Squad Leader Archive
Thread: What Should The New Name of Squad Leader Be?
That's all I will comment on....We are no mages nor doctors....we don't magically do anything.
While your coment has credit, it's not exactly what the thing was about... it's said that future buffs are "magic" in nature and i just compared that the current ones are of the same kind of magic.
If we go along your lines, then in the future you'll have several experts in your team. One coordinates fire (higher chance to hit / more damage), one plays the pathfinder (terrain negotiation) the next coordinates strategic positioning (higher defence), etc...
Now the roles are spread out, the "magic" or "no magic" level is the very same as before. And, yes, i see the big difference between _one_ leader and several experts working together, it devalues the "leader" in the title of our profession. But for terms of playability, i am ready to accept some changes. (Adjust and adapt...)
So i still stick with it, balance is my prime issue with the new concept, with playability comming up next. (And indeed playability would require some of the abilities to be used by one person in group only and thus would define a leader again.)
Changes:
(1) Squad Leader must lead the squad
(2)a. Extra Squad Leaders can give extra buffs, but the group leader needs to be a Squad Leader.
(2)b. Better yet, one Squad Leader per group.
(3) Armour Buffs are not in essence, cast, they are just applied being within 50m of the Squad Leader.
On (1): That's what many of us say, that's what the Devs clearly stated that it won't come. Anyways, see in combination with (2)a, that's my prefered solution by now.
On (2)a: This in effect would mean, everybody can give the group buffs, with the exception of charge and retreat. Those would be limited to one person, as would be the single-person buffs for agro management and the abilities to send system messages and to give group waypoints.
This concept by now is my absolutely prefered variant, with the one person who's able to do those things being the groupleader for simplicitys sake.
On (2)b: For playability, not good. Devs made it very clear, they want several SLs able to cooperate, and i even see some point in that. Currently a second SL in a group is totally wasted, this discourages people to pick it up.
On (3): so you would single out the armour buff and make it passive for everybody? Sorry, but i am absolutely sure that this will not come, and i am also convinced that your suggestion is badly unbalanced and thus vote for it not to come. If we were to keep a passive modifier, it would be group terrain negotiation, in my eyes.
Message Edited by Sylow on 09-30-2005 04:49 PM
So we should stop focussing on the fact it [i]seems[/i] like magic. The only real problems, I already mentioned. I don’t want to be a buffer for armour levels. I want the whole group to be buffed being near me. I like getting into the action, not sitting there buffing people for their armour level to increase.
Also, I’m a great leader. Please make the Squad Leader have to lead the group.
Message Edited by Dalponis on 09-30-2005 11:49 AM
Dalponis wrote:
Okay guys, we really should stop focussing on wether the buffs are magical, spiritual, religious or whatnot. As a Squad Leader I find that when I rally and such, I’m just yelling at the group to rally, they do.
So we should stop focussing on the fact it [i]seems[/i] like magic. The only real problems, I already mentioned. I don’t want to be a buffer for armour levels. I want the whole group to be buffed being near me. I like getting into the action, not sitting there buffing people for their armour level to increase.
Also, I’m a great leader. Please make the Squad Leader have to lead the group.
Message Edited by Dalponis on 09-30-2005 11:49 AM
The argument with SL right now is that the range needs to be limited to 128-256m and be removed as soon as they lead the group. Personaly I wish the passive buffs would have stayed, the GTN is nice to have and I dont like the idea of makin it a temporary buff.
As the idea for GL, it becomes now more of a balancing issue. We don't need to see a group of 8 SLs goin around and dominating things cause the buffs that SLs offer are strong, and stacking those 8 times will cause for shouts of nerf against SL, making most of our skills once again useless.
Sylow wrote:
That's all I will comment on....We are no mages nor doctors....we don't magically do anything.
While your coment has credit, it's not exactly what the thing was about... it's said that future buffs are "magic" in nature and i just compared that the current ones are of the same kind of magic.
If we go along your lines, then in the future you'll have several experts in your team. One coordinates fire (higher chance to hit / more damage), one plays the pathfinder (terrain negotiation) the next coordinates strategic positioning (higher defence), etc...
Now the roles are spread out, the "magic" or "no magic" level is the very same as before. And, yes, i see the big difference between _one_ leader and several experts working together, it devalues the "leader" in the title of our profession. But for terms of playability, i am ready to accept some changes. (Adjust and adapt...)
So i still stick with it, balance is my prime issue with the new concept, with playability comming up next. (And indeed playability would require some of the abilities to be used by one person in group only and thus would define a leader again.)
Changes:
(1) Squad Leader must lead the squad
(2)a. Extra Squad Leaders can give extra buffs, but the group leader needs to be a Squad Leader.
(2)b. Better yet, one Squad Leader per group.
(3) Armour Buffs are not in essence, cast, they are just applied being within 50m of the Squad Leader.
On (1): That's what many of us say, that's what the Devs clearly stated that it won't come. Anyways, see in combination with (2)a, that's my prefered solution by now.
