The dead Ideas thread for Commanders and the CRC

Ideas and suggestions for how to improve the Warzone 2100 base game only. Ideas for mods go in Mapping/Modding instead. Read sticky posts first!
Post Reply
User avatar
JDW
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1669
Joined: 18 May 2010, 20:44

The dead Ideas thread for Commanders and the CRC

Post by JDW » 22 Mar 2012, 01:40

effigy wrote:I'm sorry, I haven't read through this post yet, but will this make a 3rd Commander improvement thread? IIRC Rman is already compiling all suggestions.
Good point. Thread Warzoned.
Last edited by JDW on 22 Mar 2012, 21:46, edited 5 times in total.
"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."
-- Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
JDW
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1669
Joined: 18 May 2010, 20:44

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by JDW » 22 Mar 2012, 01:42

The list isn't complete. Will add the rest by tomorrow. If you have any arguments for or against any idea, please voice them, they will be updated to the list. Thanks!
Last edited by JDW on 22 Mar 2012, 21:49, edited 1 time in total.
"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."
-- Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
aubergine
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3459
Joined: 10 Oct 2010, 00:58
Contact:

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by aubergine » 22 Mar 2012, 02:19

Regarding cloaking, there is now an ECM turret which can jam enemy sensors, however I don't think the commander itself should get that ability - instead an ECM droid should be assigned to commander and stay relatively close to it.
"Dedicated to discovering Warzone artefacts, and sharing them freely for the benefit of the community."
-- https://warzone.atlassian.net/wiki/display/GO

User avatar
JDW
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1669
Joined: 18 May 2010, 20:44

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by JDW » 22 Mar 2012, 02:26

aubergine wrote:Regarding cloaking, there is now an ECM turret which can jam enemy sensors, however I don't think the commander itself should get that ability - instead an ECM droid should be assigned to commander and stay relatively close to it.
It's not available by default yet, it needs to be activated like a mod. Though, you never know what the future holds.
"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."
-- Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
aubergine
Professional
Professional
Posts: 3459
Joined: 10 Oct 2010, 00:58
Contact:

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by aubergine » 22 Mar 2012, 03:19

Another idea to the pile:

Allow commanders to designate multiple targets at the same time, based on the units assigned to the commander. So, if assigned units include bunker busters and cannons, the commander would target structures for the bunker busters and tanks for the cannons. It might be that the max number of simultaneous targets increases with command turret or CRC upgrades.

Also, rather than a strange "pew pew pew" blue dots beam appearing when commander targets something, why not have something like a red laser beam for direct fire target designation and a crosshair (like on sensor droids) for indirect fire target designation? When target is out of range, laser/crosshair would be blue.
"Dedicated to discovering Warzone artefacts, and sharing them freely for the benefit of the community."
-- https://warzone.atlassian.net/wiki/display/GO

User avatar
JDW
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1669
Joined: 18 May 2010, 20:44

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by JDW » 22 Mar 2012, 03:24

aubergine wrote:Another idea to the pile:

Allow commanders to designate multiple targets at the same time, based on the units assigned to the commander. So, if assigned units include bunker busters and cannons, the commander would target structures for the bunker busters and tanks for the cannons. It might be that the max number of simultaneous targets increases with command turret or CRC upgrades.

I think you mean the "Multiple Attack Vectors for Assigned Units" idea which was mentioned by Evilguru in the list.
"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."
-- Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Shadow Wolf TJC
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1047
Joined: 16 Apr 2011, 05:12
Location: Raleigh, NC

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by Shadow Wolf TJC » 22 Mar 2012, 04:42

Ideas that I'm moderately in favor of in the short term:

Increase the initial unit cap for assigning to commanders to somewhere between 10 and 14 for a fresh commander. I agree that commanders' unit limits currently seem too small for the multiplayer environment, though I don't want to give fresh commanders the ability to lead entire batallions of 25 or so tanks either. 10 to 14 seems like a reasonable starting point.

Remove limits on how many commanders a player may have at a time. If 10 to 14 units per commander still seems like it's too steep a number, then perhaps we could increase, or even remove, the limit on how many commanders a player can control. :wink:

Boost HP, though only for more advanced Command Turrets. The HP of T1 Command Turrets is currently fine as it is, though the HP boosts provided by more advanced versions don't seem to do them enough justice, as more powerful weapons, and weapon upgrades, start to hit the field.

Reduce the cost of command turrets, especially the more advanced versions. The price of Command Turrets can reach as high as $1750! I've seen fortresses that are cheaper than that! :stare:

Not require line-of-sight for assigning targets for direct-fire units only. While I'd like for commanders to be able to assign attack targets, even if they don't have line-of-sight to them, I'm worried about how this could be abused with indirect-fire units. I don't exactly like the idea of a commander being able to hide behind terrain while it directs indirect fire units and structures to attack its target. Therefore, I'd like to limit this feature to direct-fire units only.
---

Ideas that I'm in favor of, though I doubt that they could be implemented anytime soon:

Drive assigned units in a specific order. This would indeed help in terms of micromanaging which units should close in and which should keep a distance, though I believe that it would not be all that easy to program in.

