Squad Leader Archive
Thread: Official : Informing the Dev's of Our Thoughts on the New Abilities
Okay, I have so far taken a very anti-new abilities opinion....
But, after some grouping this weekend, I did find that these new abilities would have been very useful. Don't get me wrong, I am still very "iffy" about running the players like pets, and hope that maybe the Devs will find a way to give us these abilities without making us Player Handlers...
Interesting note: My guildies have already told me they LOVE the new abilities, and don't mind if I take control, but I think that maybe it is because they already trust me, and know that I will only use them when "Needed" (aka: when all hell breaks loose).
I guess the problem will arise mostly for non-guilded players, who don't have a large player-base that trusts them and can group with them.
I guess it is very much a double-edge sword...
Palitrine wrote...
"And where do you draw the line between human error of hitting the command at the wrong time, or maybe not seeing that add and ordering everyone to attack a certain target, or maybe you accidently have the wrong sub group attack and now all your medics are dead?
Good to know I'm going to have my reputation trashed because I accidently lost one of my human pets. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a lot of responsibility and truth be told mistakes will happen. I'm certainly not perfect and will probably make several of them in the course of my playing. My only hope is that my victories will outweigh my failures and the people I group with will see that. If I find myself hitting F5 and ordering medics to /groupattack alot I will seriously think about remapping my hotkeys to cut down on some of my mi**edit**ting keys (hehe mi**edit**ting,funny looking word)
And most importantly, COMMUNICATION IS THE KEY! I'm sorry for shouting but I feel that's a very important point. When these skills first come out we (the competent, responsible Squad Leader types) are going to have to go on a massive PR campaign. The majority of random people we meet and group with will probably be "WTH was that?!?!" if we just spring these new commands on them. We are going to have to hustle andwork hard to build trust before griefers ruin everything.
Before we ever bring a group anywhere near where the fan will hit the poodoo, we will need to communicate with everyonein the group with the impacts of these new commands and possible situations that may come up when they are needed. If I use /groupattack or /followme once or twice in the course of a couple hour long hunt, I don't EVER want anyone to be surprised/startled/pissed that I used a "Contoling Command". Therefore, it's my responsibility to get everyone up to speed. I will be informing everyone in my groups that the skills exists, and that I might need to use it in varioussituations for the good of the group. Furthermore, later on in camp or downtime I'll discuss with my peeps how it worked for them, good/bad/ugly, get their thoughts, value their input (ie build trust). This will help me to identify good and bad times to use these commands. Further, the [smart people in the] group will see me making an effort to intellegintly use the new skills, as opposed to mindless spam tactics, and hopefully build that much more trust. My hope is that this will lead them to trust me to override a couple of targets in the course of our hunting.
So, sure mistakes will be made, but if they're not totalsurprises, and the group can recover, that's about the best we can hope for.
=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Thanks,
-Psquire
Shuyunh wrote:
These types of powers willattract the wrong people to become SL's. All it takes is a couple of bad apples and the whole profession can easily be put under the "undesireable" category.
I totally agree and this is my biggest fear, and has been for quite a while.A while back I campaigned for no changes to SL based exaclty that idea, on not wanting to attract the riff-raff masses and thus sully the reputation of good, upstanding SLs everywhere. See this thread, if you have an hour to kill...
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=squad_leader&message.id=1816
I believe ESD convinced me otherwise with this line...
"I'd rather have the class working and have 1,000" [idiot/kiddie/goofy/insertyourfavoritel33tslurhere] "Squad Leaders running around than being a lonely gimp."
Basically, now, I'm willing to risk "undesirables" for some useful changes. I don't like the idea of l33t kiddies with "Strategist" titles spamming /groupattck then /holdfire on unsuspecting fellow kryat hunters. But, right now, I'm willing to risk it for some new skills and hope natural selection takes its course.
(It also won't hurt to get the lead out and get some good PR buzz going throughout the community, instead of negativity, just shooting ourselves in the feet with that)
Thanks,
-Psquire
Very very good post Psquire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are five dangerous faults which may affect a general:
- Recklessness, which leads to destruction;
- cowardice, which leads to capture;
- a hasty temper, which can be provoked by insults;
- a delicacy of honor which is sensitive to shame;
- over-solicitude for his men, which exposes him to worry and trouble.
