Do you enjoy a game more with a commander ?

[Cassius]

Originally Posted by sav112

Nope but having eight squads with perfect organisation , great over all squad communication transport by air on tap, at one point we had two heli’s hovering beside each other over the docks waiting to come in and pick up two squads and a Cobra above them…(something to be seen).

Apc moving with the troops to capture all the flag points in such a way that can only be done when the whole team is working as a force demonstrated to me that who needs a Commander we certainly did not miss one or dare say require one on that round.

Even with what I regarded a poor round by the enemy they could not handle our organised movement and would be amazed at the end there was never a commander there….


To tell the truth it was far better with us all talking and typing squad to squad than trying to tell a guy out of the way in his box, we did not have to wait for orders that would probably be too late to be effective.
I truly feel the Commander position is simply a nice touch in the game and not as important….

If you have squad coordination at that level, then yes you replaced the commander, but usually there is little squad to squad communication, with other squads waiting to see what each other do, or 2 squads tied up in firefights at a flag that isnt game anymore, instead of moving out to flags that need defending.
So far each time I have been co and the other team lacked one it was epic win. If both sides had a co the games were epic fun for both sides, with no CO there was quite some dullness especially with the attacking team not quite getting itself organized to make it a game.

[vilhelm123]

Originally Posted by sav112

Nope but having eight squads with perfect organisation , great over all squad communication transport by air on tap, at one point we had two heli’s hovering beside each other over the docks waiting to come in and pick up two squads and a Cobra above them…(something to be seen).

Apc moving with the troops to capture all the flag points in such a way that can only be done when the whole team is working as a force demonstrated to me that who needs a Commander we certainly did not miss one or dare say require one on that round.

Even with what I regarded a poor round by the enemy they could not handle our organised movement and would be amazed at the end there was never a commander there….


To tell the truth it was far better with us all talking and typing squad to squad than trying to tell a guy out of the way in his box, we did not have to wait for orders that would probably be too late to be effective.
I truly feel the Commander position is simply a nice touch in the game and not as important….

Sounds like a bloody good game to me
To be honest though it is once in a blue moon that teamwork like that happens without someone looking at the big picture. In this case your team had exceptional squad leaders and was very lucky to have them. I’d say there’s a high possibly however that a number of the players were all on a team speak sever or the like and relaying information that way.

You are horribly right about the commander being a bit of a nice touch however. Sadly there is not a lot for a Co to do most of the time apart from report contacts and every so often bomb something. It’d be nice if there were some bonuses that a Co could do but a Squad leader couldn’t. A forward repair point or something maybe (maybe four crates and a build order so need alot of teamwork and a Co to get it set up?).However I do believe that bunker building is much better in 0.8. Because more often than not there is no commander and the team should not be punished for not having one imo.

[daranz]

The thing is, a good commander CAN help you with coordination. You can go over his head and still manage to make due. However, if the commander knows what he's doing, he can make it easier for people. For example, instead of having squads type out where they wanna go, he can ask them, and then relay that information to a chopper pilot, even placing a waypoint for him to make it easier. He can keep track of extraction requests, and inform transportation squads when they have been fulfilled (not that extraction missions are ever carried out by APCs, but that's another matter).

A commander can also place contact markers on map. This means that everyone doesn't need to watch the chat for what people type out - the commander can do that, and place a marker on the position to make it easier for everyone. Of course, you can communicate "infantry G5 numpad 3" effectively via chat, but having a marker placed in that position makes it much easier.

[sav112]

Does the actual system to report contacts work…….The round before I went commander when the US were attacking and the usual thing was the squad leader moving his move marker to a spot then telling me what it is. Surly it would be better if the Actual unit was identified and the commander just accepted it…..


Plus the building thing, that works by squad leader asking and it says get a repair to this position when I accept. I actually after I accepted to drive to the place to see what was going on and getting built.

I think it would be better if put simply


The squad leaders still built but add a Bonus for the commander in that he can do a blue print of a more advanced forward command base….something needs done that for sure……

[XXLpeanuts]

If there is no commander a large map is not worth playing, hello guys this is project reality, i dont want to be part of a squad that breaks up and a team that aimlessly walks around an insurgency map having no insentive to help eachother out or work together, the only way PR can work and be fun is to have a commander, not even a paticulary good one, at the very least it is a way to request support from other squads and discus tactics.

[vilhelm123]

Originally Posted by XXLpeanuts

If there is no commander a large map is not worth playing,

Very very very true, large maps really do work alot better with a Co. Smaller maps can live without them though for example i've never had a need for a Co on Basra.

[Cptkanito]

I love PR with a commander. It gives better gameplay and obviously is more real to have a commander. But because you have to be in the command post to use the commander screen then less and less people like to be commanders.

[Rudd]

I went commander on operation archer a while ago, and I think I did a good job. 3 squads actually ended up making coordinated strikes, I was most surprised.

[Cassius]

Just had an awesome game as a CO on the tg server, well it was awesome because we won. When I took command on Jabal as MEC MEC was down to bridge, which was swarmed by apcs and I had no AT, so I ordered a retreat to the city, the next flag. With spawned apcs I organised a counter attack all the way to west beach. Half the team wasnt following orders for whatever reason I didnt get a bunker in place and like 2 squads were fighting far away from any flag. Long story short we started losing flags again, but by ordering a retreat and fortifying jabal the last flag before main we still won the game, because there was cohesion for most of the game (since all squads started following orders again seen as how the game turned to s*it) and tickets werent wasted by a single squad trying to take a flag held by 3 squads or so.

Most of the TG tags were on the American team so this time I only won with a 40 ticket lead .

Just to show you that a so so team with central intelligence can overcome a team made up by well coordinated and fast acting squads, but no central intelligence (unless the CO didnt resign torwards the end of the game the American team did not have a CO).

[Deltanew2]

Large Maps really need coordination. Commanders for large maps plz