Advisor Modus

[SC-Account]

It would be really cool to have some kind of advisor modus. It would be exactly like observer modus but the observer(s) would be able to communicate with all of the players. That would be a cool option for training games where you have some good players observe a game of some lower skill level players.

Another cool option would be some kind of "strategist modus", it would be like the advisor modus but the strategist would be attached to one team and would only see what the players of the team can see (like a dead player). While the other players focus on actually playing the game the extra player could focus on observation and making up strategies, which could lead to a really interesting game experience.

Would that be possible to implement with relatively low effort?

[rootbeer23]

advisor mode:
1) move mouse cursor over the "Allow observers" checkbox
2) press left mouse button

strategist mode:
1) press ctrl
2) press k

[SC-Account]

1.
Can't chat with team.. bad.

2.
Possible but would require editing all maps for another slot..

[laPPen]

Really great idea. I would love to see that would be really helpfull for training.
Best would be if it was possible to select players and see their eco aswell. So u could give better advices

[Swkoll]

Really great idea. I would love to see that would be really helpfull for training.
Best would be if it was possible to select players and see their eco aswell. So u could give better advices

If that would possible it would make live casting a lot better.

[SC-Account]

Really great idea. I would love to see that would be really helpfull for training.
Best would be if it was possible to select players and see their eco aswell. So u could give better advices

Yeah true, so it is a bit more than just a dead player needed for advisor mode.

[Hawkei]

1.
Can't chat with team.. bad.

2.
Possible but would require editing all maps for another slot..

1. False. Any observer can abuse (what is actually a bug). They can click on any chat text and have the chat window open. They can then change the coversation target to their team mate. They cannot initiate a conversation, but they can continue one...

There was particular abuse of this feature in GPGnet. It was the "Obi-Wan Kenobi" exploit. Because a dead player would revert to oberver mode and see everything. If they gave all their stuff before they died. They could tell their surviving team mate exactly what the enemy was doing, without fog of war. Which meant that the combined economy of both players could be controlled by one player, under the effective direction of the other. Which was of course game breaking.

2. Having to watch a game in observer mode after having died is a very frustrating experience. I don't know why anyone would enter into this by choice.

3. There is absolutely no reason why a player in a team game couldn't adopt this role. There is nothing saying that 4 separate bases MUST be controlled by 4 separate players. E.g. I am playing the air position on Seatons Clutch, but the front player is higher ranked and much better at air micro. His army is also land-locked, because, the middle game has moved to static base warfare and his micro is under-utilised. Of course, once the air base is operational, it doesn't actually need much micro. So I give my air factories over to the front player, and get my engineers assisting them. Now my eco is fully utilised at making ASF, but those ASF are in the hands of the better player. Who also has better siduational awareness, because they are fighting directly over his base... Which then liberates my attention to gather intel, and focus on the strategic gameplan and other micro intensive activities, like eco whoring, drops, reclaim missions, strategic warfare and snipes.

Considering the number of games I have lost because of bad intel... I'm thinking one player completely devoted to intel, SMD construction and specialist tactics, is actually not a bad idea!

[SC-Account]

1. False. Any observer can abuse (what is actually a bug). They can click on any chat text and have the chat window open. They can then change the coversation target to their team mate. They cannot initiate a conversation, but they can continue one...

There was particular abuse of this feature in GPGnet. It was the "Obi-Wan Kenobi" exploit. Because a dead player would revert to oberver mode and see everything. If they gave all their stuff before they died. They could tell their surviving team mate exactly what the enemy was doing, without fog of war. Which meant that the combined economy of both players could be controlled by one player, under the effective direction of the other. Which was of course game breaking.

I am quite sure it doesn't work any more and asides that you want a clean function that is intuitive, not based on bugusing.

2. Having to watch a game in observer mode after having died is a very frustrating experience. I don't know why anyone would enter into this by choice.

You won't die and it is mostly about either helping new players or playing with a well trained team. I would like to do that and so would others.

3. There is absolutely no reason why a player in a team game couldn't adopt this role. There is nothing saying that 4 separate bases MUST be controlled by 4 separate players. E.g. I am playing the air position on Seatons Clutch, but the front player is higher ranked and much better at air micro. His army is also land-locked, because, the middle game has moved to static base warfare and his micro is under-utilised. Of course, once the air base is operational, it doesn't actually need much micro. So I give my air factories over to the front player, and get my engineers assisting them. Now my eco is fully utilised at making ASF, but those ASF are in the hands of the better player. Who also has better siduational awareness, because they are fighting directly over his base... Which then liberates my attention to gather intel, and focus on the strategic gameplan and other micro intensive activities, like eco whoring, drops, reclaim missions, strategic warfare and snipes.

Yes, but maybe you don't want anyone to micro 2 bases, asides that if I get ASF from my less micro skilled ally DCC hates me.

Considering the number of games I have lost because of bad intel... I'm thinking one player completely devoted to intel, SMD construction and specialist tactics, is actually not a bad idea!

Yeah, what if you allow the advisor to be able to receive units from allies? Well he would have to have an ACU, too then, what essentially makes it another player.

[Hawkei]

The feature would have some utility in training and dedicated high level team matches.

As for generic team games, the issues associated with unified C&C and intelligence monitoring are all aspects of team games. In a 2v2, 3v3 or 4v4 there is no chain of command. Unless it is by arrangement within the team. Or unless players choose to recognise the guidance and general game plan of a more experienced team mate.

Essentially, the sorts of people who play these military simulation games are in it to "frag" someone and players who play Sup Com are generally control freaks. Hence, most teams operate like a homoginy of cooperative empires, rather then a true combined force operation. Which leads to competition for kills, resources and drama over uncoordinated tactics.

So much so, that players often think that a solo ACU with 4 eco's is more powerful, because they can direct all those resources into focused projects. But from a team play perspective, there is no reason why this could not be done prematurely by cooperation. When you get into teams of 4 or more players, it is usually best when one player can focus on strategy, instead of tactics. So instead of building direct combat units, they will focus on scouts, omni sensors, and making sure each player has SMD coverage, etc. They can micro tele-SCU's and drop missions. Analyse base weaknesses and force compositions. launch nukes... and they can do this better, because, they aren't paranoid about their ASF's being ambushed.

Having 3 players micro while 1 macro's is better than having 4 players micro, with occasional and inconsistent macro.