in the base shooting at people at the armory. I was literally jaw dropped by the stupidity.
>
>
> While I agree with the second part of your post I still believe the core was meant to be the most difficult. And from my experience I’ve been in numerous matches where we would stop the attacking team destroying the core. You can kill ‘the core in 15 secs’ but it’s also just as easy to defend it.
>
> OT I dont see a problem with the gametype
They need to give the core more health and a longer attack time at that stage. I just left another warzone, were everyone fed just throwing grenades at it til it died. It took my team less than 1:30sec to win. Not ok. There should be more to it.
You have to make your own fun in warzone assault. Last night I went into it with a full party and all we did was drive around in scout hogs. We had a few “no fun allowed” jerks who used that to pad their stats, but the best game was one wherein red actually joined us and we basically mad maxed on the spire the whole time.
> 2533274888171856;8:
> My problem with Warzone Assault is that its really unbalanced. The attackers never win a match…
you must be playing a diff game. becuase its the complete opposite. the attackers pretty much all ways win. they are givin too much time and get their Req lvls quicker then the defender.
> 2533274863753117;11:
> > 2533274888171856;8:
> > My problem with Warzone Assault is that its really unbalanced. The attackers never win a match…
>
>
> you must be playing a diff game. becuase its the complete opposite. the attackers pretty much all ways win. they are givin too much time and get their Req lvls quicker then the defender.
Pretty much this, but I have seen about a 55% to 45% split favoring the defense. But for the REQ versus time spent, Warzone Assault is the way to go. Most enjoyable part of the game for me anyway.
To the OP though, I don’t understand your comment. As an attacker, you push the core to destroy it in a timed match. The ga,me focuses action on one base at a time, keeping the action and situations kind of but not really evolving over the course of the game. You don’t have to like it, but you are wrong that the point is to capture more bases. The intro video even states as an attacker that you need to destroy the core…
Heres the issue: Warzone Assault wants to be Invasion. However its its not as deep as invasion and lacks the balancing steps of said gametype.
Invasion had 2 points to defend at once. (Here, You have to Leroy Jenkins the base until you either break it or lose. There’s no way to divide and conquer the defending team.)
There was an attack and defend round (whoever made it further “won”. If you were the same, it was a tie. This rarely happened in my experience.)
really to me, this just feels like another example of 343 making a watered down version of something we had that was better before, and renaming it just in an effort to be different.
I usually stay back and just pot shot people lol are you meant to nuke the core? 
> 2533274885506317;14:
> I usually stay back and just pot shot people lol are you meant to nuke the core?
People like you make me angry sometimes in this game 
Just think of this way: The end all be all is the core. Wether your defending the core from being destroyed or doing the destroying. The core is the important thing. Bases are only checkpoints or markers on the map to which hold strategic advantage. If your defending and your team happens to lose those strategic bases but successfully defend the core I don’t see anything wrong with that.
> 2533274855931484;15:
> > 2533274885506317;14:
> > I usually stay back and just pot shot people lol are you meant to nuke the core?
>
>
> People like you make me angry sometimes in this game
Its called sarcasm learn to detect it
Seems fine to me.
> 2533274885506317;17:
> > 2533274855931484;15:
> > > 2533274885506317;14:
> > > I usually stay back and just pot shot people lol are you meant to nuke the core?
> >
> >
> > People like you make me angry sometimes in this game
>
>
> Its called sarcasm learn to detect it
Ah, sorry. I didn’t get that Armor Mod in my REQ packs yet 