What does the fact that no one wants to command say?

[isupreme]

What does the fact that no one wants to command say?

 

It's no fun.

 

Now I know for some people it is a lot of fun, and having a good commander can be a LOT of fun.   I even imagine that someday i might learn enough to enjoy that role.  But, for the vast majority of players it is simply not the game that they want to play.

I seriously think we should give more consideration to turning Commander functions over to the players.    The harvester is the first and obvious role that players could manage.   I also believe many if not all of the commander functions could be turned over to the players.

Why not give all of us more roles to play?   I can accept that the commander functions  further the action towards a resolution of the match.  But the lack of wiling and able commanders negates this for many games.    I would like to see the players with more abilities, and less dependence on a commander.

Edited June 2, 2020 by isupreme

[Gex_str]

If your team loses the game, all blame goes on you
That is a major thing as to why people won't like being a commander and its rooted into the community itself.

Another one is that most people won't even notice that commanders exist in this game unless they'll be in a game with one of them (scoreboard change helped to fix this problem).
Third(which is my main problem): bad UI. You can't just hide all commander stuff into the same tiny menu as taunts and votes(which I only found out BECAUSE I thought of bashing my head at my keyboard).

Also, most commander stuff can be negated by shooting it down. Planes? 3 shots from Ramjet. Cruise? 1 Elite Rocket/1 PIC/Rail/2 LCGs/full load of Bradley and etc. If someone known this, they can easily make commanders only useful at buffing/stopping harvester from daydreaming/scanning(GDI only).

And last thing: at high player count people usually vote for someone they know, so in order to be a commander, you usually need to be a known player.
 And that's where my ranting about commanders ends.

[roweboat]

Yes, of course along with most other aspects of the game. Commander mode needs to be given more prevalence. 

I see alot of people not wanting to command because they are afraid they won't know what to do... when in reality, the only way to LEARN what to do, is to try. 

That's how others such as myself, @Ryz, @RustyShackleford and many others got the handle on using commands, we practiced.

 

I know Commander mode basically began as a bold experiment, but I think it has now become a key component of the game.

 

I'd say its a hell of alot of fun coming into a match with a losing situation and helping lead a team to victory with added help through radar scans, emp's and Buffs.

[Madkill40]

On 6/2/2020 at 4:34 PM, isupreme said:

What does the fact that no one wants to command say?

Too many backseat-commanders..? Here's potentially why as well...

If you are commander you may get criticism on your commanding and by all means, if I'm in voice chat from now on I'll be a total prick to non-constructive criticism players - until people can be civil to one another when giving feedback - because otherwise being the Commander can be quite damaging when a few assholes (who may or may not be regulars or developers) provide the assaholic feedback to the commander in the form of: "really fucking sucked" "so bad" "was not worth playing today"

Fuck you all and your toxic 'feedback'. 

I've witnessed and been on the end of it, its definitely not the game to blame for this one but other players who can't handle losing and justify taking out their frustrations on their Commander in a non-humorous/constructive way

The Commander takes the responsibility of their teams' losses. That's it. Its not their responsibility to be a complaints department during or post-game.

Constructive criticism; Providing feedback of what the commander did wrong, whilst simultaneously providing how they could improve.

If you can provide feedback on how your Commander could improve, then shut the fuck up with reminding somebody of just their wrong-doing in such a horrendous way. 

Don't be a fucking MOBA community. Be a fair one, a friendly one, a growing one.

A Commander can self-criticise themselves as harshly as they want. 

Commanding is fun, its the words of sore-losers that absorb the fun because the fear of loss is more than just numbers in a game.

Edit: Within regards to PUG Commanding. 

 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Madkill40

[Reivax]

i led only.. 2 or 3 times
at least i remember only two games, one on Flakeside (do u remember the famous bike rush?) and another on Arctic Stronghold
after like 65 minutes of hard work, my team finally pushed and won on AS
it was way more difficult on Flakeside, i led the team against bikes, we destroyed the usual bike rush, then we rushed with gunners in forest to destroy HON, we also destroyed REF, and an APC rush destroyed the refinery with ions and tons of gunners

sadly i don't enjoy to command anymore (if u played the game these last months u know why, take a look on the chat and how no one cares about teamwork excepts to whine)

i'm fine with the good memories, but lead a team of 32 players where :
- there are 3 AFKs i can't kick because there are ppl who vote F2 (brainless? hampering? i dunno)
- 10 new players i can't help to explain the game because i've not time and even when i have they don't reply to my DM (even if i told them how to use DMs.. are they non-english speaker? or they don't care about my DMs? i dunno)
- 10 players sleeping and walking around everywhere without doing anything useful for the team, even if they have a good time by visiting maps
- and 9 active players but they can't rush because they are forced to hold the line..

