Guild Wars 2

To do:

Remove the commander icon, both from the map and from over the head.
Replace it with the ability to start a warband; a group of 20 people.
Replace squad system with warband system; tone down size from 100 to 20.
Make it so you can see everyone’s HP bars, and amount of supply they have.
ONLY indicate, on the map, the location of your warband members, or warband leader.
No indication of map of where the other commanders actually are on the map.
Keep the Warband chat and Join Warband command; formerly squad system.

—

Consequences:

Promote organization. If a server can communicate well and stay cohesive, they should be rewarded. With the current system, it’s too easy to zerg up. Zerging, post-warband system, would still be present, but it would actually take coordination throughout map chat, warband leaders working together and players following the warband-leader to actually achieve a critically-massed zerg. This system rewards zerging by making it an achievement, rather than its simplistic form with the current commander icon system.

If the zerg were to be broken, it would take time for the warband leaders to organize up again. This all contributes to the idea that the larder the mass of people, the harder it is for them to stay cohesive and organized. The ability to do so is rewarded, since that zerg will be near unstoppable. The difference with the current system being.. the current system makes it EASIER to stay cohesive as a large mass of players by painting a huge icon on the map, and over the commander’s head. That is the root of the problem.

Rewards spreading out by making it easier for warband leaders to do so. People would be given the tools, and thus the incentive, to follow your WARBAND leader only. Leaders may choose to stick together as a zerg, or to spread out. Either way, the players are given the tools to follow their warband leader only.

From an individual point of view, it’s much easier to feel part of the group when you’re in a party of 5, included in a warband of 20, rather than simply following an icon in a solo party.

Removing the tag from the map makes it harder for zergs to regroup without communicating.

Removing the tag from the head makes it harder for zergs to stay tight and organized in the field, without further communication; as it should be.

This system REWARDS organized zerging, by making it harder. A server would be able to prove itself by its ability to keep its zerg cohesive, despite under overwhelming numbers. With the current system, zerging up in an organized manner is so easy that well.. it makes the game boring.

Basically:

Make it HARDER for the zergs to regroup by removing the commander icon from the map. This rewards better organization and communication.

SPREAD out the amount of action throughout the map. Warbands will regroup well within itself; members will find each other easily, but not with the main zerg.

More CONTROL for the commanders of the warband; allowing them to see 20 people’s HP is good.

Interesting idea, but this is exactly what organised WvW guilds do and stand for.
The only time I pop my badge is in emergencies, unorganised zergs of random people without any form of communication are walking lootbags.. not here to blow your idea, just saying all of that is already there..

Sceinna.3561:

Interesting idea, but this is exactly what organised WvW guilds do and stand for.
The only time I pop my badge is in emergencies, unorganised zergs of random people without any form of communication are walking lootbags.. not here to blow your idea, just saying all of that is already there..

Hes saying you need to find a better guild Convenant. Maybe something thats a little more organised and less of a chicken with its head cut off group of players.

Yeah, but you can’t just removed the random unorganised zergs.. some people like to play WvW on and off and aren’t as experienced as some of us are, thus they wouldn’t be picked in any groups in this system.

I do like the idea but you can’t get rid of the global badge imo, it’s needed. It would still be a nice addition next to Commander badge for guilds to pick up, because you don’t want puggers to join your organised group and possibly screw up things..

Sceinna.3561:

Yeah, but you can’t just removed the random unorganised zergs.. some people like to play WvW on and off and aren’t as experienced as some of us are, thus they wouldn’t be picked in any groups in this system.

I do like the idea but you can’t get rid of the global badge imo, it’s needed. It would still be a nice addition next to Commander badge for guilds to pick up, because you don’t want puggers to join your organised group and possibly screw up things..

What?…

You have the ability to close your warband, or kick people out of it. Have you even read the whole post, or understood its substance? The warband system is JUST as easy as the commander system.

This has been demonstrated in NUMEROUS games.. in fact… ALL of them except GW2.

Would be really nice imo. Every previous game I played had some sort of raid system (where you had for example 4 groups in a raid) and that was imo much more fun than the current commander system. We could definitely use some sort of group structure for 20 ppl, but for people to actually join those things, the commander icons will have to go. Else they’d just follow the blue icon for max WXP/badges.

If this system was introduced, I think there should be a commander chat, which everyone who is currently commander of a 10+ people group could use to coordinate the different warbands.

And to the people who say “we already have it in guilds” : not everyone who plays WvW is in a WvW guild, and not everyone would want to be in one either.

