Commander YES or NO? - Page 33

Monkeyfiend1 · 19-03-2011, 07:03 PM

Personally I'd like to see commander only open as an option once the server reaches a certain % population. Kicking a server off with 8 players while one wookies out as commander can effect the balance quite dramatically - less of an effect of busier servers though.

That being said I always thought the commander had the potential to bring a lot to the teamwork aspect of the game. More often than not it was poor commanders just running, gunning and using their assets for themselves. But good commanders really can assist squads and improve teamwork.

bombspy · 19-03-2011, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_sneaky_sniper

If they include health regeneration, there's your replacement for supply crate heals

I'm sure most BF2 players could get used to these replacements.

Find the faults! xD

BF2 players would puke if they include Healthreg.

No Commander is one thing, but if they try to replace its functions by "abilities for everyone" they would screw it up for good!

sfscriv · 20-03-2011, 02:47 PM

We will soon have 30,000 views. Not bad.

mgsgrayfox · 20-03-2011, 03:25 PM

like it really matters 1500 votes of this poll are not even actual people

-SE-Jackel · 20-03-2011, 06:01 PM

we do need commanders in the Battlefield.. it is part of the game..using the UAV and other controls was a good thing to get the teams moving in the right direction..Other wise you will have teams sitting in the rears just sniping and camping.. going la te da..

bombspy · 20-03-2011, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgsgrayfox

like it really matters 1500 votes of this poll are not even actual people

1500? But there are just 1.012 people voted for NO... I think you are wrong

wifebeater666 · 20-03-2011, 08:56 PM

No thx.

a_sneaky_sniper · 22-03-2011, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bombspy

Find the faults! xD

BF2 players would puke if they include Healthreg.

No Commander is one thing, but if they try to replace its functions by "abilities for everyone" they would screw it up for good!

I agree. I didn't mean to imply these are necessarily good things, merely that this is likely how EA/DICE views these as "replacements".

If regen has been implemented, the beta will hopefully allow any curious BF2 fans to see whether the implementation has been well thought out.
I know I know.. A lot of people think it's impossible for any kind of regen to be worthwhile, but I believe it can be designed in such as way as to retain the high value/relevance of the medic class.

mgsgrayfox · 22-03-2011, 07:45 AM

ya only way thats possible is if its not 100% health regen %65-down would be suffice... unless the 100% takes literally15 minutes..

sfscriv · 23-03-2011, 06:16 AM

Let's try to stay on topic. Should there be a Commander position leading/supporting each team?

My answer is, "Absolutely, YES!!" I was shocked and disappointed to discover in the Game Informer article that there would not be a commander and very concerned by the "everyone" is a leader at the same time concept. That is a regression of the Battlefield series. A move toward COD pandemonium. Shocker! Wrong direction, DICE.

Dave247 · 23-03-2011, 10:59 AM

I voted yes but maybe instead of removing the commander function altogether DICE should work on a new and improved version of it that is different and more towards what they want.
What some people have said giving some of the power to squad leaders is good. If they have Squad leaders, which they'd better. It hasn't been confirmed yet.

Raquemis · 23-03-2011, 09:40 PM

Not on pubs (unless an efficient way of sending orders is implemented).
It would be a nice addition to the competitive scene, though.

scruffycavetroll · 23-03-2011, 09:45 PM

bf3 with no commander = BC2 v2.1

sfscriv · 24-03-2011, 02:41 PM

Those in favor of a BF3 Commander are almost back to 60% and climbing.

sfscriv · 26-03-2011, 12:14 PM

Keep voting!!

wifebeater666 · 26-03-2011, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xSpyder124

No Commander is a DEAL BREAKER

DICE, if it's not broken, don't fix it!

And in BF2 it was a GAME BREAKER. It was broken and therefore fixed by removing it.

morganoj · 26-03-2011, 07:41 PM

Not a deal breaker but I do like the idea of someone competent organising attacks for those that don't know how to play.

Pain1ntherear_3 · 27-03-2011, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wifebeater666

And in BF2 it was a GAME BREAKER. It was broken and therefore fixed by removing it.

Sounds like an opinion. Can you tell us exactly what you thought was "broken" about it?

powersmoker79 · 29-03-2011, 05:50 AM

When I played BF1942 you would encounter players that you really felt should give other players some directions. It's nice when you have a player that's just extremely experienced and talented giving the team directions.

Secondly I felt that such a player should be an active commander. A player gets his experience by joining the fight.

Giving the commander special tools to make the position attractive was a bad thing. It resulted in players assuming the role that weren't experienced at all.

The viewpoint high above the battlefield resulted in being less aware of what was really going on then if you were on the ground.

Enforcing a hierarchy was yet another mistake.

I see the 'team leader' as someone who is joining the fight like the others. He uses a microphone. He doesn't give 'commands', but he tries to make sure key positions are filled (like AA: hey x, would you get in the AA for a while, we really need that right now?), and helps with the overall strategy ('there is someone sneaking to our back-base all the time, heads up').

Pain1ntherear_3 · 29-03-2011, 11:57 AM

Bump!

sfscriv · 30-03-2011, 05:06 AM

Keep it Rollin'

Prussia-MP · 30-03-2011, 05:08 AM

Uhm, you guys do know that there isn't going to be a commander, correct?

crimsonspear · 30-03-2011, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I BleeD DodgeR BluE

Uhm, you guys do know that there isn't going to be a commander, correct?

Actually I find it hilarious how they are relying on bots to vote for them. There is no way in hell nearly 3000 people have come here to vote on this.

That said if Commander spam is cut back and if he is actually made useful then I wouldn't mind seeing it back.

sfscriv · 30-03-2011, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I BleeD DodgeR BluE

Uhm, you guys do know that there isn't going to be a commander, correct?

Looks like YOU have given up. Here is a quote you may recognize:

"Success is achieved and maintained by those who try and keep trying."
- W. Clement Stone

Pain1ntherear_3 · 30-03-2011, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I BleeD DodgeR BluE

Uhm, you guys do know that there isn't going to be a commander, correct?

Not necessarily true. Just look at the latest interview. They still haven't found a way to make prone balanced without a commander. They already went through all of this in BF2. And as we all are aware, there is no problems with prone and snipers in BF2. Anything they come up with besides a commander of some kind, i'm sure would have been considered and trashed during the development of BF2 in one form or another.

Like ppl keep saying, it's still in pre-alpha stage, right? Plenty of time for professional devs to do whatever needs to be done.

View Poll Results: Does BF3 need the 'Commander' position as seen in BF2 and BF2142?
YES?	2,475	65.11%
NO?	1,326	34.89%
Voters: 3801. You may not vote on this poll

19-03-2011, 07:03 PM	#801 (permalink)
Monkeyfiend1 Forum Guru Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Liverpool, UK Posts: 1,215	Personally I'd like to see commander only open as an option once the server reaches a certain % population. Kicking a server off with 8 players while one wookies out as commander can effect the balance quite dramatically - less of an effect of busier servers though. That being said I always thought the commander had the potential to bring a lot to the teamwork aspect of the game. More often than not it was poor commanders just running, gunning and using their assets for themselves. But good commanders really can assist squads and improve teamwork. __________________ =SM= SneakyMonkeys.com #2 31.193.134.84:25210 =SM= SneakyMonkeys.com #1 31.193.134.84:25200 SNEAKYMONKEYS.COM

20-03-2011, 02:47 PM	#803 (permalink)
sfscriv Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: A Battlefield near you Posts: 3,788 Blog Entries: 3	We will soon have 30,000 views. Not bad. __________________ Vote - Commander Yes or No: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...er-yes-no.html

20-03-2011, 03:25 PM	#804 (permalink)
mgsgrayfox Elite Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 7,251	like it really matters 1500 votes of this poll are not even actual people __________________ Lets see 24 and 64 is....

22-03-2011, 07:45 AM	#809 (permalink)
mgsgrayfox Elite Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 7,251	ya only way thats possible is if its not 100% health regen %65-down would be suffice... unless the 100% takes literally15 minutes.. __________________ Lets see 24 and 64 is.... Last edited by mgsgrayfox; 22-03-2011 at 08:10 AM.

20-03-2011, 06:01 PM	#805 (permalink)
-SE-Jackel Hi, I'm New! Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 1	we do need commanders in the Battlefield.. it is part of the game..using the UAV and other controls was a good thing to get the teams moving in the right direction..Other wise you will have teams sitting in the rears just sniping and camping.. going la te da..

20-03-2011, 08:56 PM	#807 (permalink)
wifebeater666 Forum Junkie Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Denmark - Copenagen Posts: 3,579	No thx.

23-03-2011, 06:16 AM	#810 (permalink)
sfscriv Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: A Battlefield near you Posts: 3,788 Blog Entries: 3	Let's try to stay on topic. Should there be a Commander position leading/supporting each team? My answer is, "Absolutely, YES!!" I was shocked and disappointed to discover in the Game Informer article that there would not be a commander and very concerned by the "everyone" is a leader at the same time concept. That is a regression of the Battlefield series. A move toward COD pandemonium. Shocker! Wrong direction, DICE. __________________ Vote - Commander Yes or No: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...er-yes-no.html

23-03-2011, 10:59 AM	#811 (permalink)
Dave247 Hi, I'm New! Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 1	I voted yes but maybe instead of removing the commander function altogether DICE should work on a new and improved version of it that is different and more towards what they want. What some people have said giving some of the power to squad leaders is good. If they have Squad leaders, which they'd better. It hasn't been confirmed yet.

23-03-2011, 09:40 PM	#812 (permalink)
Raquemis Banned Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 36	Not on pubs (unless an efficient way of sending orders is implemented). It would be a nice addition to the competitive scene, though.

23-03-2011, 09:45 PM	#813 (permalink)
scruffycavetroll Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 3,492	bf3 with no commander = BC2 v2.1

24-03-2011, 02:41 PM	#814 (permalink)
sfscriv Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: A Battlefield near you Posts: 3,788 Blog Entries: 3	Those in favor of a BF3 Commander are almost back to 60% and climbing. __________________ Vote - Commander Yes or No: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...er-yes-no.html

26-03-2011, 12:14 PM	#815 (permalink)
sfscriv Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: A Battlefield near you Posts: 3,788 Blog Entries: 3	Keep voting!! __________________ Vote - Commander Yes or No: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...er-yes-no.html

26-03-2011, 07:41 PM	#817 (permalink)
morganoj Rookie Join Date: Mar 2011 Age: 25 Posts: 483	Not a deal breaker but I do like the idea of someone competent organising attacks for those that don't know how to play. __________________ Join the largest Battlefield 3 Forum \| Battlefield 3 Forums \| Battlefield 3 Online

29-03-2011, 05:50 AM	#819 (permalink)
powersmoker79 Rookie Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 334	When I played BF1942 you would encounter players that you really felt should give other players some directions. It's nice when you have a player that's just extremely experienced and talented giving the team directions. Secondly I felt that such a player should be an active commander. A player gets his experience by joining the fight. Giving the commander special tools to make the position attractive was a bad thing. It resulted in players assuming the role that weren't experienced at all. The viewpoint high above the battlefield resulted in being less aware of what was really going on then if you were on the ground. Enforcing a hierarchy was yet another mistake. I see the 'team leader' as someone who is joining the fight like the others. He uses a microphone. He doesn't give 'commands', but he tries to make sure key positions are filled (like AA: hey x, would you get in the AA for a while, we really need that right now?), and helps with the overall strategy ('there is someone sneaking to our back-base all the time, heads up').

29-03-2011, 11:57 AM	#820 (permalink)
Pain1ntherear_3 Banned Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 5,979	Bump!

30-03-2011, 05:06 AM	#821 (permalink)
sfscriv Forum Junkie Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: A Battlefield near you Posts: 3,788 Blog Entries: 3	Keep it Rollin' __________________ Vote - Commander Yes or No: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...er-yes-no.html

30-03-2011, 05:08 AM	#822 (permalink)
Prussia-MP Elite Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: United States. Posts: 7,949	Uhm, you guys do know that there isn't going to be a commander, correct?