On (2)a: This in effect would mean, everybody can give the group buffs, with the exception of charge and retreat. Those would be limited to one person, as would be the single-person buffs for agro management and the abilities to send system messages and to give group waypoints.
This concept by now is my absolutely prefered variant, with the one person who's able to do those things being the groupleader for simplicitys sake.
On (2)b: For playability, not good. Devs made it very clear, they want several SLs able to cooperate, and i even see some point in that. Currently a second SL in a group is totally wasted, this discourages people to pick it up.
On (3): so you would single out the armour buff and make it passive for everybody? Sorry, but i am absolutely sure that this will not come, and i am also convinced that your suggestion is badly unbalanced and thus vote for it not to come. If we were to keep a passive modifier, it would be group terrain negotiation, in my eyes.
Message Edited by Sylow on 09-30-2005 04:49 PM
KJFett3 wrote:
Magic? We are SLs, not mages.
jphillips1868 wrote:
We "magically" remove stun and dizzy from the team.
I focus my men constantly during combat to insure they are sure in their step and not caught off-guard.
We "magically" increase accuracy and defence of the team.
My men/women are inspired by my leadership and compeled to shoot more accuratly and fight more effeciantly under my command.
We "magically" increase damage inflicted on a target.
Because of the leadership shown in the above comment, my squad is able to more effectively concentrate its firepower on a target, allowing more of the damage to affect the target more quickly.
We "magically" give the group terrain negotiation.
I motivate my men by example and lead them across terrain in way that allows for more rapid transit across. (ie. they aren't all trudging through mud because i lead them around it at a faster pace)
That's all I will comment on....We are no mages nor doctors....we don't magically do anything.
I totally agree that SL's currently arent mages or doctors.
However, post "revamp" if SLs that aren't GLs can buff, those same effects can be explainedno other way than magic,because more than one SLin a group would hurt rather than help group effectiveness.
I'm not really agreeing or disagreeing...ask anyone ehre...I have fought this fight from the beginning...worn out am I. I was only addressing those 4 lines....thats it. Will the future be likea mage? I hope not. I will do all I can to insure it isnt for me anyway. If that means I insist that I be the only one using certain commands and Im the group leader..then that is what I must do. /shrug I'm leaving the technicallities up to you new comers.
jphillips1868 wrote:
KJFett3 wrote:
Magic? We are SLs, not mages.
jphillips1868 wrote:
We "magically" remove stun and dizzy from the team.
I focus my men constantly during combat to insure they are sure in their step and not caught off-guard.
We "magically" increase accuracy and defence of the team.
My men/women are inspired by my leadership and compeled to shoot more accuratly and fight more effeciantly under my command.
We "magically" increase damage inflicted on a target.
Because of the leadership shown in the above comment, my squad is able to more effectively concentrate its firepower on a target, allowing more of the damage to affect the target more quickly.
We "magically" give the group terrain negotiation.
I motivate my men by example and lead them across terrain in way that allows for more rapid transit across. (ie. they aren't all trudging through mud because i lead them around it at a faster pace)
That's all I will comment on....We are no mages nor doctors....we don't magically do anything.
I totally agree that SL's currently arent mages or doctors.
However, post "revamp" if SLs that aren't GLs can buff, those same effects can be explainedno other way than magic,because more than one SLin a group would hurt rather than help group effectiveness.
Now I find it curious, if everyone doesn't want to be group leader, because of the "lame" factor of inviting people, how can their be groups? I personally like being group leader, even with the freaks out there. I am by far a control freak, in fact, in real life, I'm quite the opposite, but in game, I'm a lot more ordered, calculating and tactical (ie. I take the outside threat out first, around a lair for instance, rather than going right in and having 10 enemies attack at once when the folks I'm with, will only do non-aggro and no area attacks as well as, nothing that precious Jedi could get hurt by /sarcastic cry). That is the one thing I'm not looking forward to when I join my old guild. Sure, I don't want to die, but if I didn't want to get hurt, I would just sit around like I did yesterday, doing nothing. /sigh
For the vets here, being gl, comes with the profession. It's not that I don't want people telling me what to do, it's just that some people don't think. They'll race in then wonder what the hell went wrong when they drop their pants around their ankles, waddle into battle and wonder why they get incapped or have to clone, where I'm sitting back half health and finishing off the enemy or trying to save the group.
lspiderl wrote:
well i never ment that to come out like i have an objection to being group lead just showing that u dont have to be group leader to elad the squad
That true you dont. Other of us have often stated in areas where someone has more experience we let them lead, I do this alot in the DWB bunker, where im usually the noob lol. My personal experience is in PvP, thats when I really show whats I can do
Giant2005 wrote:
After playing the original EQ for many years I gotta say the new title should be "Bard" as the new profession isn't any different to them, their role was group buffs much like this, I'm just waiting to see if the SWG Bards can "weave" their buffs to have more than one running at once like in EQ
We Bards have to sing as a band in order to get more than one buff to work.