Sceinna.3561:

Interesting idea, but this is exactly what organised WvW guilds do and stand for.
The only time I pop my badge is in emergencies, unorganised zergs of random people without any form of communication are walking lootbags.. not here to blow your idea, just saying all of that is already there..

True this.. ^^

Convenant.7092:

Sceinna.3561:

Yeah, but you can’t just removed the random unorganised zergs.. some people like to play WvW on and off and aren’t as experienced as some of us are, thus they wouldn’t be picked in any groups in this system.

I do like the idea but you can’t get rid of the global badge imo, it’s needed. It would still be a nice addition next to Commander badge for guilds to pick up, because you don’t want puggers to join your organised group and possibly screw up things..

What?…

You have the ability to close your warband, or kick people out of it. Have you even read the whole post, or understood its substance? The warband system is JUST as easy as the commander system.

This has been demonstrated in NUMEROUS games.. in fact… ALL of them except GW2.

And yet, here we are in GW2, the one without the warband system….

Daemonne.5018:

Convenant.7092:

Sceinna.3561:

Yeah, but you can’t just removed the random unorganised zergs.. some people like to play WvW on and off and aren’t as experienced as some of us are, thus they wouldn’t be picked in any groups in this system.

I do like the idea but you can’t get rid of the global badge imo, it’s needed. It would still be a nice addition next to Commander badge for guilds to pick up, because you don’t want puggers to join your organised group and possibly screw up things..

What?…

You have the ability to close your warband, or kick people out of it. Have you even read the whole post, or understood its substance? The warband system is JUST as easy as the commander system.

This has been demonstrated in NUMEROUS games.. in fact… ALL of them except GW2.

And yet, here we are in GW2, the one without the warband system….

And you are HAPPY with the current state of WvW?

I really dislike an approach that seeks to reduce zerging in WvW by increasing the interface tedium in doing so.

I like how people brand new to WvW can spot a commander sigil, and find the action. This is inclusive, and generates new WvW players that replace those lost through attrition. Also commanders from smaller guilds can fill out a reasonable size group and take down towers etc by sigiling up. Disabling its present functionality would hurt the game.

I would like to see a 4 way toggle on a commander sigil: (1) overt, operates as it does now, everyone on your realm can see it; (2) squad only- any member of your squad can see you, but those outside of it can not, and (3) guild only, where only your guild can see it even if they are not in your squad, and (4) off. This would make the sigils more useful.

The better way to counter zerging is through map design. For instance a larger map in which a single zerg could not respond to defend the entire map would force realms to break up into smaller groups defending zones. Sure they can pick zerg, but they will be beaten by smaller, more nimble groups.

Nobody new to WvW knows how squads work. Your proposal takes even more work and would be even less intuitive for new players.

Massive zergs will still exist. Warband leaders will form a party so they can see each other, creating a single unit out of several, and do the same thing they do now only with more interface stupidity. Someone will be designated leader and will still say “regroup at spawn” and everyone will regroup at spawn. Preventing players from forming basic parties in WvW would be absolutely stupid, but there’s no other way to prevent this. Won’t happen.

There would not be any more communication through map chat than there is now, for the same reasons we don’t have much now: it’s very hard to talk in map chat while doing anything else requiring your keyboard, like firing off skills, and everyone will still all be in the same few places, making it not all that useful anyway. You won’t promote more communication in map chat. You will promote more voice chat, perhaps, but since GW2 does not have built-in voice chat, it will be yet another barrier to newbie players.

There is nowhere on the interface that you could put 19 other players’ HP bars that would not either be useless (over their heads) or obstructive (on the side of the screen). Even a 20 vs. 20 fight would go so rapidly as to make this information useless anyway.

New players to WvW need commanders on the field just as they are with a visible icon from anywhere, because otherwise there is no indication of what they should be doing at all. Players who just logged into WvW would not be able to see any “warbands” on the screen and would have no idea what was going on or where to go either. Map and team chat would be clogged with “what’s going on” “where should I be going” “what warband do I need to be in” “who do I party up with” so much so that it would be near impossible to use them for strategic communication.

tl;dr: No. Please no.

One thing I miss from WAR is open warbands.

(Anyone in WAR could start an open warband that anyone in range could join without having to ask/be asked). It made it a lot easier for new players and PUGs to get around.

To some extent this is less needed in GW2 because everyone can share buffs, heals, kills etc without being in a group. But it had other features like communication, being able to see other players on the map etc that was useful in open warfare.

The idea behind this post is to reduce zerging, but that’s the nature of WvW.. battles on a large scale, if you want smaller scale and more organised you should consider playing sPvP.

