Suggestion: force commander if nobody is voted in

[Ryz]

Yeah I know, a lot of people probably disagree on this, but still.

Noticed a few things:
- In many smal(ler) games there is no commander
- Sometimes people vote no against every commander suggestion just to block the team from having a commander...
- Sometimes people vote in 'perma afk people' (the server admins can come up with some names who are afk for dozens of games a week and verify this).

Anyways. I know there will be a message when a team has no commander, but I also suggest something else:

1) auto select a commander after 'x-minutes'
2) or after voting for various commanders in a row with a no, without a good reason besides to hamper (hard to know why people vote no).
3) vote one in automatically after an 'event' (like perma damage / losing a building

I've seen games where an cruise missle  / buff / emp could make the difference between win and lose, but the team still 'argues' about a commander. I can understand people don't like some people and vote no, but if this happens a few times in a row with every other persons it's not something against the individual. 

For example today we were losing / having a hard time and I suggested some commanders and all got voted no. After a while, we were losing, someone suggested me as a commander. Again there were some no's and I asked the 'no people' to volunteer instead if they voted no every time. They changed there vote to yes. A minute later I was commander and did an offensive buff and a cruise missile and the game was over (while we were stuck for quite a while with several mammies shooting ref). I assume we would have lost if we kept on doing the same.

The enemy team also had no commander and I even explained a person on their side some stuff about it cause he didn't know, but they also didn't select one. Seen this happen a few times on low(er) pop games.

Alternative idea:
Show who votes no, would also have people (re)consider their vote!

I'dd like to hear your feedback.

[Madkill40]

Another alternative idea, if a commander has not been selected after 10 minutes the game will draw on the top 4 highest scoring players for the team at that moment in the match and players can only vote for who they want for Commander by pressing F1, F2, F3 or F4.

There isn't a "No" or "None" vote.

That way players have to pick someone. (Which typically will be somebody who knows how the game works)

This person cannot "opt-out" of commander themselves after 10 minutes UNLESS somebody votes another Commander in to replace the current Commander.

If the 'Commander' seat becomes empty then another F1, F2, F3 & F4 vote appears once again drawing from the top 4 highest scoring players for each team.

Forcing teams to have a Commander. 

Edited February 21, 2018 by Madkill40

[Ryz]

Also perfectly fine with this option @Madkill40. Personally I don't mind who the commander is, but it's sad to see games where there is nonee since it makes a huge difference.

Also I think people need to get educated about the Commander thing a bit. Last week someone said: "This commander thing is shit..." cause he thought he could only set waypoints  Ten minutes later he figured that there was a offensive buff and a cruise missle after we learned him some tricks. Within minutes Nod lost (on Outposts, yeah really :P) cause the tanks blocking our base got bufed. GG!

 

.... I was on Nod btw... 

Edited February 21, 2018 by Ryz

[j0g32]

I think there should be no option to vote against a commander, UNLESS you (edit: or someone else) volunteer(s) yourself to take their spot, i.e. compete for the position.

However, a commander should always be able to resign voluntarily. The commander can only be forced out of office, if another player challenges the incumbent and wins by majority vote.

For example at the start of the round, everyone interested in acting as commander can apply within the first 5-10secs. Slightly weighted by last game scores, a commander is then chosen randomly. This should help to favour experienced players take the lead, but not elitism, where only the top 4 players are able/forced (?!) to command.

If no commander is active, the first/only one to apply will automatically become commander (without vote!).

This is pretty much how Battlefield commander system worked.

[Cephyrus]

Hey all

Since i´m not good with writing code or modeling stuff  i will stick to things i can do
And such things is giving feedback.

First of all i like the idea of "force choose" a commander. I think it´s not hard to implent this kind of feature, but we need to work out some things first.

 

13 hours ago, Ryz said:

1) auto select a commander after 'x-minutes'
2) or after voting for various commanders in a row with a no, without a good reason besides to hamper (hard to know why people vote no).
3) vote one in automatically after an 'event' (like perma damage / losing a building

@1) Yes auto select will probably the "best" solution. After 3 mins the player on each team with the highest score will be the commander by default.
But why after 3 mins? and not like 4 mins or 5 mins or 10 mins or maybe 2 mins? well it´s simple the first 1-2 mins is like rushing/deffending the base/harvy after that time (normaly around 3 mins) people start to "organize" things like getting hottys/techs or vehicles. Thats the moment where there is a "gap" or "break" on each team and the player with the highest score will be voted as commander. But why highest score? Well the player with the highest score managed to get the harvy killed or maybe a armor break on a building or shot down like 4 engis running to the team harvester and protected it or to make it short... helped the team with a "better" kind of attack or deff then probably most of the own team does...

tl;dr: 1) the player on each team with the highest score will be choosen by default after 3 mins IF NOT any commander is voted at the beginning (within 3 mins)

           - On PUG matches the commander was choosen the map before and stay the commander unless someone will take the postition.

