Lack of leadership

[rturu]

In some games you end up with three or four people all trying to set the tactics of the team, they end up disagreeing or doing their own thing.

I thought it would be useful if prior to a game a simple data panel could come up on the screen and persons could put themselves forward to be nominated as a leader.

All team players would be able to mutually vote for their team leader using checkboxes (preferably a more experienced player) to be the main person to take responsibility for his entire team's general main tactics. Perhaps the leader could also have some exclusive priviledged commands/controls. It might be simple to implement since it consists of pre-game voting panel screen and a few 'main tactics' commands that are exclusively accessable for use by the leader. All players would know when the leader is talking to them directly by some recognizable sign/sfx.

I read somewhere that you are improving the communication system, so maybe the above is a completely unecessary idea,

but anyway regardless, the mod looks like it is shaping up quite well, good luck with it.

[b3h1ndu]

From my recollection, there was a server side mod in some Renegade servers where they let you select a Team Commander.

I can't remember the commands they could use, but yeah, I remember the Commander.

They said they are looking at bringing some server side options to Renegade X, maybe this is one of them?

[neagu]

QUOTE (b3h1ndu @ May 21 2009, 02:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From my recollection, there was a server side mod in some Renegade servers where they let you select a Team Commander.[/b]

Try Reborn's SGM2.02 Commander BETA
http://www.renegadeforums.com/index.php?t=...3&rid=24014

[epicelite]

I do think it would be nice to pick one guy to make all the big decisions!

He could have the ability to make messages appear in the middle of the screen for everyone on his team like, "GO NOW!" and to tell people to buy X thing for a X rush. :3

[genetix]

play clanwars omg...make clans balabla

[Techno]

Just because someone is elected team leader doesn't mean people will listen to them anyways.

Plus, most people just wanna come in game to do their own thing and have fun. If it's an important game where winning matters, there is going to be a designated leader to begin with.

If you all recall from the previous Renegade, the team commander never really controlled too much outside of using the !buyvech and other commands when the vehicle limit was reached.

[R315r4z0r]

It doesn't mean people will listen to them, but it will mean there wont be as much of an argument between people who don't agree.

In the end, more people will act in uniform than without the commander.

QUOTE (Techno @ May 21 2009, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Plus, most people just wanna come in game to do their own thing and have fun. If it's an important game where winning matters, there is going to be a designated leader to begin with.[/b]

Not true, people will argue over what's right in that situation. Often the most annoying or person will the biggest mouth is the winner, even if their plan sucks.

[Inflames]

An idea I can't disagree with, but it would require a 12y/o armchair general detector.

[Vipeax]

No offense, but I really don't see the point in this.

It is 1 of those new features that only add (over)hyping of certain players. Simply because someone is new in a server he doesn't have a damn thing to say because this so called "commander" is an over-hyped player that has (some) fanboys because he is a mod and they ***-lick him.

Incase someone wants to reply something like:

Lulz, you are just jealous blabla.

No, I have owned an active server for a long time (where a fair amount of players have between 5 and 12 million points on the ladders, from normal Renegade game modes, no CTF etc) and I really hated all those features like resurrection of buildings, giving certain people more armor/hp because they are better (way to make the less good play even worse) and worse is even more power (hp, more damage, more funds, ability to buy anything anywhere on the map etc) for donators.

Reborn (the maker) is an awesome program and has contributed many nice features, but this is not 1 of them in my opinion.

Sure, I wouldn't mind if those services were available with an on/off feature for the host, but personally I hate those features and I rather prefer a normal server, options like !donate are nice features though, but when you are changing the whole aspect of the game; giving advantages to people over others, ressurecting buildings; I start to wonder if some people actually care about balance rather than making themselves invincible over others.

[R315r4z0r]

QUOTE (Vipeax @ May 23 2009, 08:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No offense, but I really don't see the point in this.

It is 1 of those new features that only add (over)hyping of certain players. Simply because someone is new in a server he doesn't have a damn thing to say because this so called "commander" is an over-hyped player that has (some) fanboys because he is a mod and they ***-lick him.[/b]

That makes no sense.. the commander can be anyone.. and they aren't self appointed.

And on top of that, you don't have to follow their orders if you don't want to.

[Vipeax]

It can be anyone, who gets the most votes, who is usually an over-hyped person yes.

