Dual Objectives In Invasion

Reach’s Invasion was perhaps the best study on creating decisions for defenders while also giving the defenders no time to make them. The classic example is the dual territories scenario and how a defender must know which of the two Objectives he should defend. The decision that the defender is faced with is Should he abandon one Objective to save the other?

The two Objectives are forged close enough to each other that a defender can move from one to the other in time to interfere with an offensive push. However, they are far enough away that he cannot defend both at the same time.

A feature of the Game Type ensures that when an offensive push is repelled, the Objectives return to a minimum amount of time to capture – their Float Time – so that this decision remains credible. The purpose of the Float Time is to avoid the scenario where one Objective has just a couple seconds left, leaving the defenders with no choice but to remain and defend that Objective.

This Float Time determines how far the two Objectives can be forged from each other. If the Objectives are too far apart, then the decision to abandon one Objective to save the other is no longer a credible decision.

Not only does forging the two Objectives just within the Float Time apart from each other make the decision to abandon one Objective to save the other credible, it also offers the decision to defenders without any time to think through the consequences. It is this type of decision where there is no real time to think that makes Invasion interesting, where the invaders can trick the defenders into making a game breaking decision. It is this type of forging that adds a tremendous amount of depth to an Invasion map.

Invasion makes a great case study on forging depth into a map, though I doubt we will ever see a Game Type on the same level of complexity again. Nonetheless, I include it here to add to the breadth of this discussion.

Summary

Invasion is a Game Type that required specific features forged into your map that naturally provides quite a bit of depth.

The more intense types of decisions are those that are game breakers for which players have no time to think through the consequences.