-Sun Tzu's The Art of War, VIII-12
SithBishop wrote:
I'm sure you all know where I stand on this issue, but for the record here's my two cents: The proposed "improvements" are a joke. They have nothing to do with what we want to do in this game and they don't represent the changes that WE recommended. Despite what some people say on this forum, this is OUR game, not the developers (after all without our money there would be no game). WE should be in control of what happens to our character class and the only way for that to happen is for us to TELL them. The developers just need to be there to keep things balaced.
Vem, I say fire off your letter of protest immediately and let 'em have it. Back it up with links to these threads here and reinforce our previous "Top Five" lists. We know what we want. We've stated it over and over. I don't think its to extreem and I don't think it would make the game inbalanced. I just think the devs got the wrong message or are trying to figure things out on their own (or more likely they're trying to figure out how to make us happy using command libraries and objects that already exist in game code). Well that don't cut it. SL is worthless now, and the new changes don't add a **edit** thing.
Serial Killer : Kauri Server
SithBishop wrote:
I'm sure you all know where I stand on this issue, but for the record here's my two cents: The proposed "improvements" are a joke. They have nothing to do with what we want to do in this game and they don't represent the changes that WE recommended. Despite what some people say on this forum, this is OUR game, not the developers (after all without our money there would be no game). WE should be in control of what happens to our character class and the only way for that to happen is for us to TELL them. The developers just need to be there to keep things balaced.
I hate to tell you this, butWE don't run the show. Perhaps if this was an old school MUD where the guy running it was hosting a BBS just on the other side of town.
As it stands there's what, maybe a few dozen active posters here? We probably don't even represent 5% of the whole Squad Leader community, who speaks for them? Not to mention the nearly 300,000 other users, each of which has asequal a"share" in the game as as any of us does.
Bottom line, we're play testers, we can offer suggestions all we want, if they hear an idea or two or twenty here and make changes based on it, fantastic. But at the end of the day the Devs call the shots (as well they should). We can only decide if we like the game andwant to keep playing (and paying) or not
I really don't mean to flame, but we need to get over ourselves and just play the game (or not).
-Psquire, play or play not, there is no whine.
Psquire wrote:
Bottom line, we're play testers, we can offer suggestions all we want, if they hear an idea or two or twenty here and make changes based on it, fantastic. But at the end of the day the Devs call the shots (as well they should). We can only decide if we like the game andwant to keep playing (and paying) or not
I really don't mean to flame, but we need to get over ourselves and just play the game (or not).
-Psquire, play or play not, there is no whine.
I'm going to disagree w/ you here re: whining,although you are right: regarding the devs ownership of product development.
The forums serve several functions, andone ofwhich is to guageour happiness with SOE's product.
Lettinga companyknow what the consumer (and whattheconsumer doesn'twant) can be very key to the success of any product. It's why companies have marketing departments. It's why those marketing departments have focus groups. To get constructive feedback on customer's satisfaction re: current and potential products.
While some people like this product (Squad Leader changes), a great many do not.
SOE needs to know these things, and while they might not paya great deal of attention to the forums as a whole, it is in their interest to do so.
And while "THIS SUXX0RS" isn't constructive, MUCH of the feedback on this forum IS. So I encourage people to debate what they like and don't like, and to do so in a polite and courteous manner. 
DiLune, not sure exactly what you're looking for, a class ranking perhaps, PvP, PvE? Or even if you're asking me, but I'll take a poke anyway.
Let me just say, I am hoping that the new skills are added to our existing skills. But, since that might not be the case, let's assume the worst, that all our existing skills will be gone, and we'll only have the new ones.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I'm assuming you're looking for a straight ranking of who should own who, this is tough to say, so many possible cases. It'll be very situational (groupsize) dependant.
