Squad Leader Archive
Thread: Official: Your Comments on the New Abilities
Since this is the official thread on the topic, I will repost my original response to Holo....
OMG I didn't thinkit was possible. You have made the Squad Leader Profession even worse then it was before! Let me explain in simple words how almost EVERY suggested idea is either worthless or detrimental to a group.
HOLO WROTE:
Squad Leader
We’re looking at adding a fairly large amount of functionality to Squad Leader, and because of that, it won’t make this update. The stuff we’re looking at:
· Follow Me:
o Everyone in the group enqueues /follow on the leader
· In formation: Using code similar to AI's followOffset: the group follows the leader in column, wedge or line formation
This command is worthless. Everyone already has /follow so its a waste of my skill points. If anyone in my group can't hit /follow when i say OTM, then I don't want them in my group. It getsworse. They had this command in Shadowbane. The leader decides, hey I want to move from this camp and go onto the next camp but some timessomeone is fighting a mob or gets agro. That person is now in /follow mode and can't defend himself while this mob is pounding on him and if its a tough mob he will die quickly. This is particulary a problem when you are not expecting it. It sounds harmless at first but I learned quickly that when a leader used this command it was time I disbanded from the group.
· Hold Fire & Fire At Will
o No one in the group is allowed to initate combat, although they can defend and can defend vs. anyone attacking a member of their group
Of what concievable value is hold fire and fire at will. If someone fires prematurely the only command you need is disband member from group. If someone actually uses this button they can make the team vulnerable to attack. Under no circumstances is this acceptable and if any SL used this command I would immediately disband from the group.
· Group Attack
o Ayone not already in combat will enqueue an attack vs. the leader's look-at target
So now your healer is in combat mode and has a hard time healing. A group without a healer is worthless and so is this command. Anyone handling crowd control may warning shot the mob away who may then agro more mobs. If any SL ever used this command I would immediately disband and leavethe group.
· Cease Fire
o Everyone in the group enqueues /peace.
This is another way to kill members in the group. If someone gets out of line I boot them from the group. Again, another reason to leave a group lead by a SL.
· Assign Position:
o The group leader can assign group members to "Front Line", "Support" or "Ranged" squads. Group Attack, Cease Fire, Group Cover, OffensiveStance, DefensiveStance, Hold Fire and Fire At Will can then be directed to these individual squads
This game is too complicated and fast paced (Well, if they ever develop any real content) to assign people in any of these categories. If someone is tanking and they die, then someone else will have to step up and take their position and they might not be melee. They may very well be a pistoleer for example. If the Crowd Control person dies, or worse the healer, someone else needs to make the adjustment immediately or you will alldie. ANY KIND OF CONTROL OF THE GROUP IN THIS MANNER WILL GET EVERYONE KILLED AGAINST ANY SERIOUS CHALLENGE!!!!!!!!!! At this point if I see any SL setting up a raid, I would run for my life.
· OffensiveStance
o Gives the group a temporary bonus to damage. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers defense.
WORTHLESS. The dammage dealers need offense but the tanks need defense. By having generic stances group wide you take away the flexibility that a competent group needs to be successfull. When you think of group think SPECIALIZATION.
· DefensiveStance
o Gives the group a temp bonus to defense. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers damage.
(i.e. Assign your tanks to "Front Line" and enqueue DefensiveStance on the front line group, then assign the ranged guys to "Ranged" and enqueue OffensiveStance on that group, etc.)
SEE BOTH POSTS ABOVE. What is front line at one moment may be back of the line the next depending on what is attacking you. A SL can not possibly keep track of what is going on better then someone who is getting hit. If a pistoleer gets agro, he will not have enough time to tell the SL to change him from offensive to defensive stance before he dies. Very very risky.
· Group Heal
o No, it doesn't heal the group: It changes the look-at target of anyone assigned to a support position to the leader's look-at target, and gives the system message "You have been ordered to heal ". Used by the leader to tell his healers who to heal. So you still have to push the button yourself (because he might not need a heal - he might need /firstAid or the like.
WORTHLESS. Does any SL in their right mind think they know how to do their healers job better then their healer. If so, disband from group ASAP. Any SL worth their salt is going to treat their healer like some precious commodity. Treating them like a robot will lose the most important person in the group.
· Group Cover
o Enqueues a /assist for the group vs. the leader's look-at target. i.e. if I want everyone to shoot what Dan is shooting, then I look at Dan and enqeue Group Cover.
I never want everyone to shoot at Dan's target. I want the healer to keep Dan alive for one. I want Crowd Control to keep the other mobs from pounding on Dan as well. This command will wipe out entire raids!