I like how WvW works, because you can play amazingly organised with large numbers.. and you can screw around when you just don’t care.. and possibly get zerged yup. I like the randomness and I’m sure most people do, but as I said before; it would be nice to have an option to show your badge to just people in your squad rather than global because sometimes you want to go with just your guild, having a different badge for that (possibly other color only visible to players inside the squad) would be good imo.

It’s not a priority since with voicechat it’s not really hard to meet up.. but it would still be a nice addition, right now we target one person and follow him around, but as soon as you spin your camera in another direction you lose the target.

Convenant… I’ve been pushing the idea since BW1. Totally agree that the current grouping system for more than 5 people is inadequate for many guilds and players.

I do think there is a place for the current Commander/squad system, but they need flexibility for those players and guilds to form medium sized forces. Even if they made a simple change and allowed private squads it would help drastically. A way to hide the commander pin AND still retain all the functions of a squad. The warband system used in Warhammer online was the best I’ve ever used…. and it’s almost 5 years old.

Gw2 is a great game… with an absolutely horrible grouping system that pigeon-holes everyone into a zerg. I’m not the only one that feels this way…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Throw-your-commanders-a-bone/first

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Give-us-raid-warband-option-as-a-default/first#post1399889

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/The-Commander-New-System/first

Just want to repost something I had in another thread..

I realize the Commander and squad system is designed for something different than warhammer’s warband system… but look at the functionality difference between the two.

Warband options:

/disband Disbands your party or warband if you are the leader
/leave Leave your current party or warband
/lfg
/lfm
/lfp Opens and closes the Open Parties and Warbands window
/makeleader
/partyleader Pass party leadership to the targeted character in your party
/makemainassist Pass main assist to the targeted character in your party
/openjoin [character name] Join a specific character’s open party
/openlist
/partylist Lists open parties
/openpartyinterest Toggles your character as interested/not interested in forming a public party
/openpartynote Set recruitment settings for an open party (you must be set as interested in forming an open party)
/partyboot
/partykick
/partyremove Boots the targeted character from your party
/partyleave
/partyquit Leave your current party
/partyinvite Invites the selected target to your party
/partyjoin [character name] Joins a specific character’s party
/partyopen Sets your current party or warband as open
/warbandconvert Converts your current party into a warband
/warbandleader Pass warband leadership to the targeted character in your warband
/warbandlist Lists open warbands
/warbandjoin [character name] Joins a specific character’s warband

This is just the /slash commands for the warband system. All of this could be done in the UI with a drag and drop and right click menu as well. You also saw each groups dots on the map with a unique color. Let’s take a look at the C&S system functions.

Commander & Squad system:

/squadinfo — displays the supply carried by each member of your squad.
/supplyinfo — displays the supply carried by players near you.
/squadjoin [commander_name] – join a commanders squad.
/squadleave – leave your current squad.
/squad – speak in squad chat

Commanders can also set Waypoints via the UI… and that’s it folks. That warband system could hold between 6 people (1 grp) and 48 players. It could be used for any situation within the game, either PvP or PVE. It was simply the best grouping system I’ve ever used in an MMO for multiple groups.

I’m not saying make the commander and squad system exactly like the warband… but look at the functionality between the two. That warband system came out just under 5 years ago…

I like the idea of different modes since you could have a commander with the overt setting running the militia since they will all flock to it like a beacon-and then guild groups could have a sneakier one and coordinate with the militia commander with a chat box, VoIP, etc.

Lead.1784:

I like the idea of different modes since you could have a commander with the overt setting running the militia since they will all flock to it like a beacon-and then guild groups could have a sneakier one and coordinate with the militia commander with a chat box, VoIP, etc.

Having a one size fits all grouping system is NOT adequate. Major upgrade needed to allow flexibility for all different player styles and uses. Everyone has a different idea of what content is “fun” for them… but we don’t have the tools to properly organize for more than zerging.

Convenant.7092:

Daemonne.5018:

Convenant.7092:

Sceinna.3561:

Yeah, but you can’t just removed the random unorganised zergs.. some people like to play WvW on and off and aren’t as experienced as some of us are, thus they wouldn’t be picked in any groups in this system.

I do like the idea but you can’t get rid of the global badge imo, it’s needed. It would still be a nice addition next to Commander badge for guilds to pick up, because you don’t want puggers to join your organised group and possibly screw up things..

What?…

You have the ability to close your warband, or kick people out of it. Have you even read the whole post, or understood its substance? The warband system is JUST as easy as the commander system.

This has been demonstrated in NUMEROUS games.. in fact… ALL of them except GW2.