If you don't have to listen, what's the point in the first place then?

[R315r4z0r]

I already explained that. Just because something doesn't do it to 100% perfection, doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Sure some people will still ignore the orders, but not as many as compared to if there was no commander at all.

Also, I've been elected commander on servers where it was the first time I played on it.

[Mr. Weedy]

Empires + Commander = works (even though usually people don't prefer the commanding because it isn't as much fun as running on the field.)

Empires - Commander = No overall view of the battlefield thus it is harder to coordinate things. And in strategy games there has to be the final one who makes the decission and to prevent arguments on critical moments.

So I would imaginate that Renegade-X needs the one final person too as commander who makes final decissions on things and orders.

[MightyBOB]

No it isn't a necessity, but it is useful sometimes in some situations.

[Spycon_Fighter]

QUOTE (Mr. Weedy @ Jun 5 2009, 05:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Empires + Commander = works (even though usually people don't prefer the commanding because it isn't as much fun as running on the field.)

Empire - Commander = No overall view of the battlefield thus it is harder to coordinate things. And in strategy games there has to be the final one who makes the decission and to prevent arguments on critical moments.

So I would imaginate that Renegade-X needs the one final person too as commander who makes final decissions on things and orders.[/b]

Empire's maps are huge while Renegade's are much smaller... I don't think someone would need an overview

[Mr. Weedy]

I see. I haven't played Renegade so I don't know exactly how it works and plays out.

(And it is EmpireS. )

[GummiBear]

you can't really compare Renegade(X) with Empires, as there is no base building in renegade(X), which is one of the main functions of the commander in Empires(not the only, but one of them), and really a commander wouldn't work well in RenegadeX I think, or rather it would be pointless, there would be in a public game maybe 1% that would actually listen to the commander every 10 game, and organized games like clanwars you don't need an commander elected officially in the game

[Ban4life]

QUOTE (GummiBear @ Jun 14 2009, 11:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you can't really compare Renegade(X) with Empires, as there is no base building in renegade(X), which is one of the main functions of the commander in Empires(not the only, but one of them), and really a commander wouldn't work well in RenegadeX I think, or rather it would be pointless, there would be in a public game maybe 1% that would actually listen to the commander every 10 game, and organized games like clanwars you don't need an commander elected officially in the game[/b]

1% every 10 games, avarage 40 ppl a game (optimistic), so that would be a whopping 4 ppl every 10 matches!, meaning 1 every 2,5 matches!
In the busy times you can get 50 avarage, so that would be 5 ppl every 10 matches, 1 every 2 matches!




wow

[Demigan]

QUOTE (Ban4life @ Jun 15 2009, 08:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1% every 10 games, avarage 40 ppl a game (optimistic), so that would be a whopping 4 ppl every 10 matches!, meaning 1 every 2,5 matches!
In the busy times you can get 50 avarage, so that would be 5 ppl every 10 matches, 1 every 2 matches!




wow[/b]

Yeah, but the point is: if a player listens to a commander once, he is likely to do it again as teamplay usually gets the job done. Ofcourse, if the commander fails, which is likely in the first attempt, most likely the player stops listening. It just takes some type of player that listens to someone else.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.

[coffeeburrito]

As a long time player of the original Renegade, I can safely say it isn't Empires. I don't think having a commander would add anything to Renegade. It's not just that people wouldn't listen, but people SHOULDN'T listen. The commander in Renegade would have no situational awareness (requires level overview) to provide overall strategy, which would amount to micromanaging anyway due to smallish Renegade maps. Furthermore, he can't really enforce locks on what people purchase with their money, because unlike Empires, it is the players' money instead of the team's. What else could a commander do?

If you're going to add some organizational layer on top of the game, what you REALLY want is small squads. However, even that might be overkill. Without any kind of revive mechanism, it'll be hard to keep those players together.

In conclusion, I think Westwood had it right. No commanders, no squads. I personally don't know what they planned for Renegade 2, but maybe else somebody can elaborate on that.