Here's how I think things should be (yes I know they are not currently this way, just a starting point) based purely on skill points required to invest:
1) Master Bounty Hunter - 217 SP - (8 base prof branches + 2 base masters, 1 elite master)
2) Master Combat Medic - 169 SP - (5 base prof branches (2base classes) + 1 base master, 1 elite master)
3) Master Commando - 169 SP - (5 base prof branches (2base classes) + 1 base master, 1 elite master)
4) Master Squad Leader - 135 SP - (3 base prof branches (2 base classes), 1 elite master)
5) Master Smuggler - 121 SP - (2 base prof branch (2 base classes), 1 elite master)
6) Master Creature Handler - 106 SP - (2 base prof branch, 1 base prof, 1 elite master)
7) Any Master Ranged Weapon - 92 SP - (1 base prof branch, 1 base prof, 1 elite master)
8) Any Master Melee Weapon - 92 SP - (1 base prof branch, 1 base prof, 1 elite master)
9) Any Master Marksman - 77 SP - (1 base master)
10) Any Master Brawler - 77 SP - (1 base master)
This is just a cost breakdown of how many skill points (ie trees you have to climb) you must use to get any of the above. For simplicity I'm leaving Pistoleer = Carbineer = Rifleman, same with elite melee, and also assume Ranged > Melee. Of course we all know these aren't the case in the game. Comando's aren't seen as a top teammate to have, and as yousuggest DiLune, Squad Leaders actually rank about 23rd on this list, between chefs and dancers.
This list also totally ignores anything else that can be brought to the table with the remaining skill points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 on 1
A vanilla 135pt master SL (plain SL, no elite combat skills) would get whooped by any of the above, as well he should. Squad Leaders, almost by definition, shouldn't be worth squat solo. Rearranging this list for 1 on1 I'd rank Squad Leaders somewhere between Business II and Entertainment healing III.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small basic groups, size 5
Ignore our generic examples SL's actual real life leadership/strategic thinking talents brought to the table (or better yet assume he's equally capable in the "soft skills" as anyone we compare him to, no more no less). Our Vanilla MsaterSL's only statistical contributions to a group are his buffs (passive like Terrain Negotiation or Offensive Stance)
Assume two groups, for now both PVE, lets say hunting a Huge Kryat Dragon or something. Group A consists of 5 Master BHs. Group B consists of 4 Master BHs and 1 SL. Assume pristene conditions, all MBHs equally equiped, equal tactics, equal HAMS everything. Let's say all these Master BHs attack for 1000dmg every 2 secs. Ignore tactical disscussion like /assist vs /groupattack. Our SL just puts everyone in offensive stance and then stands there not even attacking.
It's basically 5 normal master BHs vs 4 Offensive Stanced BHs. In the first round of combat Group A will hit for base 5000 points of damage and Group B will hit for base 4000 (without OffStance). Now let's say OffStance provides as little as a 10% bonus to group damage and speed (Ignore the def debuffs for now). Now Group B will hit for 4400 dmg per round AND get shots off slightly faster (which adds up in long battles). Group B will apply their second round of 4400 dmg .2 secs earlier than Group A. After 20 seconds Group A will have applied 55000 points of damgage over 11 rounds of attack (0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20 second intervals). Group B will apply 52800 over 12 round of attacks (0,1.8,3.6,5.4,7.2,9,10.8,12.6,14.4,16.2,18,19.8). Group B is not that far off the pace despite being one gun short (remember we're not having the SL attack).
Yeah, I know, I picked numbers that helped my example look good on paper, but the idea still has merit. I'm not going to draw anything more out using fake speculative numbers. But, consider the above example if OffStance actually does more, like 20-50% dmg increases (weighted of course against the defensive penalties). We'll hafta see the final stats to be able to figure out the breakeven where having a SL instead of just an extra gun becomes beneficial. I think it follows that in the above example having the 5th memeber of the group be a Master Squad Leader vs a Master Bounty Hunter is almost a draw. Now factor in if that Master Squad Leader also has a master elite weapon in his hands!
Oh, just thought of something, if the SL doesn't shoot, Group B guys will get 25% more XP because the kryat dmg will be split 4 ways instead of 5. Of course in practice it'll be less because all us SLs will be firing also, but it's something to consider promoting (ie take down bigger and badder w/ smaller groups = more XP for everyone!)