And yet, here we are in GW2, the one without the warband system….

And you are HAPPY with the current state of WvW?

WvW is fine because I’m not comparing it to other games which are irrelevant here.
The commander tag does need some tweeks IMO, but the system doen’s need to be reworked into something else entirely.

Daemonne.5018:

WvW is fine because I’m not comparing it to other games which are irrelevant here.
The commander tag does need some tweeks IMO, but the system doen’s need to be reworked into something else entirely.

I agree, I don’t think we need a completely new system, but they NEED to make a system that offers the flexibility for ALL guild and player styles. That warband system could be used by any number of people for any situation…. something GW2 needs to do.

The commander and squad in it’s current form offers NO support for medium size forces or private squads. It’s simply a zerg or nothing.

You forgot …

/warbandleadermutiny – kicks the warband leader aka vote of non confidence in your leadership. If you can kick a warband player for being just bad, they should be able to kick you are just bad (would need more than 1 vote, maybe 51%)

outside of that fun note… I second it. The commander system is just not good. I think since BWE1, we’ve used /squad once to type in the default yellow, and really … since the supply stacking improvement, the squad system is pretty useless atm in its current state.

~ X

EDIT: … and the havok squads, they are there … but who knows where without map chatting or voice comm. Would be able to leverage small – medium groups more effectively. So many people today, just ‘stack on me, STACK, STACK NOW, EVERYONE ON MAP’… imho is useless outside of running into another zerg. Which then, in its own, deflates the goal… capping objectives in a timely manner.

Hmm…also, everyone in the warband is changed to a charr. Anyone removed from the warband gains the title gladium (along with everyone but the one player getting killed).

Anyone challenging the leader must do so on a 1 v 1 basis in an arena, in which the victor may choose to kill, spare and stay in warband, or just kicked out (gaining gladium title).

Serophous.9085:

Hmm…also, everyone in the warband is changed to a charr. Anyone removed from the warband gains the title gladium (along with everyone but the one player getting killed).

Anyone challenging the leader must do so on a 1 v 1 basis in an arena, in which the victor may choose to kill, spare and stay in warband, or just kicked out (gaining gladium title).

Now we’re talking.

+1 Warband system.

Shame on you gamers for not thinking big. Warband? Warband in name only. This is how to implement a kitten Warband: http://youtu.be/E5P-uebJv5o

Convenant.7092:

To do:

Remove the commander icon, both from the map and from over the head.
Replace it with the ability to start a warband; a group of 20 people.
Replace squad system with warband system; tone down size from 100 to 20.
Make it so you can see everyone’s HP bars, and amount of supply they have.
ONLY indicate, on the map, the location of your warband members, or warband leader.
No indication of map of where the other commanders actually are on the map.
Keep the Warband chat and Join Warband command; formerly squad system.

—

Consequences:

Promote organization. If a server can communicate well and stay cohesive, they should be rewarded. With the current system, it’s too easy to zerg up. Zerging, post-warband system, would still be present, but it would actually take coordination throughout map chat, warband leaders working together and players following the warband-leader to actually achieve a critically-massed zerg. This system rewards zerging by making it an achievement, rather than its simplistic form with the current commander icon system.

If the zerg were to be broken, it would take time for the warband leaders to organize up again. This all contributes to the idea that the larder the mass of people, the harder it is for them to stay cohesive and organized. The ability to do so is rewarded, since that zerg will be near unstoppable. The difference with the current system being.. the current system makes it EASIER to stay cohesive as a large mass of players by painting a huge icon on the map, and over the commander’s head. That is the root of the problem.

Rewards spreading out by making it easier for warband leaders to do so. People would be given the tools, and thus the incentive, to follow your WARBAND leader only. Leaders may choose to stick together as a zerg, or to spread out. Either way, the players are given the tools to follow their warband leader only.

From an individual point of view, it’s much easier to feel part of the group when you’re in a party of 5, included in a warband of 20, rather than simply following an icon in a solo party.

Removing the tag from the map makes it harder for zergs to regroup without communicating.

Removing the tag from the head makes it harder for zergs to stay tight and organized in the field, without further communication; as it should be.

This system REWARDS organized zerging, by making it harder. A server would be able to prove itself by its ability to keep its zerg cohesive, despite under overwhelming numbers. With the current system, zerging up in an organized manner is so easy that well.. it makes the game boring.

Basically:

Make it HARDER for the zergs to regroup by removing the commander icon from the map. This rewards better organization and communication.

SPREAD out the amount of action throughout the map. Warbands will regroup well within itself; members will find each other easily, but not with the main zerg.

