Armored Warfare's Upcoming Global Operations Game Mode Mixes PvE And PvP Objectives
Armored Warfare already has PvP and PvE battles, so the dev team at Obsidian Entertainment has decided to make a new game mode by combining the two, like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. If Reese's Peanut Butter Cups had composite armor and 120mm smoothbore cannons, that is...
The Global Operations game mode tasks two teams of up to 15 players with pursuing a number of different objectives, such as holding territory and eliminating enemy and AI-controlled tanks -- some spawned by player teams and some that are hostile to all players. To aid them in their conquest, players can call upon a number of resources, including the aforementioned "friendly" tanks, defensive pillboxes, surveillance drones, and air raids.
A Global Operations match will last for 15 minutes or until one side has had its point total reduced to zero by enemy action. Unlike in other game modes, players can respawn, and objectives can change during the match. For more information, check out the dev blog on Global Operations on the Armored Warfare site.
Related Articles
About the Author
Jason Winter is a veteran gaming journalist, he brings a wide range of experience to MMOBomb, including two years with Beckett Media where he served as the editor of the leading gaming magazine Massive Online Gamer. He has also written professionally for several gaming websites.
More Stories by Jason WinterRead Next
In an effort to counter complaints of unfair PvP match-ups that force solo-que into battle with pre-made parties, the Neverwinter team is introducing a PvP solo queue-event for level 70 adventurers.
You May Enjoy
Seeing the Drumstick of Death flail skin is actually hysterical.
The agreement will cover AI protections and more.
I mean...who plays SWTOR for the stories, right? (/sigh)
Feature
I'm All For A Dauntless Update, But I Seriously Dread Where The Game's Monetization Is Headed
Loot boxes, buying weapons, and other "new" features have me questioning the game's blockchain-company-owned future.
Discussion (3)