meh



tbh i don't care if ppl complain against me if we lose (at least i'll not be kicked every minutes by some trolls as some other players are)  but it annoys me too much to see my plans fail because no one want to play with me, even if my plans are geniously stupid or surprisly classic.. it's like play a C&C game but you have no kb nor mouse ^^

[Ryz]

There are many games where there is a commander infact... Why are there a lot of games where there is no commander then?

Usually there are a few signs which people who have commanded will notice:
- Early game nobody doing basic stuff (defending harv / mining)
- Team ignoring field when it matters
- 10 sbhs before mines
- generally no reply on teamchat

These are the games where I am not even bothering to command cause it's likely lost. I am pretty sure other 'regular' commanders experience the same. If you've been a commander a few times (and play the game in general) you develop a sense of the situation. Commanding can be fun if you get the team with you, but is totally annoying if you are just talking to a wall... And no I am not expecting everybody to join a rush, but if I call out mines 10 times as a player and get no reply, I think thrice before commanding....

[isupreme]

Friends, Ren X players, countrymen, lend me your ears;

I come to bury Commander, not to FIX him.

The evil that Commanders do lives after them;

The good is oft interred with their bones;

So let it be with commanders.

 

By William Shakespeare

 

(from Julius Caesar, spoken by Marc Antony)

 

Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;

I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.

The evil that men do lives after them;

The good is oft interred with their bones;

So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus

Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:

If it were so, it was a grievous fault,

And grievously hath Caesar answer’d it.

Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest–

For Brutus is an honourable man;

So are they all, all honourable men–

Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral.

He was my friend, faithful and just to me:

But Brutus says he was ambitious;

And Brutus is an honourable man.

He hath brought many captives home to Rome

Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:

Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?

When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:

Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:

Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;

And Brutus is an honourable man.

You all did see that on the Lupercal

I thrice presented him a kingly crown,

Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?

Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;

And, sure, he is an honourable man.

I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,

But here I am to speak what I do know.

You all did love him once, not without cause:

What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?

O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,

And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;

My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,

And I must pause till it come back to me.

 

While i tend to agree with many critics of commander,  I point to the opportunity the game has to give these powers to the player.

 

#1.  Harvester control.    Make this a vote.

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by isupreme

[Syntharn]

i think players have come to expect too much out of a commander, hence they are also scared of being commanders.
 

[Mystic~]

I was really into learning commanding at one point, and then I simply got voted out of too many games mid-way, I'm not the best, but I'm not awful either. This was just too frustrating for me and it spills into physical life through stress and body tension. I'm talking about people who are frustrated the game hasn't progressed as much as they want, even if we're ahead, people wanting to back-seat command and lead a rush without their commander and no powers in support. Often people just vote so they can get the powers and I couldn't get the position back, they seem to think they can become a hero and buff 2 tanks it solves everything and once the CP is gone they don't care for anything anymore.

I played one game of X-Mountain as GDI and unfortunately we got locked in base, it had to happen to one team, I spent most of the time being sniped in base and the problem with using any of the support powers is that you have to place your character in harms way of everything... you end up with your cp being maxed and you can't use anything because it requires line of sight. I've had several people !noob me just because CP is too high or something like a cruise missed when being placed under fire.

I think giving harvester control to the team so someone diligent can operate it if needed is a good idea because you get harassed for not babysitting this part of the game. I also think Spy Plane or Smoke/EMP could be something that is shared so an operation can go ahead without the commander or if he's killed on route.

I also don't like it when people don't respond when plans are made... players, including people in tanks have to be capable of grouping up, following instructions and allowing the support powers or the tank armour to do its job, else I get games like Islands which become another base-lock and it's no fun and lots of pressure.
 

[Reivax]

17 hours ago, Ryz said:

There are many games where there is a commander infact... Why are there a lot of games where there is no commander then?

