157 replies to this topic

[Rayge]

I have to admit that the commander role confused me at first. I thought that it would be like natural selection: commander jumps into a console type thing, and suddenly the game looks like an RTS, except with real people as your units that may or may not follow your orders.

Instead, as you say, they will be actual mechwarriors in mechs that basically work as the relay between scouts and the a/d. With extra goodies like satellite sweeps and bombardments, of course.

[CoffiNail]

TactOps is a good idea, aside from the part TactOps is a rulebook

There could be some confusion there then.

[Mason Grimm]

NARCoMAN, on 03 February 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

I'm not as concered about this as some of the other good peeps here. They're most likely modeling the commander role after the BF:2142/BF3 style. That might help clear up some of the anxiety about the role. The commander role in the BF games gets added specific map functions that the other players do not. Control of the radar sweep, where bombardments get (almost) placed, and the ability to relay enemy positions found by the radar sweep to the troops.

That's pretty much it. If you're not playing in a competitive league or other environment, having a person who is new or bad at playing commander won't break you. It won't really even slow the tempo. The real success on the ground comes from intelligent choices made by the attackers and defenders, with help from the scouts. Should the role be as it was in the BF series your commander points out things you didn't see, and will be able to support in adding, not controlling information.

My concern will be with scouts who think they can gung-ho the place and not get the useful info out. This game is no respawn and that makes the little guys a lot more important.

Merged this thread with "Why we picking on Commanders" (or something) since it is essentially the same thing.

[Ranek Blackstone]

Demona, on 02 February 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

Why is everyone thinking the commander is the leader? They don't have to be. They can be nothing more than intel, reporting information to the team.

The concept was perfect in Chromehounds and I'm excited to see it here. Having better intel than the enemy can often lead to a win.

QFT.

I loved Chromehounds personally, and was sad to see it go dark in 2010, but alas.

Back on topic, I agree with post. I've seen "commanders" who were in charge of doing nothing but staying alive and passing on the info, both in games like Chromehounds, and my ever favorite BF2142, while a dumb grunt squad leader was in over all command.

Commanders here will have better access to intel/counter intel abilites, along with various support powers, but that doesn't mean he's in overall command of the match.

[Spawl]

I used to play battlefield 2 and there was a caommander role there aswell, now i know the role is gonna be different but in 70-80% of the cases the one that took the role as commander took the job seriously, and did a good job. And even if the commander does a poor job of commanding i think u will notice that pretty early in the battle and then just go have fun on your own.

[Vexgrave Lars]

Define victory, organize resources, verify readiness and capabilities, access the situation (terrain, info-war data on enemy assets) then... take your Atlas out scouting for victims with your lance backing you.

Commanders call the shots, they are the head of the family that is the lance. Never leave a mech behind, and make sure the rookies don't waste ammo. Regardless of the game mechanics, a good commander builds a union between the other pilots, whether theyre Militant Combine Worshipers or Periphery Pirate Psychopaths!

"Commanding" by the numbers is is a learned skill, the mechanics of the game will support this. Differentiated from leadership, which is a beneficial character flaw. You rarely want it, and what comes with it. Others see it in you, and if you have it, you probably don't see it in yourself. I hope when I get into combat that my Commander, for whatever "in game mechanic" knows what he's doing, but I'll settle for a good group of comrades and a solid, intelligent leader.

That's just my humble thoughts,

Vex

Edited by Vexgrave Lars, 03 February 2012 - 10:35 AM.

[Blackfire1]

Quote

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

None of them. You were challenged. Meaning to protect your troll skills you had to play the game dirty. Dirty like a bad weekend at Fremont street.