More CONTROL for the commanders of the warband; allowing them to see 20 people’s HP is good.

I hate to say it, but this has “bad idea” written all over it. It punishes the pug, and alienates the casual WvW player, which is not what Anet wants with the WvW scene.

WvW is what it is like, because it lets anyone hop on a BL and follow a commander. That is a good thing in the sense that it gives community.

Needing to join a Warband, With no icon to select I might add, or even a means to know what Warbands are open on the field is really bad for the pug or person just starting to play and makes WvW more exclusive then inclusive, which is a major flaw of your entire premise.By making to harder to group up with your server mates is not conductive to getting new people to play the WvW aspect of the game.

While I agree more tools should be open to commanders to help them control/organize/and lead their “zerg” are needed, the idea that you have put out is to makes it punitive to play WvW for the fun, and that is not a step in the right direction for any game by anyone.

The idea of more tools for Commanders – Yes Please

Making WvW more exclusive – No thanks.

Your warband is no match for my krewe, bookah :P

Can I marry you.

I love this idea, doubt it’ll be completed.

some here brings up the point of not making it harder for ransom players that might come into a BL once in a while and that this is more important than making it easier and better for those of us who spend 100% of our GW2 time in WvW.

Some commanders without the guild im sure will want the randoms to follow him/her.

No support. Its fine as is is. I enjoy large zergs.

Doesn’t seem to be a reason to do this. There is already a method for organizing like this if you want. However, there are also those more casual players and PUGs/Militia that aren’t necessarily going to enjoy the highly-organized methodology which currently enjoy gathering around a Commander with others. Pop into WvW, open the map to find the Commander, and go have fun.

I like the concept of your idea myself, but I don’t think its is necessary/good for the game as a whole. Seems best to let those who prefer the larger/sometimes less organized guild+militia zergs keep enjoying that while letting those who prefer smaller and typically more effective, organized groups continue to do so via the methods already provided. At most, I could maybe see this warband system being added in such a way that it leaves the current game as it is aside from its addition allowing people in different guilds to organize on the spot into those 20-ish man groups and see eachother on the map easier without the necessity of a Commander tag. Kind of like a raid group made up of four individual parties.

The new concept is great. The issue I find in this is you cannot force people to join your warband; this is the same way for commander icons as well: you cannot make people join your squad.

kudos to OP. I like this idea. But maybe keep the commander tag for pugs as suggested above, and use warband for organized smaller groups.

Everything you need to do this is already in game, let’s not copy an old warband system from a dying/dead game.

@tehfoks

You can’t have both. If you do, then I’d want my gold back from spending it on my icon.

a warband system isn’t complicated… lol….

Ungood.3054:

Convenant.7092:

To do:

Remove the commander icon, both from the map and from over the head.
Replace it with the ability to start a warband; a group of 20 people.
Replace squad system with warband system; tone down size from 100 to 20.
Make it so you can see everyone’s HP bars, and amount of supply they have.
ONLY indicate, on the map, the location of your warband members, or warband leader.
No indication of map of where the other commanders actually are on the map.
Keep the Warband chat and Join Warband command; formerly squad system.

—

Consequences:

Promote organization. If a server can communicate well and stay cohesive, they should be rewarded. With the current system, it’s too easy to zerg up. Zerging, post-warband system, would still be present, but it would actually take coordination throughout map chat, warband leaders working together and players following the warband-leader to actually achieve a critically-massed zerg. This system rewards zerging by making it an achievement, rather than its simplistic form with the current commander icon system.

If the zerg were to be broken, it would take time for the warband leaders to organize up again. This all contributes to the idea that the larder the mass of people, the harder it is for them to stay cohesive and organized. The ability to do so is rewarded, since that zerg will be near unstoppable. The difference with the current system being.. the current system makes it EASIER to stay cohesive as a large mass of players by painting a huge icon on the map, and over the commander’s head. That is the root of the problem.

Rewards spreading out by making it easier for warband leaders to do so. People would be given the tools, and thus the incentive, to follow your WARBAND leader only. Leaders may choose to stick together as a zerg, or to spread out. Either way, the players are given the tools to follow their warband leader only.

From an individual point of view, it’s much easier to feel part of the group when you’re in a party of 5, included in a warband of 20, rather than simply following an icon in a solo party.

Removing the tag from the map makes it harder for zergs to regroup without communicating.

Removing the tag from the head makes it harder for zergs to stay tight and organized in the field, without further communication; as it should be.

