Guild Wars 2

The Interface of Command: The Squad UI
Now to control 50 people (give or take) the commander needs a UI that can hold 50 people with out over filling the screen. The current party UI won’t cut it, even if it was adjusted so that it could display that many party members it would still take up half of your screen or more, so the squad interface needs to be designed from scratch. Now, to get a squad interface that can hold the required number of people and provide the the necessary info for the commander to effectively manege his squad, the interface needs to be able provide two things, organization and information.
Organization. For organization the commander needs to be able to move squad members (via a click and drag interface) in to sub-squads of five members, so he can organize the squad into different rolls (ranged, melee, support etc etc.), as well as kick or invite players into the squad. So for the individual players know what group there in the color of the dots on the mini-map needs to be changed from green all the time, to green when not in a squad, yellow while in a squad, and red for sub-squad members. To make it easy for the commander to give orders to individual sub-squads, each sub-squad needs it’s own squad number, that would display in the top left hand corner of each members screen (that way the commander could simply say “S1 flank them” or “S5 and 6 draw them out” instead of having to name individual players).
Information. For information the commander needs to know four things, how much supply his squad has, which sub-squad has its, squad size, and player info (meaning health and profession).
To determine how much supply his squad has all the commander needs is a supply total number at the top of his squad interface (preferably with a refresh button), supply info would also be displayed on the leader of each sub-squad .
For squad size info all that would be needed is a squad total number placed near the total supply number.
There are two things a commander needs to know about the players in his squad a) profession and b) how much health they have, the current player cube party interface won’t work as even if you removed the health and buff bar, and used the background of the portrait to display health, 40-50 of these would still take up half the screen. My answer is to take a small circle (somewhere between 25 to 50% the size of the current player portrait) to represent there health bar, and place there profession icon in the middle (these would also show the players name when you mouse over them).

The Sign of Command: The Tag
On maps with multiple commanders who’s who and who’s doing what becomes a real problem as does trying to run a guild and/or havoc group with a tag, the solution for who and what is to give us multiple tag colors (eg red is attack, yellow defense etc etc) and/or shapes (eg crossed axes is attack, and a skull is for a havoc group etc). For the second problem we need a way to set our tags as squad or guild+squad setings

The Trials of Command: The Tutorial
Last but not least, the commander upon first entering WvW (after buying his tag that is) needs complete a tutorial that gives him basic training in how to use the features (this applies to new and old commanders).

That’s pretty much all that I can think of, let me know what you guys think and if I’ve left out anything. Have a good one.

DevonCarver.5370:

So, let’s say we’ve handled the commander side of it for now and just focus on a squad system. If we added a system for squad management, what are the top 3 things you would want it to do? Examples: Show squad position, allow for orders to be sent to individual players, provide health status of all squad members, etc.

This is a much larger project, but getting a sense of what people would want it to do can help provide bounds for the work.

As Ive said previously, I tend to do the vast majority of my commanding over teamspeak rather than using ingame chat, so I wont really comment on issuing orders to individual players etc. But these are some features Id like to see:

1. The ability to “tag up” a number of players in my squad. What I mean by this, is that I can assign them a sort of “mini commander tag” that only people in the squad can see. This will enable me to send somebody to cap a supply camp or focus on capping bloodlust, whilst giving a visible marker for others to follow. However people outside of the squad would be unable to see these tagged players, unless they join the squad. This would prevent any new joiners or non-squad members getting confused as to where the main zerg is.

2. A squad member counter. Pretty simple, but would let me know how many I have with me. It could be tied to the automatic supply counter UI element that the community seems to have set its heart on and provide info on how many squad members are in range of you (say 3000 range to allow for people trailing behind)

3. An auto invite feature for the commander. Make it so that I can press a button and every player in a range of 1200 is invited to join the squad, assuming they havent joined it already. Give it a cooldown of around 3 minutes or so to prevent it being spammable, but that allows me to persistent enough to get people to join the squad. Right now, I have no real reason to get people to join the squad, but with the afforementioned changes, I feel this could be an almost essential addition. Definitely so in the early days of the changes. Right now, squads are basically irrrelevant. You just follow a commander tag around and listen to him over VOIP, but joining his squad grants you no real benefit, other than hiding any other commander tags that may be present on the map.

So glad this thread is back on topic!

So here’s my suggestions for a more fleshed-out Squad UI.

- Squad members show a different color dots in the Map/minimap

- Mass Invite Function in Radius (cooldown timer to prevent spam)

- F5 – F9 keys used to keybind specific Commander commands W/ ground targeting and visible Flags/Icons/Symbols/Effects. “Stop”, “Go”, “Attack”, “Defend”, “Rally Here”

- Squad UI System: Total Players, Total Supply, Disband Button, Mass Invite Button. Squad members are displayed as mini-map style Dots for each player in the Squad UI window.

These are laid out in a grid of boxes, with up to 5 Dots per box (max normal party size). Parties that join the Squad get put into their own separate box by default. Individuals just get filled in from top to bottom. Mouse hovering over a player dot shows name.

Clicking on the dot allows a small dropdown with options. These options would be the following: “Form Party” (lets Individuals in the box party each other instantly), “Move” (Moves dots around inside the Squad UI), “Kick”, “Promote Captain”, “Promote Lieutenant”, “Demote”, etc.

In combat, These dots would either morph color (Such as Green→yellow→red, grey for downed, black for dead) with player’s Health status. That lets the Commander see his squad’s combat status in real time.

This dot system also saves space and allows MASSIVE amounts of people in a very compact Squad UI, and allows re-sizing and re-shaping the Squad UI window without disrupting the functionality.

