Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 72

Thread: 4 Months of Whoever Grabs the Officer First...

  1. #1

    4 Months of Whoever Grabs the Officer First...

    I have the patience of Solomon, but I’m just curious what the plan is to address this issue?

    I’ve read all the threads and I’m at a loss as to what Campfire Games plans to do in terms of quality control over who spawns the Officer (and NCO?) in PUBLIC games?

    Basically the issue is till up in the air or undecided?

    For what it’s worth I still support the election of the Officer before a map. As the saying goes - democracy is the worst way of deciding things; except for all the other ways, so I know it’s not a perfect solution.

    So CG, any update on your thoughts about who should be spawning as Officer?

  2. #2
    Matt(Fridge)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Secessionist Maryland
    Posts
    145
    People dont like hearing this but this is the central problem with non regimental public play. Before match elections are a terrible idea for dozens of reasons, but to stay on topic there is really nothing they can do about it in public sessions. Since we are soon getting the ability to pw our own servers the problem can be forever laid to rest in regimental play. However there is simply no way to solve the problem in public play. So yes in public sessions it will forever be whoever clicks that officer role first.

  3. #3

    CSA Captain

    Sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    England
    Posts
    399
    So far there are two listed Regiments for each map. So lets say 2nd Wisconsin is one: You click on that name and it opens another screen where all the Companies in that regiment are listed, you pick a company, choose the Officer slot which then forms that Company, other players join you, and then you can spawn in. Voila....done deal, everyone gets to play with their friends, nobody has to follow a random leader if they don't want to, everyone is happy.
    ''I'm here to play an American Civil War era combat game, not Call of Duty with muskets.''.

  4. #4
    Random leaders is the number one problem right now. It's woefully inadequate for the task at-hand and I'm pretty much done following people who I don't know at this point. The quality seems to deteriorate as the server population increases. I think the issue is really central to gameplay and particularly important in a game like this because such close order teamwork is required and you need quality leadership to rise in the top for that. Just as important is giving players confidence in their leaders. I have literally no confidence when I see someone with stripes or bars without making many judgments of my own first. Rank means precisely nothing because they didn't earn it in the first place.

    Previously I thought some sort of game-wide rating system or server-appointment system would be best but I think there's one good solution which would work in all situations.

    The best way to do that is a kind of measured election system. Where players can choose to associate with a given leader through the spawning system and therefore empower him to put on stripes and bars or taking them from him by picking someone else and disassociating with him. So you go to pick your role and instead you're choosing a person to follow as a private or volunteering to lead yourself and seeking followers. The more people who associate with a given player, the more rank he gains - to the point he can even hand out lesser ranks to his subordinates. This is fluid throughout the round and can be altered while a player is still alive, new ranks taking effect on respawn. Player name is then color-coded based on your organization. When you see stripes or bars you know the player has followers, you can visually tell who belongs with who and that can give you some measure of confidence.

    The need of a short, no-pressure planning phase at the start of the round is a mostly unrelated matter but also one that would help leader votes settle out by restarting the game round when the round goes live and spawning people in as their present role/rank.

    I've got a video pinned in my signature where I pitch the type of election system I'd like to see and I'm also working on one right now to more smoothly bring that to life. I'd be done by now but on a routine checkup of mousetraps yesterday morning I came face to face with a sewer rat the size of a cinder block in my basement and that shifted my priorities. help.gif


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt(Fridge) View Post
    So yes in public sessions it will forever be whoever clicks that officer role first.
    Thanks for the update, Nostradamus.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 04-18-2019 at 09:21 PM.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  5. #5
    Well PLM with passwords for servers this should be a moot issue. When units organize events they already know who their officers are and will take the roles as they pre-planned so there is no need anymore for messing with the officer system. If units want to play as is in public play on the official servers they can do that as well but the events will be protected.

  6. #6
    That random information is very interesting and well-thought out but what does that have to do with the point of Quaker's thread?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quaker View Post
    I’ve read all the threads and I’m at a loss as to what Campfire Games plans to do in terms of quality control over who spawns the Officer (and NCO?) in PUBLIC games?




    ........................
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    We've come to this conclusion after your requests kickstarted an internal investigation of just what kind of players are actually the ones that primarily keeps the game servers populated on a day to day basis. We have found that roughly 20-30 percent of daily players (in the weekdays) are company players while 80 to 70 percent are non company players.
    Should I put this in my signature for future reference?
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

  7. #7
    Matt(Fridge)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Secessionist Maryland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Poorlaggedman View Post
    Random leaders is the number one problem right now. It's woefully inadequate for the task at-hand and I'm pretty much done following people who I don't know at this point. The quality seems to deteriorate as the server population increases. I think the issue is really central to gameplay and particularly important in a game like this because such close order teamwork is required and you need quality leadership to rise in the top for that. Just as important is giving players confidence in their leaders. I have literally no confidence when I see someone with stripes or bars without making many judgments of my own first. Rank means precisely nothing because they didn't earn it in the first place.

