Feedback:User/Guild Wars 3 perhaps/Squads and Parties
Squads and Parties | |
|---|---|
| User | Guild Wars 3 perhaps |
| Categories | Player vs. Player Mechanics |
Go here to see a list of my other GW2 suggestions and discussion contributions.
My suggestion is to allow parties to join squads.
Similar to how players currently in a squad can not see the Squad Commander icon over another player's head if that player is not their Squad Commander, players in a party can not see any Squad Commander icons, either. If a party is not currently in a squad, then the only player in that party who can see the Squad Commander icons is the party leader.
The party leader can then choose to join any squad he/she chooses just as if they were a non-party, non-squad affiliated player. The difference is - in my suggestion - that once a party leader chooses to join a squad, all members of that party then become members of that squad, too. In this case, though, instead of Party Tango being disbanded and its players becoming individual squad members, they remain as a party within Squad Zulu. Of course, individual members of Party Tango are free to leave their party at any time. In which case, they would become non-party affiliated members of Squad Zulu. At that point, they fall under the regular squad rules; they are free to leave the squad if they want, join another one, and/or rejoin Squad Zulu whenever they feel like it.
I see this offering the advantage of permitting squads to have a hierarchical command structure without the game developers having to worry about programming it into the game. This was a concern mentioned in the squad reveal on the official GW2 site; the developers had toyed with the idea of creating hierarchical command structures for squads, but then scrapped the plan ("We discussed complex hierarchical command structures, but decided they would be too difficult to learn and use.")
By implementing my suggestion, it permits squads to have complex hierarchical command structures for those who want them while not having to worry about them at all for those who don't. It will be completely player-driven.
In concrete terms, the way I envision this working is this:
- Party Tango's leader decides to join Squad Zulu. She clicks on Squad Zulu's Commander (or any other member of Squad Zulu) and joins the squad. All members of Party Tango now become members of Squad Zulu, as well.
- Squad Zulu's Commander can then use the Squad Chat to issue a high-level strategic objective for Party Tango's leader to execute (e.g. "Tango capture the fort"). It's then up to Party Tango's leader to command her party members in the tactical details of how to go about attacking the fort, freeing Squad Zulu's Commander to concentrate on the big picture.
- Impressed with Party Tango's successful capture of the fort, Squad Zulu's Commander decides to make Party Tango his assault force. To simplify things, he tells Party Tango's leader in Squad Chat that they are now assigned to the "attack" squad map marker (e.g."Tango is assault. Follow the attack map marker from now on unless you hear otherwise."). Anywhere Party Tango sees that squad map marker placed, they're to attack it in the abscence of any other direct orders from Squad Zulu's Commander.
None of the above complicates, contradicts, or diminishes the squad system in its current incarnation. For those who don't want to deal with the complexity of party-within-a-squad hierarchical command structure, they simply don't bother. Just join a squad as per the current rules governing that action and go on about your squad's business. On the other hand, for those who desire that hierarchical command structure and the benefits it confers, their needs can be served by this simple addition to the squad mechanic without much additional programming on the part of the developers.
To aid in differentiating those Squad Commanders who are looking to command parties as part of a complex heirarchical command structure from those who don't, just add a slight tweak to the Squad Commander Icons. Those Squad Commanders who are actively seeking parties to join the squad as part of a hierarchical command structure have one type of icon, while those who want their squad to have no hierarchy would have a different icon. Players and party leaders could then easily distinguish one from the other based on what role they wish to play in a squad; one among equals or fulfilling a specific role within a hierarchy.
This does not mean that Squad Commanders who are seeking parties to join the squad and become part of a hierarchical command structure can exclude or kick players or parties from the squad; any player or party can still join that squad. It's just a simple means of easily identifying those Squad Commanders more inclined to delegate tasks to sub-commanders (i.e. party leaders) versus those squads where the Squad Commander manages everything themselves.
For those who want to take it to the nth degree, they can even divide their squads up according to alliance/guild/party affiliation. The Squad Commander is the alliance leader and field marshal, the individual guild leaders are the equivalent of generals or colonels, guild officers are then considered majors or captains, party leaders are the lieutenants, and the rank-and-file guild members are the privates/grunts.
All of the above uses and builds upon existing game mechanics with no additional programming required of the developers (except for an icon tweak and having a Squad Commander choose which icon they want to float above their head at that particular moment). Win-win for everybody.
Lastly, I suggest adding in-game voice chat for the Squad Chat channel. This would follow the same rules as the text chat for this channel; one-to-many. When a player has the Squad Chat channel open, the only person who can speak in that channel is the Squad Commander. No other voice chat (all, guild, party, proximity, trade, etc.) would be active when squad members have that channel open.
Thanks for reading.
Guild Wars 3 perhaps 23:29, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
