Shared control of commanders? WTF?

Thanks for responding.

So this is an intended mode of play...

I can see your reasoning, but even when I do play with others on a TS3 server, which I am sure I will sooner or later, I will not be playing this mode.

It is not 'revolutionary' as some claim. It is easily abused by the sheer number of 'trolls' that riddle all online games, it causes confusion even in organized teams and it is not as efficient as simply having individuals control their own commander and units and having their team communicate their individual responsibilities.

To be honest, implementing this mode has me worried for the first time about the direction of this game. Everything else has been spot on.

I know you want to 'break from the mold', but don't go too far.

Remember, most of your players will be randoms just wanting to play the game with others and only a handful will be the ladder junkies.

Anyways, just sharing my opinion.

Please take this mode out or at least put in a mode where I can co-op with other people against other co-ops and we will have sole control of our commander and units. The current mode is no fun and I personally want to help with this games development as much as I can with online play and I enjoy playing on the same team with other live players.

They plan to put in other gamemodes. But the current mode is just the easiest to put in so it was put in first to be able to test bigger games. So you will have to wait a bit to get other game-modes.

Please note how the gamemode list showed a alliance mode since release of alpha.
What you want has been planned, just not yet finished

Very cool.

Off to test some FFA for now.

Thanks to those with positive and informative replies. :mrgreen:

Having a mode like this where a team can control the units was something I felt was needed to make real team play possible. It's certainly not the only intended game mode, but it was actually easier to implement than alliances. Those will be coming along as well.

The idea that we shouldn't support this mode at all though seems like a bad idea. I do think it's going to open up some interesting scenarios for games that play out over an extended period of time.

+1

Agreed. We have some amazing fun with them, as Zaphod demonstrates here...

.....cwarner7264 you're doing it wrong or are you being sarcastic? :|
that's not an example of teamwork or interesting scenario, even if it shows that indeed they were having fun.

just about any other video he put up of Pa gameplay with teams would have fit the bill better.

Agreed and if I were being remotely serious when I posted I would have linked to a different one!

We do have some amazing team games and I just thought this thread could do with a bit of lightening up

I agree, a lot of people like this mode and should not be shut down because of a few whiners.

I didn't even click on the link and I know what video he linked to. That was GLORIOUS teamwork, the true peak of our combined performance.

Whiners? More like people who have foresight.

Many of us do not like this mode. I understand why it is implemented as in theory a 10+ hour game might benefit from this mode.

I have played at the scenarios in my head and this mode will cause more griefing and confusion than the tried and true 'alliance' mode.

Whether people agree with me or not is not my concern. My concern is that this mode was not the only mode and it has been confirmed that it is not. My concern is over.

However, if this mode is the one that is mainly supported for tournaments, I will simply move on to another game.

Thinking that this mode promotes better teamwork is a tad ignorant. I think any mode takes teamwork. It is simply a matter of practicality of the masses and so far every single game I played in this mode has been a cluster of confusion for at least one person on the team with many disconnects. It will just get worse when the beta supporters enter and unimaginable when the game goes live.

You heard it here, from me, first. Just you watch.

All concerns/opinions aside, any ballpark guess on when alliance mode will be implemented? Co-op is the mode I have been really waiting for. As I said before, I like playing with people against the AI or against other groups of people.

Perhaps the better phrase might be that it allows more flexible teamwork. For example, if you know that one of the players controlling your army is an awesome turtle, then they get assigned the job of base defence. One that loves rushing? Give them the offensive jobs.
It mitigates a lot of the micro/macro concerns with a game on this scale because the required micro is split between several different brains.

With proper communication it can offer far more flexibility for teamwork than alliance mode, where effectively each player is playing a 1 vs x with people helping.

It's a completely different mindset and requires a bit of lateral thinking, but I'm absolutely over the moon that Uber have implemented shared armies and, in my opinion, it is one of the features that is going to make this game stand out from the crowd, and could set a trend for other macro-focused RTSes to come.

I keep on seeing the salesmen terms like "completely different mindset", "lateral thinking", "stand out from the crowd" and "set a trend for other RTS to follow" being thrown around a lot around here.

Has nothing to do with 'more intelligence' or an 'elite style gameplay'.

As I said above, many people have a lack in foresight in this matter.

This mode is already being used to grief right now and it hasn't even been played by the masses yet. People will find new and exciting ways just to piss you off.

Just because something is new and shiny, does not make it better. If certain mechanics are not 'broke' in the genre, don't try to fix it with an idea that can be exploited so easily to cause grief.

Many of you have to realize that the life of a dev online is a lot different than a life of a nobody like me playing random games online. I know many of you know exactly what I am talking about.

I could easily log on right now and annoy the heck out of the majority of the players in every game I play with om this mode. Of course I wont, but there are people right now griefing.

If you are reading this and you do not post, I am telling you, start posting your concerns and experiences during alpha so it doesn't look like it's just 'one whiner' trying to help the game be the best it can be for everyone.

I'm really not seeing the problem here. This is a game mode which benefits from having organised and closely knit teams which work well together. If you don't have access to such a team, then that's fine. There's no elitism to not being in some clan or group. A game-mode will be made available for more traditional team play when the devs get round to it. I would actually expect traditional teams will probably be more popular in the long run, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have this as an option as well.

If you look at this thread, it seems possible that the devs may try to include a veritable smorgasbord of different game modes. Pick one you like. Avoid the ones you don't. It's not difficult.

If the game mode pisses you off, don't play it. They will shortly be introducing a game mode more suitable for your mindset.

In the meantime, the rest of us are enjoying this game mode very much. So please stop trying to limit options available to us just because you don't like it.

It's like me turning around and saying "Hey, I don't like the idea of an alliance mode, so please don't introduce it, Uber." That would make you a bit angry, yes? Because why shouldn't you be able to play this game the way you want it just because some jumped up little toad on an internet forum doesn't like it?

That is exactly how you are coming across.

^This.

I'm sure they will add options to prevent abuse. E.g. option to only control your own commander, griefing strikes record, voteban etc

Bleh, as an OPTION only then.