[guardian wolf]

I will say that my command style, always has been, and always will be, a frontline field officer. Like the Captains and Sergeants of WWII in the Allied forces, (the good ones, not the ****** that stayed at least two miles away from the action), I am with my troops, I fight alongside them, while coordinating the offense or defense, and I think it helps that I have a headset, so I can talk and fight at the same time. And I agree with you guys saying, commanding is tiring, and I am more than happy to let a superior take over, and I will advise during the fight. On another note though, while I command, I usually try to gather my own information, as I don't like relying on scouts as I've had many a time, when a scout feeds me incomplete, or false information (though I have on occasion, misinterpreted what he said, I will admit). And I will promise anyone here, if you are under my command, I will be the first in, and the last to leave the field. I earned my callsign (its my current profile name), by living this motto, and I have accumulated experience across multiple platforms, and genres, from Company of Heroes, to Republic Commando (looong time ago), WoT leading in Random Matches, a little bit of Starcraft, CoD. I actually earned this callsign while playing in a Mechwarrior league, but it was small, not as well known, seeing as we really didn't like publicity, and I checked the other day, the website isn't even up anymore. I made sure that my lance mates got off planet, while holding the line, and the reason I did so, was because I made the mistake of getting us into that position. I will always make sure that the objective will not be achieved by sacrificing unnecessary amounts of troops. And Vexgrave, you are right about the ones that take it seriously, I am one of them, and know by experience.

[JP Josh]

i prefer to battle where their is a overal commander that gives broad objectives to the groups

a group is three to four units mainly because when im able to play i play along with my father and two littler brothers

whenever we play world of tanks together even though we are down a person our win rate goes up why you ask?

because if you got people that know what the **** is best for the team you win alot more

[Ranek Blackstone]

Vexgrave Lars, on 03 February 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Define victory, organize resources, verify readiness and capabilities, access the situation (terrain, info-war data on enemy assets) then... take your Atlas out scouting for victims with your lance backing you.

Commanders call the shots, they are the head of the family that is the lance. Never leave a mech behind, and make sure the rookies don't waste ammo. Regardless of the game mechanics, a good commander builds a union between the other pilots, whether theyre Militant Combine Worshipers or Periphery Pirate Psychopaths!

"Commanding" by the numbers is is a learned skill, the mechanics of the game will support this. Differentiated from leadership, which is a beneficial character flaw. You rarely want it, and what comes with it. Others see it in you, and if you have it, you probably don't see it in yourself. I hope when I get into combat that my Commander, for whatever "in game mechanic" knows what he's doing, but I'll settle for a good group of comrades and a solid, intelligent leader.

That's just my humble thoughts,

Vex

Except the commander role here is the dude who calls in all the support powers. He summons airstrikes, deploys mine fields, and is responsible for intel/counter intel work. he can either be the leader in charge himself, which is cool, or he can be like the dude who simply keeps track of that for the guy who really is leading the mission from the front lines.

The thing that catches most people up here is the title when compared to the abilites he has. He's listed as a "commander" but he's more of a support unit one the field, and a good commander pilot doesn't HAVE to be a good leader, in which case he's more like a forward observer/ rader and ECM operator for the lance, calling in what is needed when it's needed to support the main thrust

[Joanna Conners]

Ranek Blackstone, on 03 February 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

QFT.

I loved Chromehounds personally, and was sad to see it go dark in 2010, but alas.

Back on topic, I agree with post. I've seen "commanders" who were in charge of doing nothing but staying alive and passing on the info, both in games like Chromehounds, and my ever favorite BF2142, while a dumb grunt squad leader was in over all command.

Commanders here will have better access to intel/counter intel abilites, along with various support powers, but that doesn't mean he's in overall command of the match.

Totally. Our commander in Chromehounds wasn't a team leader. They're more akin to someone sitting back in the green zone, feeding you info.

Besides, call me crazy but if I'm going to follow someone it's going to be INTO battle... not moving AWAY from them.

[Harrow]

Ranek Blackstone, on 03 February 2012 - 11:08 AM, said:

Except the commander role here is the dude who calls in all the support powers. He summons airstrikes, deploys mine fields, and is responsible for intel/counter intel work. he can either be the leader in charge himself, which is cool, or he can be like the dude who simply keeps track of that for the guy who really is leading the mission from the front lines.

The thing that catches most people up here is the title when compared to the abilites he has. He's listed as a "commander" but he's more of a support unit one the field, and a good commander pilot doesn't HAVE to be a good leader, in which case he's more like a forward observer/ rader and ECM operator for the lance, calling in what is needed when it's needed to support the main thrust

I envision Brian Cameron's role in the Wolf Pack novel.

