ofcourse not. you need to have a certain ranking, proving that you stand out in the game. THEN you have to be popular too.
anyone is a commander Ganelon the point being is that person a good commander I asked for your opinion of how they should be voted not if you thought i knew what a commander was btw ive got a bit of experience with good and bad Commanders and I do know what a real commander is. I hope you find your patton in the ELDAR youll need him HAIL FATHER NURGLE!
Stats are the last thing you want to consider or worry about when choosing someone for a leadership position in a game world. As the old saying goes, there is no "I" in TEAM. Players that obsess over their stats are usually(not always) more concerned with themselves and their precious KD, rather than being concerned about battlefield objectives and their team mates. Some of the qualities you DO want to look for: - A ROCK SOLID understanding of the game mechanics -They know each and every class inside and out -They know each and every vehicle inside and out -Maturity - A proven track record of leading(guild, squad, clan) - They're aware of all the politics and bullshit that come with the job. - They're okay with delegating tasks to their Officers, rather than micromanaging -They know which officers are trustworthy, and which ones they need to keep an eye on -They understand that no matter how great of a guy or gal they are, they're going to hurt peoples feelings unintentionally on occasion -Organizing the numerous other player commanders beneath them, getting those player commanders to "buy in" to their plans. -They listen to their player commanders, ask for suggestions, and implement to best course of action accordingly -Knowing the strengths and weakness of their subordinate player commanders, as well as keeping track of each squads/guild/clans specialties(attack, defense, infantry, armor, reconnaissance). -They're able to keep the peace between all the guild/squad/clan leaders. -They expect to be blamed for each and every failure for their faction(again, maturity comes into play) -They spend more time assessing the battlefield situation, than actually putting rounds down range or scoring kills -They spend more time communication orders, relaying reconnaissance reports, requesting reinforcements than they spend putting rounds down range or scoring kills. -They spend more time looking at their map noting friendly and enemy positions, than they do putting rounds down range -They spend more time posting missions(attack, defend, recon, resupply) than they do putting rounds down range -They spend more time in the briefing room than they spend putting rounds down range -They spend more time managing their factions resources and equipment. They get the right equipment to the right place at the right time... rather than worrying about getting kills. -They spend more time sorting out Teamspeak, Ventrilo, or in game voice comms and all the bugs and glitches that are associated.. than they do scoring in game kills -They are fine with having to "Triage" the hundreds of PMs and requests they receive from other players every hour -They spend more time contacting GMs to report cheating, griefing, and other offenses that go against the Terms of Service(TOS)... than they do putting rounds down range. -Chances are they're a guild leader or guild officer, and they still need to manage their guild/squad/clan. -If it's not perfectly clear, the last thing that should be on their mind are their stats and getting "leet killllzzzz!!!".
I dont think commanders should be voted on. The war council should select commanders and then the war council should live with its decisions.
Hmm, i thought we were speaking of the "War Council". If we're not, disregard my wall of text above. If were talking 10 man squad leaders or "commanders" in that regard... I'd assume that's going to be your friends, your guild, your clan. I dont think a vote is going to be required for a person to start a group(LFG!). I'm pretty sure that's just going to be the usual /invite.. till you have 10 players. You get 3 or 4(or 10) of these 10 man squads together and form a "Raid" per say like you would in an MMO, and you have a Strike Force. I really dont think that's going to require a vote or an appointment. I would think that would simply be a matter of working with the UI and forming those different 10 man squads into a Raid.
No matter how we try to control the process, we're almost certainly going to end up with antisocial leaders. It's almost completely unavoidable in real life and it certainly has happened in other games as well. The people with the highest self-confidence and the lowest inhibitions tend to come out on top of every selection process mankind has ever thought up. The best we can do is make the selection process as egalitarian as possible. That way people will at least feel as though they have a say in which sociopath attains power.
Of course the war council should be voted in. Commanders should be hand selected by the war council to execute the war councils strategy on the field.
I'd have to disagree. Certain guild/clan leaders have certain leadership styles. I've seen some really great player leaders that sacrifice a lot of play time because they're extremely busy leading the masses. Sure, there are some guild/clan leaders that are harsh and that have big egos, but let me tell ya brother they're some of the best... they're much better suited for "Front line" leadership, down in the trenches. I think what everyone has to understand is the fact that it's impossible to please every single player.