- Allow Commanders/CPTs/LTs to Minimap Draw & Ping to their squad (ONLY) like in GW1 !!! This was SUPER USEFUL for all kinds of tactical and communication purposes. Keeping it limited to just Tagged individuals capable of drawing/pining will automatically reduce spam, and since only the Squad members will see it, there’s no reason to use it to spam since everyone will leave your squad if you’re a draw-spammer, and Cpts/Lts that draw-spam can be demoted and have that ability removed.

While this may all be all discussed before, I would like WvW commanders to
a) know all squad members attached and their squad supply
b) see where all of their squad members are in a different color (party is still blue, all other squad members attached are in say purple)
c) draw on the minimap for all squad members, color may be different than white to differentiate from party drawings
d) set waypoints on the minimap instead of having to go to the upper map
e) squad should see all squad members too and see their commander as a particular symbol and still see every other commander out there (with another symbol)
f) multiple target markers available, variations of the current targetting deal
g) a ground target marker, like a large banner symbol to rally people onto a point (vs just tag)

Devil’s Advocate time: maybe I’m missing something, but what do you actually need such fine-grained squad controls/info for? There’s no PvNPCs content of the WvW maps that requires it. Is this just to make the blob-vs-blob fights more tactical?

If a plan is so complicated it needs 2 or more groups spreading out or moving independently, is it unreasonable to expect there be a separate commander for each of those groups?

Do you need detailed health bars to lead when the map plainly shows everyone when folks are downed or dead? Wouldn’t it be more efficient to delegate responding to damage surges & healing through them to the people who will actually do it instead the Commander micromanaging it?

Having the server constantly poll and update you on the supply counts of a large group, either by squad membership or radius is a HUGE drain on system resources. How often do you really need to know? When you set out after first forming up, when your group empties a supply dump, and after each layer of defenses is breached, sure – all easily managed with a ping like we have now. What’s the justification for such an extravagance as having it update even as often as every 5 seconds when 90% of the time you’re either moving from site to site or busting down a wall – times when the count is not going to change at all…

chestonu.8059:

- Mass Invite Function in Radius (cooldown timer to prevent spam)

- F5 – F9 keys used to keybind specific Commander commands W/ ground targeting and visible Flags/Icons/Symbols/Effects. “Stop”, “Go”, “Attack”, “Defend”, “Rally Here”

I do like the idea of a mass invite button, though probably with a significantly longer cooldown than most have proposed. I’m thinking more like three or even five minutes.

I also like the idea of mapping your favorites commands (from a preset list) to the function keys, but I think you could probably use that to fire text into the billboard (like the “Scarlet is attacking” messages) with a radius like the normal /say chat for EVERYONE around them to see. “Nike shouts: Rally Here!” in big letters in the middle of the screen, and tagged with who said it to reduced mixed messages. Throw in a moderate cooldown to keep commanders from spamming them (30 seconds?) and now you can direct traffic with or without an elaborate squad panel.

Nike.2631:

If a plan is so complicated it needs 2 or more groups spreading out or moving independently, is it unreasonable to expect there be a separate commander for each of those groups?

lets say youre the resident militia commander. you have a sizable group on you… maybe 25, only 4 of whom are guildies. youve just taken bay in an enemy bl, but it was a somewhat drawn out fight, and a couple enemy roaming groups retook the camps while you knocked down inner gate. you decide you would like to hold the keep, maybe throw a couple upgrades on it.

currently, the only realistic move is to bring every single person on you to the first camp you decide you want. because you cant expect pugs/militia to respond to “5 people go vale, 5 to s camp, the rest on me for nw camp. meet at nw tower afterwards.”

no one will have any clue who you are talking to. 3 people go s camp, 10 go vale, and you sigh while 12 people follow you to nw camp. at least they got one of the instructions almost correct, “the rest” followed you.

this is hardly complicated, a pug/militia commander wanting to temporarily split the group to take multiple small objectives for which a large group is completely unnecessary in order to maintain a high efficiency. a list of players that tells you party compositions is sufficient:

“party 2 go vale, party 3 go s camp and double supplies, the rest follow me. all meet up at tag after taking camps to threaten another major objective.” if your pugs listen, you can have almost everyone at full supply ready to build at least 4 catas or 5 rams without touching supplies at bay or s camp. but as it is right now… no pug will join your squad and even if they did there is no way for you to call him out for a specific task.

commanding is about delegating responsibility for smaller tasks that your underlings know how to complete, whether its in a single open field battle or in an efficient and fast map takeover. the current squad system doesnt help you do that.

hmmm… hope that helps to answer your question.

also, in relation to guild groups: they often will have several leaders on and running in the group… but only 1 tag. if it were my group, id most definitely be running it as id like to run a pug zerg, sending a party or 2 out to capture smaller objectives, scout, and feint while i run around with the larger group. but i dont think it would be necessary to have multiple tags for that, especially if i want to attract pugs to my own tag or if im running tagless to hide from spies and rally bait.

insanemaniac.2456:

Lets say youre the resident militia commander. you have a sizable group on you… maybe 25, only 4 of whom are guildies. youve just taken bay in an enemy bl, but it was a somewhat drawn out fight, and a couple enemy roaming groups retook the camps while you knocked down inner gate. you decide you would like to hold the keep, maybe throw a couple upgrades on it.

Currently, the only realistic move is to bring every single person on you to the first camp you decide you want. because you cant expect pugs/militia to respond to “5 people go vale, 5 to s camp, the rest on me for nw camp. meet at nw tower afterwards.”

No one will have any clue who you are talking to. 3 people go s camp, 10 go vale, and you sigh while 12 people follow you to nw camp. at least they got one of the instructions almost correct, “the rest” followed you.

This is hardly complicated, a pug/militia commander wanting to temporarily split the group to take multiple small objectives for which a large group is completely unnecessary in order to maintain a high efficiency. a list of players that tells you party compositions is sufficient:

“party 2 go vale, party 3 go s camp and double supplies, the rest follow me. all meet up at tag after taking camps to threaten another major objective.” if your pugs listen, you can have almost everyone at full supply ready to build at least 4 catas or 5 rams without touching supplies at bay or s camp. but as it is right now… no pug will join your squad and even if they did there is no way for you to call him out for a specific task.

Commanding is about delegating responsibility for smaller tasks that your underlings know how to complete, whether its in a single open field battle or in an efficient and fast map takeover. the current squad system doesnt help you do that.

hmmm… hope that helps to answer your question.

It does . It’s a LOT easier to work with a context.

So, in your scenario and it were me in charge, here’s what happens~

Nike: Good work! Now we need to split up. Any other Commanders here?

((sound of crickets))

Nike: I have a couple of people in voice chat with me. They are going to lead some raids so we can fortify here AND capture some camps.
Nike: In the next minute or so you may get an invite to group from either [Friend on voice X] or [Friend on voice Y]. If you do get an invite, accept it and follow them ’til we meet back up.

((Friends X and Y throw invites ‘til they get 5 people each who aren’t complete drooling mouth-breathers and then they scamper.))

Nike: Good hunting to our raiders. The rest of you are with me. We’ll get this place spruced up a little before moving on. The raiders will join back up as we hit the next big objective.

(Substitute guild channel for voice chat if you’re just typing to your guildies .)

I get it that that could be made easier, but its not wildly beyond our current tools.

DevonCarver.5370:

Summary of the past few pages:

General consensus is that the smaller bits that have been suggested would be enough to make the commander system much better for now and that it doesn’t require a complete tear down.

Outside of that there is a lot of discussion about the idea of a fully fleshed out squad system.

So, let’s say we’ve handled the commander side of it for now and just focus on a squad system. If we added a system for squad management, what are the top 3 things you would want it to do? Examples: Show squad position, allow for orders to be sent to individual players, provide health status of all squad members, etc.

This is a much larger project, but getting a sense of what people would want it to do can help provide bounds for the work.

-Supply
-Health (color coded for alive/downed/dead)
-The ability to arrange squad members disposition in the UI (drag and drop)
-Numbers associated to members (member 1,2,3…x)
-Colors associated to parties (Something different from the “classic” red/green/blue: Orange team, Purple team, Yellow team…)
-Position (color coded)
-Professions icons

Funny… I think I’m actively AGAINST profession Icons.

…Possibly because I have both a Ranger and an Engineer and I’m kinda tired off being pooped on for it…

Now, if you could self-identify with ‘Role Icons’ —

‘I am a DPS spec’ / ‘I am a Support spec’ / ‘I am a Control spec’ / ‘I am a Bunker spec’

— I think you might be able to put together more meaningful groups than just Professions (and assumptions) tell you.

My main is a Warrior. Do not look at me for god-king DPS, its not what I’m traited for .

I’d like to point out a few things from the perspective of someone who doesn’t command, might or might not pick up an icon in the future, but still spend most of their active play time in WvW.

Some of the stuff suggested seems too convoluted or intrusive, even with cooldown timers and what not. I’m sure a simple, streamlined system would trump those with lots of slash commands, auto mass invites, and so on. If I’m just wanting to roam around a bit, I don’t want stuff from 4 different commanders cluttering up my experience. Even things like the game message constantly telling me I’m in an overflow is completely unnecessary to me.

The best solutions are context sensitive. You hardly know that they’re there until you want them to be. I think a lot of good stuff is hidden far away in the UI currently (if it is even part of the UI), and I bet a lot of commander tools would not be (and are not) widely used because they’re so far from the game play. I know the LFG tool is probably fairly popular, but I don’t understand why it was relegated to sit under contacts. I think other features sometimes suffer a worse fate when they’re hidden.

I know UI work is pretty involved, but I’d consider investing the time in making a context UI that will only show based on what the person is doing. If you enable your commander icon, useful commander stuff shows up, if you join a squad, useful squad stuff shows up, if you equip a music instrument, music stuff shows up. Using the action bar is obviously not viable for commander functions, yet it has been the go to for other features and morphs so far. Developing a system to better handle the more advanced features of the game would be nice. When you equip a music instrument, you expect to play music, for example. When you equip your commander icon, you expect to command. Context additions to the UI would not needlessly clutter your experience, as you’d always have made the choice first. With a toggle to temporarily hide it, you’d be even better off.

As for squads, the obvious question is what would be helpful? The squad system is currently one of those hidden features. The game doesn’t ease you in to the experience as you go along. I’m not sure of how to browse who’s in the squad at a glance, maybe even with their supply count, or how the squad chat beats the map chat. There doesn’t seem to be a benefit to it right now where I go “I should really be in a squad to make this better”. It feels too arbitrary and not like a camaraderie. Whatever functions added should create a clearer connection between squad members, especially when there’s multiple commanders on the map. This comes back to delegation and organization.

I must stress though, I think commander features should be almost completely passive. Not everyone wants to be led. It should always be opt in, and even then, I think the commander’s tools should be mostly information gathering; nothing that interferes significantly in the UI or experience of other players. I get that some people take command delegation and the kind of team work that comes with it seriously, but there are also groups or individuals who don’t want to (or don’t always want to) be part of that system.

There are also some bad commanders out there, and they will have these tools too.

I think what we need is pinging like in LoL for both Commanders in WvW/PvE and in sPvP. “I´m on the way to this place”, “I need help here”, “Danger there”, “Be careful” etc, would make Communication in both WvW and PvP so much easier.

Julenal.3907:

DevonCarver.5370:

So, let’s say we’ve handled the commander side of it for now and just focus on a squad system. If we added a system for squad management, what are the top 3 things you would want it to do? Examples: Show squad position, allow for orders to be sent to individual players, provide health status of all squad members, etc.

-Squad position
-Squad health
-Squad supply

That if mapdraw is mapwide, it it is squadwide then that instead of supplyinfo

This. And Devon thank you for specifically bringing this up.

DevonCarver.5370:

Summary of the past few pages:

(…) So, let’s say we’ve handled the commander side of it for now and just focus on a squad system. If we added a system for squad management, what are the top 3 things you would want it to do? Examples: Show squad position, allow for orders to be sent to individual players, provide health status of all squad members, etc. (…)

Sub-Squads:

The Squad would be divided in sub-squads.

-Join a Sub-Squad: instead of have a “join squad” option, would be “join squad 1”, “join squad 2”, etc.

-Sub-Squad Chat: the commander could also have separated chats for each scuad: /squad (to talk with all the squad), and /squad1, /scuad2, etc, to talk with each sub-squad.

-Sub-Squad Orders: it would work like the Shift + left click system to mark things (mark a direction, path or point to go)on the mini map for the party members. The commander could mark directions in the mini-map (as we can do in a normal party) with Shift (could be a different key) + left click for squad 1, [another key] + left click for saqud 2, etc.

-Show Sub-Squad Position: the Commander would assign a Sub-Squad Leader. Could be a different symbol than the commander, but with the same color system (or different icons) that tell if the the team is attacking, defending, etc.

-Sub-Squad Number: the Commander could have a command that let him/her know how many players there are in each sub-squad.

I can’t help thinking all these “assign sub-leader” functions can be ditched in favor of “commanders may choose to join other commander’s squads as lieutenants” or something similar.

Since the consensus is that once you have a tag, you should have it account wide, and nobody wants to pay an opportunity cost, in the long run people with commander tags are going to become very, very common…

Some things I’d really like to see for the WvW Commander system are…

1. The ability to mark the world map with drawings, markers, and text notes that are visible only by people in your squad. These should remain on the map until removed

2. I’d like to see active commanders show up on the HUD with a short message of what they are doing and if they are LFM. This way when you join a map you can instantly see at a glance the active commanders, what they are doing, and if they need more people. This is useful for PVP and PVE; Example “Commander Bob – Tequatl DPS group – LFM” or “Commander Sara – Flipping Supply Camps – Full”

3. I’d like to see the ability to join commander squads added to the LFG tool.

4. I’d like to see a drawback for having an excessive group for certain objectives. For example Supply Camps could have a max cap rate of 10, for every friendly player over the cap rate in a radius from the cap add 30 seconds to cap time. This would encourage small roaving havoc groups to peel off from the main zerg for smaller objectives and discourage the zerge from going out of their way to cap smaller objectives.

5. I’d like to see commander tags divided between areas of the game. So there would be a WvW Commander Tag(works on in WvW bought for Honor Tokens), a Guild Commander Tag (works only for guild bought for Guild currency), and a PVE Commander Tag (Works only in PVE bought for gold)

As much as I’d like to see a progression system for leveling up commander, I know it’s a bad idea from a game design standpoint. To use an example Planetside 1 had a progression system for abilities and command. When PS1 launched there were few commanders because leveling up command meant not leveling up your character progression. Then once people started hitting their progression cap, suddenly everybody wanted to command to continue their progression, but most of these people had no actual interest in commanding. These individuals just wanted to continue to progress their character and the whole game suffered.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

How big do you expect a squad to be?

I expect a squad to be between 10 -20 people, anymore than that and you start to get a breakdown in mechanics.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

What kind of content is a PvE commander most useful?

Right now a PvE commander is most useful for things like Scarlets Invasion where many objectives are on the map, but large numbers of players would be completely uncoordinated. After that they are useful for adventures like the tower of nightmares where content is somewhat gated by group size, it currently lets groups build up a “critical mass” to keep going.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Is money a good enough gate for commander tags?

I’d say no, I think it should be higher. At launch it was fine, but the economy has shifted and 100 gold is much too easy to get.

Nike.2631:

I get it that that could be made easier, but its not wildly beyond our current tools.

indeed. the thing is, it would take so long that by the time youre buddies are ready to go, they couldve already been back on your tag. and maybe its a case of planning ahead, but you may not have the luxury during a drawn out fight where your attention needs to be on the battlefield.

even if half your people listen, youll have at least 3 parties in your squad that you can delegate small tasks to… and if half the people in each party arent just aloof and following the tag blindly, those smaller tasks can have a reasonable chance of success. and the reason is because youre able to point at a specific group of people and say “heres a task for you specifically”, thats something that is barely possible and nowhere near easy with the current squad system because the only information a squad can give us is thru /squadinfo… and thats commanders eyes only, no party breakdowns, no profession info.

which brings me to profession info:
you say youre against providing that info, but it is truly necessary info for a good commander to have. i can think of reasons to ask if i have engi, ranger, thief, mesmer, or ele that dont specifically apply to a zerg v zerg fight. guards, wars, and necros have poor ability to hide and nearly unusable ranged weapons. i dont want to have to ask for each person to type a letter corresponding to their profession. i can, but its annoying to me. i would like to be able to say you, you, and you, take out that AC. instead of … hey can i get some big aoes on that AC? maybe? no? still autoing the door? kthxbai ram :/

i would like to be able to break a keep outer gate, break off a thief or two and a mesmer, and wait 3 minutes for a big enemy group to see a broken gate and no one inside, repair the gate, and go to the tower on the other side of the map where ive sent a party.

i need to know quickly, i dont want to wait for people to say what class they are. and its not info i cant get in any case, by just clicking on everybody following me.

DevonCarver.5370:

If we added a system for squad management, what are the top 3 things you would want it to do? Examples: Show squad position, allow for orders to be sent to individual players, provide health status of all squad members, etc.

