Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

absence of a commander: why?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • absence of a commander: why?

    Something I have noticed lately, especially last night is that people don't like playing as the Commander. I squad led for the first time last night and people would jump in and jump out of the commander slot just so they could benefit themselves and the squad they were in.

    Now, I am no stranger to the battlefield series, but when did it become the standard practice for players to hop into the CO slot just for the heck of getting a crate or some sort of service?

    Another really irritating thing happened last night and it really pissed me off. The team I was on in one round, (Qui?) started off with its squads all locked. The first 20 some odd seconds of the actual round was filled with players sitting around waiting for a squad to join that was not locked. I mean, there were between 4 and 6 locked squads that consisted of about 3 and 5 men. Now, I can understand chopper squads and Striker squads, but having so many little locked squads, really left a problem for our team during the early part of the game.

    I ended up squad leading later in the match and frankly, I look back and feel that these actions were just early warning signs of a problem with the team itself. We lacked the coordination and wherewithal to play as a good team.



    Interested in listening to guitar playing and a good conversation, look for me on TS.

    "Hope is for the weak. I hope for nothing. I work for things. That is the only way for events to unfold." -Cleverbot

  • #2
    Re: absence of a commander: why?

    That is the reason I started being a Squad leader many moons ago. Someone had to step up and lead, same thing goes for the CO. Why expect someone else to do it? One thing I have learned is the only person you can always influence and change is yourself. Let me be the first one to say, "Thanks for stepping up and taking on a leadership role."

    One thing that can help is to try and drum up some team work on Mumble or TS. Give some ideas get feed back, take charge. You will be surprised what happens when you get that communication thing going.


    A good leader requires both character and strategy. If he is to be without one, let it be strategy. - General Rick Hilliar, Former Canadian Chief of Defence

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: absence of a commander: why?

      Lack of commander probably has to do with the temporary removal of the UAV. As for going CO for a short time just for the benefits of that position (O kit, area attack, etc), i see that happen a lot in PR and i do it myself every now and then if needed.
      Locked squads can be a problem sometimes but i found that a polite request in teamchat will usually get you a spot in one of those squads.

      There is also another easy solution for these issues, lead a squad or step up to be commander.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: absence of a commander: why?

        I hate to say it but I feel the Commander position has been subsidiary to other developments in game development. Over time, this has eroded a key part of the game.

        I often liken PR to Chess and see the Commander the Chess player. However, instead of developing the Commander since the first break from the blueprint BF2 as more important, linearly I have seen an inverse trend where that role has become less important, to the point of it being unimportant. This is a pity for me to see for I felt it a great aspect of the game.

        There was a time in PR's life when a Commander was necessary. Indeed, in a version of PR past without a Commander the team was stuffed and couldn't play. No honestly there was a real deal version you had to choose a Commander and everyone would shout 'who's going for Commander' the thing that they did, I can't remember nor the reason why. Nor can I remember why that was changed. What happened though was after that the Commander took a dive. It seems other developments took place like maps, graphics and gameplay tinkers but to the expense of the Commander.

        Considering my position of likening PR to Chess and viewing the Commander role as critical to Game Development - it is integral to the game on many levels - it would be interesting to hear what the devs had plans for the Commander role in the future.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: absence of a commander: why?

          Originally posted by Buflak View Post
          Lack of commander probably has to do with the temporary removal of the UAV. As for going CO for a short time just for the benefits of that position (O kit, area attack, etc), i see that happen a lot in PR and i do it myself every now and then if needed.
          Locked squads can be a problem sometimes but i found that a polite request in teamchat will usually get you a spot in one of those squads.

          There is also another easy solution for these issues, lead a squad or step up to be commander.
          I do hope the UAV makes a return, and the Laser designated marker makes a return as well.

          I agree with you buf on the locked squads, they are as abundant as players in the server.
          Randy = Ace ! - Warlab
          Level II Volunteer FireFighter
          Level I HazMat Technician
          NYS EMT-B
          Town of Mamaroneck Fire Dept.

          sigpic




          Bring On Project Reality 1.0!!!
          RSS Feeds:Bamboo | | 9/11 - Never Forget |
          Apophis - "TG was created to cater to a VERY specific type of gamer rather than trying to appeal to the greater gaming population.
          Tactical Gamer is not mainstream.
          We are not trying to attract mainstream gamers."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: absence of a commander: why?