So, in small groups I think it's fair to say that a Master Squad Leader almost equal in group worth to a Master Bounty Hunter (and if that SL has an Elite Weapon Master then he's worth more)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large groups, size 15-20
I was gonna write out some examples for larger groups, but I've already rambled too much, I think you can all extrapolate the value provided in aggregate to the entire group by a SL just from OffStance alone. Compound the values of Def Stance and group subdivision alone and I think people will begin to see some very powerful results. I will submit that the other proposed skills are just icing on the cake and will speed efficiency (less downtime) and lethality (is that a word?) of SL groups. I think groups of 20 Master Elite professions are going to get owned and owned hard by groups w/ 19 elites and 1 squad leader.
Large Groups, Squad Leaders should clearly be the most valuable player in the group, for stance passives alone. In PvP they should rightly be the first ones sought out to incap.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conclusion, I think competent, skillful Master Squad leaders, assuming these stance buffs pan out even moderately well, will be invaluable neccessities to any decently sized group in both PvE AND PvP. I think the only profession that will be more valuable to a fighting/hunting group will continue to be Master Doctors because of their revive powers (Best skill in the game imo). Whether or not the rest of the community sees us as such depends vitally on how effectively we use and promote (and NOT abuse) these new skills.
Just my take on the subject. Hope that was about what you were looking for DiLune
Thanks,
-Psquire
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very good points Kerryak.
I don't mean to take away from healthy debate, and things that suck should definitely be brought to light and vocalized (vote early, vote often). I have no problem with anyone vocalizing their concerns with this class in a polite, logical manner, or even in just "I'm frustrated, this blows, *sigh*" manner (although I might ask them why). You're right, all those inputs are valuable, and I suspect the Devs do read most of them when considering changes.
Something about that post above just struck me as wrong and I wanted to respond. I think it was really just the WE run the show mentality that was bugging me.
Long live the debate!
-Psquire the Tank, "That's how you do it! That's the way you debate!"
Psquire,
Let me give you some feedback on your senarios...
"Small basic groups, size 5"
The Krayt Dragon will not just be sitting there getting hit and not hitting back. In this scenario the Krayt Dragon will be able to kill your BH's even faster then it could before. Plus, in Shadowbane anyone who was in an offensive or defensive "stance" had a movement penalty as well. If they implement a similar stance concept, then the dragon will have an easier time catching and killing the BH's.
Yourscenario is also the most favorable for stances. There is one mob, and flexibility is not required. You can have a CH send their pets in, a few medics keep them alive, and the additional firepower from the offensive stances would be a huge advantage to take the dragon down. When you have a complex encounter with multiple mobs, thing could get much more interesting.
Right now complex encounters don't really exist in the game. Just imagine if healingteam matescaused agro like it does in EQ.Lets sayyou have 4 mobs attacking your groupand everone is focused on just one mob. After the first heal yourmedic would thenhave 3 mobs chasing him around and defensive stance would not keep him alive for more then another second or two. The members in offensive stance would also incur more agro as they would be doing more dammage. Your offensive toons would be stealing agro from the tanks and getting hammered. Until they make these mobs smart enough to attack according to some kind of realistic agro rules, all encounters are incredibly simplistic. We can not assume that the developers of SWG will leave the game in noob mode forever.
Large groups, size 15-20
As the number of troops increases, the more your going to have to trust your troops to do their jobs properly. When things get tough, its hard to sort out what needs to be done. Everyone has to trust the combat methodology and game plan developed for the encounter and take care of their role. Trying to have a centralized figure over riding other members individual controls would likely make things worse, not better. 15 to 20 minds on the same page are better then one micromanager.
Yourentire post is based on the value of stances, which is fair. SOE posted that SL are going to get them, and stances can add a significant value in a fight. However,if they are introduced in the game it will likely be at the individual group player level where they belong. The TK's already asked for stances and were blown off. If SL get them as a group wide function, the whole melee community is going to have a fit, just you wait and see. The first time a melee gets their exp nerfed its all over. People will stop playing in protest. SOE has made mistakes, but I can not belive they will make one this big.
). If more and more voices are heard, they will react faster.