Multiple attack vectors for assigned units. As useful as such a system would be, this would require some sort of possibly-sophisticated computational algorithm whatchamacallit in order to determine who should attack what. It would need to account for not only weapon multipliers, but may also need to account for kinetic/thermal armor, or even determine targets based on how deadly their weapons are to the group overall. :hmm:
---

Ideas that I'm neutral or skeptical about:

Increasing the commander's range. Increasing it to the point where most, if not all, direct-fire weapons can't outrange them may be all fine and dandy, but I'm not exactly comfortable with giving them a range as great as mortars. :|

Remove the requirement for a Command Relay Center to be present. They seem to provide far too little functionality to be worth keeping, though I'm not exactly in any rush to see them removed ASAP. 8)

Toggle an auto-assign/unassign mode for commanders. That could reduce micromanagement a bit, but what if you don't want certain units, such as artillery or specialized direct-fire units such as Bunker Buster Hovers, to be assigned to any commanders at all? I fear that it could just as likely frustrate players as much as it could help them. Perhaps giving commanders some sort of area-of-effect aura that provides the experience-boosting effect towards any friendly units within its range would work better? :hmm:

Assigned units follow formations. I don't see how this could provide any benefits for this game. Most maps have bottlenecks that are too narrow to even support formations in general. :roll:
---

Ideas that I'm opposed to:

Giving commanders cloaking abilities. If you want to implement stealth in a game, then you should also implement a means of detecting them. Otherwise, they'd be overpowered. :lecture:

Giving commanders a weapon. Commanders already have high HP, which they need more than any weapon to survive due to how enemies would prioritize attacking commanders over other units. :lecture:

Two types of commanders. I really don't see any reason why this needs to be added. Commanders need as much HP as they can get, so the idea of fragile commanders seems outrageous. Also, for so-called "super commanders", see my replies on reducing commander costs (which I support) and giving commanders weapons (which I oppose).

Indirect-fire commanders. In terms of purpose, this seems similar to the idea of commanders not requiring line-of-sight in order to be able to assign attack targets, and much like that, I'm concerned that this could be abused with indirect-fire units. Moreover, I think that the idea of an arcing designator beam seems ridiculous, as how would such a thing work? :lol2:
Creator of Warzone 2100: Contingency!
Founder of Wikizone 2100: http://wikizone2100.wikia.com/wiki/Wikizone_2100

User avatar
effigy
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1217
Joined: 22 Jan 2010, 03:21
Contact:

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by effigy » 22 Mar 2012, 05:08

I'm sorry, I haven't read through this post yet, but will this make a 3rd Commander improvement thread? IIRC Rman is already compiling all suggestions.
This is why some features aren't implemented: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=7490&view=unread#p87241

Cyp
Evitcani
Evitcani
Posts: 779
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 23:35

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by Cyp » 22 Mar 2012, 07:31

You missed the idea of giving commanders a self-destruct button. Then they wouldn't be completely useless, at least. Currently, they're just an expensive wall, so the enemy just has to be careful not to waste any ammo on the commander.

User avatar
JDW
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1669
Joined: 18 May 2010, 20:44

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by JDW » 22 Mar 2012, 08:33

Cyp wrote:Currently, they're just an expensive wall, so the enemy just has to be careful not to waste any ammo on the commander.
Updated . Thanks
"Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."
-- Ambrose Bierce

User avatar
Shadow Wolf TJC
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1047
Joined: 16 Apr 2011, 05:12
Location: Raleigh, NC

Re: The Ideas thread for Commanders and the Command Relay Ce

Post by Shadow Wolf TJC » 22 Mar 2012, 09:31

Cyp wrote:You missed the idea of giving commanders a self-destruct button. Then they wouldn't be completely useless, at least. Currently, they're just an expensive wall, so the enemy just has to be careful not to waste any ammo on the commander.
I doubt that it would make commanders any more useful, except as expensive suicide bombers.

@JDW: Perhaps you could add the following arguments that I have both for and against certain ideas:

Argument against increasing initial unit assignment cap: The bonuses provided by commanders would make them OP for their price, if they were made high enough.

Argument for increasing or removing limits on how many commanders players may control: Would allow players to assign over 100 units to fresh commanders, even if commanders' initial unit assignment cap wasn't raised.

Argument against not requiring line-of-sight for assigning targets, or against making the commander's weapon an indirect-fire weapon: Could allow players to abuse this along with indirect fire units, by hiding the commander behind terrain, in range of targets.

Argument against increasing the commander's range: may allow it to outrange even mortars, if set high enough.

Argument against toggling an auto-assign/unassign mode for commanders: Could cause unwanted assignment of some units, such as more specialized units like, say, Bunker Buster Hovers, to commanders.

Argument against assigned units following formations: Bottlenecks on maps would often mess with formations.

Argument against giving commanders cloaking abilities: Would require the addition of stealth-detecting capabilities in order to keep them from becoming OP.

Argument against giving commanders a weapon: Commanders need more protection than they need firepower due to how they'd become a priority target due to how they provide their assigned units with bonuses.
Creator of Warzone 2100: Contingency!
Founder of Wikizone 2100: http://wikizone2100.wikia.com/wiki/Wikizone_2100

Post Reply