This system REWARDS organized zerging, by making it harder. A server would be able to prove itself by its ability to keep its zerg cohesive, despite under overwhelming numbers. With the current system, zerging up in an organized manner is so easy that well.. it makes the game boring.

Basically:

Make it HARDER for the zergs to regroup by removing the commander icon from the map. This rewards better organization and communication.

SPREAD out the amount of action throughout the map. Warbands will regroup well within itself; members will find each other easily, but not with the main zerg.

More CONTROL for the commanders of the warband; allowing them to see 20 people’s HP is good.

I hate to say it, but this has “bad idea” written all over it. It punishes the pug, and alienates the casual WvW player, which is not what Anet wants with the WvW scene.

WvW is what it is like, because it lets anyone hop on a BL and follow a commander. That is a good thing in the sense that it gives community.

Needing to join a Warband, With no icon to select I might add, or even a means to know what Warbands are open on the field is really bad for the pug or person just starting to play and makes WvW more exclusive then inclusive, which is a major flaw of your entire premise.By making to harder to group up with your server mates is not conductive to getting new people to play the WvW aspect of the game.

While I agree more tools should be open to commanders to help them control/organize/and lead their “zerg” are needed, the idea that you have put out is to makes it punitive to play WvW for the fun, and that is not a step in the right direction for any game by anyone.

The idea of more tools for Commanders – Yes Please

Making WvW more exclusive – No thanks.

What in the WORLD are you talking about? Warbands are open joining… You are COMPLETELY missing the point. Contrarily to your belief, not all gamers are stupid (like you think of them to be…)

Pubbies are NOT idiots. They WILL join a warband, recognize its role and fulfill their task. What part of “other games have done so, and pubbies have loved it” is not understandable?

This idea will help the commander organize his zerg.
This idea also help those who want to detach from the zerg.

Because SOME people like zerging, everyone else should be punished?

Some pretty good ideas here, ANET should consider some of them.

Convenant.7092:

What in the WORLD are you talking about? Warbands are open joining… You are COMPLETELY missing the point. Contrarily to your belief, not all gamers are stupid (like you think of them to be…)

Pubbies are NOT idiots. They WILL join a warband, recognize its role and fulfill their task. What part of “other games have done so, and pubbies have loved it” is not understandable?

This idea will help the commander organize his zerg.
This idea also help those who want to detach from the zerg.

Because SOME people like zerging, everyone else should be punished?

WoW. Anger Issues much? Well, to be blunt, I find your post hostile and insulting.

I never I said anyone was stupid, that is you just making up lies to support your lame pillaged idea that you thought worked great in “some other game” and mistakenly believe it will work everywhere!

Come up with your own idea next time, and stop trying to force people to play the way you want to. Entitled Much?

In short, like it or not, your idea is bad. In the sense that It’s convoluted and won’t be helpful.

What Anet needs to do. Is make The Current Commander Tools into a Graphic User Interface, as opposed to a Command Line prompt.

They have the foundation set, they just need to follow through and finish it off, That would really help the game along far more then trying to re-invent this warband idea.

They should also make it so the Tag can have display options, like: Guild/Public/Off.

good brain storming on WvW idea but this won’t work, who’s to say who in a group of 20 people gets prioritized for boons and condi removals?

now if you’re able to do 5 man groups and merge them therefore letting the system know who to prioritize for buffs then maybe you got something.

Of course if you do this you’re opening a whole new can of worms; people will only want certain classes and probably will limit who’s in each 5 man group with the warband.

Ungood.3054:

I hate to say it, but this has “bad idea” written all over it. It punishes the pug, and alienates the casual WvW player, which is not what Anet wants with the WvW scene.

WvW is what it is like, because it lets anyone hop on a BL and follow a commander. That is a good thing in the sense that it gives community.

Making WvW more exclusive – No thanks.

In warhammer….someone almost always had a public warband up. I’m sure this wouldn’t change in GW2 either…. there is a need for a public Squads and there would always be one running IMO.. I think the point the OP is making, and which I agree with, is the complete lack of tools to organize for anything else BUT a zerg.

I’m not going to tell anyone else how to play or organize their guild or friends in GW2, but the lack of options basically forces us to follow one inflexible system. Organizing and grouping in GW2 should be easy and fit ALL peoples playstyles.

Serious upgrades are needed with the current tools for GW2.

Leave the commander tag for real commanders. Let the guilds do their own thing without needing the dorito. I hope the idiot who thought not having a larger grouping system in a game with a 5man group size was fired.

Ahmrill.7512:

Ungood.3054:

I hate to say it, but this has “bad idea” written all over it. It punishes the pug, and alienates the casual WvW player, which is not what Anet wants with the WvW scene.