This is a much larger project, but getting a sense of what people would want it to do can help provide bounds for the work.

TOP 3 things:

• Increase maximum squad size to 50
• Commander has NO CHAT SUPPRESSION in squad chat
• Increase radius of /supplyinfo (more of a general thing I suppose)

Other things:

• Make it easier to join squads, many people don’t know they exist. Unfortunately I don’t have any suggestions on how to do this, you’d have to look to fellow peers.
• Maybe make it so the chat somehow highlights the commander’s text, maybe a different color or bolded
• Class icons- Very small (optional) HuD element which has the picture of the class icon and the number beside it of how many there are. I know this could lead to a lot of generalizations of classes, but knowing the availability of class specific skills (eg: tomes, portals, static fields) could help a lot.
• Map markers need to be a bit more visible and useful.

How about no:
-Lieutenants, I just don’t see the necessity, commander tags are easy to come by, I know in the zergs I roll with there are at least 5 other commanders which I can easily pick out. I’ve seen many people suggest this, if someone could explain to my why it’s such a big deal that’d be helpful.

A suggestion from a commanders PoV that could actually assist us and have no need for an entire screen to be filled up with whos in the squad.

Have a simple UI with an option to show professions only, for instance:

Squad Window:
15x Ele
25x Warriors
14x Thieves
blah blah blah

showing how many of what professions that are in the squad, and from my pov playing in wvw back in the day finding a specific profession in the field was a pain in the butt, this would solve a few issues.

also add an option to select a few skills in a dropdown menu to show who in the squad has it currently equipped, such as…you wanting to find a mesmer in your squad with portal already in his bar or a staff/sword+pistol mesmer…
you would set the drop down search option in squad menu to find that criteria of mesmers / whatever your looking for so you wont have to ask anyone in particular to switch from their normal builds/skills/weapon sets. Once you sort through the squad this way, names will appear so you may address them individually, scroll window added in case you have a huge one, but scroll window only applies to the name section. Color coded minimap dots based on your squads professions. (going by professions colors).

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

Would be nice to see them in the screen. Dont know how important would be to see them on the map but wouldnt be bad to have it if one can Shift + left click on the map and trace routes they can follow. That would be very nice, since the function of a Commander should be mainly give orders.

2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

I like that. And if the Commander also can set areas in which the players should stay, and also if they should stand or retreat, etc.

3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

I think that maybe could be more than one way to get it, and one could be this, but i dont think it should be the only one.

Also, i think the Commander title should be account bound, since the commander is the player and not the character. Over all now that the WvW lvls will be shared between all characters.

@Isaiah,

Great summary. A few comments.

1. I’d reeeeally like to see commanders have the ability to unclaim structures if there is no active buff on it. So many times a random guild will claim something they cannot buff.
2. I really like the idea of a commander’s tag only showing up to select people (party, team, guild, etc. Glad to see that captured)
3. I do think the tag should be account bound and cost 100 gold + a certain number of laurels.
4. Also, I’m not a big fan of too many options. At the end of the day, I want the commander to be leading us in fights, not standing around trying to lay out responsibilities for a ton of different sub squads. It’s easy enough just to say it through voice chat.

Regarding gating, I think that having minimum rank 250 in wvw would be a reasonable baseline in addition to the current gold cost. It shows some dedication to the game type and someone of that rank should have at least a rudimentary understanding of wvw strategy.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

—snip—
Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?
—snip—

Mother of Grenth. This. SO MUCH THIS! I love this idea.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Question
4) What did I miss on this list

You need some way to pass command to another guild/squad member without reforming the whole squad.

/makecommander: Pass command leadership to the targeted character in your Squad.

I’d prefer “private” squads over " guild" only squads as they don’t exclude inviting non-guild members for private events. But if you are going with guild only commanders then you should not have to reform the entire squad every time a guild member who is commanding has to log out.

Reforming an entire squad every time someone has to log out is frustrating and you end up losing people from the original squad. This could work for ALL C&S formats.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Question
4) What did I miss on this list

When a commander uses a waypoint, a popup should be displayed to commander’s squad asking if they would like to use waypoint with the commander. Minimizing a common reason commanders get suppressed in mapchat and adding value to players who join a commander’s squad.

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Kitten no.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

1. in wvw, considering i can manage fine without it now and only see luxury benefits from it, i dont think its really necessary. for guild missions itd be truly useful and incomparable (especially because the only players visible on the map are party members and commanders).

2. i like it, but there is almost 0 use in open field battles. your attention must be anywhere but the top right corner of your screen. i think itd be great for training new players. would i use it? probably only if event creation were as simple as calling target on the ram site or door.

3. i think no. guild membership has even less bearing on game knowledge and leadership ability than amassing x amount of tradable currency. plus, people already complained a LOT about how they felt forced to join large guilds in order to take part in guild missions. giving guilds the ability to hand out commander tags wont do anything to discourage trolls or encourage leaders. in fact, we already have the unfortunate situation of guild sponsored commander tags that are just wasted donations, though its not prevalent.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

I guess that depends from the size of the squad. For me personally is not very important to see the members of the squad on the map. It´s more important to see the Squad Leaders on the map.

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

An excellent idea that i agree. Would be nice to see that implemented. A notification is popping up like “Commander XYZ is attacking X.” Bring supplies to complete the “Siege-Equipment” event. Or an event to “Capture the Enemy Commander” maybe ?.

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Depends on the size of the guild. It might be seen ok for bigger guilds but for smaller guilds that could cause a problem.

Question
4) What did I miss on this list

ETA Just Joking

Regards

Seed

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

I’m not sure if this is really necessary. It would just clutter the minimap up way too much. Changing the color of the name plates, like the party system does, would be nice though.

