TEAMWORK - And why it actually works.

[Airshark79]

Mapper can only be the commander in push maps. In my opinion mapper should strive for variety.
All gray geometry

Commander seat could be a bad idea, except for its relationship with arty.

It is also important to note that player controlled arty could be completely useless whereas commander arty is directly tactical and mostly failproof.

SL's performances also could vary between maps and conditions. I particularly enjoy smoke as a tool but in some maps it is a waste of time.

[hitm4k3r]

Mapper can only be the commander in push maps. In my opinion mapper should strive for variety.
All gray geometry

Commander seat could be a bad idea, except for its relationship with arty.

It is also important to note that player controlled arty could be completely useless whereas commander arty is directly tactical and mostly failproof.

SL's performances also could vary between maps and conditions. I particularly enjoy smoke as a tool but in some maps it is a waste of time.

The mapper has a lot of influence where people can go and where not. This has nothing to do with pushmap or not. There are a lot of natural choke points on basicly every map. And what the mapper should aim for is a totaly different topic. FH2 demands a certain amount of minimum historical accuracy or background for the maps wich can be a limiting factor. On the other hand do we have tournament maps wich are more build around the whole sand box idea of the game, whereas the official maps are more a kind of a flashback into a historical battle. Both has pros and cons.

And commander is failproof you say? I have seen it failing too much for such a statement. Whether player controlled arty could be useless or not is not the matter of our discussion. I see people failing with the KT on Eppeldorf thus making it totaly useless. Doesn't change the fact that it can be damn usefull. Fact is that the player controlled artillery demands much more interaction, teamwork and skill from a team.

[Airshark79]

I think meuse is a design that cannot fail, wheras StVith may turn into the worst kind of campfest. All gray leaves things to do even if your team is being destroyed. In the contrary, I should also admit that in so few scenarios there were both sides fighting for land without an owner. Chokes kill and compounds add variety

Commander arties failures are no more than the usual one

[LuckyOne]

Fact is that the player controlled artillery demands much more interaction, teamwork and skill from a team.

And that fact you pulled out of... where?

I wouldn't call clicking a button "much more interaction, teamwork and skill". In fact I'd say for the commander arty to not be wasted on a very insignificant flag for a few irrelevant kills it's completely the opposite: "the commander arty needs much more interaction, teamwork and skill from a team". When people don't think as a team, why do they expect their "commander" to do it?

[hitm4k3r]

Well, player controlled arty doesn't work with just one click, that's the point. It requires a good spotter, a minimum of communication (smoke or HE) and atleast some aiming, even if you fire without a spot with direct fire.

Just clicking on a minimap on the next cap zone requires zero effort from a team, no matter whether there is a spot or not. You don't even have to aim. I don't really know what you want to hear in that aspect, but that's just as it is and it doesn't require rocket science to understand this. Try hitting a moving target with a 25pder on Tobruk compared to just balasting an huge area with commander arty. And commander arty can't get wasted. It reloads and you have unlimited access to it.

And your last point sums it up pretty good: the commander is the most useless player in this game. Because equal how good the team is, he doesn't change the outcome of the battle.

[Mayhemic.MAD]

In my opinion the Commander is basically a very good idea. The problem is that it got ruined by some jerks fooling around and players not following orders of a able commander because they think they know better or just want to get kills and ignore the overall situation.
All those things can also happen in other areas, like a noob taking the KT, or squad leaders not going for the important positions, or squad members wandering around instead of sticking to their squad leader.
Fact is that the commander can dedicate all his time to follow the kills and whats happening on the map and so get a good knowledge on whats going on and direct the squads so that they are distributed for maximum efficiency. A squad leader can only afford a quick glimpse every now and then at best. And the random distribution of squads you get without a commander often fails and leads to losing the map.
So in my opinion, having a good commander can make the difference between winning and loosing a map.

The commander artillery also needs some skill to use properly. You gotta make the decision on what flag to use it, based on where your team currently is and also decide on the timing. You might make some kills anyway, but without some planning it fails to help your team advance and then you gotta wait quite some time for the next try. 
Of course on some maps like PDH, with just one flag to attack, the commander artillery might seem too overpowered and cheap, since there is not much tactics involved there.

