Purchasable Tagging Grenade

[MrSunshine]

A purchaseable tagging grenade that takes up the same slot as beacon/airstrike would be pretty awesome. Would work a lot like how the Commander Mod binoculars currently work, except in the form of a grenade.

It would be great for tagging targets in tunnels or groups of vehicles, the visual team targeting really makes a difference in teamplay and it helps a ton when coordinating what target to focus-fire on.

[Terekhov]

WTB SBH/stank tagger. Makes them visible from farther away for a bit when stealthed, and behaves normally when unstealthed

[Agent]

Seems like this would be unnecessary if Yosh still plans to implement the commander stuff into the base game.

[Terekhov]

That's assuming every game you're able to a) Have a commander and b) Have a competent commander

It'd be good to have ways for other players to contribute in a similar way. What are the downsides?

[RoundShades]

That's assuming every game you're able to a) Have a commander and b) Have a competent commander

It'd be good to have ways for other players to contribute in a similar way. What are the downsides?

There is technically a way to do some medium-difficulty coding, and integrate the commander mod to a default player prior to a vote.

Just have commander default to first player on team with score of 8k. Assuming Agent still is hooking score to events, or even before that by just creating a 1-time event that does the jog of checking score internally.

That way, every team has commander. If Sub-Commander's still work, make the first 3 people to reach 8k score get them so odds are 1 of the 3 are interested in using "binoculars or q-spotting or direct-orders" to do commander-like things.

Of course, leave in the function "vote commander" and "commander passing power to new commander" (all still in Yosh's code I think and hope). Whoever gets commander first can pass it to someone they know can use it, use it themselves, or a team can vote someone in, but most times 1/4 the community makes a better commander, than the absence of a commander.

[Ryz]

Commander sounds good, but not based on the amount of points. Why? Noticed this many times before:

- take a map where you can shoot the enemy from a great distance (Whiteout, Complex for example)

- camp the hill with one arty / mrls

- enemy camps the building with 1 / 2 repairs

- second arty / mrls gets added

- more repairs get added

- people keep pointwhoring and the building goes never down

People shouldn't be promoted for pointwhoring, but for archieving stuff / working together. If 5 arties move in and a strike a building all together the situation will be:

a) enemy has less time to respond and repair it

b) the attackers will have less points whored

c) the result still is likely permanent damage to the building

[XD_ERROR_XD]

Commander sounds good, but not based on the amount of points. Why? Noticed this many times before:

- take a map where you can shoot the enemy from a great distance (Whiteout, Complex for example)

- camp the hill with one arty / mrls

- enemy camps the building with 1 / 2 repairs

- second arty / mrls gets added

- more repairs get added

- people keep pointwhoring and the building goes never down

People shouldn't be promoted for pointwhoring, but for archieving stuff / working together. If 5 arties move in and a strike a building all together the situation will be:

a) enemy has less time to respond and repair it

b) the attackers will have less points whored

c) the result still is likely permanent damage to the building

This depends. Try reading this article about pointwhoring:

http://www.renegadewiki.com/index.php/T ... ointwhore'

This artical (sometimes painfully) shows why pointwhores do what they do, and how they get away with it. Marathon games may be different but many points still stand.

I've had enough games where a team was completely distracted by a certain threat like Artywhores to only get killed by another threat lurking.

[Agent]

There's actually a tiny bit of reworking going on regarding points, that might discourage classic point-whoring.

I had previously tossed around the idea of using some sort of score-based or recommendation-based rank to select a commander by default, though.

Back on topic though, it'd probably be better to just have q-spotting actually share some sort of noticeable indicator (separate from the commander spotting indicator).

[RoundShades]

There's actually a tiny bit of reworking going on regarding points, that might discourage classic point-whoring.

I had previously tossed around the idea of using some sort of score-based or recommendation-based rank to select a commander by default, though.

Back on topic though, it'd probably be better to just have q-spotting actually share some sort of noticeable indicator (separate from the commander spotting indicator).

Could do all 3, because:

-I still think having a commander that fielded first, is 99% of the time better than having no commander at all for that game, especially assuming they would know who they should give commander to.

-With the upcoming change in how score is obtained, score should be harder to get the "classic way", basically much like how Ryz suggested "permanent damage should reward more than damage to armor".

-I also think that everyone that q-spots something, should use the same code as Yosh's mod, with less visible icons.

-Score-based merits, early-game commander if left unvoted, "veterancy", and late-game bonuses, are all fine and we should at least try it, as long as it isn't score-ends-game based.