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

I suppose this would be cool. As long as it doesn’t clutter things up, current events have the big orange circle and signs and things everywhere, please don’t make things go crazy.

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

It definitely seems fair, newcomers shouldn’t just try to become renown commanders without even being in a guild, it just doesn’t make sense. Having an active enough guild where it can purchase these new type of tags should mean that it’s qualified enough and came make smart decisions about who to give commander tags to.

Question
4) What did I miss on this list

Account bound commander tag. “…the commander is the player and not the character.” (Didn’t quote ‘cuz I’ve seen it a couple of times now)

Hokie.1045:

Account bound commander tag. “…the commander is the player and not the character.” (Didn’t quote ‘cuz I’ve seen it a couple of times now)

i see this constantly. i agree with the direction of making unlocks account bound. it just makes sense, because it doesnt discourage players from playing different toons, playing the game how they like.

but no one knows who your other toons are and thats a kittening huge issue when it comes to confidence, trust, and expectations. and thats why i dont think account bound commander tags are currently viable.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

I can see a huge amount of potential in this. If it could be done in a streamlined manner, it would provide much more control for the commander and much more information/direction for all of the squad members.

New feature/option for commanders, “Call for reinforcements” Go to the rally champion NPC (NPC is always there now?) and pick option, select minimum account wvw level/rank. Random players will get a pop up throughout the server who meet the requirements of account WvW rank to travel to the WvW map which the commander requested. Imagine being outnumbered 70 to 10 in a borderlands map, 70 of your people show up after a few minutes because of the reinforcements. Now we have a fight. If you’re in a dungeon, event, battle, guesting? you won’t get a popup. If you’re in a party your whole party gets the pop up.

Destroy siege-Another new option by commander, commander targets the siege, types /destroysiege. Nearby allies will get a pop up/go near the siege to destroy the siege. People who do not have max supply will get some supple back. Certain amount of people must /destroysiege or agree to destroy the siege.

Commander rank account bound, if commander tags up his/her account name will show and not his/her character name. Normal, bronze commander-rank 150 or above, silver commander-rank 620 or above, gold commander-1395 or above, platinum commander-rank 2545 or above, mithril commander-rank 4095 or above, diamond commander- rank 6445 or above. Since commander is account bound now, refund people the money for additional tags per account. Example, I have 5 total commander tags on my account, after update I get a 400 gold refund in my mailbox.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Commander gating

• Current 100g gate isn’t the cleanest gate. (Whole goal behind a gate is to limit the number of commanders out there.
• Gating using WvW abilities seems to have some debate to it, but seems like something we should avoid.
• Account bound commander tags vs character bound.

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Question
If there will be any change to the Commander Gating, does that mean everybody start from scratch? or current Commanders still get to keep their tags? Because I would hate to lose/get a refund on my tag. I saved hard for that when i had very little cash and would like to keep it.

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

Commander gating

• Current 100g gate isn’t the cleanest gate. (Whole goal behind a gate is to limit the number of commanders out there.
• Gating using WvW abilities seems to have some debate to it, but seems like something we should avoid.
• Account bound commander tags vs character bound.

The events sound good but you would have to work on the UI. Current assault/defend event + siege building event + gate attack event would cover a very large part of the screen.

I don’t have any interest in commanding in WvW so gating via WvW abilities wouldn’t really make sense for me.

I would have gotten one by now if it was account bound. I would only be using this to help with organization when doing guild stuff. I have different characters for different roles. Since the tag is currently character bound it is pointless for doing that.

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Since 100g equals 50,000 Influence this will either be a price reduction, price increase or no change and possibly with the added delay of build time. An active guild can be replaced by a sufficiently large quantity of gold. Removing the ability to buy influence with gold would probably be outside the scope of this discussion. It could require merits but that just makes it a time gate and a punishment for having a smaller guild. Unless it is your intention to not have small guilds then that approach(requiring a significant cost in guild merits) would be a bad idea. There are already several things that put smaller guilds at a disadvantage, you don’t need to add more.

insanemaniac.2456:

Hokie.1045:

Account bound commander tag. “…the commander is the player and not the character.” (Didn’t quote ‘cuz I’ve seen it a couple of times now)

i see this constantly. i agree with the direction of making unlocks account bound. it just makes sense, because it doesnt discourage players from playing different toons, playing the game how they like.

but no one knows who your other toons are and thats a kittening huge issue when it comes to confidence, trust, and expectations. and thats why i dont think account bound commander tags are currently viable.

That seems like a problem that can be trivially solved without ANet lifting a single finger. If you are following a commander around who you think is doing a great job just add them to your friend list and set the nickname appropriately. Obviously that can be improved if we can get another list just for commanders and maybe another field for notes instead of having to abuse the nickname.

Hi,
I dont know if this has been mentioned yet, but often there are multiple commanders running around with their various zergs converging on eachother(from the same server that is). Sometimes, you can lose the commander you were following.

I suggest that there could be a color system to the commander icon instead of everyone having a blue icon. When you zone in, you pick a color, and that color is not selectable by another commander until he/she un-tags.

This way, in the middle of a mulit-commander zerg, you can find your commander a little easier.

This color change would also impact the minimap as well as ‘world map’.

Thoughts?

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Question
4) What did I miss on this list

Add the commander tag (of the color the commander is) in front of the chat the commander says so that the followers can see what’s said by a commander and what is said by normal mortals.