[Demigan]

QUOTE (Coffeeburrito @ Jun 16 2009, 03:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As a long time player of the original Renegade, I can safely say it isn't Empires. I don't think having a commander would add anything to Renegade. It's not just that people wouldn't listen, but people SHOULDN'T listen. The commander in Renegade would have no situational awareness (requires level overview) to provide overall strategy, which would amount to micromanaging anyway due to smallish Renegade maps. Furthermore, he can't really enforce locks on what people purchase with their money, because unlike Empires, it is the players' money instead of the team's. What else could a commander do?

If you're going to add some organizational layer on top of the game, what you REALLY want is small squads. However, even that might be overkill. Without any kind of revive mechanism, it'll be hard to keep those players together.

In conclusion, I think Westwood had it right. No commanders, no squads. I personally don't know what they planned for Renegade 2, but maybe else somebody can elaborate on that.[/b]

Wrong, I think.
A commander might not be the answer, and neither will a squad, which they are already implementing (the squads, not the commander). This will probably help a great deal. Since communication will be a lot easier. Instead of having to type everything, you will be put into a squad in which you can teamspeak. It might not be a perfect method, depending entirely on how the squads are divided. But it's a great start. Simply being able to communicate between people without having to type will help the game tremendously. And keeping it to only specific people will add to it in larger games where it would be totally crowded with people trying to talk.

In renegade, one of the reasons I think teamplay is so shortcomming is because communication is difficult and relatively slow. You can't really do it out in the field, there's always the chance a sniper is aiming for you, GDI has it even harder with all the SBH preying (although they rarely fire).

A commander will probably be elected more on favourism then his leadership. A little while ago there were servers where you could give recommendations to people once a day. Recommendations are quite a good way to let people try and achieve something, and people will listen rather to someone with lots of recommendations then someone without. However, I saw small bands of friends do the following: these players were usually quite good, but they just logged on, recommended all their friends, and THEN started playing. This way, the entire band of friends would earn at least 6 recommendations a day, or more depending on the size of the friends that did it. The same will apply to the commander. The person chosen would be chosen by some friends, they've got most people voting for one person.
So, a commander should be chosen randomly. At the end of the game, you could have a tiny vote on how well the commander did it. This vote would have 3 answers: 'appalling', 'Neutral' and 'Good'. The avarage is going to be taken. Then this is going to be put into a statistic, just a number behind the amount of times this commander was appalling, neutral or good. This way people will have a lot better way of knowing who is a good commander or not. Everyone will vote, and if a small group of friends start crying 'he's good' but nobody else saw any commanding going on, then he will either go on 'neutral' or even 'appalling' if he should have made commands or only gave bad one's. If you don't vote, neutral will be filled in automatically.
Dunno if such a system is a good one, or even easy to implement, but it's a thought. If you think you can do better, which I think some of you can, just write down your own idea.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

QUOTE

As a long time player of the original Renegade, I can safely say it isn't Empires. I don't think having a commander would add anything to Renegade. It's not just that people wouldn't listen, but people SHOULDN'T listen. The commander in Renegade would have no situational awareness (requires level overview) to provide overall strategy, which would amount to micromanaging anyway due to smallish Renegade maps. Furthermore, he can't really enforce locks on what people purchase with their money, because unlike Empires, it is the players' money instead of the team's. What else could a commander do?[/b]

I agree completely. If the commander had access to a map overview, rebuilding structures, and firing superweapons, then he'd be legitimate. But all of the features I've named are not good for Westwood's C&C Renegade.

There are a few servers out there with team commanders, and the system I think is pretty overrated. Not only do people not listen to a commander who poses no real advantage in the game, but like you mentioned, players shouldn't always blindly follow the orders they get. In the servers I'm talking about, anybody could be a commander, and a lot of the time they come up with very lousy tactics. Although teamwork is a good thing, bad strategies are often a lot worse than doing your own thing.

[R315r4z0r]

QUOTE

As a long time player of the original Renegade, I can safely say it isn't Empires. I don't think having a commander would add anything to Renegade. It's not just that people wouldn't listen, but people SHOULDN'T listen. The commander in Renegade would have no situational awareness (requires level overview) to provide overall strategy, which would amount to micromanaging anyway due to smallish Renegade maps. Furthermore, he can't really enforce locks on what people purchase with their money, because unlike Empires, it is the players' money instead of the team's. What else could a commander do?[/b]

Contrary to what Fobby just said, I utterly and completely disagree. I couldn't disagree any more than I currently do.

