[Hjacked] Supreme Commander

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Thtb]

Hjacked omfg!

[|-|Cozmo|-|]

i dont think you should have 1 up 2 down thing going on, it will be hard to balance.

If you want to give resourses based on company and doctrine then have a base amount and add MP, Fuel or MUN were nessisary, armour would get more fuel and maybe some extra mun, inf would have more MP and MUN etc.

[DasGuntLord01]

It seems to me that this sort of talk doesn't really help us, especially if we remember  that this game will one day happen on a warmap.  TAV, Availability, and RBs will mean nothing then.

Before the war starts, players should nominated, and vote for, commanders etc.

When the war starts, the commanders should be given a huge slab a resources to divide among their subordinates as they see fit (and probably enforce minimum and maximum values so that everybody gets something.)

Then participating and winning battles give you experience, and maybe spoils of war.

Conquering territory increases your resources income, which the commanders distribute accordingly.

This encourages 1) Chain of Command, 2) Command and Control on the strategic level, and 3) Many great choices when it comes to company composition (which is my main point).

When Command wants to commission a real Armored Company, it set's aside a butt load of Manpower and Fuel, and some munitions, and gives it to an armored player with instructions to do so.

Same goes for Infantry based and Airborne based companies.

[Thtb]

Ohh commander ass-crawlingsounds great!

Maybe it shoud be furture split up to sub-commanders since it woud be a bit much work for one person to hand out Res for 11.382 Players.

Also waht if someone has a fake account or doesent use it at all.

[Duckordie]

1.  5


2.  3


3.  2


4. 27,7%

[DasGuntLord01]

Ohh commander ass-crawlingsounds great!

Maybe it shoud be furture split up to sub-commanders since it woud be a bit much work for one person to hand out Res for 11.382 Players.

Also waht if someone has a fake account or doesent use it at all.

Yes, there would have to be sub-commanders, maybe even a realistic chain of command.  I'll work something out later.

As for fake-account / inactive account, that's why we'd vote it.  Allow me to elaborate.

Before the war begins, players on each side nominate, and then vote for, a supreme commander and a group of generals.  The Supreme Commander and the generals can then promote other players.

Voting prevents the promotion of inactive players.  If a supreme commander has been inactive for a couple of days (just your standard inactivity flag) then one of the generals can take over until such time as the supreme commander is active again.

This goes for any player.  If a Lieutenant Colonal goes inactive, then a General Can promote another player to colonal.

_{Should this be in a different thread? If so, say so, or move it.}

[Thtb]

@Duckordie Thx.

@DasGruntLord01: Sounds very very Good to me!

@Compact Flash: Yeah we will all vote and then it will be unk0wn for reason unkown .


You will not be allowed to vote for yourself i hope!

I hope you will not be allowed to vote yourself.

I hope you will not be allowed to vote for yourself.

[|-|Cozmo|-|]

Ohh commander ass-crawlingsounds great!

Maybe it shoud be furture split up to sub-commanders since it woud be a bit much work for one person to hand out Res for 11.382 Players.

Also waht if someone has a fake account or doesent use it at all.

Yes, there would have to be sub-commanders, maybe even a realistic chain of command.  I'll work something out later.

As for fake-account / inactive account, that's why we'd vote it.  Allow me to elaborate.

Before the war begins, players on each side nominate, and then vote for, a supreme commander and a group of generals.  The Supreme Commander and the generals can then promote other players.

Voting prevents the promotion of inactive players.  If a supreme commander has been inactive for a couple of days (just your standard inactivity flag) then one of the generals can take over until such time as the supreme commander is active again.

This goes for any player.  If a Lieutenant Colonal goes inactive, then a General Can promote another player to colonal.

_{Should this be in a different thread? If so, say so, or move it.}

my prime concern with this was the inactivity malarchy but you have found a way round that so i say, oohraa.

[DasGuntLord01]

You will not be allowed to vote for yourself i hope!

I hope you will not be allowed to vote yourself.

I hope you will not be allowed to vote for yourself.