Commander can control this by toggling it on and off with a command.
/chattag on
/chattag off
Or if he just wants a single tagged message while being untagged in chat
/tagwrite “Message”

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

This is a very interesting idea. It would simplify the communication and pull the attention to important things. But I have also some questions about this. Will you see the location of the siege weapon the commander placed on the map after the event is initiated? Can you restrict the visibility? Otherwise you can have an overload with events from different commanders on the map. Could you initiate events like “repair the walls/doors in xy” or “repair mortars an cannons in zz” in an easy way without clicking each wall or mortar? Could you initiate events by clicking on objects like supply camps or towers on the map and ask for " start upgrade mortar in xy" or “start upgrade higher supply in camp aa”?

insanemaniac.2456:

but no one knows who your other toons are and thats a kittening huge issue when it comes to confidence, trust, and expectations. and thats why i dont think account bound commander tags are currently viable.

Going off the assumption that all ‘big important good’ commander use a voice chat server, all you have to do is “Hey guys, this is my alt” there, done. The problem which you outlined it literally something that is solved in a matter of seconds and should not be a valid reason for not making commander tags account bound.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

I think this thread is nearing it’s end so I wanted to do a quick high level summary of what I’ve gotten out of it so far and a few questions about each.

• Removal of buff display to enemies. As well as we should avoid doing skills/abilities that highlight the commander to enemies.

Mostly an observation that right now commander endure increased risks, which is a significant part of the reason they could be given additional powers/benefits. If the risk is removed, then yes, there’s less justification for their receiving abilities – including squad intel and direction abilities. Personally I think that having commanders be visible to the enemy increases the interaction in fights and promotes interesting gameplay. Some tactics only work because the commander can act as a lightning rod or bait for their own traps (pay no attention to the thugs standing next to me just waiting for you to come at me…). But I like trade-offs rather than strict advantages.

Questions:
1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

Inversely proportional to squad size? With 10-15 it sounds great. With 40 I think it’d turn your mini map into a field of colored snow…

• Seems to be some debates on buffs to followers, but there is a lot of good examples of ways to do that.

Just wanted to reiterate that buffs that tip the fight are bad. Buffs that help set up the fight (speed to get there, wxp to encourage group cohesion) can help with the reality that most Commander-lead groups are fairly casual affairs. Groups that are not casual are generally on voice chat which trumps 99% of the changes suggested here for speed and clarity of communication.

2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

It certainly plugs directly into the condition responses of players . You’d need safeguards against innocent spamming and hostile misdirection, but as a way of communicating its wonderfully visceral.

• Gating using WvW abilities seems to have some debate to it, but seems like something we should avoid.

People say that, but I’ve heard very little reasoning behind it. Gating needs to happen in one form or another so “it’ll slow down Commander acquisition” is the point not a strike against the concept. Its hard for me to shake the feeling that people just don’t want to give up their stacks of guard leech or their favorite siege skill and actually commit to being a commander on some of their characters. Wxp would actually encourage diversity of roles – paying with wxp, commanders (initially) need people who have diverse wpx skills rather than doing everything themselves.

• Account bound commander tags vs character bound.

With world experience becoming account wide, it gives you a nice situation where the entire account becomes commander-capable at the same time and then its a choice: “does this character command, or are they going to be my supply runner, or are they my guard-leeching roamer?”

As they continue to gain wxp, they gain the privilege of doing more things simultaneously. Logical expansion of the existing environment.

3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Hell. No.

4) What did I miss on this list

Cookies. Good commanders should have their own currency of ‘cookies’, granted as an extra drop when they complete wvw world events. They can then mail them to squad members. These cookies provide no buff, but man do they taste good!

Nah, I’ve got nothing else .

Thanks for listening!

shauncoates.6874:

When a commander uses a waypoint, a popup should be displayed to commander’s squad asking if they would like to use waypoint with the commander. Minimizing a common reason commanders get suppressed in mapchat and adding value to players who join a commander’s squad.

Ooo. I LIKE that!

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

Seed.5467:

An excellent idea that i agree. Would be nice to see that implemented. A notification is popping up like “Commander XYZ is attacking X.” Bring supplies to complete the “Siege-Equipment” event. Or an event to “Capture the Enemy Commander” maybe ?

One bit you mention in passing that I think should be strongly highlighted:

Having those events say who initiated them would be hugely helpful with not getting sidetracked by ‘subversive commanders’. In fact it would help you identify who is throwing trebuchets in dumb places trying to leach the group’s supply.

People should have to own their good directives and their bad ones.

The events also need fairly brief timers so they don’t linger. A command to break the door becomes superfluous after a near wall goes down. Its also meaningless if the group is driven into retreat. Timers aren’t flawlessly context sensitive but they do ensure adequate clean-up.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

Nice to have. Allows to distinguish players dots from people actually working toghether with a commander. But I see a problem with a big squad. Maybe not showing when fully zoomed out as the only exception?

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

I guess some people might like it, but honestly this should have the lowest priority if you re-do the system. It also does not solve the problems of people not following orders (e.g. throwing additional siege if not requested, not building siege). An event like system will not change this. I think it’s an overkill.

A commander event system is more useful if it’s actually setting objectives on the whole map. For example the commanders creates an event for people to “take this supply camp”, “Looking for scout in eastern tower” would be more interesting.

Events in the near vacinity of the commander are IMHO not worth any dev effort for events. But aiming more an whole map strategy they might be interesting. But I think this is clearly out of scope for now.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

• Current 100g gate isn’t the cleanest gate. (Whole goal behind a gate is to limit the number of commanders out there.

If you have a goal of limit the total number of commanders make the commander tag decaying if not used actively in WvW (make sure being AFK at the spawn does not count towards an activity for example).

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Question
3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

Alternative way to obtain a commander tag is ok. But preventg large guilds createing tons of commanders easily. Make sure if you leave a guild or do not represent it, then you cannot use a tag that was awarded by the guild. Just tie it to the guild if it was sponsored by the guild. And limit the tags a guild can generate as well.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

4) What did I miss on this list

Yes, declaiming objectives when there are no buff on them anymore! This is an important aspect when no one from a guild is currently online to claim something else or a new players or troll claim a structure.