You're basically saying that it's completely impossible to have any form of strategy in this game, scratch that, in anything, because you simply don't have an overhead map? Situational awareness requires nothing except an analytical mind and a responsive and engaging group of teammates.

Guess and check. That's all it is. Strategy is basically the planning of future events between you and your opponent so that you will gain an advantage down the line.

If anything, Renegade's style gameplay not only allows for, but promotes MORE strategy than in any actual RTS game ever made. (Chess doesn't count.)

[Demigan]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Jun 17 2009, 03:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Contrary to what Fobby just said, I utterly and completely disagree. I couldn't disagree any more than I currently do.

You're basically saying that it's completely impossible to have any form of strategy in this game, scratch that, in anything, because you simply don't have an overhead map? Situational awareness requires nothing except an analytical mind and a responsive and engaging group of teammates.

Guess and check. That's all it is. Strategy is basically the planning of future events between you and your opponent so that you will gain an advantage down the line.

If anything, Renegade's style gameplay not only allows for, but promotes MORE strategy than in any actual RTS game ever made. (Chess doesn't count.)[/b]

Besides that, wasn't there going to be an overview of the map on which you can draw your lines for how you want a strategy to go? I don't know, but even without adding the places of all friendly players it would be an incredible useful tool for anyone designated as commander. If friendlies are added on this map, a commander would be able to give real-time commands and strategy's. I've been infiltrating bases numerous times when all you need is one person to help you. A commander could help get people who have infiltrated get in touch and coördinate their attacks. Just think of the amount of times you needed cover for your nuke in Walls, with all the SBH's running around in the base but all going after different goals, placing the nukes one after the other instead of all at the same time. Or snipers shooting away their entire load just before you place your beacon, giving you no cover.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.

[coffeeburrito]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Jun 16 2009, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Contrary to what Fobby just said, I utterly and completely disagree. I couldn't disagree any more than I currently do.

You're basically saying that it's completely impossible to have any form of strategy in this game, scratch that, in anything, because you simply don't have an overhead map? Situational awareness requires nothing except an analytical mind and a responsive and engaging group of teammates.

Guess and check. That's all it is. Strategy is basically the planning of future events between you and your opponent so that you will gain an advantage down the line.

If anything, Renegade's style gameplay not only allows for, but promotes MORE strategy than in any actual RTS game ever made. (Chess doesn't count.)[/b]

Let me clarify then. The game is completely capable of having strategy. The point was that commanders would have minimal responsibilities given the nature of Renegade, and they would be underequipped to adequately provide immediate tactical advice like "Watch out, there's a guy coming down that tunnel". That leaves them with the sole responsiblity of responding to player alerts ("enemy incoming left side!" -> "ok everybody go to left and defend"), and giving general plans of attack ("ok, you 3 sbhs go sneak in, we'll use diversionary attacks"). However, that is nothing that could not already be accomplished with basic communication skills and a little mutual respect. If you want to rush the base, just ask who wants to join you. If nobody wants to help rush, a commander telling them to won't really change that.

Fobby had it exactly right with this:

QUOTE ((NE)Fobby(GEN) @ Jun 16 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are a few servers out there with team commanders, and the system I think is pretty overrated. Not only do people not listen to a commander who poses no real advantage in the game, but like you mentioned, players shouldn't always blindly follow the orders they get. In the servers I'm talking about, anybody could be a commander, and a lot of the time they come up with very lousy tactics. Although teamwork is a good thing, bad strategies are often a lot worse than doing your own thing.[/b]

[DXR_13KE]

make it flow the way it flows now, no commander needed.

edit: who's up for a flying coffin + SBH rush sh**int units left and right in the enemy base??

[[NE]Firestorm]

nah flying coffin+bunch of chems is more deadly

[R315r4z0r]

QUOTE (Coffeeburrito @ Jun 17 2009, 02:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let me clarify then. The game is completely capable of having strategy. The point was that commanders would have minimal responsibilities given the nature of Renegade, and they would be underequipped to adequately provide immediate tactical advice like "Watch out, there's a guy coming down that tunnel". That leaves them with the sole responsiblity of responding to player alerts ("enemy incoming left side!" -> "ok everybody go to left and defend"), and giving general plans of attack ("ok, you 3 sbhs go sneak in, we'll use diversionary attacks"). However, that is nothing that could not already be accomplished with basic communication skills and a little mutual respect. If you want to rush the base, just ask who wants to join you. If nobody wants to help rush, a commander telling them to won't really change that.[/b]

Hmm... you seem to have the wrong idea of what a commander is..