Usually there are a few signs which people who have commanded will notice:
- Early game nobody doing basic stuff (defending harv / mining)
- Team ignoring field when it matters
- 10 sbhs before mines
- generally no reply on teamchat

These are the games where I am not even bothering to command cause it's likely lost. I am pretty sure other 'regular' commanders experience the same. If you've been a commander a few times (and play the game in general) you develop a sense of the situation. Commanding can be fun if you get the team with you, but is totally annoying if you are just talking to a wall... And no I am not expecting everybody to join a rush, but if I call out mines 10 times as a player and get no reply, I think thrice before commanding....

i agree from the first letter to the last dot

 

2 minutes ago, Mystic~ said:

I was really into learning commanding at one point, and then I simply got voted out of too many games mid-way, I'm not the best, but I'm not awful either. This was just too frustrating for me and it spills into physical life through stress and body tension. I'm talking about people who are frustrated the game hasn't progressed as much as they want, even if we're ahead, people wanting to back-seat command and lead a rush without their commander and no powers in support. Often people just vote so they can get the powers and I couldn't get the position back, they seem to think they can become a hero and buff 2 tanks it solves everything and once the CP is gone they don't care for anything anymore.

I played one game of X-Mountain as GDI and unfortunately we got locked in base, it had to happen to one team, I spent most of the time being sniped in base and the problem with using any of the support powers is that you have to place your character in harms way of everything... you end up with your cp being maxed and you can't use anything because it requires line of sight. I've had several people !noob me just because CP is too high or something like a cruise missed when being placed under fire.

I think giving harvester control to the team so someone diligent can operate it if needed is a good idea because you get harassed for not babysitting this part of the game. I also think Spy Plane or Smoke/EMP could be something that is shared so an operation can go ahead without the commander or if he's killed on route.

I also don't like it when people don't respond when plans are made... players, including people in tanks have to be capable of grouping up, following instructions and allowing the support powers or the tank armour to do its job, else I get games like Islands which become another base-lock and it's no fun and lots of pressure.
 

same

i don't need to write a text wall, thanks

[Madkill40]

Just to add, my comment references PUG commanding

[Ryz]

4 hours ago, Madkill40 said:

Just to add, my comment references PUG commanding

Maybe put it in the post as well, would make it a bit more clear... Now people see this AFTER reading your post. 

[Handepsilon]

Quote

I seriously think we should give more consideration to turning Commander functions over to the players

Unfortunately, while this might become less 'bad commander', it will also amplify the 'loser team' chats.

We players just like to think 'it's never my fault', it doesn't matter whether or not the ability to command exists or not. Players will always find something to blame that isn't themselves.

There's also teamhampering potential, but I digress

[roweboat]

Yes the game functioned perfectly fine for years with out Commanders.

 

Commanders are always an easy target to blame. That I say, so what.

 

Regardless. A commander tutorial is desperately needed, maybe even more than the basic tutorial.

 

I'd love to see more people trying to command.

[isupreme]

Quote

Unfortunately, while this might become less 'bad commander', it will also amplify the 'loser team' chats.

We players just like to think 'it's never my fault', it doesn't matter whether or not the ability to command exists or not. Players will always find something to blame that isn't themselves.

There's also teamhampering potential, but I digress

Some serious points to consider.   

    I do think we could handle our own loses if the command functions were broken down into several players.  Especially if they were less dependent on gathering large rush groups that succeed or fail spectacularly.

    Teamhampering does have potential, but is it more than we get currently, when we desperately vote in a bad commander?    I would hope we could work thru that problem.

 

Mystic said:

Quote

I think giving harvester control to the team so someone diligent can operate it if needed is a good idea because you get harassed for not babysitting this part of the game. I also think Spy Plane or Smoke/EMP could be something that is shared so an operation can go ahead without the commander or if he's killed on route.

That's the spirit!

[Handepsilon]

Quote

    I do think we could handle our own loses

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Back in Beta 4 before commander was a thing, there are still people whining about being in loser team

[roweboat]

People will always find something to complain about! it's human nature

[Atomsk]

I'm grateful for whoever wants to command, however the match turns out. I don't see the point of being critical of a commander, however experienced or successful, because it's still him or her taking the risk and taking command.

4 hours ago, roweboat said:

People will always find something to complain about! it's human nature

Haha, probably the only takeaway we have here  I love you all, but sometimes I glance at the chat and think to myself: "whine less, play more". 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Atomsk

[Ryz]

It might be a thing to automatically stop the harv after being destroyed 5 times and when there is no commander.
Will greatly reduce the snowballing effect. 

(maybe something for a seperate topic?)

