39 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

So, rather than a 12 v 12 que, it's a 13 v 13 que. Except, the 13th guy is the commander. So he has the overhead view of the entire battlefield... basically, he's Starcrafting 12 other pilots. He doesn't see enemy of course... so his view is more like a fog of war. But because he's an overhead view, he can micro each individual pilots more directly.

"Alpha go to E3"
"Bravo Lance Push and Take F4"

Obviously, the pilots would not have to obey the command. But I think in most cases, it would be pretty sweet to know that there's a pair of eyes over you.

Commander can issue air strikes, artillery, and all the other random perks (for example, in incursion, a commander can also call dropship assault location.)

And since commander is only 1/13, if you really hate the job, you won't be getting it too much anyways.

Oh and just so you don't go 200 matches without getting it, commander works in a multiplier system like map and mode voting. The more you signed up and don't get, the more multiplier you get to actually get the job.

What you guys think? Mechwarrior and Mechcommander all in one game?

[Rogue Jedi]

that could be something viable for private matches, but should not be in quick play or faction play.

If someone drops expecting to use a Mech and does not get to they are not likely to be happy.

There would need to be an opt in (default opted out) for the commander or else you would get game where someone who does not want to or is not able to command gets command.

a few examples.

many players are likely to completely ignore commands, as they do now with refusing to work together.

A new player on his/her 1st game acting as commander causes a loss, get stick from the rest of the team and decides not to play a second game.

The commander may not understand the map/mode and that could cause problems if the players follow the commander.

A troll deliberately gives bad commands

The commander may not be setup for VOIP and may not know the command options

A few bad experiances like the above and you will end up with PUG players completely ignoring the commander ^{(like how many people ignore the rest of the team now)} unless it is an orgonised group who chose the commander in advance, the commander effectively would not get to play a lot of the time.

I have no problem with the idea but in my opinion it needs to be ether opt in (and if you do not opt in you will not partisipate in a game with a commander) or private match only.

Edited by Rogue Jedi, 12 May 2017 - 09:30 AM.

[DAYLEET]

Hard to get people to play commander. Then the side who has one always win if the other dont. We bitched when Battlefield 3 lost its commander slot and they put it back in BF4. Nobody uses it anymore, everyone wants to be on the ground. When you are suddenly being overwhelmed in BF4 just look at the player screen and sure enough someone just joined them as a commander.

Even squad leaders dont do **** any more and when they do, half their squad ignore everything they say. This one is really perplexing because if you dont lead, then you can at least assign your current location as an objective and double everyones point.

Gamers have really regressed in a short period of time.

I would expand the como_rose. Being able to point and click; "go there", "defend/attack there" or "something moving/incoming there" would get used as opposed to the system we have right now where you need to use the map.

[B0oN]

Commander ?
I´m in !

+1

[Nesutizale]

If FW is any indication PUGs regulary ignore anyone trying to organize them. Many seam to have simple VoiP dissabled as when you start typing they suddenly react.
A reason why I would vote for VoiP to be enabled by default.

Still dosn't solve the problem of people simply wanting to do their own thing and more a reason why I think that FW should be a Units only mode. They will use the options a command modus will give them...on everyone else I fear its wasted.

Anyway a command modus would be nice, I have Marauders with a command console anyway so who wants to jump in

[PhoenixFire55]

Yeah, would love to have some T5 potato who is gonna tell me what to do ...

^- ∞

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 12 May 2017 - 09:53 AM.

[Jackal Noble]

I thought that was what the forums were - Commander Mode, where we all think we have a bearing on how this game is made.

[Christophe Ivanov]

The biggest problem with this is TRUST. How can you trust someone you have no idea who? What kind of experience do they have? Are they some kind of wacko on a power trip? Or someone who genuinely interested in helping, teaching others in organized combat?

The only way I can see this in succeeding is if anyone who wishes to be labeled a "Commander" and have access to the controls as such, they would have been cleared by PGI or perhaps anyone in Tier 2 or 1 level.

[sycocys]

Would really only work in 12v12 full teams, and could for simplicity's sake just make the match 11v11 and a commander on each side.

But it would have to be an opt in thing, most people just want to play the game and at least to this point of the game there's no real reason to have a commander role because all the maps are so tiny. If the maps were 2-3 times as large and there were objectives set up to split teams up into lances then it might start to make sense to have a battlefield commander in some fashion, but until that happens it's just a role that wouldn't get used.

[Mystere]

It would be great in Community Warfare. I am not so sure about Quick Play though.

