Showing Posts For Horobi.9084:
I don’t know about it being exploitative, but I would expect the commander to sit back and play the map (they already do it to some extent by hitting M and getting reports from scouts). I guess in my mind I envision the commander sitting in a keep getting information from the scouts and placing objectives on the map for their squad to accomplish. I fully agree that most guilds/servers manage the battle to a lesser or greater extent using voice servers and websites. The in-game tools we have available limit the extent a commander can micro manage the battle. It is difficult to micro manage the militia in-game due to chat suppression and the rate at which a commander can type the objectives in chat. It is very taxing (under current tools) for a commander to keep many things going on at the same time, this leads to why I believe zergs are popular. It is easy to say everyone stack on me, follow, supply on me, etc. I believe most of us would agree while zerging can be fun, most of us would prefer a well organized overarching battle where tasks are assigned and the individuals of the squad accomplish them. It should be noted that zergs have lots of limitations, one of which is true map control. One or two zergs can’t control the map if many strikes are being done simultaneously. I believe that with a greater sustained micro management of the battle (aided by in-game tools) the zergs will fall by the wayside and the wvw experience will progress to something even more enjoyable for all of us. Thank you everyone for your thoughts so far.
I have a potential solution to some of the issues (breaking up zergs, new player being lost, small guilds looking to help out the war effort, etc.) with wvw and a method of potentially increasing the overall skill cap for wvw. I think it would improve wvw if commanders are given dynamic event like tools. The commanders could place the events (not suggesting rewards for completion) on the map for those in their squad (attack, defend/hold, build siege @ X location, etc.). There could be feedback in the system indicating if the desired number people are at the objective, so the squad members and commander can know which objectives are being done and which need more to complete. This will break up the zergs (reduce culling) by allowing a commander to easily hit multiple targets at the same time, forcing each side to respond in kind by attacking/defending multiple objectives. Thoughts?