use polling to declare a leader

[kinngrimm]

on several occasions i declared myself as a hater of the polling system. Main reason of it is when i got distracted in midfight to additionaly press 2 on default. I hadn't time to read the chat nor am i in TS yet.

But as we seem to have sometimes a lack of recognizing or acknowleding a lead, we could just poll us one. He must surly accept it but in the end, folks will listen to him more willingly.

[Ishar]

It take too long with the current yes/no options - one poll for everyone on the team? That takes longer than the round itself.

[Chagan_Arslan]

make it an automatic poll between three players with the highest lvl, and only winner of such pole can use voice commands

or something like that

[Arson]

I can tell you right now that I'd have no motivation to listen to the 3 circle-jerking high level players that votes themselves in as an arbitrary leader for a match, and I think you're fooling yourself if many others would either. There's simply no motivation for players to have or listen to a leader in a game when most leaders would be terrible, or most players would think themselves better capable of handling their own tactics.

Now, you could consider adding mechanics to make it beneficial to listen to a leader, but let's not confuse what games SHOULD do and what gamers WOULD do.

[Wiglaf]

He must surly accept it but in the end, folks will listen to him more willingly.

+1
it's a great idea and very well worth the try. it will work for some people, maybe even the majority - i'm a psychology student, you can trust me ;-)

[Webb]

me and my homeboys represent taylor gang erryday so taylor gang or die......................................



most people wouldnt listen to another player because they are so arrogant that they think they can do better themselves and valid points have been made and one is that just because someone is a high level it doesnt make them a leader at all lol

[Chagan_Arslan]

I can tell you right now that I'd have no motivation to listen to the 3 circle-jerking high level players that votes themselves in as an arbitrary leader for a match, and I think you're fooling yourself if many others would either. There's simply no motivation for players to have or listen to a leader in a game when most leaders would be terrible, or most players would think themselves better capable of handling their own tactics.

Now, you could consider adding mechanics to make it beneficial to listen to a leader, but let's not confuse what games SHOULD do and what gamers WOULD do.

im not saying how game should look or what gamers would do, if your talking to me that is

ofc large part of team wouldnt listen but there are those rare occasions in cRPG when a team do something together, having a leader might increase this

and how this mechanism would look i meant that at start of the first round lets say a table would pop up with three guys in it 1. player A 2. player B 3. player C and the team press 1, 2 or 3 and chooses a leader for that map . Now you are playing and you get to know some names, if someone would suck at tactics you would know and you wouldnt poll that guy, if he on the other hand was decent you could poll that guy.

As of now, voice command is avaible to anyone, and if its enabled to all it will be listen to by none, just saying

[lienlook]

interesting idea

[kinngrimm]

I would't poll every round but for an entire battle series, in such way it really becomes clear what spirit and tactics the lead can transfer to his team.
Still he must accept, as it is a responsibility which could be quite stressful, not every player at every time would want it.

@Chagan_Arslan and Arson, in context to autopoll depending on player level i agree with Arson, i wouldn't either, only because someone like me has a lot of time on his hands and can grind some more levels doesn't give him the big picture for leading and thinking of good tactics.

If it is a clan server, it would be them who have majority, no problem, from my site, if a clan is on a another server, they might get the poll, they might not. The beauty of polling a lead is, that the minority usually swimms with it. Another thing i noticed, we allready have several player with a good reputation, as far as i have noticed, players even ask them for advice what to do and people listen. Problem is new people don't know them, but over time they will. Another thought to that case again, it is ganging up on the lead, they don't have the choice to say no, but they should.

Perhaps you can do it in the follwoing way.
Before a player starts on a server playing, he has to confirm if he wants onto the a candidat list, from there xy random lead candidats will be taken onto the poll list. Then people poll.

[Kophka]

The way it used to work : There was a tick box on your character site that you'd select to nominate yourself as commander. Commander in-game was automatically given to the highest level person on a team, that had selected to be a candidate. Nice, easy system. Not that he was always the best commander choice, or knew what he was doing, but it was clear who the server had selected by the message : "SoandSo is now your commander!".

