157 replies to this topic

[Ranger207]

(Good stuff at bottom.)


I'm no good at "twitch shooters," so I like to play strategy games. It can be like MechCommander, or it can be my what is my current favorite game, America's Army. All you veterans (real, not video game veterans) know how much good training can do for teamwork; well, AA tries to replicate this as much as possible. From what I've played, which isn't nearly as much as some people, I've found that there are two kinds of people:

• Team Members, and
  
• Lone Wolves.

I'm referring to a player who goes out for his own personal glory, not a guy who owes his allegiance to no House (or Merc Corp). These players tend to charge in and shoot and kill, and, in the no-respawn style of AA, die quickly. (Or camp, but the effect is nearly the same.) Sure, there are some players that that will try to flank the enemy, or set an ambush, but they will do it for themselves, not the team.
The other type of player, the Team Member, will follow orders and do what's best for the team, even if it means sacrificing themselves. The best Team Players also have some grasp of strategy, because if the commander is busy, he will need to be able to decide if it's better to, for example, get on top of a building and snipe, or go down the alley and distract the enemy so the VIP can be extracted.
The good commander (a Team Player) will be able to capitalize on this and his other opportunities, such as a Lone Wolf or two running this way and making the enemy thing that it's a major assault, even if they're just there to get points. The good commander needs to be fluid. There's a saying- "As soon as the battle starts, the plans go out the window (or airlock, whatever the case may be )." It doesn't really matter what the Lone Wolves do, as long as the commander has a core of good Team Players- he can then adapt his plans to whatever the other players do, and maybe send some of his core to help advance his/her goals.
The bad commander-a Lone Wolf (again, the play style, not the allegiance)- on the other hand, thinks of the commander role as just another role- except with artillery. Even in this case, all is not lost, as a group of good Team Players can just elect a new "battlefield commander" or one can take that role by themselves. This is, of course, made harder if the commander is a mission-critical objective, like a VIP, in which case the Team Players have to adapt their play style a bit to accommodate the bad commander.

Finally, to prevent this problem, I believe that there should be some kind of co-op teamwork training provided, either by your House or the Mercenary Bonding Commission (the ComStar precursor to the MRBC) for Mercs and "real" Lone Wolves- players with no allegiance. To help establish the good commanders are, you could have "Commander Points" given to you after a battle by the players on your team that aren't in your clan/merc corp/house unit. The top and bottom votes would be discarded to prevent someone from losing all his Points just because of someone blaming the commander for his own lack of teamwork, and so that a bad commander can't get a friend to give him a whole bunch of points so he can get to use airstrikes more often. You would start your career with 50 Points, with a few points added temporarily before battle for mounting command modules, and the system would be more of a guideline of who to elect before battle to be your commander than who the computer chooses to be your commander. All in all, it would be a simple system-if you liked your commander, give them a few points afterwards and the computer will remember that for next time.

My two cents.

[Rilenn]

First, I've really enjoyed reading this thread. It is one of the more interesting ones. I'd like to add a few of my thoughts to it as I'm sure there are others that think like me.

There are many definitions of "leader" such as Line supervisor, Floor manager, Assistant manager, NCO, OIC to name just a few. All of us have encountered these "leader" types in one shape form or another. You have good ones and you certainly have bad ones. I myself have been a "leader" type. While I would like to consider myself a good one, I know for a fact there were some decisions I should not have made. I consider it a good thing that I can learn from my mistakes though and move on. Its the ones that dont learn that worry me.

MWO is not real life. I am going to play this game as a form of relaxation among my other personal pursuits. While I could certainly lead and play a commander role, I am not. I've had my fill of that in real life. Someone else can gather all that information, sort it, evaluate it and give "suggestions". I'm happy to play my part in accomplishing the mission goals for the team. Need me as a scout? Done....Plug a hole in the line? Point me in the direction....go kill an Atlas with a Flea? O.o I'm gonna look at you like you have two heads, then I'm gonna look at the best way to do the most damage with that Flea. As a team, if we keep losing becuase of questionable "suggestions", then I'm going to look for a new unit to join.