Of course not.

I'm now trying to work out a system that won't break.  So far I think a simple, three-tiered system.

0th Tier) Supreme Commander (General), who leads a number of Regiments, and his personal company [Think of his personal company as Division HQ].

1st Tier)  A number of Regiments, led by a Colonel, each containing 2+ Battalions, and the Colonels Regimental HQ.

2nd Tier) A number of Battalions, led by a Lieutenant Colonel, each containing 2+ companies, and the Lieutenant Colonels Battalion HQ

3rd Tier) A number of Companies, led by Captains.

 - - - - -

The numbers should be flexible to allow for an organizational scheme of choice, depending on the number of players on each side.  The above scheme, assuming 2 Regiments with 2 Battalions with 2 Companies, all with HQs allows for 12 companies on each side as an example.

We can add extra tiers (Corps, Armies, and Army Groups) if we start getting thousands of players, and if our war map is sufficiently massive.  Otherwise we just start increasing the number of companies in a battalion, battalions in a regiment, and so on.  For example, having 3 of each would yield 30 companies on each side (27 companies, and 3 'HQs').

_{[I think my maths is right.  You get the idea though, even if it isn't.]}

[Unkn0wn]

We're planning on getting rid of the resource system and changing to a 1-resource or 2 (independant) resource system .

[DasGuntLord01]

Well I'd love to see how that would work. 

Adds more Epic Simplicity, I suppose.

[|-|Cozmo|-|]

We're planning on getting rid of the resource system and changing to a 1-resource or 2 (independant) resource system .

its was you that said "and while we are at it lets get rid of resourses!" (in a sarcastic manor, when trying to rebuk AMPM's and my own platoon idea...

 

[Thtb]

Woud be intresting if the supreme commanders coud choose who vs who;).

Or at least how will fight back the attackers if there are more than one defender
(for the sake of even-ness) and then give that guy a bounus or wahtever depending on the battle (small report).


WANT EIR NOW !!!

[Bonte]

a way to make uneven battles a lot evenier...would be to have the outnumbered guy have the same popcap of the two against him combined...without that oneven matches are pointless....

by popcap i mean ingame popcap

also have timers based on how DUG IN a company is.......like if ive been in the territory 1day/turn i get 2 mins of set up.....and an extra 2 mins for every extra turn ive been int he same territory...

[DasGuntLord01]

I think armies should have to invest resources in digging in.  Each "Dug-In" point would increase the amount of deployment time.

Woud be intresting if the supreme commanders coud choose who vs who;).

Or at least how will fight back the attackers if there are more than one defender (for the sake of even-ness) and then give that guy a bounus or wahtever depending on the battle (small report).

This could also be the resposibility of lesser commanders.

Also, I'm not a fan of simply giving a guy more stuff if he's done well.  That's why I'm proposing the rank system.  Yes, higher ranks will get more stuff, but they MUST look after their subordinates.  Yes you get more stuf, but more stuff means you need to make more decisions.  If you make good decisions, the returns are epic, and you win wars.  If you make bad ones you lose wars.

[Akranadas]

It would be cool if Supreme Commanders could hand out medals and bonus' to their subordinates through winning or nice playing.

[|-|Cozmo|-|]

that would be real nice... and if that commanders side won they would get a medal for leading their side to victory....

[Thtb]

Lets collect medeals until it effectly can suck up more shoots than a Tiger front armor!


(Medaealls are made out of metall. A lot of medalls means a lot of Metall. A lot of metall is Armor.)
/Worstsenteanceeverend.

[Akranadas]

We could use the medals from Company of Heroes and Opposing Fronts, but give them a different meaning. Something Like:

For the Americans as an example;

Expert Infantryman Badge



Gain a Kill to Death Ratio greater than 1.50 with an Infantry Company.

Bronze Star



Win ten games in a row

Parachutist Badge



Get 6 Squads of Airborne to Veterancy level 3

Medal of Honor



Given on a match to match basis on what units do what. (or something)

[Ucross]

Very nice