Squad Leader Archive

I have to agree with Wolfwoodcross on this Yeraze. I don't feal a person willing to go after SL should be penelized for wanting to go solo. Making a class dependent utterly on othere players removed a lot of playability to the class.

What I mean buy this is we can't have it where a player in order to play is forced to make a group in a game that is suppose to design for player free interaction. artesen classes are not forced to have a tool holder when building things. Archetecs are note required to have a contruction crew. Why force SL to. Tather we want a class that can be played on a stand alone bases. Can a SL stand alone in the battle field? Not as it is now.

Being a sl does not let you tell the players how to attack a target. does not let you decide where to go with w raid. You are only a tool in a group like doctor. So your not really the leader of the group. But with Troopers(pets) You atleast have some control of the battle and battle targets. It's add to a class that benifits the player of that class to stand alone.

As of right now SL is the only class that can't stand alone doing it's designated role in the game.

One more example is I know friends who are Master marksmen or riflemen and Tailor. Or Master brawler/droid ingineer. Even entertainer/bounty hunters. But it is not practical as it stand to be a SL and a nothere none combat type. SL needs to have the ability to ogment a group and stand alone.

Wolfwoodcross has a great idea about making the SL into a center of a command zone. This needs and should include NPC troops (pets) To make it a fully stand alone skill.

I would still think that troopers (pets) should be perchased in some form and not just recieved.

Remember, It's not just a game. It's a monthly Expence.

I agree with a lot of points you make but lets look at it from a diffrent angle Just to twist the tables a little.

rebels and imperials have faction solder. Therel imited and not very usfull. but thay have them. Neutrals have the only one option CH. But some would rather have a few thugs.

Most clasess ar desighn in one form or a nothere to complement or ogment other clasess. What is the main diffrance between a NPC and a Player Avatar? The NPC does not talk back like a good solder.

It's not that I disagree with you on what your saying. I just feal it need to beable to be fun on stand alone as well. Look at a AP leader. He makes a AP hall. Gets peole to join it. If he is good he trys to provide content for players to do thing as a group. Why? becuse he is the leader. Not a class. Just the guy everyone decided to follow in making a AP.

A SL is a class. A job in a game system. Like medic, Or commando. I admire you sticking to your guns on your ideas. Just consider if what is proposed adds onto the skill tree and the class. IT does not stop people from joining a group or having a SL being usefull to the group. It does let the SL be usful to him self as well.

I don't know if you sit around all day waiting to join a group or everytime you come into town you yell out forming a group or have a reguler team you run. I my self log on. And when friends are on I team with them or as I meat new friends. But as is often in this type of game not everyone you know is on or availabel to group with you.

Having a Solo option permits players the opertunity to do somthing while waiting for friends to join. It does not take away from what a SL does.

The way you look at it is the SL is the servint of the players. Might as well be a NPC then. Limiting what the SL can do or play. If I wanted to be a SL Medic I would be group only player with no solo abilities at all. Spending my time yelling in city squares forming groups or waiting for friends to join me. Sad existance.

Adding NPC solders to a class desighned to lead troops into battls seems to fit the hole idea of a SL.

You said Faction troops. Well that all fine and good for Faction players. But most players are not in a faction. Making troops none item. But with a SL having the ability to call faction troops to agment a group or add a starwars look to it would only highten injoyment in the class. And still not take away from it's abilitie to ogment a group.

Eather way I feal adding to a class is far better then limiting a class. You short change other players when you force players to play on only one style of content. Don't take away the option. Add to the number of option. And NPC add to options a player may use.

I ask think about what you feal you want to force players to do Vs what you whant to do your self. Adding NPC will not take away from you boing a SL or force you to use pets of anysort.

When I was in beta it seemd to me that pets where going to play a meajer role in the game. After all everyone can have a large powerful pet. I use to have 2 stormtroopers and a Dark trooper to attack targets with. even got so good as to do flanking manuvers telling player what pet to assist to choose Targets. Not to mention I use to follow the one rulle of the chain of command that I learned long ago. Keep the commanding officer out of the battle field. that way placed there to remove tunnel vision. Having troops to send in in my stead help that.

anyway I git on it is add to the class. Don't limit it or force players to play a class only one way. Let there be options. And that is what this class and all the rest where desighned to do. To have open option on there use and there ideas.

Remember, It's not just a game. It's a monthly Expence.

---

Yeraze wrote:
While this is a well thought-out & defined idea (Kudos on the good job!), I'm from the camp that believes a Squad Leader leads players, not NPC's.

That being said, however, if the bonuses & abilities you list above worked for PC's in the group as well as the NPC's you summoned, I think it would be great.

---

I used the words "Party Members" specifically for that reason. Squad Leader benefits, in this idea, would affect ALL party members, PCs and NPC Units alike. My bad for not making it more clear (sorry for the confusion >< )

I actually had an original revision that stated that Units would ONLY be useable while Solo, but I figured 1) that was no fun, and 2) While the Units will be great assets, they should not betoo overpowering.

