Special XP for the team leader

Special inf or XP for the team leader... to encourage the creation of team.

Like, did you think of all the ways this wouldnt work?

I can be the leader of my team, and be tri boxing...

absolutely possitively 100% /UNSIGNED!!!! just 1 reason off the top of my head... there would be absolutely no teams with this. there are about 100 others but this one is probably the best reason not to do this.

Not a bad idea at all. But then no one would join.

Team leaders already get merits that nobody else does. That's encouragement enough to drive. Adding additional bonuses will only make people fight over who the leader is.

... really... really... really unsigned.

The basic problem is that this type of concept has been tried before, in another MMO... called Planetside. Leaders of teams could gain Command Experience. As your command rank progressed, you gained special abilities and attacks, such as being able to reveal all friendly forces, reveal all enemy forces, launch an EMP attack, launch an Orbital Strike, launch a larger EMP attack, launch a larger orbital strike. Gaining Command Rank also allowed you exclusive access to various global channels to talk with others of the same Command Rank, and issue orders over the Global Network.

The system somewhat worked in the early stages of the game as competent leaders who were capable of reading maps, directing firefights, and determining strategy often lead the teams.

The system then somewhat fell apart as various outfits began swapping team-leads just before base capture, effectively "powerleveling" players of Planetside that had no business trying to command or direct the game. The system further fell apart when Planetside converted from a campaign based game to a session based game, and the need for leaders that understood military combat, strategy, and tactics, was slowly removed from the game.

In the end, you wound up with a bunch of "powerleveled" Command Rank 5's that had no business what-so-ever trying to direct fights or issuing orders... competing with each other for a dwindling playerbase. Nothing like having a successful fight on Ishundar, then a CR5 comes in and calls all forces to Cyssor... and over half your fighting force just ups and leaves because a CR5 called an offensive someplay else.

*******

Okay, yes, part of this is me ranting about SOE's cluster.... well, you know what comes after cluster.

Part of it is a point about giving "special" benefits to team leaders. Verant's original approach was pretty good on paper... but it wasn't designed to deal with a casual player-base.

In City of Heroes, offering a special benefit to the team leader would see a similar.. exploitation... of the system. A significant number of players would use a special EXP bonus on a team-leader position to work through levels as quickly as possible. Not all players, but enough that it would be an issue.

***

I do think that there is a potential argument to be made that maybe In-game Leaders should get something "special" for leading the team, beyond simply badges for mentoring.

Say like the ranking members of a Super Group. If you have both a Super-Computer and a prestige expensive remote dial-in, you could access your super-group computer inside a mission and research data on your opponent. Like you are fighting, say, Silver Mantis. As a Super Group leader, you could access your Super-Computer and look up that she's a stalker with Thorny Assualt and Invulnerability.

This type of bonus power would be different than say, a Blaster's Surveillance as you'd have to make the call outside out of battle, and you wouldn't be able to monitor real time stats.

But stuff like this would help expand the usefulness of SuperGroups, and stuff you can have in SuperGroups.

I think external bonus powers like this are a better way to handle leadership and teaming incentives in the long run of the game.

merits is enough of a leadership perk, nothing else please.

The encouragement to form a team should be not having a team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BackAlleyBrawler you *******!!!!

hahahaha just hahaha uhh

NO

Battlefield 2142 has an interesting take on this one. Squad leaders get extra points, but only if they issue orders and only if squad members follow those orders. This actually caused squad leaders to want to give orders (as supposed to ignoring their squad) and, make sure their orders were such that COULD and WOULD be followed. Of course, that meant you wanted to have non-brain-dead squad members, which in most FPS games is a luxury, but they got extra points (practically double points) for following your orders, anyway. With players that had brains instead of butterflies in the skull, the system worked well.

Commanders, by comparison, didn't get any bonus points beyond what they got for doing commander actions, but the winning team's commander got his points doubled, so if anyone had anything real to gain from his team winning was the commander, which tended to incite most commanders to even try. Those who weren't voted off for just using their commander status airdrop supplies to themselves, at least.

When players were thinking, this created interesting dynamics. Commanders and squad leaders would quickly develop a rapport, with commanders so desperate for squads who would follow orders that they'd shower you in supplies, scans and all kind of artillery support for so much as doing as you were told, while thinking squad leaders really wanted to follow the commander's orders because that meant they'd get more support. In-squad, squad leaders were encouraged to give orders that would be followed, which required a squad leader to know where his men were and typically give them objectives in the vicinity, which were more likely to be followed. Squad members, on the other hand, had reason to follow orders, both for points and because only squad leaders could make requests for support from the commander, so a squad member had to have his squad leader's favour in order to get any support.

Of course, in practice this rarely worked. Idiot commanders would give you either stupid orders clear across the map where you simply couldn't move your squad in time to matter and you'd have to abandon an outpost for no reason, or they'd give you move orders that didn't award points (I learned to just accept his stupid orders and then fix them on my own right afterwards). And, of course, requesting supplies or a scan would often go unanswered completely, because the commander is an idiot and currently asleep. I don't mind being denied support, but god damn take the time to say no! On the flip side, squad leaders would refuse to even acknowledge orders, or acknowledge them and never actually act on them, or just keep refusing. They'd demand supplies over and over, or you'd offer them supplies and they'd never actually request them. And I tell you, it's a lot easier to just approve a drop request than to try and figure out where the guy might need this dropped.

In-squad, the biggest problem was brain-dead squad leaders who never gave orders. Ever. I lost track of how many times I've been silenced for demanding orders over and over again. Or even if they gave orders, they'd give one at the start of the match and never change it when the battle has moved so far away. And forget about squad leaders requesting drops for you. You might as well be yelling to the wall. And forget about them being tactically minded. You could spawn at a squad leader, but instead of being tactical and standing back, the idiot would get himself killed first. And leading squads was no walk in the park, with squad members simply refusing to acknowledge any order you give them. They'd just keep on spawning wherever they feel like, having little duels with the same one guy, while you were repeatedly ordering them to hold a vital point. Schmuks!

Basically, all that giant tirade was aimed to say was that, even if you reward the creating and leading of teams, you don't actually get more people to do it. In fact, all you get is idiots looking to be in charge for the benefits, but never doing anything useful with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

Are you and Power_NA related or are you guys just competing to see which one can come up with the worse suggestion?

This one has to be one of the most ill thought of the last few days. It has so much potential for going wrong, it hurts.

So, no.

I think, you all are being kinda mean to the OP.

Often many players do not want to lead, and many TFs do not occur for no one will step up to the task. Yet as soon as one does, its amazing how many players "suddenly" develops interest to play the TF.

Now, as some of you posters have indicated, if the rewards for leadership are so great, how come there is such reluctance for folks to lead? There seems to be a contradiction somewhere, one would think if the leader awards were so great, then no one would want to play unless they were leaders, but we do know that is not the case. So in retrospective, many of the other poster's assertions, that the built-in rewards are enough, may be at best questionable.

So I tend to agree with the poster, than some sort of bonus for the leader is actually appropriate.

Now the question is how much, and what issues should be addressed with this:

1. For instance, the ugly disconnect, and the leader is not the leader anymore. How you allow for this?

2. How much, different tasks are more complex than others, say leading a Hammi raid team, versus a TF team, versus a thread mission team, versus a scanner/radio team, etc. One would expect the bonus awards to be different.

3. Should there be a minimum team size, to get such a bonus?

4. Should a proof of leadership be achieved to get prize? Such as TF takes normally 120 min, but leadership was such it took 100 minutes? Despite that Dev metrics is 100% against good leadership, tactics, team and composition; while the Devs only recognize as good: 100% kill all, be dumb and inefficient, the longer you take the more politically correct you are.

5. Anyone can think of other situations that must be accounted for?

Hugs

Stormfront

the answer is still no. the amount will not be attractive if you make it to small and will only cause major problems if it is to big. i really don't think there is a median here.

I will be team leader of 3 of my accounts and take 25% more drops?

I can haz this?

One of the reasons why I don't team is ppl annoy me,no amount of inf is gonna change that....NO THANX.

What about badges for time spent being a team leader?

That just came off the top of my head, really.

WOW I'VE NEVER EVER SEEN THOSE BADGES BEFORE EVER IN MY ENTIRE LIFE!!!

OK mister literal genie, I'll be more exact for you. How about badges specifically for time spent being a team leader, regardless of whatever level they happen to be?

Or did something else get changed while I wasn't looking? 'Cause then I'd say that it seems silly to get time earned for that if everyone on your team is at the same level.