Systems: Daily Commander Vote - Page 3

Tikuto · 2012-01-12, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

This won't work, all you need is one zerg outfit to elect their members everyday. Even if you have thousands of players they can still easily sway the vote since there is no organization otherwise.

Yea but making players only select one Outfit member amongst a whole continental list to multiple-select from can affect players all-round.

A list of multiple players to select from. You select a 'team' and not a single person, and the vote is accumulated by the game so decide 'team' selection.
Where the Outfit may only select one member, highest-ranked by default, can affect that wannabe commander. That Outfit player who is never selected and is so damn good at being a leader may have to consider leaving his Outfit.

Ultimately, this 'Active Commanders' continental list where only one Outfit member can be selected could greatly change the power of Outfit simply because the pre-selected highest-rank Outfit member (single) amongst other players (multiple) has the ability to be selected for his confidence and renown as a leader. If he can't he'd leave to join the 'commoners' or form his own Outfit to prove his ability. It would be almost as if the game-system and the players work together for sieving-out the best leaders of the game, which in return improves everyone's gameplay. Outfit leaders should eventually become the forefront team of continental commanding, by average, every time.

Can you see how this can make Outfits and imperial leadership in general a much more impressive thing?

holy crap this is actually awesome idea

Hamma · 2012-01-12, 11:15 AM

I see no point at all for an overall commander. Regardless of what is appointed people and outfits will do their own thing to support the fight. Continental broadcasts and chat imo are a thing of the past. It was simply a popularity contest that encouraged asshattery.

This mission system will replace it and people can select empire wide missions if they want to or do not want to.

Grognard · 2012-01-12, 02:28 PM

Personally, I like this concept in its base form, and given that I also agree with a lot of they nay-sayers... Ill tell you why I like this concept, and how I see its posibilities. I'll try to be organized...

My reason for liking this idea... is because of the difference between personal charisma vs. bestowed authority. I believe the nay-sayers are concerned about bestowed authority, and I agree... A big outfit will bully the vote, so I agree with them. However, if implemented correctly, and the outfit leader sucks... end result is the same, hes back to just commanding the outfit. So, I think that it should have zero to very few perks, per se.

I see this as more of a strategic commander, than a tactical commander, that can inspire (especially the zerg), or be ignored, as people see fit. The true game bestowed authority would still be the commanders who have earned their tools by advancing the skill tree in the current system.

There are still some perks though, that could signify someone that has the recognized charisma, or community recognized "leadership", to be "trusted" by enough people to be "voted in", so to speak. This system would not be a single daily leader system, rather a confidence threshhold system... In fact, a given elected leader does not preclude another... It simply becomes a way for us to say, via willingness to vote, that you do a good job. Thereby signaling to other players, that s/he probably has something going for them, that we find useful to further the goals of the faction.

There are still some possible problems like the big outfits voting their own guy in all the time, which can be pre-sniped by not allowing votes by same outfit members to count, or some such method that attempts to produce a truer confidence-based system. Also, how many votes are required to become "elected"... how long does the term last... should the vote be a toggle (allows immediate recind of vote)... is there a minimum population per continent to even allow a vote... etc. In the end, even a vote that is 100% for a single fantastic super dude, does not require anyone to follow him. I still argue that it is likely there is a reason why a person would be voted in time after time. This could be viewed as a playerbase, faction specific, reward for someone who gets things done right, and leads well, consistently. Not, however, a substitute for those who have access to skillset tools.

So how do we know who this guy/gal is? This is where the military "flavor" NewSith mentioned comes in... I myself prefer a prefixed moniker of "Field Marshal", or "General" to the screen name, as it is a rank, and militaries often have more than one field officer in a given area, so it would not be strange to see more than one elected strategic grade officer. Also, it would not hurt at all for an outfit leader to get the prefix by his whole oufit voting for him/her in. It even makes sense from an orgaizational size point of view anyway. Even if s/he sucks... history is replete with high ranking idiots, which we all hope will not be the case here (LOL, I have a sick hope for at least one, cause they are halarious...). It would even help the real leader spot his big numbered outfits.

So in summary, I think this idea has a lot merit, but only if it does not, in any way, circumvent the folks who devote their time and effort into developing their command trees. These are the folks that have, rightly, the true authority to use the tools of the trade, and in a perfect world... these are the guys/gals who will get voted in because of their skills with those tools. I think this can work beneficially for everyone. Folks... we will have commanders with tools to do so, but some people are... leaders.

Arrow · 2012-01-12, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by NewSith

(No offense nor trolling)
Do you realise that it sounds as if you want to command, yet this system can rob you of this posssibility? This argument, which was now brought by several people, can pretty much be viewed like that.

The whole point is - Nobody's "notorious by default". And if 1500+ people select a person, then it can hardly be a grief. The one selected is selected because people want him, not just because somebody likes to press random buttons.

PS: FFS, people, I am the Russian here, yet I am the one recounting the meaning of democracy to you!

This would only be true if there were no such things as outfits. But seeing as the outfit that has the most zerglings you could say that theyd have a biased vote to vote for their outfit leader. FLAWED IDEA seee ya good bye and good riddance.

Tikuto · 2012-01-12, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

This mission system

ah yea forgetting about that

Bittermen · 2012-01-12, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Hmr85

We had a few threads on this earlier in the year and I was all for the voting method. But after looking back on it. No

Voting would be a horrible Idea. It would definitely get abused. The Largest outfits with the biggest player base would always be in charge. I do however, really like Cutterjohn's Idea though. That sounds like a great way of doing it.