 

Suggestion: the CP timer starts ticking after 3 mins (the point where a commander is choosen by default) so every commander have the chance to "counter" early rushes with (deff) buffs from the enemy team to prevent like massive arty/rocket rush within the first few mins. CP ticking at minute 3 will be starting on a normal parameter if all buildings are alive (since every building your team lost you will get +1CP/s more) so in some cases the ticking after 3 mins will be higher. (we need to keep an eye on this so no bug will pop up in cases a team lost a building the first 1-2 mins)

 

 

@2) see point 1) IF NO commander is voted in the first 3 mins a commander will be choosen by default.
@3) not "a good solution" since we have the same problem like before if the player who will be commander ragequit after the team lost a building and maybe a random afk player will be chosen. the better way is to stick to the player with the highest score.

Suggestion: to prevent "abuse" by the player with the highest score to just not use or waste CP or doing nothing as commander the team can vote an other commander by electing with far less "yes votes" VS "no votes". Like you will need in that case 2 no votes for every yes vote but why 2:1 rotation with commander elcetion? Normaly it´s the other way around. It´s simple... we have many players here who are playing in a group of 2 or more ppl so these groups can "block" other peoples vote by their voting since normaly you need more yes votes. (it´s not the case everytime, but some people don´t like other people and just "counter vote" to prevent a elections just to "fuck the person up").  In the case of a commander, you will need more no votes to prevent changing the current commander. The commander don´t need to "worry" about any kind of votes if he is doing the job right. (wish that would work on political elections that simple... )  So yeah people will think twice if changing a commander is a good or a bad idea.

 

14 hours ago, Ryz said:

Alternative idea:
Show who votes no, would also have people (re)consider their vote!

Nah... that´s not "fair" in a voting system, even if those "no-voters" are most of the time the same people... It´s your own decision to vote yes or no and not your task to judge people by their vote

 

14 hours ago, Madkill40 said:

Another alternative idea, if a commander has not been selected after 10 minutes the game will draw on the top 4 highest scoring players for the team at that moment in the match and players can only vote for who they want for Commander by pressing F1, F2, F3 or F4.

Remeber... to much information poping up on the screen on the same time will people overstrain...
To much to read = to less time to handle things and people will notice a vote but will act like "screw this i will just press F1" or "i will ignore this, they others will do the job for me"

On the other hand.. yes a voting with like more then 1 or 2 people would be cool but... you can do it in the left corner the size of the "radio coms" but then it will be "to small" to get enough attention and to press binded keys like "1-4" bound to fast weapon switch will be "bad" in the moment you are switching your weapon midfight...

 

1 hour ago, Ryz said:

Also I think people need to get educated about the Commander thing a bit.

It´s not about the commander... you can read the "how to use commander power" hints on the same menu but people are "overwhelmed" in general how to handle things like commander buffs or how to stop the harvy... ( yes yes yes girls and boys... you need to SET A WAYPOINT for the harvy and then tell the harvy to STOP. if you don´t want teh harvy to get killed everytime BUT remeber... every harvy that respawns is A NEW HARVY. so if you stoped the harvy but it got destroyed you need to wait till "the new harvy" respawned and to stop him again. The harvy don´t remeber whe last thing you said to him... it´s like working with people on the same workplace but you need everyone to tell what to do even if it´s the same job )

 

I was thinking of just "doing" a tutorial on how most of the "mechanics" in RenX works...

Like a tutorial of how to:

-mine the base safely

-sneak into enemy bases (safely)

-use your advantage from every inf class/ vehilce class

-compensate your disadvantage (like artys can´t shot downhill as long as they are staying on high gradient)

-counter enemy units

-use spies (seen shotgunner spies asking for ion/nuke to kill AGT/Obe)

-use commander mode

-disarm nuke/ion  (no no no ... shooting a nuke with a soldier gun won´t work )

-reach those "mimimim this ion/nuke is glitched" - spots (seriously... i´m playing long enought to know that "spacebar" is for jumping to reach those beacons... but probably not everyone knows that... o__o )

-many more to come...

 

And yeah i´m speaking from "general" tutorials... to help more or less "new" players.

We all know that you can kill a Rave/Sydney or Havoc/Sakura with a soldier (or any other free unit) "pretty easy" if you know how to

Don´t want to see "defenseless new players" running into someone like @Minji or @bentō (if you know what i mean )  

 

But... i don´t know how to "make a video" + my voice is a secret (seems like someone else needs to make a tutorial on how to make a tutorial video for me like it seems )

So at least i´m "good" at giving feedback

Have fun all and stay nice! See you on the battlefield

 

Greetings

 

 

[Agent]

I think my favorite implementation for this has been to display a vote during the pre-game so that people can vote for their initial commander based on the player list. It forces people to remember that they need a commander, and also gives something to do other than fly around the map. Players would nominate themselves so that they aren't forced into the role constantly, and would appear on a list of players wanting to be commander that's almost similar to voting for the next level, except it'd make most sense to organize it by votes.

This shouldn't be too hard to implement, but would require some UI development that is just generally in high demand and low supply around the team.