Chain of command

[Levente]

Since PS2 will be massive, i suppose there will be massive chain of commands, and roles, like squad leaders, commanders etc. at least i hope because the reason i stopped playing BF3 is cause theres absolutly no teamwork involved and everyone runs around like a headless chicken. How exactly did this work in PS1? did you have a command rose like in Bf2? will we something similar system like that? i hope the "lower complexity treshold" in ps2 is not the case like in BF3. :lol:

[SKYeXile]

how it worked in PS1 will differ from how it will work in PS2.

The ingame systems for PS2 would seem to be provided through the squad leadership tree, which should tie in with the player made mission system where you can designates missions that other players can accept.

I believe there is a squad leadership channel or something?

what information we have is rather basic, i do hope there is still a proper way to coordinate the zerg, there were some stand out zerg leaders in PS, and command chat and /comall /comxx were useful tools in giving directions.

If all those fall through, hopefully there willbe some zonewide broadcast/chat where people can coowardinate ...but i imagine it would be very spammy.

In lax of all those, outfits will form alliances and you will need to be apart of an outfit to do anything and the casual, soloers and newblers will be forgotten about.

[Coreldan]

Majority of the playerbase in PS didnt have that much teamwork either. There were basically two kinds of players. There was the zerg that roughly was zerging blindly to the place that the commander may have told em to. Then there were the organized groups that did the more... specific operations while working as a team.

But, I think it was sort of a two way street. The organized people sort of needed the help of the zergs and the zergs needed the help of the organized groups to get stuff to really happen :D

[AncientVanu]

...outfits will form alliances and you will need to be apart of an outfit to do anything...

Could you explain how these work?

[ringring]

The command mechanism is ps1 was first via the outfits.

The outfits, because they were organised got stuff done. They made the offensives work and made sure the empire wasn't flanked or back-hacked.

Outfits on the same team recognised each other and co-operated both informally and formally. Some outfits joined empire alliances and coordinated via forums they set up and also actively within the game via teamspeak/vent.

The game mechanics that supported this were few but important. This was the command ranks. Once you hit command rank 5 you gained an ability to access command chat and talk to all the other CR5's and it gave the ability to talk to the empire continent and world via /contxx and /comall commands.

I thought of it as, the outfit was a vertical coordination and command chat gave horizontal integration.

But, at the end of the day command wasn't mechanistic imposed by the game, it was human. Your command ability depended on your understanding of the strategy, your ability to explain and your ability to convince other leaders.

Many cr5's never truly tried to lead.

I kinda liked that, at the end of the day that command came down to the human / inter-personal level. It fitted in with the whole PS vibe that the game is 100% PVP and not PVE.

If in PS1 we had a mission system. It wouldn't necessarily work any better that command chat did. If a CR5 slaps down a mission I reckon it would be ignored unless there was some prior discussion among cr5's that is was a good idea / it should be done / it must be done.

I think the mission system's effect will be to make the game more accessible for casual players. After a while it may not be used, or at least the outfits may only use missions set by themselves.

[Coreldan]

Outfit is basically the Planetside equivalent of clans and guilds.

What he means in general is that the most people will be in the zerg, they are sort of the cannon fodder who keep dying and pushing back in. This will keep the enemy busy enough and naturally help with the pushing, while it's often the organized groups (outfits) who actually seal the deal.

[Tikuto]

Outfits will form Alliances

What's the point in that? We have a whole Empire as one alliance. Communication is all that is required and no integrated system to bind Outfits together as 'Alliances'. It's just time-wasting and worthless. :rolleyes:

The only instance I'd see such thing being useful would be an Outfit merger, which wouldn't be an alliance. Quite simply an Outfit ceases service and conforms into another's with their Outfit name, plus maybe a historical badge of recognition.

[ringring]

What's the point in that? We have a whole Empire as one alliance. Communication is all that is required and no integrated system to bind Outfits together as 'Alliances'. It's just time-wasting and worthless. :rolleyes:
I think we don't need systems at all apart from command chat to be honest.

I don't think everyone finds alliances time-wasting. You watch, they will form organically.

Outcasters+Ruffnex+the russians
Long Forgotten Soldiers+Clowns

[AncientVanu]

Thanks for the explanation.

[SKYeXile]

What's the point in that? We have a whole Empire as one alliance. Communication is all that is required and no integrated system to bind Outfits together as 'Alliances'. It's just time-wasting and worthless. :rolleyes:

The only instance I'd see such thing being useful would be an Outfit merger, which wouldn't be an alliance. Quite simply an Outfit ceases service and conforms into another's with their Outfit name, plus maybe a historical badge of recognition.

Not really, alot of the time empires dont want to work together within eachother, its best to find somebody you share a common playstyle or can synergyise with.

Outfits never really merge with eachother, by name they might, but they will always have their sects and groups within them after a "merge." the zergfits wont understand what im saying here though.

And then finally alliances grow apart, its much easier to break an alliance and go your separate ways than it is a guild, its easier on everybody.