            Originally posted by Buflak View Post
            There is also another easy solution for these issues, lead a squad or step up to be commander.
            Agreed Buflak, another startling, nay revolutionary solution would be for a few more people to not lock their squads. I know. crazy right. It's much easier to tell the new guy to start his own squad. Lets take the craziness to a new level. How about TG tagged players and regulars lead open squads and help new players. Utter madness!


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: absence of a commander: why?

              CO... well... Hard to say. Some matches don't really need a CO to work. Some would definitely benefit from a CO.
              It very much depends on the SLs, their ability and will to work together and to communicate. If there's a consensus in the team about what to do, everything is pretty fine.
              If there's not... well... yeah.

              On the other hand a BAD CO is hell! Of course there's the mutiny button, but if there's no one who wanted to take the spot in the first place, nobody will be likely to step forward to mutiny and replace a bad CO.

              The reason why I, for example, won't take the CO is the same as with the SL. Lack of experience. The outcome of this is mostly stuttering (How I love the english language in situations of stress, responsibility and pressure) and a general state of 'Wtf should I do?'.

              But yes, lack of UAV is certainly a factor in the current CO-lessness.
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: absence of a commander: why?

                Originally posted by Taip3n View Post
                I hate to say it but I feel the Commander position has been subsidiary to other developments in game development.
                100% spot on.

                Need coordination between you and another squad? Mumble/MSL.
                Need indirect fire support? Mortars and MSL.
                Need other support? Mumble. Squad. Leader.

                The only thing the CO provides as a direct benefit is a 105/155 barrage or pinpoint airstrike and the UAV. The UAV is currently disabled because it crashes people. Indirect benefits include allocating assets (to your friends) and having loose control over a group of players who seemingly resent you for every choice you make.

                I'm really not kidding on that last point. It might not be intentional, but while commanding a few rounds after release, I heard a lot of thinly or not at all veiled contempt from a loooot of people that the commander was asking for status updates once every ten minutes or ordering people to move in advance of a push. People took a long time or really circuitous routes to their target and responded to me in much the manner one would respond to a mentally disabled person asking why the sky was blue when I asked why they were six grid squares away from their target in the wrong direction. It somehow translated to my fault that I didn't know there was a TOW or whatever in the way that was only discussed over a mumble meeting between two squadleaders as they passed each other.

                Locked squads are talked about a lot, but that's all it ever amounts to is talk because people simply don't want to open up after a long day of dealing with other people's crap at work or in the household. There's really nothing more that can be said about it, it's like playing with all your friends on the same team on a smaller scale.

                Also, just because a squad is locked does NOT mean you need to try and pry your way inside. I took to locking my LEARNTG squads while I was trying to beat the supersniper and general tard attitude out of a couple of prospective regulars, behavior that may have earned them a ban from an admin coming on shift after one of those long days. Two of them are now successfully recovering tards and the third is being beaten within an inch of his supersniping life, and he's changing slowly, by the way.

                Edit lol

                Originally posted by Celestial1 View Post
                UAV will make a return in the next patch, and you may see slightly more CO activity. Most often though, no one really uses the slot because mumble can be used to coordinate between squads much more easily anyway.
                CO has the benefit of having of coordinating multiple squads. Unfortunately, because most players no longer give have any idea what "strategy" or "tactics" means, the CO is rarely used to it's potential and players get irritated at being ordered around because they want to tard rush in.
                Players are more likely to be irritated reciving orders from a player who's very "out of the loop" then they are being ordered to wait. Strategy has no application in PR, and the tactics are all there. The benefit of coordinating multiple squads is, again, provided by mumble without any overhead.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: absence of a commander: why?

                  I won't run a 6 man infantry squad if I can help it. I will lock it at 4 (if I intentionally allow it above that, I may be having those extras in a special supporting role, besides infantry).
                  It has several benefits, one being that it allows for a more efficient spread of manpower.
                  As a side effect, it causes more people to create squads.

                  I don't believe locking squads is a problem that needs solving.
                  Lack of leadership is a problem.



                  UAV will make a return in the next patch, and you may see slightly more CO activity. Most often though, no one really uses the slot because mumble can be used to coordinate between squads much more easily anyway.
                  CO has the benefit of having of coordinating multiple squads. Unfortunately, because most players no longer give have any idea what "strategy" or "tactics" means, the CO is rarely used to it's potential and players get irritated at being ordered around because they want to tard rush in.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: absence of a commander: why?

                    I would play more if the UAV was working.

                    I dont have a problem doing it on insurgency though.

                    "All of you stay frickin high speed. All you stay on your frickin primaries and frickin slay bodies all day long. Good to go" -Combat Ninja lol

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: absence of a commander: why?