They aren't an omnipresent god giving you orders based on what you're doing because they know and see all.. they are a single person's mind organizing ideas and providing the most efficient plans for what is thought to be happening. The person with the most analytical mind and most efficient plans would be the person that gets elected to be commander.

If the 'commander' knew all that was happening all of the time, and was able to give orders to the rest of his team to dodge enemy attacks... then there is simply no fun in that. The fun that's in making strategies in Renegade is predicting what the enemy is going to do.. not knowing what the enemy is going to do and acting accordingly. Sure it might be fun to receive orders based on your immediate surroundings.. orders on how to act and what to do next.. but that's now what this thread is talking about.. and that's not what Renegade is about anyway.

I suggest make a commander that is able to give 'official' orders. Players would always have the choice to follow them or not. However something should be given to reward the players that follow the orders... like a set number of points. (however, ideas may have to be made to prevent this from being exploited into a point farm.)

A commander shouldn't have any extraneous physical abilities to those on the field. He should merely be given the power to organize plans and perhaps use that planning board feature that was mentioned earlier (if it's still in the game.)

This is not to say that only plans made by the commander are the plans that will happen. If a commander says ftank rush, everyone else can go stank rush if they felt like it. The idea is to not force players to submit to someone's will, but give an official team position to someone that may or may not make a difference in team organization. There is nothing to lose by making a simple official team position, so I don't see a reason to not do it... other than the extra work it might take.

One positive thing I can see from making a commander position is that newer players that don't know what to do when they first start playing can use the commander's orders to gain a grasp of the game's flow and learn how to play and react to the battles.

Accomplishing a plan always feels better if it is organized in an official and thorough manner. A complex and organized plan for the entire team is much more fun that saying "whoever want's to rush, get a tank and come with me!."

[havoc9826]

For those of you who don't know, the Black-Cell servers had a working commander system for years. Being able to give team orders and warnings was very useful at times, when people were willing to listen. It certainly helped for strategy, as everyone could more easily notice the ppaged orders, and if people didn't like the current commander, they could vote for a new one. Commanders could also access some extra features that only existed on the BC server at the time, such as a proximity healing aura, enhanced !c4 that told how many mines were in each building, and a few other things. Reborn (the person) has tried to replicate some of the functionality. You can find that thread here, a Black-Cell forum thread here, and an archive.org backup of the BC wiki here (go into the All Out War section and scroll down). If you never experienced it yourself, you shouldn't just dismiss the idea. Done properly, this system works, and assuming both sides get capable commanders, it can improve the experience. Hell, if there's a way to hook into the waypointing system already in UT3 (the pop-up arrow pathways), it'd make rush instructions that much clearer.

[Vipeax]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Jun 20 2009, 10:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suggest make a commander that is able to give 'official' orders. Players would always have the choice to follow them or not. However something should be given to reward the players that follow the orders... like a set number of points. (however, ideas may have to be made to prevent this from being exploited into a point farm.)[/b]

Rewarding people for that sounds so sad....

*cutted whine talk*


Can't keep people from having an opinion and to have this added in a later state (this should not have any priority for a first release at all) with the OPTION to turn it on, sounds great, but then I'd wish this would not be setup on the official server... really I do.

[Jointn00b]

well my experience with renegade is that people almost never listen to 'good' idea's. most of the time when something is suggested peeps just ignore it and go on with camping or trying stuff on their own. And no i don't talk like an ass in game. i always suggest things, and when i give a command like building needs repair most of the time i'm the only one repairing lol. that's my experience with renny and that's why i've stopped playing for now.

[R315r4z0r]

QUOTE (Vipeax @ Jun 21 2009, 07:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rewarding people for that sounds so sad....

*cutted whine talk*


Can't keep people from having an opinion and to have this added in a later state (this should not have any priority for a first release at all) with the OPTION to turn it on, sounds great, but then I'd wish this would not be setup on the official server... really I do.[/b]

Why is it sad to get points for playing the game? They do it in Battlefield..