And this is a bad thing? The biggest outfits obviously have the best leadership.

acosmo · 2012-01-12, 04:59 PM

the only leader i will follow is my outfit leader. i believe i speak for the majority when i say this

NewSith · 2012-01-12, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Arrow

This would only be true if there were no such things as outfits. But seeing as the outfit that has the most zerglings you could say that theyd have a biased vote to vote for their outfit leader. FLAWED IDEA seee ya good bye and good riddance.

But why does it work in other games? I recommend reading Grognard thoroughly, he has a point about leaders and commanders.
Also - define "zergfit". With exmples.

Now, personal note:
You are all saying "OMG ZERG OUTFITS WILL WIN!". Okay then I give up. Let leaders of 10-man [OMGLOOKBOOBIES] outfits spam global with senseless meassages telling to go right when there's no right turn.

Originally Posted by Mike33

Americh, m8s,,,,,,,,,,,,

EDIT: For those who plan on saying that I base on PS1 - If everyone's equal in rights, than there're dicks who abuse their rights. Always. Sorry for being militaristic.

Crator · 2012-01-12, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Grognard

GREAT INSIGHT

Very well said!

Arrow · 2012-01-13, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by NewSith

But why does it work in other games? I recommend reading Grognard thoroughly, he has a point about leaders and commanders.
Also - define "zergfit". With exmples.

Now, personal note:
You are all saying "OMG ZERG OUTFITS WILL WIN!". Okay then I give up. Let leaders of 10-man [OMGLOOKBOOBIES] outfits spam global with senseless meassages telling to go right when there's no right turn.

EDIT: For those who plan on saying that I base on PS1 - If everyone's equal in rights, than there're dicks who abuse their rights. Always. Sorry for being militaristic.

Define zergfit? Ghost of the revolution containing over a 1000 players in one outfit. My outfit TRx containing 50. Who will win!? Sturmgrenedier another one containing atleast 1000 player base. It would be to imbalanced in a game where teams are created on a large scale.

Basically what you just said from your last post that my outfit shouldnt qualify because it is smaller. Yet again my outfit did a lot more for TR emerald then a lot of zergfits at times.

NewSith · 2012-01-13, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by Arrow

Basically what you just said from your last post that my outfit shouldnt qualify because it is smaller.

EXACTLY! TRx SHOULD NEVER TAKE COMMAND!

But, being a mature person, I have to ask you to point me at where I said that.

Every coin has two sides. Just like you are saying that Big Zergfits will abuse the system, so I say that Small LOLfits will abuse the lack of system. That's all. And, by all means, I don't mean that TRx is a lolfit, you are far from being casual.

Finally to counter your millionthousandpeople voting at the same time - I tell you:

Commander is rather figurative term. (You still refuse to read Grognard's post, don't you?)
They have to be online to vote.
(Elaborating line 1) Outfits will do as they want anyway. Zerg will zerg anyway. So the point is that somebody must just be there, so he accidentally gets zerg's affection, or even outfits' affecttion if he's good enough, and starts to command. If he can't make it the chain is simple:

*He commands, Outfits refuse -> [OPTIONAL] He insults outfits -> Outfits don't select him anymore
*He commands, Zerg refuses - > [OPTIONAL] He insults the zerg -> The zerg doesn't select him anymore
*Rising Star pops up -> He is advertised enough -> Outfits and the Zerg select him
*If new Commander fails -> Repeat

DviddLeff · 2012-01-15, 05:31 PM

I do not think voting is the way to go.

What I would like to see is Platoon leaders able to join Companies of 3-4 platoons, and whoever joins them together as Company leader gets to be in charge and set Company and Platoon Missions if the Platoon leaders do not set their own themselves. Then the actual commanders decide amongst themselves.

Arrow · 2012-01-15, 05:53 PM

I'd just rather leave political bs out of the game. It's unnecessary and will boast more drama by the egotistical individuals then it will be fun or help in any situation. If there is a commander he cant have any viable powers (obviously) over other players but if you give people the option to act as if he doesnt exist then what's the purpose of even having one? The idea is just rediculous. The people who will be listened to are the people who deserve to be listened to not some twat whose read war tactic books and thinks he's the sun tzu of planet side because he's labeled supreme commander.

SKYeXile · 2012-01-15, 05:54 PM

If there were still CR5's in PS2 only CR's been allowed to vote would be acceptable, it does not give more powers to zergfits since there CR5 per capita is lower than other outfits. PS2 could do something similar, perhaps only max level characters can vote, provided it takes some time to levelup.

Madlaps · 2012-01-18, 09:00 AM

zergfits aren't large because of great leadership.. They are large because they spam recruitment channels and accept anyone who sends them a tell or accepts random outfit invites.

Quantity never equals quality. So why would anyone ever want a vote based system that encourages this?

Squads/platoons/regiments are the way to go. You choose your leaders. If as suggested each leader of a different tier squad/plat/etc gets continental chats - this makes it both player decided on a smaller scale (squads choose their platoons/platoons choose their regiments/etc) and means multiple different sets of players have a say in who has a part in leading the empire. Idiots will be ignored if they are just zergfitting to get reg leader, but atleast there are other 'regiment' leaders who you'd hope might have common sense.

*might*