    Previously I thought some sort of game-wide rating system or server-appointment system would be best but I think there's one good solution which would work in all situations.

    The best way to do that is a kind of measured election system. Where players can choose to associate with a given leader through the spawning system and therefore empower him to put on stripes and bars or taking them from him by picking someone else and disassociating with him. So you go to pick your role and instead you're choosing a person to follow as a private or volunteering to lead yourself and seeking followers. The more people who associate with a given player, the more rank he gains - to the point he can even hand out lesser ranks to his subordinates. This is fluid throughout the round and can be altered while a player is still alive, new ranks taking effect on respawn. Player name is then color-coded based on your organization. When you see stripes or bars you know the player has followers, you can visually tell who belongs with who and that can give you some measure of confidence.

    The need of a short, no-pressure planning phase at the start of the round is a mostly unrelated matter but also one that would help leader votes settle out by restarting the game round when the round goes live and spawning people in as their present role/rank.

    I've got a video pinned in my signature where I pitch the type of election system I'd like to see and I'm also working on one right now to more smoothly bring that to life. I'd be done by now but on a routine checkup of mousetraps yesterday morning I came face to face with a sewer rat the size of a cinder block in my basement and that shifted my priorities. help.gif


    Thanks for the update, Nostradamus.
    When your against organized regiments but say random leaders are a problem. #justpoorlaggedmanthings

  8. #8
    Any thoughts on a simple time qualification for public games?

    20 hours in the game (not including drill server) and you can ‘unlock’ NCO.

    50 hours in the game and Officer is unlocked.

    The simple premise is after spending this much time playing you should be exposed to the mechanics of gameplay enough to be able to provide basic leadership.

    It’s still not a perfect solution and I prefer the election model, but it’s better than what we have now.

  9. #9
    Matt(Fridge)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Secessionist Maryland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaker View Post
    Any thoughts on a simple time qualification for public games?

    20 hours in the game (not including drill server) and you can ‘unlock’ NCO.

    50 hours in the game and Officer is unlocked.

    The simple premise is after spending this much time playing you should be exposed to the mechanics of gameplay enough to be able to provide basic leadership.

    It’s still not a perfect solution and I prefer the election model, but it’s better than what we have now.
    What would this do honestly? Its not like you spend a certain amount of time in game and your suddenly guaranteed to be a good leader or not to troll and abuse the officer class. You could just leave your pc on with the game loaded at menu for 50 hours and bam your good to go. Not to mention if there were to be a bug in the game where it could not detect someones playing time and a deserving officer cant get the slot would be a major problem.

  10. #10
    Playing time really doesn't matter. Like Matt said you can idle in the game first. It'd be better than the current situation but why not refine the concept a little more.

    The issue is two-fold: Are you qualified? Do players respect you? If those two answers are yes than you're ahead of the curve. Jump in a server and you'll find that the answers to those are often 'no' for the guy in the role.


    I've got visual proof of bums off the street from December 3rd being respected and doing a fair job at the officer role being totally unqualified. I've also got footage of people very experienced who are totally unqualified or not respected and doing a very poor job. Game mechanics can't measure that, only the players present can. There's currently no way to measure it. You're just stuck with whoever you get. That's what the OP is complaining about from a very underrepresented player base in this forum. It's kind of not fun when from 75-100 players on a team the guy who gets officer class is the first one to click two buttons. It's been that way more than four months - from the beginning actually.

    Democracy requires respect and I believe that would drastically improve it but people want to say it won't ensure qualification?! As if we should go back to accepting nobility and the Divine Right of Kings just to settle the question of who's ruler because the best qualified person won't always get elected. Like Quaker said.... it's the worst way of doing things, besides every other way tried.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt(Fridge) View Post
    When your against organized regiments but say random leaders are a problem. #justpoorlaggedmanthings
    Being pro-public isn't exactly anti-company. Unless your version of pro-company is anti-public? That's a rhetorical question for the readers of this thread.
    Last edited by Poorlaggedman; 04-19-2019 at 03:36 AM.
    Gameplay Suggestions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUuaVXTJsY


    Old Pennsylvania Discord: https://discord.gg/MjxfZ5n

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •