what we also need is good communication between our powerful guilds(powerful means good any guild can be big and be shite!)
I think it's a good initiative Uriel, but the point is moot IMO. In regards to merging smaller guilds, the game already has an integrated chain of command, and we will all fight accordingly by that system, if not then that's something the devs need to fix. As far as looking for leadership ahead of time, I prefer the idea of trial by combat and leadership by example on the battlefield. I think it would be best to wait until the game modules and Alpha to test ourselves and find those who are meant for the Path of Command. The whole point of the Alpha is to try out the game, and in terms of long-term consequences I think the Alpha will be especially forgiving. I imagine the devs will still allow the most successful faction to carry some benefits into the Beta, but nothing too important, otherwise it would sort of defeat to point of an Alpha IMO. For the time being I shall wait and see, but if a worthy leader comes out from your efforts Uriel, then I look forward to seeing him in the battlefield.
I have to go with Asurael here, it's much to early to say. Though it IS a good idea, you have to admit, guilds are likely to have a lot of people loafing around until the game gets closer to actual launch, which is perfectly normal. I'm liking the idea of Trial By Fire, we're to vote for our War Council and then they elect Commanders (AT THIS STAGE), who then elect sergeants? Or Squad leaders? I'm not sure how far it filters down. The worry for players not following commands is for me... kind of minimal, if the War Council is setting good objectives and we get to embrace the Eldar kind of Strategy (as in hit random objective X and everyone is like.. Why did they do that?! But of course we know it was to attract a certain factions attention so they could capture it and ultimately be assaulted by the 'Nids, or something) everyone should have no issue following it. What i'm more excited for is that our War Council will actually have to be Farseer/Autarch-esque, if we get proper access to Eldar style strategy. They have to be able to plan those crafty skirmishes or mystery attacks in order to achieve some objective which, at the time, has seemingly no link. This means I really can't help but agree with Asurael, people will have to 'try out' for Command positions, it's basically impossible to assign them in any way until the game is playable. Anyway, consider me on Stand By as far as this goes.
I like the idea but its way too soon. We don't know how tactics will work, not even how our classes will fair in combat. EC will be a game where both micro and macro strategies will come to play, so until we can field-test as Asurael had said, we can't know for sure who can best take a position. The formations of guilds is something that happens naturally, no reason to push. Biggest problem will be communication, even if we have hundreds of small guilds we can still workout if there is communication, maybe even some specialization, like a guild that is good with anti-tank tactics. Before we establish a chain of command we should decide how we will talk, I don't know if there will be possible to see how many classes are deployed in-game before respawning, if not then we will have to decide a way to balance classes in field, so we don't have a bunch of Fire Dragons respawning after a enemy tank shows up, as it was being discussed in another thread. About the idea of having 2 advisers, unless the game has something to support it I don't see it very differently from players giving opinions. I like the idea from having at least one member from a time-zone in order to have at least one council member logged in, but being realistic its hard to have someone logged in 24/7 even if divided by 10, and i dont think the devs will make the eternal presence of the council a need, people have lives.
Agree with above, I think as far as communications go that will be the point of Strike Forces and Squads. Commands can easily filter down through the network and Squad Leaders can deal directly with their squad members to work out what classes should be used etc. I really don't see it being an issue. You should note though, that behaviour said War Council positions were for the most dedicated (and competent) faction members. That said I think you're right about not needing the council to ALWAYS be present.
The War Council, if it isn't already composed of guild leaders, will be in heavy communication with all the guilds for obvious reasons. In the end, there will (hopefully) be a lot more than 10 people deciding the strategic course of action of the whole faction. How communication works would be a much more interesting question. Can squad leaders listen in on generals? Can a general "choose" a soldier to do information filtering for them (This is done extensively in real life)? Can a random soldier communicate with another random soldier (call system)? Can communication ingame be blocked somehow? Etc.
I'd be more interested in what the 'goals' are. Are the Council given a set list of things they can do per month, and decide from that what to pursue? The problem with a game like PS2 is that there is pretty much zero scope for planning for the future. You fight only to hold onto your bases and capture other bases...but it all happens so quickly that at the end of the day, well, you can go from owning everything on a continent to owning nothing in the span of a few hours. And because the 'push' is constant, over 24 hours, and it's just the one thing that you're doing, with varying levels of troops, you can't say 'Okay, we need you three squads to hold this base while the rest of the forces go over here' because in about an hour's time half of the people in those squads will have logged off to go eat their tea. It ain't like a real war in any comparative sense. Now, this can be overcome somewhat through players, but it'd take some real doing. For instance, if I were Chaos, it'd make sense to make an 'Iron Within' guild soley for the purpose of guarding bases. Regardless of who's available at the time, they log in, have a list that comes up given from high command saying what bases they want guarding, then they deploy to those bases and repair defences, stave off Tyranid attacks, etc. I can't imagine it would be a very POPULAR guild, as the levelling would be low or otherwise suck balls and attacking is always more exciting than defending, but that's the problem with 'class progression' systems in wargames. You want the points and the points are always overwhelmingly tied up in killing. Even if you say 'well the points from orders would balance it out'...would it? Because it strikes me that you'd get more points from ordering an attack than from ordering a defence, considering the additional points you're going to accrue. So these are some of the challenges such a Council would have to overcome, particularly as the Guilds are going to be made largely by communities transferring themselves over from websites, rather than being spawned from a particular need, and the people of those websites aren't all going to have the same idea on what they want to do.
Lot's of good points in your post. As to who cares about craftworlds/factions within a race I would say I care that's why I was probably the first to create an Eldar craftworld specific guild thread on EC (at least that I know of.) I would argue that having diversity and the draw that folks like from the lore of the game does not have to be an obstacle. Also as I understand the Behavior info shared so far the EC official councils will end up directing strategy so any strikeforce that is part of a smaller guild will be able to carry out those orders. Don't get me wrong given the right conditions and depending on how EC is developed I do think there is a benefit to further collaboration. But since this is 40K with a strong backstory I think it's safe to say I feel as strongly as a Spacewolf being a Spacewolf about being part of a Biel Tan faction. Having said that I think there will always be a percentage of players/groups that are going to play the game without organized participation. So any organization/collaboration that takes place will be a percentage of the player base.
This one is a difficult thing to say as all the craftworlds even though are the same faction, they all function differently. They all have different tactics in the battlefield. I am looking at this through a lore prospective.
Since we really don't know enough about the game there isn't anything to really plan. Also, leadership has to be earned in-game, and so either way I think we are waiting until at least the first PvP module releases.