· Forced March
o Non-combat group burst-run sort of thing. Broken as soon as anyone in the group engages in combat.
This is the only ability that is actually ok, but it is not sufficient to provide us with a raid role.
· Smoke-em-if-you-got-em
o In a camp, out of combat, everyone in the group gets a mind regen bonus. The bigger the group the bigger the bonus.
This was almost a BIG winner until you made it dependent on a camp. First off, you need mind regen all times especiallyduring combat. Its value becomes almost negligibleduring a rest period. Furthermore, if you are clearing out the night sisters in Dathomir you can not setup a camp in the tunnels. Even if you can setup a tent, people want continuous pulls, not pull, camp, rest, pull, camp rest. This could have been a winner, but with the camp requirement nowits almost useless. At least you got close on this one.
When I first read these changes, I thought it was a sick joke. No one in their right minds will want to be part of a group led by a SL unless they never use any of their abilities. Its all risk, no reward. IF THESE CHANGES GET IMPLEMENTED I WILL NEVER JOIN A GROUP THAT IS LEAD BY A SQUAD LEADER. ALL SQUAD LEADERS WILL BE BANNED FROM ANY PA I AM A PART OF. THIS HAS GOT TO BE THE WORST SUGGESTION FOR ANY CLASS I HAVE EVER SEEN IN ANY MMORPG GAME EVER!!!!
Then my follow up post...
This is just a follow up on my earlier post on the SL "upgrade."
The main SL enhancementseems to be these differentstances.I don't know if I really beat that horse dead yet so heregoes another try....Lets say that the front linemelee gets an increase in defense by 1/3 and a decrease in offense by 1/3 for being in a defensive stance. The ranged support class on the other hand gets an increase in offense by 1/3 but their defense is cut by 1/3 when using offensive stance. The question is, how does this effect the experience a front line melee gets while grouped with a SL who uses stances? Well since the front line are at 2/3 dammage output and the ranged are at 4/3 that would equate to a 50%DECREASE IN EXPERIENCEfor front line troops. WHAT MELEE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD PUT UP WITH THAT? Doesanything more needed to be said on this topic?
I am not sure this game will ever be group friendly the way experience is calculated. All experience should be divided up within the group, and then divided by which weapon you are using, healer is healing, scout is doing whatever scouts do,etc... Any other method of calculation takes away from the group play experience. Players are then rewarded appropriately for their roles even if its Crowd Control and you are warning shot adds away. The basic /assist command doesn't work. Complex content doesn't exist and is no where in site. What is going on?
I have a hard time concieving howthese SL profession "upgrades"could get approved or this game could be so poorly conceived in the first place. I played EQ for about 3 years. I created a guild and raided every dungeon in the game prior to PoP including PoH, PoF, PoA, Kael Arena, and named dragons in ToV. I have literally spent over 1000 hours leading groups from 6 man teams to 50+ member raids. I have probably forgotten more about group leadership then what the SWG dev team has shown so far. Yet SWG is partnered with SOE, the creators ofEQ who should know better then this.DoesSOEnot want SWG to even remotelycompete with EQ or EQ2? Is the fix in? Did theSWG team niavely create a strategic alliance with SOE and expect them to help create a product that would cut into theEQ MMORG market share? EQ2 should be released in a few months, right about when this game will have completely failed. SOE is probably laughing all the way to the bank...
I feel cheated.
I just don't know that this game will ever be fixed. I think there is an inherentconflict of interest here between SOE and SWG. They should never havecreated this partnership.
My opinions:
>-Follow Me:
>Everyone in the group enqueues /follow on the leader
Yawn. Everyone knows to follow...
>-In formation:
>Using code similar to AI's followOffset: the group follows the leader in column, wedge or line formation
Ok. I could see this as fun for the military types, though not necessarily useful.
>-Hold Fire & Fire At Will:
>No one in the group is allowed to initate combat, although they can defend and can defend vs. anyone >attacking a member of their group
This is needed. About this and follow being exploitable...I disagree. You can always leave the group if you feel your squad leader is an idiot or is trying to put you in harm's way, and there is a lot of incentive for squad leaders to want people in their group.
>-Group Attack:
>Anyone not already in combat will enqueue an attack vs. the leader's look-at target
This and the subgroups from assign position seem quite basic and necessary.
>-Cease Fire:
>Everyone in the group enqueues /peace.
After warning shot it could be good....I guess...but only if the /peace happens quickly. Mediocre at best, but hey, sounds easy to code and might be useful....
>-Assign Position:
>The group leader can assign group members to "Front Line", "Support" or "Ranged" squads. Group >Attack, Cease Fire, Group Cover, OffensiveStance, DefensiveStance, Hold Fire and Fire At Will can >then be directed to these individual squads
Subgroups are definitely needed...don't want my medics attacking all the time.
>-OffensiveStance:
>Gives the group a temporary bonus to damage. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers >defense.
>-DefensiveStance:
>Gives the group a temp bonus to defense. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers >damage.
>(i.e. Assign your tanks to "Front Line" and enqueue DefensiveStance on the front line group, then >assign the ranged guys to "Ranged" and enqueue OffensiveStance on that group, etc.)
I like the stances. I could definately see using each of these at different times. For instance, against tough social mobs I would go defensive...against solo mobs I'd go offensive. Not sure I'd issue different commands to different positions...but I might. I wonder what kind of feedback your followers get when you issue these commands though.
>-Group Heal:
>No, it doesn't heal the group: It changes the look-at target of anyone assigned to a support position to >the leader's look-at target, and gives the system message "You have been ordered to heal ". Used >by the leader to tell his healers who to heal. So you still have to push the button yourself (because he >might not need a heal - he might need /firstAid or the like.
Don't like it, and probably won't use it. I agree that medics don't really need this much direction; they often healsomeone that needs it before Ieven notice. I have a sysgroup macro that messages that "%TT needs a medic", and that works well. Letting them know that so and so needs healing is all that is required...screwing with their targeting seems extreme. Maybe larger groups need this...but it seems like even then it would be overkill. Someone with 100 Health left will suddenly be hit with multiple heals and your medics will have their time wasted. Maybe it would be useful though...I dunno.
>-Group Cover:
>Enqueues a /assist for the group vs. the leader's look-at target. i.e. if I want everyone to shoot what >Dan is shooting, then I look at Dan and enqeue Group Cover.
I think this could be very useful. Anything that helps the group target as a group is fine by me.
>-Forced March:
>Non-combat group burst-run sort of thing. Broken as soon as anyone in the group engages in >combat.
Simple, logical, and needed. Good.
>-Smoke-em-if-you-got-em:
>In a camp, out of combat, everyone in the group gets a mind regen bonus. The bigger the group the >bigger the bonus.
Since I'm a ranger/squad leader I may be biased, but this sounds great to me. More people get killed from mind damage than any other type, so I set up camp whenever anyone is close to being incapped from it, (and rarely for any other reason, other than to attract a group) and this would make our camping shorter...which is good. I don't want to sit in camp any more than anyone else.
Other comments:
As far as PC's as pets:The follower made the decision to join the group, and when they choose to join a group led by a squad leader they shouldexpect to lose some control in return for the benefits. However, I do think it would be advisable to let them know that the group they are joining is led by a squad leader. Not everyone wears their tag, and if I joined a group of what seemed like hunting buddies and unexpectedly found myself forced to follow the orders of a military commander....I might be upset. Perhaps groups led by squad leaders should be referred to as "military groups" in the Join Group: Yes/No dialog box.
Passive bonuses: I'd like to see more passive bonuses. I'd also like to have players who join a group led by a squad leader to know what bonuses they are receiving. They should be happy to join such a group and letting them know that they are getting +10 to melee or whatever makes sense for everyone. People really need to know the good things they get when they give up some control to a squad leader. They also need to be able to compare squad leaders.We should hear "Wow, look at what I get when I join that Master Squad Leader's group" - spoken with the same enthusiasm as when they see a Master Ranger's camp for the first time. The other thing that passive bonuses give the class is something positive for all squad leaders...not just the skilled ones. I can see with these commands that a really bad squad leader could make things go a lot worse for a skilled group than NO squad leader. Putting up with a squad leader who is a slower learner might be do-able if the followers know that he is giving them some good passive bonuses. In other words, even a bad squad leader should be better than not having a squad leader, and having great passive bonuses can make that happen.
Jamga Gibbrad
Ranger/Pistoleer/Apprentice Musician/Squad Leader
(Ex-Smuggler, Ex-Merchant, soon to be Ex-Entertainer...)
Disclaimer - I'm not a Squad Leader - yet. To be honest, these changes don't put the class in the direction I would wish to go. I don't want to play puppeteer. I want to give my group tactical advantages. Thus, the line of group control skills really doesn't impress me. I am afraid a few people would exploit them greatly, thus many people would come to despise the skills,and us as an entire class.
My biggest issue is still that earning combatXP doesn't reflect what we'd usually be doing to contribute to groups, yet that is the only method we're given for advancement.
I am glad that SOE is trying to improve the Squad Leader profession. However, I am very glad that these changes are not going in "this update" whenever that occurs. I substantially agree with Duncaen Starstriker's analysis.