[Kubador]

Commander right now is pretty useless and only adds to confusion. In my view he should be just deleted or his role enhanced by giving him incentives for other players. He could get some kind of boosts to 'trade' with other team members just as squad leader has with the ability to spawn on him (you follow me and I give you a spawn closer to action). Some ideas I have on top of my head:

- swap commander artillery with a spot for user arty; spot lasts as long as normal one but has a cooldown and can be placed anywhere on map
- give spawn boost to selected SL for a while so his members spawn X% faster; useful for overpowering flag defenders etc.
- spawning some special kit (cooldown or limited uses) under SLs feet (sniper, AT, MG)

There can really be a big variety of what commander can get to bribe players into his battle plan. Both parties work with each other to benefit more than they would doing it on their own. Perfect example is the artillery system and points received by targeting assists. I think that working toward a system where teamplay creates synergy is the way to go. Alas it's a difficult task.

[LuckyOne]

^ There can be a lot of things. Sadly a lot of things also can't be because of engine limits. Although it seems to me some of the suggestions could work.

Maybe give the commander an ability to deploy a spawn point/reinforcements point? That way he can contribute at least a little more than currently possible. Maybe not just an "on map click" but something with the command truck. Drive it somewhere and then while in range use the commo rose to set it up. You could call it "Forward HQ" or something. I think it would be interesting on larger maps. Like a tent that spawns extra equipment for attacks. And it wouldn't be easily abused because it would require the use of the rather fragile truck.

[Matthew_Baker]

Just gonna jump in since the commander discussion is being tossed around again
*cough*http://fhpubforum.warumdarum.de/index.php?topic=19306.0*cough*

Not to necro an old thread, it'd just be easier to keep alike discussions together, considering I honestly care about how people view the commander in FH2. Feel free to copy/paste your thoughts into that thread or keep it going over there

[Airshark79]

How about reenabling the sat view with lots of grain, something around 10fpm and no ability of spotting?

That should make the commander a more valid source of strategy and intel instead of a powerup.

Ive seen extra effects being used to some extent in 2142.

[hitm4k3r]

Please not.

This isn't a modern warfare game with drones and stuff. There are just things that don't fit into the game and scenary.

[Airshark79]

Just talking about making it work. Aerial photography wasnt uncommon.

Coveting 2 seats for a scout plane for a whole round could be the stupidest thing to do teamwise.

Maybe something refined with autopilot?

Because powerups can be lame.

[hitm4k3r]

Idk, the spotter plane or the command cars just fit in more nicely from my POV. The spotter plane can be pretty usefull if it is in the right hands just in case that you haven't noticed it. One of the best tools on maps like Lebisey or Gazala. You can give arty spots on positions that are not in range of the binoculars and it is something that I consider much closer to the aerial reconnaissance that you mentioned. So nope, the recon plane is pretty much one of the most teamplay based vehicles in this game.

The commander has to controll them and be a part of the battle and not just some remote controlled top view camera. It really dosn't fit into the game and the artillery view is the maximum what I could accept as it doesn't show you the whole map and is very limited. And don't even get me started with autopiloted stuff. Can I finaly have my aimbot? 

[LuckyOne]

How about reenabling the sat view with lots of grain, something around 10fpm and no ability of spotting?

That should make the commander a more valid source of strategy and intel instead of a powerup.

Ive seen extra effects being used to some extent in 2142.

I guess timed black and white view that has a decent cooldown time could be a nice way of representing photo recon that was conducted at the time. Not sure how doable it is though. And the film grain could be a nice touch. Coupled with the ability to add markers it would bring a whole new metagame for the commander - deciphering intelligence info and feeding it to the map. A skilled one could help his team a lot. But make some mistakes and identify that smudge as a Tiger when it's a nice big white rock and your team might be in for a surprise.

[Airshark79]

Scout planes have some problems and proper integration with commander could fix that. Autopilot for 1person use for instance

Then again overhead view could be done easier.