Players can choose to follow him or not, there's no way to force it. But if the majority choose to, then even a bad idea can turn into a victory. People that choose not can probably keep playing as they like, no biggie. Implement this again, along with repopulating the public Team Speak 3 servers provided for us,
and we may see something interesting happen.

[Grey]

Leaders is silly: There are only 2 gamemodes: In one gamemode, we simply try and kill as many oposing team as possible, in the other we all try to attack/defend a set point: Since everyone knows the conditions of victory, and theres no secondary objectives that need filling, short of opening doors and gates: We dont need leaders.

[Joker86]

I already thought about it a bit, and have a suggestion:

As we all know that votes almost never succeed, voting commanders just won't work. By the way I don't know how the voting option can be modified at all, and if it can contain more than two options. If it was restricted for 2 options it would make no sense at all, as there should be more than 2 candidates to vote for. And a single vote for each candidate with "yes" and "no" would take too long, and would be unfair for those being the last to be voted. (unless the system can wait with the result until the last vote has passed  )

So I thought about another system: a forum vote!

Players who are willing to candidate for a commander role can field in a thread, and then a vote will be added, and let's say the ten players with the most votes become commanders. They PM their nickname and cd key to chadz (I know, PM  :roll:  ), and he gives them commander right, as soon as they log in with the particular character. (I think the commander feature should be bound to certain characters, to help the players recognizing their commanders).

Commander rights means: he is the only one in a team being able to place flags, and players don't need to join a batallion to see them, they see them always. And the arrow, too. And then there is another important feature: he gets an additional chat key, to write messages onto the screen of the players where usually "The poll has been rejected" and "Khergit Khanate wins" pop up. This way you can make those players follow, who actually are willing, but don't follow the teamchat at all. I know this feature is easily abused, spamming the screens of players with bullshit, that's why I planned a forum vote. So better vote for people you trust in 

And for those cases of hardship not willing to follow team tactics at all, the commander can be muted always. 

The commander features are only enabled, if two or more commanders join a server. So autobalance has to always put them into different teams. If there is only one commander he can't do anything, as it would be unfair for the other team. If there are more than two commanders, the order of the forum votes decides. So the commander #1 in the forum would ALWAYS be the commander, commander #2 only if he isn't in the same team with commander #1, and so on...

I think this is a good solution to provide the community with some commanders, give them actually some use ( = screen messages, so only those players don't follow the team tactic who really refuse it. The other players, who didn't pay attention till now, will be "cought" by this system  ), and probably improve the gameplay.

If you think those screen messages are "too much" we can just make a special chat colour (orange or whatever) either as alternative to the screen messages or as replacement. Of course the screen messages are only for "emergency cases" to tell players to "stop" or "fall back".

[huscarl_johnson]

anyone who is capable of orchestrating pub players (charisma, infamy, whatever) doesn't need this. It's conversely useless for everyone else who would use it. You really think adding in a poll option would suddenly endow players who win it with legitmate authority on a team? Christ.

Anyone who remembers BF2 will remember that it was overwhelmingly used by players to score artillery kills. Anyone trying to actually 'command' would be ignored or told to fuck off. You can't expect any order out of pubs.

 Honestly, if you want to lead or be led, just join a clan.

[kinngrimm]

@huscarl_johnson we got something in common, we both speak about systems of personal believe. In youre case "Christ", in my case "voting".

[Grey]

Anyone who remembers BF2 will remember that it was overwhelmingly used by players to score artillery kills. Anyone trying to actually 'command' would be ignored or told to fuck off. You can't expect any order out of pubs.

 Honestly, if you want to lead or be led, just join a clan.

Bigtime "fuck offs" to commander, untill he dropped a humvee on you! 


Seriously, just use TS or Vent or Mumble with your friends if you need more teamwork, but as it is, if ur highskill and other highskills are near you, you WILL work together to eliminate enemies, so I dont see why a group command is going to work better than each guy playing to his personal best style