[MammothMKII]

Hmm, I actually enjoy commanding (occasionally), it's as rewarding as it is difficult, and the main reason why one would shy away from commanding, is as @Madkill40 already said, toxic criticism. Everyone's here to enjoy the game (commander included), and the last thing one wants to hear is that they're losers or that they sucked. One thing we can do as a community is "initiate" people into commanding roles in smaller games for example, where the pressure is lower.

 

On another note, commanding in RenX teaches real life leadership skills, such dealing with high stress situations or toxic team-mates, and claiming opportunities in a narrow window of time.

[Madkill40]

In-Game only the Commander should be able to use... dare I say, in-game microphone.  So each team will have one voice, but the catch is everyone in the game can hear only both Commanders [If Commanders have a mic ready to use] 

Then twitchy self-moderation takes hold of any mic-bleeders. <: Mic isn't necessarily mandatory, but its easier. 

[Handepsilon]

I actually think that might be a good idea to insert some additional method to stop harvester from killing itself when commander is either too busy or nonexistent

The question is probably how. A vote will probably be too long to go through

[dtdesign]

Couldn't we just reduce the ridiculous amount of VP it rewards to the ENTIRE team? Especially in lower player games, the impact is huge and getting a vote passed is sometimes near impossible. I've seen too many teams where there was no commander and every player was pretty much ignorant of any votes or (benefit of the doubt) did not notice them.

Also, I think we should remove the ability for non commanders to start any custom votes. Votes should either be specific to some objective (map change, kick player) or be started by the commander ("Who's in for a X rush?"). This could improve the situation by turning votes into something that really matters, rather than pointless banter of a bored player.

Personally, I have not found players to be generally toxic towards a commander. There are and will always be some lonely jerks that blame others, but putting them aside most players seem to be grateful for someone taking their time to organize things. In the few times I had been commander, players were usually very encouraging, even when my ideas didn't work out. However, in some games it took some real effort to gather enough people for an unknown reason - this could be something worth investigating in terms of improving things.

[roweboat]

14 hours ago, Handepsilon said:

I actually think that might be a good idea to insert some additional method to stop harvester from killing itself when commander is either too busy or nonexistent

The question is probably how. A vote will probably be too long to go through

Maybe an idea if possible:

Could a Ctrl + v command be given to a specific class? I.e engineer?

So if you are an engineer, you would have access to harvester control exactly as a commander does now.

[Atomsk]

17 hours ago, Handepsilon said:

I actually think that might be a good idea to insert some additional method to stop harvester from killing itself when commander is either too busy or nonexistent

The question is probably how. A vote will probably be too long to go through

I think voting is a pretty good option, no? It's a few keypresses away and allows for the democratic vote. Same with people screaming bloody murder about afk's. The vote option is right there? Sometimes the problem exists between keyboard and chair, not the functionality

Giving individuals control over harvester will cause willing or unwilling grief, I think. Above that, I would guess (but could be wrong) that it's the easiest and quickest to implement?

Lastly - what is the desired end-result? Harv returns to the refinery bay seems the most logical thing to do?

This probably deserves its own thread, we're derailing isupreme's original point. I personally decline command votes (for the handful of times I've been voted to), because I'm not at all familiar with the command powers and I feel there's usually a lot more experienced players around, not waiting for me to bumble about. I'm more of a grunt, just point me where to shoot  

[Agent]

18 hours ago, Handepsilon said:

I actually think that might be a good idea to insert some additional method to stop harvester from killing itself when commander is either too busy or nonexistent

Perhaps we could just make it easier to stop the harvester, such as by providing a default stop location so that commanders don't always have to explicitly set one. This default could maybe be set by the level designer, or just set to the refinery.

That would also make a vote easier to implement to stop the harvester if there's no commander or the scenarios you mentioned.

[Xtractor]

52 minutes ago, Agent said:

Perhaps we could just make it easier to stop the harvester, such as by providing a default stop location so that commanders don't always have to explicitly set one. This default could maybe be set by the level designer, or just set to the refinery.

That would also make a vote easier to implement to stop the harvester if there's no commander or the scenarios you mentioned.

