Commander

[Yossarian]

People sulk about all the NOE raids/senseless usage of CVs that we see in this game.  Here's a possible solution: have a commander system.

Perhaps by having several commanders per team (i.e. Rooks would have 5 commanders, Knights 5 and Bish 5), one would be able to get some more large-scale strategy (and therefore, immersion, activity [esp. at peak times] and fun) into the game.

So, if this were implemented, the commander could tell his 'team': "Destroy FH #1 at Base 53, then proceed to CAP Base 53, and ensure troops arrive safely".  Then, if the game detected that that group of people destroyed the FH, and prevented any enemies upping at base 53 from leaving a certain area around the Base, those players would get a significant (maybe 1.5 or 2x ?) perk point multiplier for their actions.  The commander would probably want to be in the area, and would receive points depending on the success of his 'team'.

I won't go into the complexities of what you'd have to do to become a commander (maybe a sort of rank/election system?), but with an effective commander and a team who at least partially obeyed them, you'd suddenly see a lot of strategy and immersion coming into the game.

[Rino]

     I am my own commander, suits me fine, but then I'm not into landgrab "immersion"

[Ack-Ack]

People sulk about all the NOE raids/senseless usage of CVs that we see in this game.  Here's a possible solution: have a commander system.

Perhaps by having several commanders per team (i.e. Rooks would have 5 commanders, Knights 5 and Bish 5), one would be able to get some more large-scale strategy (and therefore, immersion, activity [esp. at peak times] and fun) into the game.

So, if this were implemented, the commander could tell his 'team': "Destroy FH #1 at Base 53, then proceed to CAP Base 53, and ensure troops arrive safely".  Then, if the game detected that that group of people destroyed the FH, and prevented any enemies upping at base 53 from leaving a certain area around the Base, those players would get a significant (maybe 1.5 or 2x ?) perk point multiplier for their actions.  The commander would probably want to be in the area, and would receive points depending on the success of his 'team'.

I won't go into the complexities of what you'd have to do to become a commander (maybe a sort of rank/election system?), but with an effective commander and a team who at least partially obeyed them, you'd suddenly see a lot of strategy and immersion coming into the game.

We already have a plethora of arm chair generals that polute this game and this would not inject 'a lot of strategy or immersion coming into the game.'   


ack-ack

[Nemisis]

We already have a plethora of arm chair generals that polute this game and this would not inject 'a lot of strategy or immersion coming into the game.'   


ack-ack

Agreed. They are kinda annoying.

[Yossarian]

Well let's scrap the 'arm-chair' bit of that - with this we'd have a commander with a slight amount of power.  I now know you three don't care about strategy, but perhaps others do.

[Shifty]

Well let's scrap the 'arm-chair' bit of that - with this we'd have a commander with a slight amount of power.  I now know you three don't care about strategy, but perhaps others do.

How would he have power? How long do you think paying cutomers would continue to pay to be lorded over by some cyber Napolean?
It's bad enough now having to squelch the little Generals everytime you log on now. No thanks, there's more than enough people who think they're in charge of game play as it is.

[APDrone]

The idea of having rank and priveleges for 'common' players ( ie, not game developers, trainers, CMs.. etc ) that is obtained by some sort of goal system will not go over well.  

If you want to have a commander for your side, make an open invite to your countrymen to be part of a larger organization. Maintain a roster and membership outside the game and communicate via e-mail as to particulars and details.  Best bet is to start with a few large squads.. direct a joint operations night or two.. then when people see what's going on, you'll find other squads wanting to join in.

Pretty soon you'll have 30 or 40 squads available to conduct operations.  Rotate the command duty amongst those that want it and have fun.

Research 'Rook Joint Operations' .. from 2001 - 2003 on the boards and you'll get an idea of what went on before.

Good luck.

[moot]

Yossarian, that's more likely to work bottom-up, not top-down.

[Ack-Ack]

I now know you three don't care about strategy, but perhaps others do.

Oh please, you don't know how I play or what elements of the game I like.  You haven't been playing as long as I have so you really don't have any clue to make that judgement.  Sheesh, little kiddies think they know everything.


ack-ack

[Nemisis]

Well let's scrap the 'arm-chair' bit of that - with this we'd have a commander with a slight amount of power.  I now know you three don't care about strategy, but perhaps others do.

I care about strategy, I just don't want to have 5 armchair generals all talking at the same time. If they each get their own channle then OK, I can see this working, but if not, it will get annoyng.

[stodd]

Umm I thought that 1DOGFIGHT was the commander? 

[texastc316]

-1. In theory, yes, maybe. But I don't see it working, too many know it alls that wouldn't be in command trying to command. Like in a mission, you have the leader of the mission, and 15 others barking orders and ideas and poof. Chaos disorder and general good times.

[E25280]

Ghi is already such a commander on the Bish side . . . without any "programming" to make it happen.

Which is the only way it should happen, IMO.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Uh,,,, NO

[StokesAk]

kan me B teh c0mm4nd3r?