[Elizander]

It's all fair. Not everyone can be a good commander? That's just like not everyone can be a good scout or attacker.

[Jack Gallows]

Elizander, on 04 February 2012 - 01:11 AM, said:

It's all fair. Not everyone can be a good commander? That's just like not everyone can be a good scout or attacker.

Basically.

It'll work out, if you suck at the commander role, people will either ask you to play something else, or they'll stop playing with you unless it's your friends and they either help you get better (I hope we can make skirmish matches!) or help you into a new role.

In the end, it'll work itself out, but don't be afraid to try the Commander role, just like any other. See what you're good at.

[firefox117]

I donno, after seeing the tech tree, the commander seems pretty interesting. I wouldnt mind trying some of those skill sets and all. I would like to see more info on it still, and how they actually plan to use the command role in the game. I.E. does the command charge in with his troops and fight, or does he stay back and call in support and give orders? After all, most modern day commanders do stay back from the front and observe their troops and issue orders instead of getting into the thick of it.

We've already seen that the role of the scout is to provide information on the battlefield, and it would make sense to me if the commander stays back, and uses that. If he goes down in combat, then you lost a major asset it seems. Hopefully theyll release more info on it.

[Opus]

Jack Gallows, on 04 February 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

Basically.

It'll work out, if you suck at the commander role, people will either ask you to play something else, or they'll stop playing with you unless it's your friends and they either help you get better (I hope we can make skirmish matches!) or help you into a new role.

In the end, it'll work itself out, but don't be afraid to try the Commander role, just like any other. See what you're good at.

OK, you work it out at whos expense?

You seem like a fine fellow, And you freaking nailed it, either they will inform you they are playing a different role, or people will leave your corp, and you'll be standing alone when you log in

Others to assume they can be a commander because they created a website, and throw a title on their name, means nothing.

if you as a leader/commander ruin a companies worth of Mech's those players are doomed to have to find ways to make C-bills, and rebuild, or pay for in game cash...

If you played wow, their are thousands upon thousands of Guilds with leaders that are the shyts, and they claim the higher in game content as theirs because they are leaders who suck....

I'll avoid corps for a while, or make my own till I prove myself, or a corps proves that they are worth my time, and efforts put into the MWO world...

Edited by Opus, 04 February 2012 - 10:14 AM.

[Setzz]

I've played WOW, was guild leader for a while then moved to another realm and joined a guild where the Guild Leader IMHO was the best in performing his role in all sense of the word. Awesome officers, impeccable coordination from raid members supported his role.

This is almost getting to be a semantics issue again, I see if te role suggests / recommends battle tactics, calls out support artillery etc he's more of a tact ops role than a true commander who leads. Note that yes I see a lance leader will actually lead a lance (may or may not be te whole group).

If a corps is MWO's equivalent of guilds in WOW, then it's a corps leader should be named commander, and maybe the role can have a name change.

In any case it's still too early enough to see, and I guess what we're doing is as a community giving to te devs ideas and feedback. Whether these feedback is implemented its all in the devs hand, and we'll be able to sort out what works n what doesn't and move from there.

[Kaemon]

Actually now that I've been chewing on this for awhile, I'm seeing a few options for the commander role that might appeal to those who want the role but not necessarily to lead.

- information disseminator (just the facts, ma'am) gathers info and relays it to the team, so they can keep on with the fighting, no forced directions or instruction, just what's going on from all incoming feeds.

- company com guy - the guy left manning the radio in case the boss calls asking whiskey tango foxtrot why haven't you won yet? Keeps the friendly fire down by informing other lances of our situation, position, etc...needs battlegrid to accurately relay status

- salvage hawk (merc specific) - The guy who rolls around and makes sure we get paid, possibly the most important role on a merc lance.
(if of course salvage is in game, and you have to actually retrieve salvage during the round).

- medic - MRB (not 100% sure it's in game, but if it is). - needs to know the where the battle is at and where people are down (but not out).

Just a few different roles that may benefit from some commander sauce.