After the game goes Live and the first battles are fought, units will start to develop reputations. Most importantly though, PLAYERS will start to develop reputations. Time will sort the good commanders from the bad ones.

[Joanna Conners]

Kay Wolf, on 02 February 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

Who formed your team; did you just suddenly come together out of thin air like some manner of bad Chinese fantasy film? Did that person, or anyone else in the Lance have any manner of authority, perhaps expressed a need to go this place or that, whether in-game or not, or were you all psychically attuned to come up with exactly the same answer at exactly the same time? Did someone start the email(s) that helped you all decide what League(s) you would play in, or was there, again, that psychic link, as in bad Japanimation? When a match was over, did any one person log out any more than anyone else, or did all of you log out at the very same split-second?

If your answer to any of these questions is yes, then your group did not, indeed, exist, or you're lying or, at least, embellishing. There was a leader, there was someone who pointed you in a direction, and the rest of you may have been in-tune enough to agree 99 out of 100 times, but someone took charge and, whether s/he needed to play in a command role or not, s/he was still the commander.

Stop playin' the games.

Wow. Someone is pointlessly hostile. Is it so hard for you to accept that you have to resort to personal attacks?

We all took part in our formation. We can't point to any one person who organized, coordinated or made decisions. We're all equal. The last time someone tried to take a leadership role we told them to get lost. We don't need it and we don't want it. We're all capable and we all respect one another.

Edited: If I can't say something nice...

Edited by Demona, 02 February 2012 - 09:34 PM.

[Paul Inouye]

I'm going to play as a commander... and if you don't do what I tell you to do, I'm going to shoot you in the back with my OMG-PPC/2000 that has a 97KM range and does 2000 damage to your Mech.

Spoiler

This is why we have Community Warfare, cause you kids can't play nice together.

Remember? Lone Wolf, Faction Player and Merc Corps?

Kay Wolf is definitely going to need to be a Merc Corp player if he wants to issue absolute commands. Expecting people in Faction or Lone Wolf gameplay to follow orders to the letter, will pretty much end up with them telling him to stuff his hat no matter how effective he is as a commander. The Merc Corps are for those who want to fight in a highly co-ordinated group of like-minded players. Kay Wolf will find like minded players and they will rock and roll however it is they want to.

Others have different methods of strategy on the battlefield. For example, in my WoW guild that I ran, I expected my guildies to know how to adapt when poop went south on us. If I had to micromanage their movements and control their mobs/aggro... I'd have a lot more grey hair than I do right now. I'd expect the same from anyone I play with in MW:O. Know your role. Adapt when you need to. I'll assist from command in any way I can and I'll go down in flames with the rest of you if that should arise. I'd expect you to adapt as I would expect you to rely on me to adapt to the changing face of the battleground.

Command will fall upon those who do right. It's a natural pecking order that rises after numerous bouts.

Oh... and...

Spoiler

SUCKER!

[Helmer]

Kay Wolf, on 02 February 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

(raises hand) Presently unemployed, but a professional with leadership responsibilities in just about every job I've ever had nonetheless.

Perfect example of the "It really doesn't matter what we do professionally". Personally, I dont care what Kay does outside the game for work, I could care less what his post count is. Waving your ePeen saying "Follow me because I'm a leader in Real Life" means very little. (Granted some professions lend themselves more to it than others.... but honestly, how many of us employ tactics and combat situations in our daily lives?)

I'd follow Kay , not because of a high post count, but because of WHAT he says, not how much. Does forum eloquence make him a good leader? Not really. But I'd be very honored to fight with him Same with Aegis,Kaemon, Coffi and numerous other people on the forums.

And, honestly, there are probably a good number of "kids" out there who might be damn good at tactics. They might not be professionals or "Leaders" in real life, but again, dont care.

There are naturally going to be Merc units, House units, and Lone wolves who make a name for themselves because they are good commanders, can react quickly, and calmly. Personally, I want to relax after work, and enjoy. If I get a chance to make a name for myself as a steady, reliable mechwarrior. Awesome.

[Ranger207]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

Spoiler

SUCKER!

Your spoiler didn't work...

EDIT: Nevermind, you ninjafixed it.