I'm also with Yeraze. Every time someone says SLs should control faction pets, I cry. Squad Leader. Using faction pets does not require leadership.Grouping withplayers does.

To me, the ideal Squad Leader skilltree would be filled with skills with both positive and negative effects, so that each skill has a different role in combat and requires the Squad Leader to make intelligent, perceptive decisions based on how the battle is progressing. In other words, being a Squad Leader should require in-life leadership skills.

Most people won't agree with that, as this is an RPG and there's supposed to be a distinction between player and character, but I can't see any other method of implementing SL without the class turning into an EverQuest bard clone.

But this isn't my thread. You have some good ideas, and it's refreshing to see a new reorganized skilltree. I think you place too much emphasis on time durations, though; I would greatly favor more abilities over abilities with increased durations.

---

Yeraze wrote:
We don't want to be the only ones that can create a group, and we know we're not the only ones that can lead a group.

All we ask for is that when a group of 20 players goes against a group of 19 players + 1 master squad leader, the group with the master squad leader wins (almost) every time. We should provide a tangible benefit to a group, where as right now we're simply occupying a slot that is better filled by any other combat profession in the game. Heck, a Rancor probably would be more beneficial than an SL in a group.

An SL can lead faction pets or CH pets all they want, that's fine by me. I just don't want specific bonuses to the number or strength of those pets in the SL line. I'm a firm believer that power & number of Faction Pets should be determined by Faction Rank, and creature pets by the CH skill. I don't want to be a Creature Handler handling stupid mindless automatons, I want to turn a group of thinking, breathing players into an efficient war machine.

The community is somewhat split on this, but I believe it's split because no one knows of a good set of game mechanics to make this possible. Adding mechanics to let us control NPC's is easy, adding mechanics to let us "boost" players is hard without stepping on the toes of Doctors/Entertainers or turning us into EQ Bards. We've come up with some good things though, like improved regen, better targeting, bunkers, etc.

SL is a profession for interaction & dealing with players. If you don't like that, then perhaps SL isn't for you. The Dev's want SWG to be a "grouping" game, where almost none of the high end content is solo-able. They're not quite there, but heading that way (Check the TC update notes for news on the Corellian Corvette, that one looks almost un-soloable). With the increased introduction of "2-legged krayt's" like NightSisters, Tusken Observers, and Force Sensitive NPC's, they're trying to get groups to go out and hunt more. Squad Leaders are supposed to be at the forefront of that, but we're left behind because we honestly have nothing to contribute right now.

NPC's aren't the answer, better tools for "managing" combat are what we need.

---

Once again, I used the words "Party Members" specifically for that reason. Squad Leader benefits, in this idea, would affect ALL party members, PCs and NPC Units alike. My bad for not making it more clear (sorry for the confusion >< )

NPC's aren't the answer, but should certainly be part of a Squad Leaders repetoire. A solo Squad Leader with 5 pets is still not as powerful as a squad leader with 5 pets and 25 players. This just gives Squad Leaders a solo-option and a strategic feel using squad tactics. This way they always have a Squad to lead.

---

Drazzule wrote:

Okay look at it this way. Rather then saying Faction pets say NPC pets. AKA solders. I don't whant a Rancor army to command. I want NPC's. If not a SL then what?

And as far as leadership. You don't need to be a squad leader to lead a group. If you beleave that then groups with out a SL should only be 5 and with should be 20.

OR have it only SL can form groups. Would that be fair?

I don't understand the logic in this thinking. You don't have to be a SQ to run players in a group. The SL role was as a commander of solders on the field. That can and should include NPC's. And why just Faction pets? Why not Neutral solders to. Mecs. For instance.

It seems there is a idea going around that SL should be the only people to form AP's and Groups. And I don't agree with that. Sorry.

I play a lot of stratagy games. Warcraft, CivIII, RoN. As Examples. None of the troops I lead into battle are players. There all NPC's per say. Groups of troops that I control to make a battle plan. That take stratagy. planing. And exacution to acheive a battle plan.

Why on earth do you think this will not work here? And make a SL anything less.

the idea ofsolder pets and the idea of a zone of control is what most stratagy based games work off of. Why would this game be diffrent in that context?

And again I will say. You Don't ?Need to be a SL to run a group.

---

You are correct. Every longterm vet of this forum realizes that. However, that's why we are getting a revamp. As SL stands you don't need it to run a group and it really doesn't add much when you do have it. However, with the revamp you still won't need a SL to run a group but you will need one to be a kickass group, and SL will kickass. Modifying players is much more rewarding to most SL.

Just as the Devs didn't want to add a CH clone for droids I am 90% certain they don't want to do the same for NPCs. It would be nice if they had faction perks for controlling faction NPCs but most of use would prefer to keep it out of the SL trees.