WvW is what it is like, because it lets anyone hop on a BL and follow a commander. That is a good thing in the sense that it gives community.

Making WvW more exclusive – No thanks.

In warhammer….someone almost always had a public warband up. I’m sure this wouldn’t change in GW2 either…. there is a need for a public Squads and there would always be one running IMO.. I think the point the OP is making, and which I agree with, is the complete lack of tools to organize for anything else BUT a zerg.

I’m not going to tell anyone else how to play or organize their guild or friends in GW2, but the lack of options basically forces us to follow one inflexible system. Organizing and grouping in GW2 should be easy and fit ALL peoples playstyles.

Serious upgrades are needed with the current tools for GW2.

Hummm, why did you remove this from your quoted part?

Ungood.3054:

The idea of more tools for Commanders – Yes Please

As it seems we agree.

The problem with converting WvW to a raid based structure is not the mechanics but the conflict with the fundamental design of most of GW2: inclusion.

While you didn’t explicitly state that raids (warbands) would be exclusive, it is implied in a few places and consistent with the historical use of raids.

Yes, many games have ways to form elite and exclusive clubs to distance players from the rabble. ArenaNet has guilds and dungeons and sPvP for those so inclined.

WvW is about the rabble. It is an opportunity to dive into the chaos and uncertainty and attack people you can never know without having to beg at the gates of the castle for admission.

I hope it stays that way.

Have fun.

I’d be fine with that kind of gameplay personally, but I think it would cause less people to jump into WvW.

Simplest fix is allow people to hide the commander pin to people only in a squad and retain all the functions. Currently if you hide the pin it dissolves the squad.

Ungood.3054:

Hummm, why did you remove this from your quoted part?

Ungood.3054:

The idea of more tools for Commanders – Yes Please

As it seems we agree.

Missed that sorry, and yes we both agree the commander and squad system in it’s current form needs a huge upgrade. I’m going as far as saying it sucks as the only grouping system for more than 5 people and I still can’t believe they haven’t changed anything significant since BWE’s.

This is just my opinion, but the commander and squad is the worst multiple grouping system I’ve used in the last 5 years and I’ve played most major MMO’s.

In light of new discussions concerning zergs, I feel the need to bump this! The new Arenanet news about future of WvW makes this post relevant again.

Thank you, moderators!

Convenant.7092:

In light of new discussions concerning zergs, I feel the need to bump this! The new Arenanet news about future of WvW makes this post relevant again.

Thank you, moderators!

I agree some great discussions in this post, and highly relevant now!

Where as I don’t necessarily agree with the title to this thread (removing the commander pin), I do think that ANet can learn a thing or two from the Warband system (from Warhammer On-line).

From reading this thread, there seems to be a lot of “fear” that warbands exclude while Commander pins include the PUG players. And although it’s “easier” to follow a commander pin and run wild in a zerg ball, ANet, in a sense, has allowed a dumbing down of their players by doing so. However, warband were NOT exclusive as many might think they were.

In use of this “raid” UI system, etc. we easily were able to get PUG players into open warbands. By simply “communicating” using in game map chat (region 2) we broadcasted which warbands had room, we asked if anyone needed a warband (for newer players who didn’t know how to join), we helped reorganize PUG players into groups that worked (formed them into their parties to make sure each one had at least one healer)… individual warbands would train new players how the warbands worked (warband chat was nice). When we had more players than warbands could fit… I had asked warbands to split up… usually the warband leader would take half (or a quarter of his band) and his Warband Assistant Leader (which also was a nice feature) took over the rest… forming up. In time, we were training players to lead… multiple leaders to lead…as the system encouraged us to split warbands to create more warbands as more PUG players joined in the fray. This was done on a continual basis on our server faction (Phoenix Throne – Destro) and it actually worked well for the community as we were actively being inclusive and catered towards the PUG players. At the same time, guilds also formed private warbands… often either leading some of the more daring maneuvers or raiding in coordination with our “zerg”.

What made the Warband nice to work with was as Ahm mentioned above… there were a LOT of tools at our fingertips as in game mechanics. It felt way more streamlined and workable than say, our current Commander/Squad system in GW2. Warband/Raid UIs are quite… intuitive… they are not clunky to use. And fine, ANet doesn’t want WvW UI because it messes up immersion… fine… but why work with a system that is SO clunky to use?