Not sure @ refinery if would be good  (Nukes,& Sbh) maybe an  VIP-Base  engineer could have that job 

[roweboat]

6 hours ago, Atomsk said:

This probably deserves its own thread, we're derailing isupreme's original point. I personally decline command votes (for the handful of times I've been voted to), because I'm not at all familiar with the command powers and I feel there's usually a lot more experienced players around, not waiting for me to bumble about. I'm more of a grunt, just point me where to shoot  

I WILL VOTE YOU IN MORE NOW

[roweboat]

@Agent @Handepsilon 

Honestly just giving a vote option to dock Harvester at Ref Bay sounds like a great idea.

[kira]

Or a simple teleportattion to a predefined location in the map. 

With a vote ofc. 

[Atomsk]

14 hours ago, roweboat said:

I WILL VOTE YOU IN MORE NOW

pls no roweboat-samaaaaaa

I'll give it a go on a low-pop match  

I've added a separate thread on the harv issue. 

To get back on track of the commander role, I was wondering if targets designated by the commander have an extra effect. Is that the case, right now? It would be nice to offer players an incentive for carrying out a commander's request. 

[isupreme]

Could players buy an option similar to a group being buffed?

i.e.   I can buy a buff which i can activate for myself.     I could do it alone or get others to join me.

It could be regulated like the command points so it is not too crazy.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2020 by isupreme

[isupreme]

Well my dear thread ..  .. how are you?   You were so popular for a while...  but sadly it was all about the harvester.    [ 07 that result ]

I had hoped together we might discuss the importance of moving command functions to players.   Even an argument about the need for command powers to climax protracted battles would have been fun.     ah well.

you dear thread and I both know that true gaming freedom lies in the abilities given to ALL the players....   but maybe it is too soon for  others.............

[CL Smooth]

On 6/16/2020 at 9:51 PM, isupreme said:

Well my dear thread ..  .. how are you?   You were so popular for a while...  but sadly it was all about the harvester.    [ 07 that result ]

I had hoped together we might discuss the importance of moving command functions to players.   Even an argument about the need for command powers to climax protracted battles would have been fun.     ah well.

you dear thread and I both know that true gaming freedom lies in the abilities given to ALL the players....   but maybe it is too soon for  others.............

Brain droppings I made from long ago:

-=-=-=-=-

eva-Auftragstaktik

-=-=-=-=-

Players vote freely to form an ad hoc squad, or takeover leadership of squad to Attack enemy / Defend own:

Structure (PP, REF, WF/AIR, BAR/HON...)
Harvester
Or beacon would be manually placed by squadleader for these default placeholders:
"Field"
"Tunnels"
"Flank"
"Base"
Other position

Squad beacons show up onscreen and HUD similar to commanders.

Additionally, under commanders, players may be forced to fall in to the C&C style [numerical] groups led directly by commanders (squads), with roles selected and changed by commanders:

1 Alpha (cavalry typ heavy) default defend own Field
2 Bravo (light support) default defend own Tunnels
3 Charlie (Scout, skirmisher) default defend own Flank
4 Delta (special ops) default attack enemy base
5 Echo etc...

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by CL Smooth
ad hoc

[isupreme]

Quote

Players vote freely to form an hoc squad, or takeover leadership of squad to Attack enemy

Now THAT's! what I'm talking about.      We can make decisions faster on the field then a Commander can make sitting in the base.  There is NO Commander that can see all the action all the time.    It is the front line forces that are in the thick of the fight who know the time to strike.  Right>??    When the team forms  a solid front and pushes the enemy forward...     the ITCH to strike is real.    Maybe it is jumping the gun, maybe it is INSTINCT,    born of battle.   Born of battle experience...

I would enjoy an option to purchase additional goodies.    Who doesn't want more toys  right?     Enable me to purchase  a squad option.   Enough players with squad options can join together ....and they can activate together.  

  Bam! lets go.

  Let my team visually see that i have that option.    Let me visually see that they have same.   The action will happen and it will be F.U.N. 

Quote

Squad beacons show up onscreen and HUD similar to commanders.

Sign me up.

[Cheesemonk]

Most games where I volunteer to be commander these days it is to use one or two specific powers. I don't enjoy typing to my team constantly when trying to tell them to do something while I am standing around typing instead of helping do it myself. I will become commander to stop harv, or to cruise missile a guard turret, or to use a buff in low player games, but I don't enjoy all the typing it takes to organize a team. I would love if I could vote to be given just some of the powers, without the burden of responsibility for using them all.

Observation:

Commander role has too much to do; Scouting enemies, controlling Harv, judging the best time to rush, getting in position to call down cruise missiles, typing "y" "/c inspiring text" every 5 seconds.

A new UI would help the wall of menu options and make the role more accessible to new players, but I still suspect there is too much to do compared to normal game-play.

Suggestion:

Introduce sub-commander roles.

Have a harvester sub-commander, who can control harvester.

Have an air-support sub-commander, who can call in cruise, emp, and smoke.

Have a scout sub-commander, who can use radar scans and lights up targeted enemies with "e" just like commander.

Reserve the buffs for the full commander, who can still use all the powers.

Optional:

Commander can select sub-commanders, or players can vote them in.

We can come up with a better name then sub-commander. call them captains or officers or something.

 

[Knive]

If no one wants to learn to command then there will never be a new commander.
If people don't want to command then they are afraid.
If people say that the current commander is bad that commander will never command again going to step 1 again.
If they do try again they will end up to be a good commander soon enough.
If people blame a commander tell them to command next time and see their skill I've never seen a commander blame another new commander only regular people.
People are afraid to be a commander due to lack of knowledge or they are scared being blamed sometimes you can't do anything with just a bar and a power plant, sometimes you can't do anything with a WF and bar due to lack or credits and lack of defense once you're rushing sometimes you can do something with just a bar due to having only one building which has to be defended so it's easier to rush out while at least 40% are defending.

People just don't see the risks at rushes:
-Credits
-Commander points
-Counter rush
-Lack of defender/offensive/supportive infantry which support tanks
-Lack of people during a rush wasting CP (2nd point) and Credits
-Lack of field-control
And the list goes on with some other stuff

So all I want to say by that stop blaming commanders for being bad and let them learn, you might lose your match but that means nothing as long as he had some experience as commander he can continue as commander later on and be like I don't know a good commander I guess.

If you need help as commander just ask another good commander to help him out most of the commanders don't look at the chat they just plan something and go on they don't care if someone just typed "Rush inc".

I'm just going to add a few points what you should do or have as commander:
-Look at the chat and inform yourself about the current situation if you're going to rush soon or if you're not up to date yet
-Try to inform people what to use if vehicles are full: Sydney/Raveshaws, Laser Chain Gunner(LCG)/Gunner or Rockets
-Try to use the map press "M" to open it you can see the whole map including your teammates and spotted enemies sometimes you can also see how many of each class or tank you have
-Don't be toxic to your teammates, you shouldn't be toxic in general if you want to play ren X normally
-If you planning a rush and let's say you want 10 mobius's and you typed "/C I want 10 mobs in ref" once and then just wait and you only see 1 mob in ref and you, then don't be surprised first of all try to use "/r" so the text stays longer than just "/c" and try to say that multiple times lets say each 3 seconds you type that again you can simple just press the "UP ARROW KEY" to repeat the last message you typed in, try to inform the others how much there are right now in that case it would be "2/10" and try to inform them about the plan (Target Buff yes or no if yes which one offensive buff = more dmg and your faster in everything / defensive buff = you take less dmg) 
-People say to not use cruise missile and emp/smoke airstrikes but they don't know why you shouldn't use them, you can use them but to get your enemy back up meaning if you put a EMP strike at the front of your base because there's like 8 Nod tanks they will have to back up making a perfect time to push with your tanks, Cruise missile is to just punish the tanks that aren't moving back EMP just EMPs them giving them another chance, Smoke airstrike is often used when pushing Obelisk of light (Obi) or Advanced Guard Tower (AGT) because they can't fire at you when you're in the smoke now the scan just marks the enemies when they are in line of sight of the scan making you able to track them easily.

If the harvest needs to be stopped stop it.
You should also know that you can open the menu pressing "Control+C."
 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Knive

[Knive]

3 hours ago, Cheesemonk said:

Most games where I volunteer to be commander these days it is to use one or two specific powers. I don't enjoy typing to my team constantly when trying to tell them to do something while I am standing around typing instead of helping do it myself. I will become commander to stop harv, or to cruise missile a guard turret, or to use a buff in low player games, but I don't enjoy all the typing it takes to organize a team. I would love if I could vote to be given just some of the powers, without the burden of responsibility for using them all.

Observation:

Commander role has too much to do; Scouting enemies, controlling Harv, judging the best time to rush, getting in position to call down cruise missiles, typing "y" "/c inspiring text" every 5 seconds.

A new UI would help the wall of menu options and make the role more accessible to new players, but I still suspect there is too much to do compared to normal game-play.

Suggestion:

Introduce sub-commander roles.

Have a harvester sub-commander, who can control harvester.

Have an air-support sub-commander, who can call in cruise, emp, and smoke.

Have a scout sub-commander, who can use radar scans and lights up targeted enemies with "e" just like commander.

Reserve the buffs for the full commander, who can still use all the powers.

Optional:

Commander can select sub-commanders, or players can vote them in.

We can come up with a better name then sub-commander. call them captains or officers or something.

 

I like your idea but they would have to learn to use those powers too and no one will know if they will just waste the commander points due to being new or trolling, I'd rather suggest that normal players can vote to stop harvester which just 50% of people who vote "yes" each time someone votes "no" it's going to increase 5% to the needed votes to "yes".

I commander a lot of games too but I just want to let different people to learn this commanding so they will later enough be full commanders too.
Having new commanders would be great but it's hard to get them.

[Atomsk]

I gave it a try recently, but got voted out immediately after because I was trying to figure out how to park harv. People barely respond to "protect harv" or "reclaim field" or questions. I'll just be a grunt, kudos to whoever wants to command, it ain't my thing. 

[Knive]

2 hours ago, Atomsk said:

I gave it a try recently, but got voted out immediately after because I was trying to figure out how to park harv. People barely respond to "protect harv" or "reclaim field" or questions. I'll just be a grunt, kudos to whoever wants to command, it ain't my thing. 

Just keep trying you will learn it and make them proud soon.
It's ok if you're failing as I said as long as you're learning you will get better.

[roweboat]

With public commanders, you have to earn people's trust for most of them to listen to you.

 

Use radar scan alot, it's cheap and you can reclaim the used CP quickly if your teammates are doing their job.

[Knive]

It is indeed a problem that most of the people don't trust what a lot of commanders are doing and rather go for their KD improvement instead of actually listening to you, by typing Commander messages you should gain a bit of trust/respect especially if your plans succeed.

As @roweboat said use scout planes / radar scans it can assist players greatly.

If you end up getting blamed don't counter them much just ignore them or else they will remember it.

You can always ask another experienced commander for help.

Edited June 27, 2020 by Knive

[R315r4z0r]

I don't like any of the commander aspects of the game. I think it removes a large part of the appeal of Renegade's multiplayer. That is to say, we are a team and we all work together, communicate, strategize and execute as a team. Yeah, sometimes some voices end up as the 'commanding' voice, but that all happens during a match.

I have fond memories of multi-hour matches in the original Renegade where you just form bonds with your teammates. You learn each other's strengths and begin to trust in the ideas of others. If someone was in that match for 2 hours and they had to leave, you actually felt the weight of that.

The commander functions completely remove this aspect from the game. Paired with the increased pace given in the game's balance, there simply is no more room to form those bonds on the fly. Now, you're either a commander and the weight is on you, or you're a no body and should just shut up and listen.

And to be completely honest with you, 90% of the time I just completely ignore anything the commander does or says. It's spam as far as I'm aware.

[Suspiria]

On 7/13/2020 at 2:39 AM, R315r4z0r said:

I don't like any of the commander aspects of the game. I think it removes a large part of the appeal of Renegade's multiplayer. That is to say, we are a team and we all work together, communicate, strategize and execute as a team. Yeah, sometimes some voices end up as the 'commanding' voice, but that all happens during a match.

I have fond memories of multi-hour matches in the original Renegade where you just form bonds with your teammates. You learn each other's strengths and begin to trust in the ideas of others. If someone was in that match for 2 hours and they had to leave, you actually felt the weight of that.

The commander functions completely remove this aspect from the game. Paired with the increased pace given in the game's balance, there simply is no more room to form those bonds on the fly. Now, you're either a commander and the weight is on you, or you're a no body and should just shut up and listen.

And to be completely honest with you, 90% of the time I just completely ignore anything the commander does or says. It's spam as far as I'm aware.

Hmm, interesting perspective.

Quite a few people here call those multi-hour matches "stalemates", and strongly prefer to play more than one map/match in their two hours of free time.
Myself included.

However I really do understand just how it feels to be in never-ending matches.

Back in 2005, I've experienced these 40+ hour battlegrounds in World of Warcraft.
I'd go to sleep, wake up in the morning, go to school, come back home,.. and then the same battle was still going on.
And many of the exact same people were there again, just like me. As if nobody had a RL; we had our own little world.
I've never understood exactly why it felt so epic, but I've always longed back to those days.