Edited by Paul Inouye, 02 February 2012 - 09:32 PM.
Ninja fixed this one too suckah!

[Blackfire1]

I've learned your Spoiler pattern paul. I'm on to you.

[Paul Inouye]

Blackfire1, on 02 February 2012 - 09:28 PM, said:

I've learned your Spoiler pattern paul. I'm on to you.

Only one contains a nugget... which one is it?

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

[Larry Headrick]

Argh.... shell game i suck at the shell game.

[Naga]

Kay Wolf, on 02 February 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Many of those out there who are claiming to be commanders and/or leaders are in the same boat, lots of experience, both in the real world and in game. So, why all the bashing?

Because it's easier than actually leading...

For most people they only ever make a decision for themselves. And from personal experience many people are incapable of doing even that. Just watch your friends try and pick something to eat from a menu sometime... And picking something to eat is a simple decision...

As a commander you're making decisions for yourself and others. Decisions that don't end in a disappointing meal at least, but possibly a waste of time (or death, worst case). And if you choose your meal, you only have yourself to blame. If someone else chose your meal, you can blame them.

The commander is the face of the results. I'm sure all the leaders here know when the chips are down who gets blamed for failure. And if the plan succeeds some leaders (the bad ones) take the accolades.

In BT, work or life, if you ever find a leader that takes all the blame for failure (theirs or not) and gives you all the fame of success (yours or not), you'll follow them to the ends of the earth. Be one of these commanders, and you and your team will be unstoppable...

[name51875]

Kay Wolf, on 02 February 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

Okay, so you're selfish enough to not be willing to sacrifice your 'Mech to allow reinforcements to arrive to help your buddies in the remainder of your Lance? Okay. After that point, I have no use for you in my unit.

When i was in my old team, we are selfish enough to go into the battlefield without even making any tactics (because our bond is very strong to trust each other tactical decisions). But when we are going to be outnumbered or we lost a lance, we're not stupid enough to stay and die, we'll let the place fall to the enemy hands, after that we'll go stealth, regroup, design a new tactics, and take that place back with careful counter attack. We prefer to honor our lances by winning the match rather than stay and die to honor him/her.

Edited by Viper Centurion, 03 February 2012 - 02:05 AM.

[name51875]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Only one contains a nugget... which one is it?

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Ahhh! no nugget only hippies!

Edited by Viper Centurion, 03 February 2012 - 06:12 AM.

[EGG]

Has the definition of PUG changed over the years? In TF1 / Tribes it used to be a closed-server game of players from different clans played as a scratch-match. Generally whoever was a clan leader or senior capper / HO would lay out basic strategy, but all players would have an understanding of what needed to be done to succeed in a competitive match and would get on with it, changing roles as needed or asked by whoever was the de facto leader.

One thing I've noticed in playing 8vs8 public games of Spring RTS is that generally players will follow basic orders given by a player who either:
- Definitely looks like they know what they're doing (you know it when you see it in Spring)
- Is a name player
- Has a game-rank that indicates they've crushed a lot of skulls

But generally the three some in combination. Part of the reason it works is whoever is dishing out the occasional order won't give orders that cannot reasonably be followed by a mostly-independent player of unknown skill level. Asking a total random to go early Air is a recipe for trouble, whereas telling them to increase their metal-scavenging, placing turrets or backup another player's defensive line before they crumble is likely to be followed.

[Jack Gallows]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Only one contains a nugget... which one is it?

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

Spoiler

GOTCHA YA HIPPIE!!

The real reason for the Mechwarrior delay!

JK =D

Spoiler

It's a trap!

[Dlardrageth]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

I'm going to play as a commander... and if you don't do what I tell you to do, I'm going to shoot you in the back with my OMG-PPC/2000 that has a 97KM range and does 2000 damage to your Mech.[...]

*reported for trolling*

The different take on commanders/leadership/whatever is most likely to come from differences in personal histories. Some people here might have a military background, some never really played games that required leadership, others been deeply involved in games with elaborate leadership structures or battle commander setups (big fleet battles in EVE-O comes to my mind as an example). Add on top of that as icing the personal issues some people might have with following any command/order/suggestion that isn't their own (egocentrism and sociopathy is not unknown on the internet), and you get your answer why some dislike authority/leadership/commnand roles.

