playerkick on commdeath and commcontrol by dedicated to comm player in teamarmygames

Enjoyability i could see happen by a loss to cheese .. but playability? You are doing the same stuff you do in a 1v1 ffa or later alliance ... except that all your deeds matter to the teams eco and the army being kinda split ... aside from it becoming difficult for a comeback if you lose members of your team and their control over the army how exactly shall playability suffer from that setting?

You still don't understand how you're being backwards by asking to change something that already exists rather than wait for your game mode to come out?

You seem to still not get of what i consider to be the main difference between team and alliance and i have explained it so many times now in various threads

well you should clarify that because I probably have a good answer to that that everyone will wanna hear.

team no matter how many players you have you have all only ONE eco TOGHETHER
Alliance each player his own eco ... 5 players 5 ecos ...
It is as simple as that it doesn't .... ... at least shouldn't need any more clarification than that ... 2 answers i dont gonna accept ... you guys telling me to wait for alliance ... and ask to make shared eco and unicontrol in alliancematches ..
You gonna have to do better than that ...
As for the poll no matter its outcome i'm gonna deal with it ... i'm not the forum but just a mere tiny part of it ....
But i'm not gonna accept lazy butt answers

so : <Herm herm> the point is you get to have an option in team armies to share units upon com death and overflow or not.

As a result. you can have exactly what you wish for with team armies. fair enough?

It is totaly not the exact same thing ...
Even if you gift every last unit or structure to another player in allied armies your commander still would be his own entity and eco no matter if destroyed or alive
In a team you are part of the teams eco from the get go and whatever move you make production or armycommandwise affects the other teammates aswell ...
In allied armys you building mexxes pgens or units affects always and only you in the first place and no one else ... except for when you decide to drop a nuke into your allies bases or do something in that direction .....

again, not true, not with fullshare and shared economy.

But you HAVE fullshare and unitcontrol in teamgames already ... What's the point?
Why shall fullshare eco and unitcontrol be possible in allied armies but not
Commdeath and control in team armies? That makes no sense ....

the point as I stated is the simple difference between attention span as a resource or not, it's revolutionary in every way and this, unbeknownst to you is what you are attacking.

I do like this idea. Would be a nice way to ensure that Commanders are liabilities, not throw away nukes with lots of destructive power. Especially with the Uber cannon buff we're about to get.

Just some new special fabrication bot that is as efficient as a Commander, with more health than a regular fab bot and less than a Commander, same speed as a commander (heck, maybe even a little faster), and storage and whatnot.

Maybe even a small gun that's about as strong as a Leveler or something.

@ tatsujb
So what? You dont want to lose another players attentioncapabilities ???
How bout keeping his or your comm unharmed then? Like its supposed to be? You dont want to look at your comm when it is attacked ? Serves you damn right if you get killed yourself then .... what happened to the comm being a liability thing?

all of this doesn't matter.

what you don't realize is if we leave it as is and add fullshare and overflow options to team alliances we both have what we want.

If we modify team armies only you have what you want and a lesser version of what you want at that.
is my point of view clear now?

So i take it it is cool to violate the very coreaspect of the game
It is also totaly cool to blur what gamemodes are exactly what?
I'm sorry but seriously ... what the hell?
I also NEVER stated that teamgames shouldnt or couldnt be played like they are now if you have fun with it , did i?

I think you've managed to misuderstand my post above word by word.

what core aspect am I against? I feel I am protecting the game in it's current state.
Blur gamemodes? no. I'm defining them to you despite your efforts not to understand.

And neither did I so I don't know where you got that from.
the poll howerver clearly states a change to team armies.
give me your understanding of my word "fullshare" (have you ever played FA with fullshare?)

First off, how would vote 2 work, you could delete teammate's com and have him kicked?

Second off, vote1 describes alliances. Pretty well. If it doesn't describe alliances, it also describes an abusable mechanic that allows a player(s) to join with a random martyr they picked up in some chat room pre-game and do the exact same thing as current, except the martyr joined knowing he would leave in a few minutes, and the other player(s) would continue on like they would in a current game.

So, I voted 3 by default. No hard feelings. Just logic.

When a player loses his commander he is out of the game ... unless gamerules are changed this is true for 1v1 or ffa and likely later alliance ... this is currently not true in teamgames ...

And i realy have to question your definition of alliance when you suggest to bring in the imo very defining aspect of what teamarmy is ...

To clarify for the millionst of times

Team
Shared vision, economy and unit control
( personal wish: except a players commander and the player being not able to influence the game when his comm is destroyed)


Alliance
Shared vision
Seperated economy and unit control for each player and his commander
Ability to give control of a unit or structure to another player except the commander
Aswell as ability to give resources to another player

If this is what you want what were you asking to change in the OP?

I just descriped it above ...

"vote1 describes alliances"
It sooo doesn't ... it just describes the very mainaspect of the game
And abuseable mechanics like rejoining midgame simply have to be fixed .... they have nothing to do with what a gamemode is supposed to be ...

I realy like to ask the devs of what they consider teamarmies and alliancearmies to be
And how they are supposed to be played ...

As it stands for me i don't like how teamarmy games currently are with the commanders

I don't understand.