3rd Party Tools – someone mentioned that “other” games are irrelevant, however, players will always compare GW2 to other MMORPGs… one reason why GW2 is so awesome is because they evolved this genre to a whole new level by improving on those “other” games… however, where ANet excelled in many areas of the game, they also regressed in other aspects. Communication, organization, and forming up within WvW has been a mess. Since BWE3 we found out that map/team chat was somehow inherently screwed up in the programming that they couldn’t change it… not even to this day. The Commander/Squad feature probably was not as well tested… period. It was a novel concept, loved the pin idea… but beyond that, it was just clunky and felt like they threw something together last minute to spice up the soup.

In this new tech age…it seems that MOST WvW servers organize through 3rd party tools. Want to talk about exclusion? How many times have you read… “join server TS, now!”… tell me that isn’t discouraging for new players coming into a game…or the casual gamer who doesn’t necessarily want to download software, or buy a headset. Or, more so, when you challenge that statement “err, sorry, I don’t want to join the TS, or I don’t have the program, or can’t you just type in map?” and face a searing retaliation making you feel like a total idiot… and then you realize you’re a pariah unable to join in on all the reindeer games (fortunately or unfortunately for me, for early GW2 I actually was an admin, but I still didn’t like using the JQ TS at the time).

ANet “could” have created more ways to better organize players… if their intent was to focus on the casual gamer, without providing stronger in game mechanics, on some level they failed. Sure players can easily follow the zerg… but often, the zerg does not talk back to them…or from what I’ve seen, many Commanders don’t talk in Squad nor Map/Team chat…nor do they have lieutenants that help communicate to the rest of map. It’s Server VOIP or nothing. To me, that is NOT friendly towards the casual players.

Likewise, ANet probably did not see how Commander Pins would evolve… and basically begin the “culture” of zerging in WvW. Although a given map can have up to ten commander pins showing, most WvW servers (I can be wrong here, but just from what I’ve seen) run 1 or 2 commander at most… so as to NOT confuse the players. This, unfortunately, is not a “friendly” mechanic for guilds or players who want to form up smaller raid groups (as Devon wants to emphasize).

Example… when our guild gets on map… we usually run raid groups… hitting camps, killing yaks, murdering sentries, baiting out opposing players and ganking reinforcements running to their zerg while dumping supply where it’s needed. However, when we get 2 groups, or start peaking a 3rd group… here’s where things get muddy. When we run around, often we have folks lost, especially when the 2 groups split up (due to combat, or a wipe). Some of our newer to WvW member don’t know the maps as well, and have a hard time regrouping. And so on and so forth… it WOULD be a lot easier if we popped a commander pin, but we don’t, because when we do, then A LOT of people start following us because ANet has TRAINED players to follow the Commander pin (does that make sense? You want action, go to the pin). However, on some level, that is detrimental to our larger map efforts where our zerg is, and it becomes hard to be a backline raid group when you start piling on more than 20 players. Also, in a pure economical sense, it would have been better to have two raid groups going… less players are needed to cap camps and disrupt the backlines… multiple teams work better than say, one larger one. So we don’t pop the pin.

So my suggestion to ANet and Devon… to at least consider adding in elements that would help the organization of those mid-sized groups of guilds and even PUGs that want to more easily gather up together to hit behind the enemy lines, far away from the zerg….

Two quick suggestions…

1. Private Squads – many have stated this before, and although it seems exclusive, it does allow guilds, and those that do not want to confuse players to more easily organize and hone in where those raid teams are going.

2. Allow Squad Members to See Other Commander Pins – there are many that can benefit to see where other pins are… it’s so much easier to coordinate your group if you can SEE where other commanders are… without having to go into a 3rd party VOIP tool to hear what the other Commanders are doing. Although Commanders can see other Commander pins, their squadlings cannot. It’s often those Squadmates that are strong tactical players, or they are always “map” aware of what is going on… and it helps a lot for more than just the commander to see what’s going on.

Azylynne.9487:

ANet “could” have created more ways to better organize players… if their intent was to focus on the casual gamer, without providing stronger in game mechanics, on some level they failed. Sure players can easily follow the zerg… but often, the zerg does not talk back to them…or from what I’ve seen, many Commanders don’t talk in Squad nor Map/Team chat…nor do they have lieutenants that help communicate to the rest of map. It’s Server VOIP or nothing. To me, that is NOT friendly towards the casual players.

Completely agree. In their goal to include casual players they created an all or nothing system for every player. Either you run a 5 man or join the zerg. Anything else is difficult to do, requires 3rd party voice programs and simply feels clunky and unfinished.

Many of the people playing Gw2 for WvW are experienced players from similar open world PvP games. There is simply no tools in the game for those players and guilds to organize the way they enjoy.