Background Image

Structure Of The War Council

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Unglory, Nov 27, 2013.

  1. There needs to be at a very minimum dev oversight even if there is a public vote.

    Some people need to be screened out based on administrative record.
  2. Romulous xDAx Romulous_xDAx Well-Known Member

    There are no plans for a war council as of yet by the dev staff.

    Lets hope it never exists either. :eek:
    Chaplain Valerius likes this.
  3. Then what's all this crap about confirmation of 10 High Council per faction?
    Chaplain Valerius likes this.
  4. actually its master of sanctity....

    also--how would groups/clans/guilds interact with this council? perhaps you have to already be leading a guild to be considered for council membership?
  5. kernowstig Member

    To be honest this all sounds like a nightmare. I am a member of a chapter/clan within SM on the ps3 and we intend to keep our numbers relatively small, incorporating trusted, like minded individuals who have the same aim as the the rest of us- to have FUN. I think it will be highly unlikely that we will allow ourselves to be subject to any orders from outside our group. Those that wish to appoint themselves, or are appointed as 'leaders' from outside of our chapter can ASK us to help achieve objectives or complete tasks and if it sounds like fun and presents us with the sort of challenge we will be looking for then we might agree to do it. If not we won't and to he honest I think this will likely be the view of many playing this game- we do it for fun not to be told what to do and when to do it. With this in mind any high command that is established will need to make sure that they don't get too big for their boots or get any delusions of grandeur because I really can't see many people having what they do in game dictated to them.

    I think and hope that what is more likely to occur is that is that different chapters/clans will make friendly alliances with others and then work together to achieve the tougher challenges/objectives.

    In my opinion the idea of having a faction based high command attempting to direct and control the game is a recipe for disaster and in all honesty really quite horrible.
  6. I don't think that was the intent. I think the HC was intended to just set some optional objectives for the good of the faction that would add extra reward if the objectives are achieved.
  7. Then I guess Miguel Caron must have resigned without us noticing after doing this interview with Massively at PAX 2013.

    Google is your friend. ;)

    The concept of tiered leadership, and the war council, was raised there. And has been raised at other times since - which is why its been brought up in several topics here. And there are some wide-ranging views on how much value in-game leadership roles will add both to co-ordination and emergent gameplay (concensus seems to fall broadly into the 'good idea' camp) and whether or not the proposed election approach to the war council is the right way to get people in there (concensus is far more mixed).

    Behaviour weren't drawn on the in-game leadership in either AMA - although only a couple of us actually asked about it. My guess is its very early days, and could still be hugely transformed, but the idea of player-driven objectives seems pretty core to the developers' vision of EC. And somehow players have to be able to decide what the critical objectives are going to be.
  8. I think it depends much on the community. A few groups have already expressed intent to not listen to anyone but themselves which kinda makes me doubt the community is capable of something like this.
  9. I really hope we do get it to work either way. Just looking at PS2 makes me want to shout at the lot of them. Tactics is a key part of any war game. This is a MMOFPS so it needs structure, other than leveling (or upgrading whatever) the only objectives you have are the ones you set yourself. The majority of those is going to be following other people and zerging round the map. With organisation this game is going to get boring really quickly.
    It would not do the game justice, it would not do the lore justice and most importantly it would not do the players justice.

    Public voting- like all democracies is amazing in concept. Practically it is a nigh impossibility to get fair.
    Devs choosing- As mentioned above it could result in accusations of favouritism, some people not following orders etc.

    Instead of a vote in system, what about a vote out system? Where someone ascends to the rank of war council member and starts issuing loads of random orders someone can vote to kick them and if there is a general consensus they will be struck from the war council for a set time. Yes it can be abused but if a large enough chunk of the population want them out then they should be removed from office.

    It's not a perfect system and you'd need to iron out all the details but it is an alternative option.
  10. kernowstig Member

    I hope so Partisan, but if that is the case then it seems to be an overly complicated way of achieving it. Good relationships and communication between chapters can achieve this without the need for a HC. Don't get me wrong, if some people out there want to do this because it will improve their enjoyment and fun factor then best of luck to them, it's what we're all here for- FUN.

    I think it will be interesting to see if they can pull it off, it would be quite an achievement to get everyone 'singing from the same hymn sheet' like that for any period of time. For any form of command structure to work there has to be some form of accountability for everyone involved all the way from the bottom to the top of the pyramid. When people fail or refuse to do things that command structure will need to hold them accountable which inevitably leads to people playing the blame game and ultimately leads to fractured communities, feuds and all that crap. That, for me, is why I find the hole idea is a recipe for disaster.

Share This Page