At the same time it was also (one of) the world's first MMORPG battleground with 40x40 players in one little spot. Completely unique to its time.
Having said that, I do think that some nostalgia can be based on false attribution, where one (mis)associates such freshness and uniqueness with less or even ir-relevant game traits. Then later when you think back of those less relevant game traits, those emotions and memories that were coupled arise again aswell.

Now, I'm not necessarily saying that such a dynamic on its own would fully explain why I don't feel the same way about Renegade-X as you do.

What happens to me in a nutshell is that I start feeling braindead/bored out of my mind with the non-stop field battles where little else happens except pushing back and fort a little. There's little to no purpose to destroy the other tank, because he'll just get a new one and be back in <2min. Why even bother?

The only way to win such a game was to... well: wait until the other party tires enough that they make some stupid mistake in defense.
Possibly because their top defender(s) had enough and leave(s) the game and nobody effectively takes up their spot(s).
And then you would capitalize on that mistake and the game finally ends, yeeey.

In other words: without leadership, to me it feels like both teams are just trying to bore/tire each other off the battlefield.
And in the meantime have some fun shooting each other with all kinds of stuff, ofcourse.
But that's just that, after a while. And only that, is not really my idea of excitement. Which I do seek in videogames.

I don't just want to win the battle with the other tank.
I also want to win the war.
And I don't always have, or want to invest, 5 hours to do that.
Especially if there are so many great maps to play.

Please do keep voicing your opinion however (perhaps in another topic; not sure if such a discussion would fit here), because I'm still quite curious as to what exactly makes some people long back to OldRen dynamics so much, other than possibly some false attribution here and there.

Because sometimes there are actually still some great (sometimes very subtle) elements in OldRen that definately do fit into RX.
Such as the recently added smooth camera movement getting in and out of vehicles, to give you a tiny example. I love it!
And perhaps one day we'll find a way to make the sky go red on a nuke, and make it rain with the ion. Stuff like that would still be totally legit. (if enough ROI)

Those are unseen/forgotten dynamics that people don't always know how to articulate, but together all those things do create a certain "feel" or even "vibe".

And I wonder if one day RX will be able to better approach that "feel" of OldRen, without having to surrender its own modern, progressive soul in the process.
(which is a real fear of some RX ppl, and understandably so)

[Suspiria]

On 6/26/2020 at 11:58 AM, Knive said:

If no one wants to learn to command then there will never be a new commander.
If people don't want to command then they are afraid.
If people say that the current commander is bad that commander will never command again going to step 1 again.
 

Back on-topic: I agree that social pressure is probably one of the bigger causes of people not taking command.
Meaning that it may be important not to let the skill gap between current commanders and new commanders grow too large.

And I guess that maybe that's where a commander-tactics guide comes in? (which we probably already have?)
Because once people have truly done their homework on this, they will naturally be less afraid to take command me thinks.

e.g. RL analogy: I never feared corona once because I did literally everything I could to protect myself and my famn. Everything.
If I hadn't, I would've been anxious like hell just like the others.

Same applies to commander.
If you are better prepared then you will still fail sometimes, but rather honorably and constructively instead of feeling like an idiot. IMO

Edited July 19, 2020 by DugeHick

[Yeetler]

Not even half the team is listning.

[Knive]

On 7/21/2020 at 7:14 AM, Yeetler said:

Not even half the team is listning.

I agree you need a good team if you want to command normally.

[roweboat]

Basically if you don't communicate clearly and repeatedly, most of the time, the commander will have a bad time.

 

And the newer the team, the more the exact steps taken need to be communicated.

 

I've been learning that the hard way 

[Tytonium]

When you're calling for a gunner rush to meet at bar an hour into the game while losing horribly and only 3 people show up because the rest of the team is new:

 

[Knive]

32 minutes ago, roweboat said:

Basically if you don't communicate clearly and repeatedly, most of the time, the commander will have a bad time.

 

And the newer the team, the more the exact steps taken need to be communicated.

 

I've been learning that the hard way 

Yeah that wasn't nearly the problem in the old times. XD 

But I used it before too so I didn't really change.

The problem about new teams is that they never ask stuff, would be huge if there also would be kinda like a tutorial maybe just a list for the short names and stuff.

Most of the new people don't understand that teamwork is important in RenX so they have to learn it in a hard way by losing and stuff.

Worst outcome is that they don't learn and complain against others why they lost.