[Vipeax]

QUOTE (R315r4z0r @ Jun 21 2009, 08:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why is it sad to get points for playing the game? They do it in Battlefield..[/b]

I don't see the link between playing the game & having to be someone's bitch.

You play it for fun, right?

[R315r4z0r]

Yea, and it's fun to play as an organized team and functioning in a real military like manner.

..more so than just going off on your own and doing whatever..

[Demigan]

How about instead of points, you give money to everyone that follows your orders?

For instance: there will be a pot that will be the teams money. This money will only be available to the commander, in a way. This pot will simply fill up with every credit the harvester and refinery get, and perhaps a tiny portion of the total points gathered by the team. half of this pot will be removed after 5 minutes, so after 5 minutes, all money earned for the team-pot during that time will be halved, unless this half is used/given away. Just think of it as if the money goes to other bases who need it.

This money will only be usable as a reward for following orders. The amount that can be earned for following an order should be small, and a limit to money given to a player for every so many minutes should be installed to prevent a commander simply giving all money to one player by giving him a lot of small orders.

The commander cannot in any way give this money to himself ofcourse, only by charity of players that followed his orders and decide to give him something could he earn that money. You could give him the option to buy tanks with the money, but the commander himself would be unable to drive or fire (unless he's a passenger) any vehicle he buys that way for 10 minutes or so. That way he can fund rushes and have more control on team-actions.

Another option he might get: discount on certain items. To incite people to buy the right characters/tanks, you could set up a disctount for those characters. Say you want a gunner rush, the commander will then put a discount of 100 credits on Gunner, everyone will be able to buy Gunner for 100 credits. For every Gunner that is bought, the money of the discount will be deducted from the team-pot. The discount can only last untill there is money in this pot. As the team-pot won't be earning lots of money through points, this pot should be stragetically used, otherwise it would be depleted and useless in no time at all.

Perhaps it would be fun that if the harvester is destroyed, a portion of the team-pot would be used to rebuild it. If not enough money is available, or even none, it wouldn't matter at all. Just think of another base having his teamearnings halved after 5 minutes and the money will go to building your new harvester. It would be an even greater incentive to keep the harvester alive if the money you get for a reward come on top of the money you get anyway form the harvester.

The amount of players in game would then matter a lot. This team-pot would gather money as if he was earning practically no points, so solely receive money from the harvester and refinery.

I don't know how much time it would take to make such a system or a better one. But anyways, it shouldn't be in the first vanilla version.

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[havoc9826]

QUOTE (Demigan @ Jun 23 2009, 04:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How about instead of points, you give money to everyone that follows your orders?

For instance: there will be a pot that will be the teams money. This money will only be available to the commander, in a way. This pot will simply fill up with every credit the harvester and refinery get, and perhaps a tiny portion of the total points gathered by the team. half of this pot will be removed after 5 minutes, so after 5 minutes, all money earned for the team-pot during that time will be halved, unless this half is used/given away. Just think of it as if the money goes to other bases who need it.
This money will only be usable as a reward for following orders. The amount that can be earned for following an order should be small, and a limit to money given to a player for every so many minutes should be installed to prevent a commander simply giving all money to one player by giving him a lot of small orders.

The commander cannot in any way give this money to himself ofcourse, only by charity of players that followed his orders and decide to give him something could he earn that money. You could give him the option to buy tanks with the money, but the commander himself would be unable to drive or fire (unless he's a passenger) any vehicle he buys that way for 10 minutes or so. That way he can fund rushes and have more control on team-actions.
Another option he might get: discount on certain items. To incite people to buy the right characters/tanks, you could set up a disctount for those characters. Say you want a gunner rush, the commander will then put a discount of 100 credits on Gunner, everyone will be able to buy Gunner for 100 credits. For every Gunner that is bought, the money of the discount will be deducted from the team-pot. The discount can only last untill there is money in this pot. As the team-pot won't be earning lots of money through points, this pot should be stragetically used, otherwise it would be depleted and useless in no time at all.
Perhaps it would be fun that if the harvester is destroyed, a portion of the team-pot would be used to rebuild it. If not enough money is available, or even none, it wouldn't matter at all. Just think of another base having his teamearnings halved after 5 minutes and the money will go to building your new harvester. It would be an even greater incentive to keep the harvester alive if the money you get for a reward come on top of the money you get anyway form the harvester.

