Where have they gone? Sharing a commander, one of (IMO) the greatest features of spring, enabling people to have Allys on a new level, where you really have to cooperate and discuss what to do to get anywhere, and no one is playing it?
How come? Even if you have a hard time controlling the normal routine of your super macro/Micro empire with a second, half-dull player that doesn't know your style, isn't funny when you both try to fight over where the weasel scout should go?
Isn't it great when you can concentrate to microing an attack, knowing that your partner got your base covered?
Isn't it great to take a break in the normal part at the end and FPS a krogoth for a while?
Isn't it a great way for newbies to learn how to play to play on the same team as one, really being WITH the action rather then watching a replay where you can't affect a single aspect or try it out yourself at the spot?
Come on people, let's bring shared commanders back on the map!
Where have all, shared com games gone? Long tim...
Moderator: Moderators
I guess the problem is that its not really very intuitive in the lobby to select, and not very well presented to the players.
(this whole ally-team/team number stuff is MUCH too confusing. Maybe making one a number and one a letter would help a bit. As in players 1,2,3 are in team A, ...)
Also, the ingame information should present whats going on better. (the. info names with many people the same colour, and specs mixxed in, too, isnt very informative).
And last but not least, a startup message when launching the game in the form of "you are playing together with ******" would help much confusion i have seen with new people wondering why their commander does move on their own...
But i would really like shared commander games.
They are a great way to have many people and huge battles without too much lag, and especially with higher unitlimits it can be nice to have someone take care of all airforce related stuff, for example, and another one take the economy.
(this whole ally-team/team number stuff is MUCH too confusing. Maybe making one a number and one a letter would help a bit. As in players 1,2,3 are in team A, ...)
Also, the ingame information should present whats going on better. (the. info names with many people the same colour, and specs mixxed in, too, isnt very informative).
And last but not least, a startup message when launching the game in the form of "you are playing together with ******" would help much confusion i have seen with new people wondering why their commander does move on their own...
But i would really like shared commander games.
They are a great way to have many people and huge battles without too much lag, and especially with higher unitlimits it can be nice to have someone take care of all airforce related stuff, for example, and another one take the economy.
-
Foxomaniac
- Posts: 691
- Joined: 18 Jan 2006, 16:59
Me and my friends play shared comm alot - it's fun, you don't have to worry about managing everything alone - and your partner can learn from you.
The problem with this is, most people want to play on thier own - to have complete control over everything, shared-comm in a pub can be pretty bad - as you need a way of communicating with your partner.
Text can be a little slow and some people don't even look at text.
It's better to play Shared-comm with friends using some external voice software (ex. ventrillo/teamspeak).
Just my opinion.
The problem with this is, most people want to play on thier own - to have complete control over everything, shared-comm in a pub can be pretty bad - as you need a way of communicating with your partner.
Text can be a little slow and some people don't even look at text.
It's better to play Shared-comm with friends using some external voice software (ex. ventrillo/teamspeak).
Just my opinion.
IMO the problem is that you are all too often paired with a guy who is either a newbie or an idiot. Not really any way around that except through clans maybe? Presumably people on the same clan would know who they'd want managing their base/army.
I'm a very good battle-manager but I tend to spend too much time managing my front lines - meanwhile my opponent is just stalling me while he focuses on his base. More resources versus more battlefield skill are almost on a par with each other currently. In my experience, a lot of people think they have to jump to L2 as fast as possible or else lose... apparently in Spring it's average to have L2 at 15 minutes, which AFAIK wasn't the case in OTA. You'd spend a good while at L1 and usually at least one player would be eliminated from the game at this point. Rushing L2 isn't what this game should be about... (woo, what a tangent that went to)
I'm a very good battle-manager but I tend to spend too much time managing my front lines - meanwhile my opponent is just stalling me while he focuses on his base. More resources versus more battlefield skill are almost on a par with each other currently. In my experience, a lot of people think they have to jump to L2 as fast as possible or else lose... apparently in Spring it's average to have L2 at 15 minutes, which AFAIK wasn't the case in OTA. You'd spend a good while at L1 and usually at least one player would be eliminated from the game at this point. Rushing L2 isn't what this game should be about... (woo, what a tangent that went to)
-
smokeynseinor
- Posts: 44
- Joined: 21 Oct 2004, 12:19
thats why i said metal maps in where if say 6 are sharing a comm its very easy for each one to take some kbots and build for themselfves and/or others to attack with units and so.smokeynseinor wrote:I dislike shared com games because people tend to disagree and get angry at eachother when somebody attacks in a particular way or somebody orders certain things to be built then somebody changes the build orders.
