Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:
Nothing prevents a player from requesting that the player relinquish command. Then at that point, anyone could take command as per usual. The majority of players, especially those that don't want command, will comply.
Seems like it would be good compromise to the chaos of the current system. I just think it's important for a team to have a baseline starting point just to get an idea if the person in charge is at least a decent player first before they start taking orders from them. If a better leader steps up to the plate, sobeit. At that point, the players can hash it out just like they do now when somebody wants to take command.
What you're saying isn't consistent with your own complaint. Your acting like the world is full of people battling over the command position. But the reality is 99% of people don't feel like taking command, and in the majority of games nobody does. And a player isn't going to suddenly start commanding because the game said to him "hey, all these people are lower ELO than you, here's a new chat color."
But what WILL happen is somebody who has command experience who might have noted "hey, nobody's in command, ok I guess I'll step up" will just not bother because some other person has been assigned command. Regardless of whether that person is actually doing any leading
You're exacerbating a major problem (lack of people who want to lead) in order to do something which is a dubious fix on a problem that rarely occurs (two people are fighting over who gets to lead). And yes, it IS a dubious fix, ELO whatever you say continues to be a poor measure of who can lead pugs, if for no other reason than it favors people who rarely play in pugs.
Edited by MuKen, 08 June 2013 - 08:25 AM.