The amount of players in game would then matter a lot. This team-pot would gather money as if he was earning practically no points, so solely receive money from the harvester and refinery.

I don't know how much time it would take to make such a system or a better one. But anyways, it shouldn't be in the first vanilla version.

Yours sincerely,
Demigan.[/b]

QUOTE (havoc9826 @ Jun 20 2009, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For those of you who don't know, the Black-Cell servers had a working commander system for years. Being able to give team orders and warnings was very useful at times, when people were willing to listen. It certainly helped for strategy, as everyone could more easily notice the ppaged orders, and if people didn't like the current commander, they could vote for a new one. Commanders could also access some extra features that only existed on the BC server at the time, such as a proximity healing aura, enhanced !c4 that told how many mines were in each building, and a few other things. Reborn (the person) has tried to replicate some of the functionality. You can find that thread here, a Black-Cell forum thread here, and an archive.org backup of the BC wiki here (go into the All Out War section and scroll down). If you never experienced it yourself, you shouldn't just dismiss the idea. Done properly, this system works, and assuming both sides get capable commanders, it can improve the experience. Hell, if there's a way to hook into the waypointing system already in UT3 (the pop-up arrow pathways), it'd make rush instructions that much clearer.[/b]

QUOTE (BC Dragonade Wiki)

• Healing Aura: All friendly units within 20 yards of the commander will recieve a small amount of health regeneration.
  Teamfund donate: Allows the commander to donate credits from the teamfund to any player on their team. !teamfund donate nick amount or !tf donate nick amount
  Buy vehicle command: The commander will be able to buy vehicles for their team. Bypasses the vehicle limit. !buyveh vehname (GDI: humm-vee, mrls, apc, medium_tank, mammoth_tank, orca; Nod: buggy, mobile_artillery, apc, light_tank, flame_tank, stealth_tank, apache)
  Buyveh can be used directly from the teamfund. Example: !tf buyveh humm-vee or !tf buyveh 1.
  Command !order/!o. This is a page only command that sends a page to everyone on your team, telling them your order.
  * Example: /r !o Get more stealth tanks for a rush.
  Command !warn/!w. This is a page only command that sends a page to everyone on your team, warning them of whatever.
  * Example: /r !w Nod is rushing our pp with flame tanks!

[/b]

[Demigan]

oh, ok, sorry

[DevilofEchoes]

squads=yes! commander=no!; i like the idea of running around in an actual coherent group of people; sometimes the "ffa-ish-ness"(free for all) bugs the crap outta me; there are times where i like it and other times where id like tactics being used,instead of everyone just running all willy nilly. its mostly just the infantry cause the vehicles mostly force you to work together as a team.

and not everyone has to hop into a squad if they dont want to, but the ones that do at least we will have established a "common" goal. and some squads will do like an "unofficial" leader (as he just says the goal; no offical leadership recognition required), that tells them what theyre going after, some squads will just democratically chat vote real fast, and other squads will just suck horribly awful and everyone will die. and if you disagree with the squads goal then voice it and say why with good reason, or just dont be in that particular one, or dont be in one at all. lol. i know there are times where i am soloing, like yesterday where i held down the entire nod base with a single mammy on islands for 10 minutes while the 8 people on nod kept trying to rush my tank on the airstrip. lolz. was a good fight. i had like 15%hp left at the end.

about the only teamwork communication i hear is when says mammy/flame tanks rush go go go. lol. and everyones already in mammys and/or flame tanks. and the people that do squads may streamline their tasks within a squad, becoming more effective, engineers will go straight for demo-ing a building when we rush it while the others kill the infantry or hold off the vehicles. other people get to volunteer suicide runs. as the obelisk can only shoot so many people within the 15 or less seconds it takes to get in a building. i know ive voluntarily jumped on landmines for others. the point of the squad is not for them all to survive but to accomplish their goal through teamwork, surviving is just a bonus.

*and sorry for bumping an old thread. =/ but i was afraid if i made a new topic, id get lambasted for there already being one. and i did see other threads about squads but this one seemed the most relevant to my little shindig.