[Tikuto]

I don't think everyone finds alliances time-wasting. You watch, they will form organically.

Outcasters+Ruffnex+the russians
Long Forgotten Soldiers+Clowns
That's how it can remain, which is cool with me. Nothing needs to be on paper. Outfits working together is co-operation and doesn't need to be identified as 'Alliances' in every game.

All that may been need is general knowledge within Outfits: 'Outfit Message: Outcasters+Ruffnex+the russians - we worked together'. If it so has to be written on paper then, still, let it remain a pure social gaming thing. The name is entirely personal though the type of co-operative entity could be optional: Coalition (TR only)
Imperium (TR only)
League
Concord
Confederation
Federation
Syncretis (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/syncretism) (VS only)
Sovereign (VS only)
Communion
Incorporate
Fellowship
Union (NC only)
Conglomerate (NC only)
Syndicate
others...Again, this is just pure aesthetic each with there own description in relation to PlanetSide2. I hopes this would encourage the existence of more than just three empires and stimulate social differences.

[Mastachief]

I would quite like to see more tools for outfit to outfit co-op.

Certain outfits gel well together and the ability to have GUI tools to assist these links would be cool.

[Qwan]

Since PS2 will be massive, i suppose there will be massive chain of commands, and roles, like squad leaders, commanders etc. at least i hope because the reason i stopped playing BF3 is cause theres absolutly no teamwork involved and everyone runs around like a headless chicken. How exactly did this work in PS1? did you have a command rose like in Bf2? will we something similar system like that? i hope the "lower complexity treshold" in ps2 is not the case like in BF3. :lol:

A answer to your question, First PS1 there was two ways to work it. First there was the zerg, this mob of players push to the next base and you just excepted an invite and moved with the flow. You got battle rank and who ever was in the first slot (Squad leader) got Comand rank. In PS1 if you hade more than one squad you had a platoon. But most of the zerg element consisted of small unorganized squads. Now for an outfit, This is the way my outfit worked. I am not speaking for other outfits, if we didnt have enought peps on say only 3 or 4, one person would take charge and we would do small gen bust, some tower hacking, base draining or small raids. IF we had enough for squads, we would perform ranks say for instance, select a leader, form squads, sometimes grouping them into platoons. The acting platoon leader would say what he wants done and the squad leaders would talk over chat and make it happen, with input from the acting platoon leader. If some one didnt want to do the missions with us and didnt follow orders they were dropped from squad. IF someone logged on and wanted to just run some solo mission they only had to say dont count me in. But there was more XP in operations than in just soloing it. right now my gaming community is playing BF3 we have a server and use mumble to communicate. Our server supports up to 64 players and it stays full during peek hrs, there is usually always a cue. In bf3 wo ever is team leader marks the objective,and we make sure we have engineer, medic and assult, also balance out squad sprint, squad ammo, and stuff like that, right now were asking dice to make the squads larger, if possible. But on a good night my community can make up like 4 teams on our server, working together over mumble and corrdinating attacks. And we use all maps as well Rush, Conquest, and stuff like that. So if you feel like coming over and checking us out check out Terra nova gaming community, and check it out. Tell them qwan sent you :groovy:

[Figment]

Didn't Higby mention once there'd be an outfit alliance chat?

[Levente]

would be cool to set waypoints as a leader, like move to this position or defend here ya know like in bf2 xd. i keep mentioning that cause its just perfect cant think any better way :groovy:

[sylphaen]

would be cool to set waypoints as a leader, like move to this position or defend here ya know like in bf2 xd. i keep mentioning that cause its just perfect cant think any better way :groovy:

That was already possible in PS1. You could set up to 4 waypoints on the map and also draw "tactical" information.

PS1 players would know what "Tactical" usually revolved around, though.
:rolleyes:

In a tight group, nothing beats voice chat and orders given by your command.

[Qwan]

would be cool to set waypoints as a leader, like move to this position or defend here ya know like in bf2 xd. i keep mentioning that cause its just perfect cant think any better way :groovy:



There are in PS 1 you can do this and send it to your squads map, but you have to get command rank to access it.

As far as chat that allows outfit and alliance chat, I guess there is but for most players its probably gonna be TS, Vent, or mumble servers you know. Or like in PS1 our outfit leader had contact with the over all commander and everyone else just listened to the direction our leader told us to go, or we could read it on global chat, which required CR 5 I dont know alot of people who use the chat that comes with BF3, we just use mumble, it was free with the server for BF3.

[Graywolves]

Ever since MAG I've despised any kind of forced chain of command in these games.

in PS1 we had a natural order between squad leaders, platoon leaders, outfit leaders, and between the outfit leaders (alliance or Ops leader?)

[LongBow]

Honestly the mission system looks like its going to be great, as those people who try to lead but are actually disliked will be ignored! while popular objectives will attract many people to a single area.

Outfits and their leaders will naturally form a network ... the only reason you would not be a part of the CoC for your empire on your server is because you worked hard not to be =P