Please with sugar on top of it:
- objective can be declaimed by the claming guild at any time (not have to find a unclaimed supply camp on a map). It’s just annoying.
- if there is no buff for x amout of time on a claimed objective it can be declaimed by a commander / get automatically declaimed?

Also….

All commanders should be able to see other “Public” commander pins.

Havoc forces need to see where the public commanders are so they can plan where to strike. Currently if players join a squad they can’t see other commander pins. If you add guild/private squads it would be nice for the commanders of those guild/private squads to see where the public commanders are.

On the subject of Commander Visibility: I like everything suggested except for one thing – please do not make the commander tag colour/shape be tied to WvW rank. There are plenty of new commanders out there that are intimidated about the idea of tagging up for the first time and they dont need the pressure of being singled out as a “new” commander.

Commander tools:

1. Very important. If I send a snipe squad off to cap a supply camp, I want to see whereabouts they are on the map. The suggestions look fine but I would remove the ability for commanders to make announcements by way of a large message appearing in the middle of the screen. Its too open to abuse and spam. If you absolutely must do it, make it limited to WvW only.

2. LOVE the idea of an event style system for building siege. However I would like to point out that its only a good idea if the system is limited only to commanders. Too many randoms drop siege in places where siege is not needed, wasting supply.

If you do raise the cost of becoming a commander, I would ask that you give several weeks, if not months, notice. 100g is still a lot of money for the majority of the playerbase and those patiently saving their money deserve the time to work on getting the commander tag at the same price as the rest of us.

The ability to purchase a commander tag should not be limited by any factors other than currency. Whether this becomes a simple gold price, or a combined gold + karma price I will leave in your hands as I believe both those suggestions have merit. Just dont make it require WvW badges or a particular WvW rank. Not every commander buys their tag to use in WvW.

3. Guild gating is an unfair system. As stated, it would require people to be in larger guilds (If smaller guilds can obtain commander tags, then larger guilds would be able to obtain them at a rate that would make them far too prevalent anyway) and even if you were in a bigger guild, the decision to become a commander is not yours alone. The decision to become a commander should be the players, not a committee of players.

I like the suggestions so far, but I just want to reiterate that I feel its a bad idea to start tacking on experience/rank/rating requirements to a commander. I get that they need to be less common (Lions Arch sure does have a lot of commanders that you never see anywhere else these days) but artificial gating isnt the answer.

Some recommended viewing for Devon and all the CDI-hosting Devs .

Khisanth.2948:

That seems like a problem that can be trivially solved without ANet lifting a single finger. If you are following a commander around who you think is doing a great job just add them to your friend list and set the nickname appropriately. Obviously that can be improved if we can get another list just for commanders and maybe another field for notes instead of having to abuse the nickname.

the friend list is this game is useless imo… i dunno if theyve fixed anything with it since about.. oh… a year ago, but nicknames and comments used to reset every patch. the lack of a friend chat channel really hurts, i dont bother opening that list for the most part because i honestly hate whispering. anet really needs to lift a finger here.

Hokie.1045:

Going off the assumption that all ‘big important good’ commander use a voice chat server, all you have to do is “Hey guys, this is my alt” there, done. The problem which you outlined it literally something that is solved in a matter of seconds and should not be a valid reason for not making commander tags account bound.

not a good assumption. various factors make it hit or miss. especially when you include your followers needing to be on VOIP too. or you know, like… being anything more than zombies and paying attention to /s or /t. few people actually know large portions of the regular wvw’ers (even in a small community like fc) and its plain easy to be anonymous even with a tag. if i were to buy a tag on my guardian i wouldnt stop saying “im rikk” for a week straight, whether im on ts or not.

secondly, its not just the good people. currently, we only have 1 response to troll tags. join the real commanders squad to block out every single other tag. we need improvement there, account bound tags open more opportunities for trolls to start with unsullied reputations and screw around with people. i dont think placating lazyness is worth the opportunity cost of hassling new players with figuring out whos who any more than they already have to.

I love the idea of commander created events. To add to it perhaps we can have complex requirements in them. Like a commander can create an event to take down a gate without tagging the door and creating swords on the map for the enemy.

I also really like the idea of commanders being able to access a special chat that appears yellow across the squads screen.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

Questions:
1.) How important is it to see your squad members as a different color and always visible on your map like party?

Would most definitely need another color, and maybe have an option for near, far, whole map for visibility?

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

2) I’ve always felt the best commander organization tool would be the ability to create events. Like drop a siege and the commander can set this is a build event then everyone gets Ui like build this flame ram 0/50 supply needed. Or Destroy this gate <show gate health bar>. Lets assume for this discussion there are no rewards to the events just a communication tool. Thoughts on commander created events?

It would have to be something super-intuitive and quick to drop. If it takes too long, it will be ignored and they will just type it out or say in TS.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

3) A guild gating system would be clean but require all commanders to be in a fairly active guild is this a fair gating system?

So only large guilds would get it? No thank you, not interested. A guild that runs 10-20 on reset night but only 5-10 during the week would need to be able to get it as well, and I have no desire to run in a guild that queues a BL all by themselves just to get a guild commander tag for my leaders. Maybe scale the difficulty by the number of active members in the guild? And make it available only while in (and representing) the guild that they got it in… if they quit the guild, they lose it.

Isaiah Cartwright.8569:

4) What did I miss on this list

What about guild commendations for wvw for the guild commander gating? Could be escorting/killing yaks, taking camps, towers, keeps, etc. One per night, or something similar to how guild commendations are done now, pick your objective carefully. Obviously an SM take would reward much more than killing a yak. On this note, you could also have the pve guild commander set up much the same… tie it to events in pve.