I think the commands that force an action by group members will at bestbe not very helpful and will annoy other group members. At worst they will get people killed and cause them not to want to group with SLs.
Forced March will be useful. The mind regen will be only marginally useful if it must be used in camp.Change it so that it works anytime the group is not in combat. Keepthose two, as modifiedandthrow out the rest and go back to the drawing boards.
The offensive and defensive stances are a step in the right direction, but because of the corresponding negative effect, they will likely hurt as many players as they help. If you took away the negative impact of the moves these would be a good addition. Otherwise they are a waste of time.
Ithink SOE should focus onpassivecombat bonuses, active combat bonuses that havecompletly postive effect,and most importantly making it clear, through some type of automated message to groups members that the bonus actually helped them. For example, if an improved offensive stance were used, an attacking player should receive a message in their chat window or centerscreen that you've done xregular damage and y extra offensive stance damage. It is important that other players perceive that their is some game benefit to have a SL lead their group.
I give SOE a B+ for effort and a D for the results.
<< Remove the OffensiveStances and DefensiveStances entirely, and when you assign FrontLine they get the DefensiveStances bonuses, when you assign Rangedthey get the OffensiveStances bonuses.>>
I like this thought. It seems that it would certainly streamline things.
A question I have is, why is there a trade-off with the stances (damage dealing vs. damage taken)? Aren't we spending xp and skill points to buy a special ability? Shouldn't that special ability always be advantageous? Isn't it enough to say that we can either increase damage dealt, or buff against damage taken, but not both at the same time? Combat is too chaotic to be the time to be fiddling around trying to get people into the right stance for their current situation.
-Follow Me:
Everyone in the group enqueues /follow on the leader
I guess it could be useful.. I don't really use /follow too much unles im goin AFK 
.. what would be nicer is something that made the SL stand out more.. as in, if theres a group of 20 people, you want to know which one your SL is.. maybe have his text bubbles background be red, or orange, and not white.. basically something i can visualize..
-In formation:
Using code similar to AI's followOffset: the group follows the leader in column, wedge or line formation
If there is some strategy to having players follow in formations, then I don't know it
-Hold Fire & Fire At Will:
No one in the group is allowed to initate combat, although they can defend and can defend vs. anyone attacking a member of their group
A needed skill for large groups
-Group Attack:
Anyone not already in combat will enqueue an attack vs. the leader's look-at target
I agree with the "mind if the whole group goes AFK for 20 mins" concept.. i could see that happening easily.. and the SL wouldnt mind either cause the bigger the group, the more xp... maybe instead the SL had an ability that somehow highlighted the target that the SL is targeting... like a big red arrow pointing to the target..
-Cease Fire:
Everyone in the group enqueues /peace.
Makes sense.
-Assign Position:
The group leader can assign group members to "Front Line", "Support" or "Ranged" squads. Group Attack, Cease Fire, Group Cover, OffensiveStance, DefensiveStance, Hold Fire and Fire At Will can then be directed to these individual squads
This sounds really cool.. if it works.. seems like it would take a long time to organize
-OffensiveStance:
Gives the group a temporary bonus to damage. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers defense.
Good.
-DefensiveStance:
Gives the group a temp bonus to defense. The bigger the group the better the bonus, lowers damage.
(i.e. Assign your tanks to "Front Line" and enqueue DefensiveStance on the front line group, then assign the ranged guys to "Ranged" and enqueue OffensiveStance on that group, etc.)
Good.
-Group Heal:
No, it doesn't heal the group: It changes the look-at target of anyone assigned to a support position to the leader's look-at target, and gives the system message "You have been ordered to heal ". Used by the leader to tell his healers who to heal. So you still have to push the button yourself (because he might not need a heal - he might need /firstAid or the like.
Stupid, useless
-Group Cover:
Enqueues a /assist for the group vs. the leader's look-at target. i.e. if I want everyone to shoot what Dan is shooting, then I look at Dan and enqeue Group Cover.
See above
-Forced March:
Non-combat group burst-run sort of thing. Broken as soon as anyone in the group engages in combat.
A novel idea... i dont like the "engages in combat" part... suppose my group is getting torn up, so I use the "cease fire" command, then the follow me command, then the forced march command to get my troops the hell outta there.. however if the enemy (-ies) are still engaged in combat vs. my group members and they attack a member, the person automatically attacks back.. thus cancelling the whole dealy..
-Smoke-em-if-you-got-em:
In a camp, out of combat, everyone in the group gets a mind regen bonus. The bigger the group the bigger the bonus.
I really like this idea...