Its easier on metal maps (or so do i think)
.
-
Foxomaniac
- Posts: 691
- Joined: 18 Jan 2006, 16:59
-
Lindir The Green
- Posts: 815
- Joined: 04 May 2005, 15:09
I don't like shared commander because 2 out of the 3 times I played it I was paired with a newb (and one of them my ally didn't even speak english 
.)
Then I had one game allied with DaveTheBrave, but it wasn't very fun because Dave didn't know CORE very well, and he was in charge of our side.
I suppose it would be fun to do the grunt work of somebody who is way better than you, but it wouldn't be very fun for them if you screwed something up due to not being as great as them.
.)Then I had one game allied with DaveTheBrave, but it wasn't very fun because Dave didn't know CORE very well, and he was in charge of our side.
I suppose it would be fun to do the grunt work of somebody who is way better than you, but it wouldn't be very fun for them if you screwed something up due to not being as great as them.
There's an entire subset of strategy that you have to use to get good at co-op comm play. It's fairly intuitive actually, problem comes in getting good at it 
When you start, have one player do initial base building for first thirty seconds to minute.
Once you crank out your three raiders, have the base builder keep building and have the other guy send the raiders on their way. While the raiders are raiding, and by the time they die, the base builder shoudl have built two or so con units.
The raider now takes the con units and builds stuff with them and order queues. While those orders are being uindertaken, the second batch of attackers are being used by the raider.
---------
So yeah, there you have it for first four minutes or so. I've played a few commshare games with good players, and it was VERY enjoyable. Your strengths complement each other, and your weaknesses are diminished. And if someone needs to go to the bathroom, no need to pause the game :D
Basically it comes down to good communication and agreement on tasks:
1) Split tasks up
2) Always have one player the designated "comm driver" (so both of you dont take over comm and dgun with it at same time) and the other the raider/light expander
3) Check up on your partner's work now and then so that if you need to take over for their half of the responsiblities, you know where everything is, etc.
When you start, have one player do initial base building for first thirty seconds to minute.
Once you crank out your three raiders, have the base builder keep building and have the other guy send the raiders on their way. While the raiders are raiding, and by the time they die, the base builder shoudl have built two or so con units.
The raider now takes the con units and builds stuff with them and order queues. While those orders are being uindertaken, the second batch of attackers are being used by the raider.
---------
So yeah, there you have it for first four minutes or so. I've played a few commshare games with good players, and it was VERY enjoyable. Your strengths complement each other, and your weaknesses are diminished. And if someone needs to go to the bathroom, no need to pause the game :D
Basically it comes down to good communication and agreement on tasks:
1) Split tasks up
2) Always have one player the designated "comm driver" (so both of you dont take over comm and dgun with it at same time) and the other the raider/light expander
3) Check up on your partner's work now and then so that if you need to take over for their half of the responsiblities, you know where everything is, etc.
When I played shared comm with Peace it was awesome. Peace was around the same skill leven and we usually talked far more than anyone else in all our games, so good communication and similar mindsets.
On the other hand, lots of times I played with people who were completely clueless and would want to build lots of tight in defenses when we had no resources. Almost worse are the people who know what is going on, but want to use a completely different strategy from you.
I recall one time Peace, Decimator (IIRC), and myself were sharing comm. I prevented Decimator (comm controller) from making a radar tower because we had a peeper popping into the sky. Unfortunately, someone flew away my peeper and some enemy units came 'out of nowhere' to attack our base.
Sometimes it is fun. Sometimes it isn't. I don't like playing shared with people I don't know.
On the other hand, lots of times I played with people who were completely clueless and would want to build lots of tight in defenses when we had no resources. Almost worse are the people who know what is going on, but want to use a completely different strategy from you.
I recall one time Peace, Decimator (IIRC), and myself were sharing comm. I prevented Decimator (comm controller) from making a radar tower because we had a peeper popping into the sky. Unfortunately, someone flew away my peeper and some enemy units came 'out of nowhere' to attack our base.
Sometimes it is fun. Sometimes it isn't. I don't like playing shared with people I don't know.
Three now!Kixxe wrote:And who are the two who voted "lolz noob!1!"? ~.o
-
wizard8873
- Posts: 254
- Joined: 21 Jan 2006, 02:42
yea, its been a while since i've seen one. one of the things i read was the texting was too slow to communicate. maybe building in teamspeak into the game would help this out. sure we can go out and download a 3rd party program but then hosting comes into play for that server and everyone would need to download it and it just gets ugly. having one built into Spring would actually be kinda useful. communication would be faster, easier and more accurate. just a thought