Battle Cry of Freedom > General Discussion

A Catch 22 of Modern Warfare **CAUTION: Yet more reading.**

(1/4) > >>

McEwan:
And now we come to the greatest enigma in the topic of war, one that has been present since the beginning of organized armies, one that has shaped the plots of novels, movies, and the actual course of military events. It has plagued those who fight, and bears down on the shoulders of those who command them. It is summarized in one question only, a question that has been asked and contemplated by countless commanders and everyday soldiers. One simple question:

"Do I follow this order?"

This suggestion is not about the production or features of BCoF itself, but rather how we, the community, will act upon it. This suggestion could very well be applied to NW, but I feel it just doesn't have the immersion and factors of battle that we're all hoping BCoF will have, which is why I'm posting this here. This suggestion may seem...intriguing to some, and to others extreme to the highest extent of the word. Please just remember that everybody has their own opinion, and therefore the right to run an event the way they choose to.

This idea was first spawned in my brain while looking over this very board. I came across TheBoberton's post in my own "Grand Commander" thread:

--- Quote from: TheBoberton on January 26, 2013, 09:08:20 am ---The problem with North and South is that it goes so far as to give the general's staff 'rankers', whereas it should simply be the general and his various aides. And the abilities shouldn't really be forced, to be honest. Insubordination was and remains present on a battlefield, and it really should be up to the regimental commander's intuition as to whether or not directly following the orders is worth the risk.

--- End quote ---

As I said before, insubordination, or the questioning of orders has been the most pressing topic in war for ages upon ages. It was certainly present in the Civil War, as well as the Napoleonic Wars, but like I said, NW doesn't have the capacity for this kind of organic course of events. BCoF will, if it's made the way we are hoping, with 3-D VOIP, the possibility of runners, huge maps, and large amounts of people, make commanding an army (1 team of players) a much more challenging prospect. In this way, orders may be jumbled or lost by runners, orders may arrive too late, or find that new ones are needed; generals themselves may very well make a personal mistake in tactics, and send the entire team onto a path to tragedy. It is here that the minds of each subordinate commander, and my suggestion, come into play.

In BCoF our main concern is immersion. This is why we're pushing for 3-D VOIP, realistic artillery and destruction of environment, etc. We want to be in the Civil War experience. My suggestion is about immersion, but not specifically about the in-game experience. I'm talking about the system of battle as a whole, stretching beyond the servers into the community itself.

As speculation, organized events in BCoF will probably make each team have an overall general more often than not, considering the massive scale of things making complete organization essential to victory. These generals will, of course, issue orders to each regiment under his command, maneuvering them to places of his choosing and issuing other such general commands, leaving the specific combat details to the regiment commanders themselves. But what if a commander doesn't agree with an order he's received? What if he's seen something the command group has not? Predicted something the general had not taken into account? Does he follow orders anyway? Or does he go against them and do what he feels is the right course of action? If he does the latter, what will that entail for him?

As perhaps a way to enforce the role of an overall general, and add immersion to the experience, if a regimental commander goes against an order and is caught in the act, should he be punished? In the real military, a court martial would be the way to deal with issues like this, so having something of the like for these events would make for a much more interesting experience. A regimental commander would, if he disobeyed orders, be summoned to the place where the general's staff of that day currently is (TS channel or something), as well as the host of that event, and be put on trial for his actions. If he can convince the staff that his actions were necessary and primly effective compared to what the outcome of the specific order would be, then he would be free to go. If not, the the officer would be placed on probation, either for leading in a line battle, or even (this is based primly off people's preferences) be banned from the event for one week, or two etc., depending on the perceived severity of the offense by the general's staff and event host (let's just call them judges).

This would not only make sure a general's role in events is bypassed and made obsolete, but also make a regimental commander's decisions of loyalty versus free will and will to survive a massively more interesting prospect. No more would there be events of random lines doing random and even silly things all over the map. Centralization and coordination would be made so much more critical, and battle would be made that much more authentic.

As I always say, I hope this concept fills you with as much excitement as it does for me. Thanks for reading, and please post with any suggestions.

Matthew:
Brilliant work McEwan as always, I look forward to see more of your ideas =)

Miller:
I must say, i hope the devs are reading these proposals with as much eagerness as i am. i hope its not discarded as over ambitious, because ive never heard of anything thing like this before in rpg. I hope we can see vast improvements in realism, such as this, in BCoF, and that it remains a primary goal of the dev team.

psmith:
Love your posts McEwanMaster.  I read that the devs will have a map-specific goal/objective system that will help determine the points that individual players & regiments & commanders earn for achieving them.  Your idea spawned a thought in my head that perhaps the commanders could change regiments' goals during the battle, overriding the server, and thus using a limited # of "command pts" to do the override.  For example, if 3 regiments were assigned to capture and hold "Cemetery Hill", but they are clearly having a hard time of it, the commander(s) could spend a command point(s) to order other regiments to change to that objective.

Perhaps these command points regenerate over time.  Would make the commander role a bit more interesting, and useful.

Also - nothing has been discussed regarding losing points.  I believe games should take away points for certain reasons.  Perhaps if a regimental commander disobeys commands, the commander has the option of penalizing that player's points total at the end of the battle.  If the regimental commander acted prudently, then the commander has the option to also not penalize them. 

Thoughts?

McEwan:

--- Quote from: psmith on January 26, 2013, 08:13:12 pm ---Love your posts McEwanMaster.  I read that the devs will have a map-specific goal/objective system that will help determine the points that individual players & regiments & commanders earn for achieving them.  Your idea spawned a thought in my head that perhaps the commanders could change regiments' goals during the battle, overriding the server, and thus using a limited # of "command pts" to do the override.  For example, if 3 regiments were assigned to capture and hold "Cemetery Hill", but they are clearly having a hard time of it, the commander(s) could spend a command point(s) to order other regiments to change to that objective.

Perhaps these command points regenerate over time.  Would make the commander role a bit more interesting, and useful.

Also - nothing has been discussed regarding losing points.  I believe games should take away points for certain reasons.  Perhaps if a regimental commander disobeys commands, the commander has the option of penalizing that player's points total at the end of the battle.  If the regimental commander acted prudently, then the commander has the option to also not penalize them. 

Thoughts?



--- End quote ---
Personally I think the concept of points for various actions and such is a bit silly, and hard to use in the way you suggested. While point systems like this could fit well in more casual games and events, the purely organic decisions and abilities of the commanders and their men strike a chord of authenticity with me, when it comes to immersion and the courses of events (in more serious events of course).

Your idea, with some tweaking, could be a good change of pace for events on the other hand. Not all battles in BCoF need to be as visceral as I have suggested. And thanks for the compliment!  :D

Thanks Matt and Miller for your comments by the way! ;)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page