[jujooguppy]

Anyone who has played this game since launch (and before) Knows that team work does and can happen all the time, without an over rated Commander position. This isn't battlefield. a commander is not needed. Making it like battlefield would, well, make it like battlefield, which wouldnt be nearly as enjoyable.

The time spent programming in, setting up bug testing and balance testing a commander can be used for something actually useful like polishing the game in the first place. Don't waste time on something the game truthfully has no place for.

[S31Apoc]

commanders are nice, but we first need VOIP & Team Commands.. VOIP would work really well in renex IMO

[TigerXtrm]

What I remember from Renegade mostly is that the teamwork came mostly natural. The entire fun thing about it was that there was no need for having a leader or discussing tactics before the game. You just played and went with the flow. You stay in groups, work together in fights and generally if you saw one person move out to attack a base you all went. The MOVE OUT command was particularly useful for that.

Renegade is great as it is because it doesn't NEED leadership. In a good match the entire team can come together and act like one unit. Teamwork without communication like that is exclusive to Renegade and it still brings tears to my eyes whenever I see it happen.

[noxdrac]

QUOTE (S31Apoc @ Oct 4 2009, 01:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

commanders are nice, but we first need VOIP & Team Commands.. VOIP would work really well in renex IMO[/b]

hear hear!

All renx needs is radio commands and the voip. Squads would instantly shun newer players cause it would stack them in with veterans who wtfinsult their asses once they make a tiny mistake, or can't leg it like the old players. personally i think the l4d/ut3 voip is pretty good for renx, just add a little speech bubble on the player list for who's talking, or show a small image to the left of your screen, with the name, just so u know just who the hell is talking to you anyway.

Teamspeak/ventrilo/whatever the f* your using is good enough for now with the groups chosing their own members, but once everyone can go voip, it will burn your ears and mind not knowing just who is yelling for repairs, and getting in the distraction apc instead of the real one will also be a huge waste of that freshly bought superweapon.

Squads didn't work for me in bf1945, didn't work for me in bf2 or bf2145 and sure as hell won't work for me in Renegade-ehx. The simple reason for squads not working in renegade-ehx is that its much more intense, and objectives switch quicker then any bf game or whatever.

*lols at the idea of an engi squads in canyon* REPAIR TEH BARX *6 guys run to barx to repair leaving all other buildings unmanned*

also, on the topic of commander in the Empiresmod style, I like the idea, but not in ren-x. it would be awsome if once they've perfected ren-x they could make something like it, but don't even think about messing with ren-x in such a way. it would, quite literally, be spit out by the players. Ren-x as the remake of renegade, and if u want a tibdawn fps, call it tibdawn fps and then make it.

THIS IS ReNX people. voip was lacking in renegade, it was supplemented by 3rd party voip clients. the option is there to put it in, great, lets do it, but lets not add things that change the gameplay with 980 degrees only to find the origional concept was lost.

remember, teamwork wins this game, and if voip helps, put it in, its a feature, making commanders and squads, that changes the pace of the game entirely.

[TigerXtrm]

I'm not sure if having a VOIP ingame is going to be that good of an idea. Especially with teams sometimes ranging in the 20's or 30's on a good day, it would be like being on a 30 man teamspeak without anyone to control it.

[noxdrac]

QUOTE (TigerXtrm @ Oct 4 2009, 02:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not sure if having a VOIP ingame is going to be that good of an idea. Especially with teams sometimes ranging in the 20's or 30's on a good day, it would be like being on a 30 man teamspeak without anyone to control it.[/b]

Call me naive, but I think it will be manageable allright, the same problems never occurred in ut3 with 20ish players in a ctf/team deathmatch unless someone put his voip to voice activated and had a friendly chat with his mom while playing ut3. In the end he got punished for not cleaning his room while we where all laughing at him. good times good times.

Anyway, i think there are some ideas that can fix this from happening, just.... can't... think of one right now:P

maybe only push to talk? that should atleast stop the chat while their doing something usefull, such as shooting, jumping around, attacking, rushing etc.

Don't worry about that to much, natural leaders are bound to step forward and use voicechat in a good manage-able way. if you find that voicechat is indeed messing up the game, or someone is beeing a prick,

console-mute_playername ftw!

[S31Apoc]

in aa3 you can mute the ones you dont want to hear.. it also has a speaker beside there name in the score menu you can click to change volume to low, hi & mute for each player..