<< logically speaking there HAS to be a trade off. >>
Logic has little to do with this game, or Star Wars in general for that matter. But what I am saying is, if there IS a trade-off (+10 damage done, but +10 to damage taken, for example), isn't the net gain zero? Did I just spend 5 skill points and 175k SL XP to buy a level of a skill tree to get a net zero effect? How can this be seen as worthwhile?
I like the idea of granting a defensive bonus to resist damage, and an offensive bonus to increase damage. These are good ideas, and are things we've been asking after. It could even be fine if both cannot be implemented simultaneously. But I'm very leery of the "trade-off" aspect, as it has the potential to take a useful bonus and turn it into a hinderance.
Re: We shouldn't criticize changes that we haven't had a chance to play with yet.
This is an inherently faulty argument. I've never stabbed myself with a fork either, but I can make the educated assertionthat I would not enjoy it.
Again, not all of these proposed changes are completely without value. If implemented right, one or two of them could be very valuable. However, given that all of our existing abilities (with the arguable exceptions of /sysgroup and Mobility 1) are virtually useless (c.f.; multiple posts outlining these problems, sometimesin excruciating detail), I'm interested in knowing what they plan to do with them. Are they being kept or replaced? Is this a proposal for an entirely revamped class, or an addition? Basically, I want to see what they're envisioning for the whole class as a finished product. Otherwise, it is very difficult to judge the profession's overall viability and utility.
If they want feedback basedsolely on the idea of "We want to add all these things; will that make things better?" then my answer is "No."
It's a well thought out skill set that works as a whole. Above all, it brings out best of SLs from the worst.
BTW Vemnox, if you want objective comments from people, you're better off posting your personal comments on a separate post as a reply or in its own thread. I see that as a way to persuade people your way at the same time.
Kaldimaar2 wrote:
<< Remove the OffensiveStances and DefensiveStances entirely, and when you assign FrontLine they get the DefensiveStances bonuses, when you assign Rangedthey get the OffensiveStances bonuses.>>
I like this thought. It seems that it would certainly streamline things.
A question I have is, why is there a trade-off with the stances (damage dealing vs. damage taken)? Aren't we spending xp and skill points to buy a special ability? Shouldn't that special ability always be advantageous? Isn't it enough to say that we can either increase damage dealt, or buff against damage taken, but not both at the same time? Combat is too chaotic to be the time to be fiddling around trying to get people into the right stance for their current situation.
My only experience with stances is from Shadowbane where you had three stances (I think, its been a while),normal, offensive, and defensive. As already stated, if you are in offensive state your attack speed, dammage, etc. would increase at a comparable decrease in defense. This is a huge benefit if your playing an offensive role in a group because if things go properlyyou don't need defensive skills.
The problem I have with it in this gameare two fold. One is if your a melee your essentially nerfing your own experience. I suppose this can be adjusted by the developers so they get their experience adjusted accordingly, however this skill has been asked for already at the base class level. In the forum (I can't remember which one but it was probably in brawler/TK because that is what I am) the developers responded with we tried to do this in beta and couldn't get it to work properly so we are not going to do it now. Suddenlythey are going to give it to us as a group wide SL ability, go figure. As a base/elite brawler/marksman typeability, I would be ok with it as long as they made adjustments for experience.
My big problem with it is in groups. I played Shadowbane and have been in offensive stance and gained agro (usually when the tank dies). While in offensive stance you are very vulnerable to attack and if I got caught in it, they pretty much hit me every time for full dammage. The result is that if you are using stances you are keeeping an eye on what is going on and switching stances if you see potential problems (there was a delay in changing from offensive to normal in SB). If I am in offensive stance and the SL is not paying attention I can get killed easy which would piss me off. In fact, as I have stated many times on this board, I am against the control of players in this game in any form as it takes away from the game.
In EQ I helped train hundreds of people to play roles in 6 man teams and train them again for large raids. Everyone makes mistakes. That's how they learn. Lots of people are making mistakes in the game right now because most everyone is a newb. If you start forcing people to do things, they will not learn anything and will only become resentful. Futhermore thats not what leadership is about. It's about spending time with a team to understand their strengths and weakness, clearly communicating group goals and the roles people will be playing to acheive them, and providing appropriate feedback through the process. If SL becomes a PC control profession not only will I drop my skill points in it, but it will likely evolve into the most despised profession in the game through natural selection.
Just because Vemnox is the correspondant does not mean he cannot post his opinions. He is a representative of this board and a part of the community. If here were a representative of SOE then he would have no business posting his opinions.
Now, if he made his reports with his own opinions in mind, and forget the rest of us, that would be a valid issue.