Guild Wars 2

The commander tags can be bought for 100 gold but they’re not measuring the commanders skill in any way. I think commanders should be able to rank up so you can see if it’s a good/experienced commander or a bad/inexperienced commander. I’m not sure how this should work, but in some way it should be visible to other players and the commander himself if he’s a good commander or if he needs to improve.

Ranks
Bronze Commander (Tag in bronze)
None

Silver Commander (Tag in silver)
- Permanent Aura of Leadership (5% movement speed to allies in a XXX radius around you)

Gold Commander (Tag in gold)
- Permanent Aura of Leadership (5% movement speed to allies in a XXX radius around you)
- Permanent Aura of Bloodthirst (Killing an enemy player grants allies near you in a XXX radius 5% movement speed for 3 seconds. 3 second cd)

Platinum Commander (Tag in platinum)
- Permanent Aura of Leadership (5% movement speed to allies in a XXX radius around you)
- Permanent Aura of Bloodthirst (Killing an enemy player grants allies near you in a XXX radius 5% movement speed for 3 seconds. 3 second cd)
- Permanent Aura of Motivation (Allies repair structures 10% faster)

Diamond Commander (Tag in diamond)
- Permanent Aura of Leadership (5% movement speed to allies in a XXX radius around you)
- Permanent Aura of Bloodthirst (Killing an enemy player grants allies near you in a XXX radius 5% movement speed for 3 seconds- 3 second cd)
- Permanent Aura of Motivation (Allies repair structures 10% faster)
- Permanent Aura of Fortification (Structures in a XXX radius around you takes 5% less damage)

Legendary Commander (Tag in flames and blood)
- Permanent Aura of Leadership (5% movement speed to allies in a XXX radius around you)
- Permanent Aura of Bloodthirst (Killing an enemy player grants allies near you in a XXX radius 5% movement speed for 3 seconds. 3 second cd)
- Permanent Aura of Motivation (Allies repair structures 10% faster)
- Permanent Aura of Fortification (Structures in a XXX radius around you takes 5% less damage)
- Permanent Aura of a Tyrant (Reduces incoming damage on himself by 20%. Heal 1% of his health for every allies death in a XXX radius around him)

Commander tag is mostly for WvW, so it should be measured in how much in WvW and how many good feats you have accomplished. How meaningful you are to your team and your server.

ohhhh, thats a good idea
In fact this way people might be able to acquire titles and achievements through commanding, i love it

Then you need a scoring system based on how good the commander is. And how on earth would you accomplish that?

Score based on kills? Yeah, Sacrx is a great pug commander, everybody know that :p
Score based on votes from people following the commander? Can you spell “trolling”, lol?
Score based on how many keeps they captured? Yes I am sure that its truly the best commanders that run around the karma train and cap garrison with 50 people while its defended by a Ranger and his trusty pig, not these chumps that win 30v50 open field engagements, lawl.
Score based on wxp? Ugh… Dont even get me started.

So again… How do you measure it?

I don’t think there is a way to “measure” how good a commander is. Even the current wxp ranks favor zerging and karma trains, it has nothing to do with personal skill.

Most players know commanders on their servers so I don’t think extra ranks would improve anything.

I’d rather see more utility options for commanders, such as the ability to select a colour for the tag for main/havoc teams.

This is a stupid idea. You don’t want newer commanders having to play catch up, and being abused that they are not willing to tag down because a “diamond commander” wants to tag up.

It’s fine as is, only thing needs changing is the ability to alter tag colours to avoid confusion.

There was a huge CDI about that subject. There were a lot of really good ideas in it, and what’s more, the devs took part in the discussion. Look it up. A similar idea as in the OP was discussed there, too, iirc.

Just keep the names of good and bad commanders in mind… the good ones I have on my friend list the bad ones no.

Like Claudius said this was already discuss during the CDI on commander. Overall, people like the idea but don’t know what should be use to rank the commander. And anyway, more people prefer to use different shape and color as an organization tools and not a rank of commander. This way a blue dorito commander will have the main zerg, while a red dorito commander will be running supply to repair a gate and a silver dorito will lead the havoc team. Way more useful that the ranking of commander.

Anyway anybody that play WvW a bit know most of the good and bad commander so this ranking will only be useful for new people or people that don’t play a lot.

More grinding for stats?

throws food

Instead of ranking the commander improve their tools, squads could be much more usefull today is only a separate chat… let us see where the squad members are, let commander choose who can enter his squad so we can ignore afkers and trolls, let the commander choose captains to better divide the groups and give them obejctive tasks, like havoc captain, defensive captain, I dont now I am no commander but I miss this stuff from other games… or at least give guilds this hability, this game is called Guild Wars and have very few content and utilities for guilds, bonus banners are not enough.

This is an amazing idea, +1 from me. Would help distinguish bad from good commanders when I’m not running with the guild or people I already know.

Some commanders are good on attack, but bad at defense;
Some commanders are good at defense, but bad at attack
Some commanders are good managing different groups of people, others are good at driving a zerg.
Some commanders have great map awareness, some are good at taking the best solution when hard pressed, some play for PPT, other just for fun, other change style depending on the people following them.

I never met a commander that was bad at everything. And such a system would make it even harder for new commanders to get experience…

Defining what a good commander is is hard, because the definition depends on the person making it.

Some commanders only tag in “hard” situations – that is, when we are outnumbered 1:10, our structures are attacked, and no “experienced” commander wants to take up.
So, they do what they can, but, obviously, it is little. With a rating system, who would be willing to tag-up in hard situations, when you are sure you’re going to lose everything? Defensive commanders tend to have less followers than offensive ones… So they will always be struck in bronze?

No ratings sounds better to me. Because there is no “fair” way to rate a commander or it’s experience. And buffs would make it even harder to get new commanders to give it a try/players to follow these commanders.

That sound to me like, “upgrade our zerg”, “make zerg more effective” and “we need a wxp/karma train more effective”.

Piedplat.3597:

That sound to me like, “upgrade our zerg”, “make zerg more effective” and “we need a wxp/karma train more effective”.

Agreed.

You want to know which is the good commander? Play the game and figure it out. The good commander probably isn’t the one karma training himself higher stats.