Bit of a sh**storm in a waterglass IMHO, because if at the end of the day the current commander is behaving like a nitwit (repeatedly), I'll just stop listening to him. It's a game after all so I won't be forced to bother with anyone I think is a ****wit (or anything similar). And yes, I agree your job/skills/whatever in real life can amount to mostly nothing in a game. Because it is not a clear depiction of the real world usually.

So I'm right there with people stating that I don't care what people did elsewhere before, nor going to start quoting my past "honors". Because it is an exercise in futility IMO. No past merits will mean anything in MWO if you cannot make people follow your lead based on current merits. I guess most will have a similar attitude.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 03 February 2012 - 05:18 AM.

[Jack Gallows]

Dlardrageth, on 03 February 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

So I'm right there with people stating that I don't care what people did elsewhere before, nor going to start quoting my past "honors". Because it is an exercise in futility IMO. No past merits will mean anything in MWO if you cannot make people follow your lead based on current merits. I guess most will have a similar attitude.

This.

I honestly don't care what you do out of game, or what you did beforehand. Put your money where your mouth is and build your rep just like everyone else in game, and not before. All we do on the forums is build cults of personalities and friendships. You could be some kind of 20 year + military commander in RL and completely suck at MW:O, or you can be some kid who's never touched an online game or Mechwarrior game before and be the next tactical messiah.

Willing to give people benefit of the doubt at times, but really, previous experience can never prove the future.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Kay Wolf, on 02 February 2012 - 08:54 PM, said:

You're missing the entire point, and I never said anything about NOT working with a team for the win... you're assuming that. Again, you know what assuming does, right? I don't think I'm a real military leader, even though I was encouraged heavily by the varied chains of command I served with in the Army to go Green to Gold, because I had the skill, talent, and demeanor to be an officer. That means leaving conversations where petty individuals who refuse to study and understand the entire conversation, who will not see anything they choose not to see, will continue to harp on ideals they do not understand in order to talk down to others. Have a nice evening, Nick.

I was being a smart *** and that wasn't right. So for that I apologize. I don't have enough info to judge whether you are for real or just another Intarwebz general. Here's hoping we can meet up on the battlefield and happily pound each other to scrap!

[Mason Grimm]

Jack Gallows, on 03 February 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

I honestly don't care what you do out of game, or what you did beforehand. Put your money where your mouth is and build your rep just like everyone else in game, and not before. All we do on the forums is build cults of personalities and friendships. You could be some kind of 20 year + military commander in RL and completely suck at MW:O, or you can be some kid who's never touched an online game or Mechwarrior game before and be the next tactical messiah.

Willing to give people benefit of the doubt at times, but really, previous experience can never prove the future.

I agree and I disagree at the same time.

Previous experience shows you have the capaibility for competence but like everything else MWO will require learning. I think if someone is a 20 year military commander with real world tactical experience then he understands the core of unit deployments and how best to use which assets where (note: in the real world). Those skills, assuming he learns the mechanics of MWO, will be quite valuable in the game world.

Some 12 year old kid, who has no real world experience will simply not be able to draw upon skill sets like that. Nor will he understand the tree of Strategic, Tactical and Task levels of Command. Things like this are learned and experienced.

Where I agree with the statement is that just because you have those skill sets does NOT automatically make you an instant success in game.

There are several factors, including but not limited to......

Knowledge of game mechanics
Knowledge of the battletech universe
Training and capability of those you command

I think that is far more than my 2-cbill allowance but you get the general idea.

[MaddMaxx]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

I'm going to play as a commander... and if you don't do what I tell you to do, I'm going to shoot you in the back with my OMG-PPC/2000 that has a 97KM range and does 2000 damage to your Mech.

I have to ask sir. How much Drop-Off does that puppy have after the first KM.

[name51875]

Paul Inouye, on 02 February 2012 - 09:26 PM, said:

I'm going to play as a commander... and if you don't do what I tell you to do, I'm going to shoot you in the back with my OMG-PPC/2000 that has a 97KM range and does 2000 damage to your Mech.

Can i have that PPC?