                      Originally posted by mat552 View Post
                      Locked squads are talked about a lot, but that's all it ever amounts to is talk because people simply don't want to open up after a long day of dealing with other people's crap at work or in the household. There's really nothing more that can be said about it, it's like playing with all your friends on the same team on a smaller scale.
                      There in lies the rub and the excuse. Many of the long time SL's (Dispo, Nardini, Cougar, Warlab, T-Man etc) are adults with a lot of responsibilities, families of our own, jobs, homes to run, admin responsibilities etc. Yet these players, despite their limited play time, still find time to run unlocked squads a lot of the time to ensure some 'TG' is passed on and new players have somewhere to go. Yet some, who spend countless hours playing PR every day (jealousy here) can find little time to do the same, can't find it in themselves to maybe sacrifice one round to helping others. That to me is....well, I'd rather not say.

                      "Locking squads is not a problem that needs solving"

                      That is your opinion, as an admin with access to more information and simply more time observing the server I wholeheartedly disagree. Lack of leadership is certainly a factor, agreed, but to say that locking squads is not a factor is a transparent defence of your own choice to lock at 4 man inf squads. That's fine, run your squad how you want, however even if I want to run a 4 man squad I will sometimes unlock it and give the slot to someone who needs it. Why because its unselfish and benefits the community. Argue all you like, I've been here a long time, I've admin'd for a good while now and this is a subject close to my heart, i.e. I've devoted a lot of time and energy to it.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: absence of a commander: why?

                        Originally posted by mat552 View Post
                        Strategy has no application in PR
                        Wat.

                        Yes it does. I'm referring to tactics as being squad-level and per objective, strategy being team-wide and per round.

                        Originally posted by A.WICKENS
                        That is your opinion, as an admin with access to more information and simply more time observing the server I wholeheartedly disagree. Lack of leadership is certainly a factor, agreed, but to say that locking squads is not a factor is a transparent defence of your own choice to lock at 4 man inf squads. That's fine, run your squad how you want, however even if I want to run a 4 man squad I will sometimes unlock it and give the slot to someone who needs it. Why because its unselfish and benefits the community. Argue all you like, I've been here a long time, I've admin'd for a good while now and this is a subject close to my heart, i.e. I've devoted a lot of time and energy to it.
                        It's not a transparent defence; what I'm getting at is that it's a short term, short sighted "solution".
                        Lack of leadership is the problem, and the long term solution would be to address that; pointing to locked squads as part of the issue isn't quite accurate.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: absence of a commander: why?

                          Call them out on it and help them learn then? It might not be second nature or easy to anyone, but for some people, it really is a monumental and staggering output of mental energy to lead even a few people for any length of time. These are the people who buckle under any command responsibility, real or imagined. Be supportive of their fledgling efforts. Remember that they are going to fail, spectacularly at first, and that it will take months, years even, to learn to lead. There's no need to tolerate tardery, but there's an underlying attitude that rears its ugly head when someone new steps up, and that's the unwillingness to take a chance.

                          You can watch over the course of a couple rounds that some people earnestly do want to lead an INF VOIP squad, but they're shunned in favor of trying to squeeze into the cool kids club, and they lose heart and fall back into nameless squadmember obscurity.

                          Edit:

                          Celest, my apologies, I was using a different definition: Strategy is how you get to a fight. Tactics is how you win it. I lump large logistics and other huge movements into strategy out of RTS habit. I don't really consider Platoon/Company size units to be strategic.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: absence of a commander: why?

                            I think its time peole make a pledge to do the stuff they find boring every 25 rounds or so, like supplies (if needed) mortars commander. I tried commanding once, but there were too many pubbies on the server and some peole have the attitude of ill do the exact opposite of what you say, just to show I can. Frustrating.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: absence of a commander: why?

                              Third, what do YOU think?
                              Funny you should ask...

                              I think CO is tricky because you, I, we, don't actually want a CO in every game. I don't want a CO in everyother game. Maybe every... third? I want to play a game and have some fun. Deploying to battle and following orders would be tedious (read: unfun) if that's all we ever did, listen to a CO and win/lose based on their decisions.

                              A great many victories have been won by squads working together in squad chat (mumble), no CO required.
                              I'm not downplaying CO and their value, but they need to be able to manage people, which isn't always easy.

                              I prefer a few SLs organizing based on their squads own goals and strengths.

                              But sometimes yes, a CO is the only way to pull a team together.
                              Q: How many members of Congress does it take to change a light bulb?
                              A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its conditions are improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are delusional spin from the liberal media. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?!?

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X