While I am at it, we should really ditch the latter, get a Solaris mode, and configure that along with the Training Academy and Community Warfare to compensate. That cesspit of a "originally meant to be a filler but is now the game" mode is a big impediment to significantly improving the game.

[naterist]

if they split the ques in fw like everyones been asking, then that could be a pretty cool position for there. would feel pretty cool if the dc could focus on being dc.... but itd only work in groups were that position can be either voted on or volunteered for. solo que, it would feel like bs.

[Shadowomega1]

DAYLEET, on 12 May 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

Hard to get people to play commander. Then the side who has one always win if the other dont. We bitched when Battlefield 3 lost its commander slot and they put it back in BF4. Nobody uses it anymore, everyone wants to be on the ground. When you are suddenly being overwhelmed in BF4 just look at the player screen and sure enough someone just joined them as a commander.

Battlefield 4's version of command was badly designed, you couldn't take on the role while in game, or resign it so someone else could take it. To take that position you had to leave the game, and rejoin as commander, furthermore back in BF2 multiple people could apply for commander role however the game would pick the highest ranking person and if two people of the same rank had applied it would give it to the one with the most commander time and highest hidden skill ranking. Furthermore in BF2 once all your commander abilities were on cool down you could jump out of map mode and help fight.

[Baulven]

It would need a few points to make it work really well.

First it would need to ADD objective markers to your lances or companies hud so they don't have to constantly swap back to the map

Second you would need to give bonuses to the people for following directions

Third you would need a commander rating system. Which opens itself to trolling unfortunately but if fall below a certain threshold for rating you are no longer commander eligible for a week.

Commander would also need to be an lot in check box. A lot of people wouldn't be huge into the option of playing commander and not driving their much. Also there would need to be an option to play and command (it satisfies lore and keeps more people available for matches) though this shouldn't necessarily be the default. Honestly we need a quick wheel for points of interest as well, since if you could just select move to waypoint it would be a lot easier to coordinate.

[DAYLEET]

Shadowomega1, on 12 May 2017 - 11:32 AM, said:

Battlefield 4's version of command was badly designed, you couldn't take on the role while in game, or resign it so someone else could take it. To take that position you had to leave the game, and rejoin as commander, furthermore back in BF2 multiple people could apply for commander role however the game would pick the highest ranking person and if two people of the same rank had applied it would give it to the one with the most commander time and highest hidden skill ranking.

And someone could overthrow the cmd and force a vote to take his place.

Shadowomega1, on 12 May 2017 - 11:32 AM, said:

Furthermore in BF2 once all your commander abilities were on cool down you could jump out of map mode and help fight.

That was forbiden in the server i played. A cmd could always spot targets or talk to the SLs. There was no time for a cmd to fight, ever, commanding/leading was more important than just dropping arty or uav.

[Deathlike]

It wouldn't work unless you designed it properly.

For instance, Commo-rose v1 was full of less than effective messages. "Help" didn't mention location... like any 911 call, you're not helping things at all if you have no location to report.

Considering things are being done at a minimally viable pace, I would expect nothing but below standard design.

Also, people are more likely to want to pewpew... herding cats is painful in the solo queue as it is.

[Baulven]

Deathlike, on 12 May 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

It wouldn't work unless you designed it properly.

For instance, Commo-rose v1 was full of less than effective messages. "Help" didn't mention location... like any 911 call, you're not helping things at all if you have no location to report.

Considering things are being done at a minimally viable pace, I would expect nothing but below standard design.

Also, people are more likely to want to pewpew... herding cats is painful in the solo queue as it is.

It's really dependent to be honest. Natural selection is one of my favorite FPS games because of the commander role. It could work, but I don't have huge faith it would be implemented well.

[Deathlike]

Baulven, on 12 May 2017 - 12:01 PM, said:

It's really dependent to be honest. Natural selection is one of my favorite FPS games because of the commander role. It could work, but I don't have huge faith it would be implemented well.

Natural Selection is designed well.

This game had a hotfix for chatspam syndrome (spam everyone and filter later).

It's like night and day.

[Lily from animove]

what for? yiuc an currently command alreay and people rarely listen, so all you achieve is a role where one guy may have to watch the scene since no one is listening.

[Lykaon]

Step one: enable voip
Step two: formulate a plan
Step three: vocalize your plan over VOIP
Step four: you are a commander.

[Lupis Volk]

Battlefield tried this.....It went soooooooooooooo well. Peoeple totally didn't ignore the commanders and do what they want because i play for fun or i play how i want to. No not at all.........