Eliminate the commander role.

[Makida]

I think this is another idea to "save" Allegiance by completely destroying the aspects of gameplay that make it worth saving.

I personally like Allegiance because of the sort of game it is, not because it's called "Allegiance" or is hosted on this community or because of the players in it. If you change what Allegiance is in such a fundamental way, why bother trying to keep it going at all? Might as well just find another game to play.

Yes, of course changes are good, keep the game fresh, etc. But "eliminate the commander role and replace it with treasures" isn't so much "keeping it fresh" as "making it a totally different game."

Could it be fun as an alternative gameplay mode? Maybe, I don't know, it seems like it'd be kind of boring actually. But even if it would be fun as an alternative, in practice one of two things would happen: Either no-one would play it, sticking to traditional conquest games, or it would replace conquest games as the dominant game type, in which case, see above.

[DonKarnage]

Without significant changes that pander to the brainless dumbasses, Allegiance will forever be a small niche game that many will hear of, few will play, and fewer will stick around for more than a week.

I showed this game to many of my friends, only a few got talked into trying it, and none of them could handle the stress, confusion and drama for more than a week.

[Makida]

Again, what's the point of saving allegiance if the only way to do it is to "pander to the brainless dumbasses", as you put it? There are plenty of games out there already that do that. Why bother trying to save Allegiance at all, then? Seriously, what's the point?

If the only two options are 1) Alleg dies a slow death or 2) Alleg becomes an unrecognisably different, less complex, less interesting game as a result of attempts to broaden its appeal, then I honestly prefer option 1), and I honestly don't understand people who would prefer option 2). What's the point of saving Allegiance if to do so, you have to ruin it? Do you like this game because of its name? Because of the colour scheme on the forums? Because of the artwork? Or what? Because if you prefer option 2), I can't see how your reason can possibly be "the unique gameplay." For me, at least, the gameplay was the thing that made Allegiance good in the first place.

I just hope there is an option 3) somewhere, but honestly, if Allegiance cannot survive without becoming something unrecognisably different, and worse, then maybe it's time for it to die. Otherwise it'd be like... dragging Stargate: SG-1 on after Season 8 even though the only way to do it was to make it stupider. Better to end it with some dignity.

[DonKarnage]

Well, there's always people out there who have been looking for such a game their whole life but never knew of it.
I just don't know what to think. I DONT want this to be like all the other bull@#(! games, but what will this game be if nobody plays it anymore?
What a waste it would be if this game just died. All the effort spent to keep it going all this time. All the players who would have loved to play this but never knew until it was too late.

But... why can't we appeal to the masses AND our current community? We would keep our old game mode, just have something new that's easier and more fun to play for average player.
They would have that, and we would still have our beloved conquest.

Those who like conquest will play conquest. Those who want to play doom in space will do just that. Why would it be all one or nothing?

[beeman]

Nah, I like having commanders.

[Imago]

Autolaunch - R6 -quickstart works!
The installer includes in the Games shortcuts a "Play Now" that uses the -quickstart switch.

edit this: USA Independence Day 2009 I worked on this! (also Two Weeks later)




edit this as well: auto joining a populated game or creating a new game on double-click of the shortcut, solves many of the same issues. again, this was done in 2009 people....and that was the hard part. now you just have to remove NOAT and auto-kick AFK's (I wrote all that code back in R2?) ...right?

[NightRychune]

i wouldn't remove NOAT, but I have always been a fan of autoremoving AFK people

[Phoenyx]

QUOTE (girlyboy @ Jun 7 2011, 02:48 AM) Again, what's the point of saving allegiance if the only way to do it is to "pander to the brainless dumbasses", as you put it? There are plenty of games out there already that do that. Why bother trying to save Allegiance at all, then? Seriously, what's the point?

If the only two options are 1) Alleg dies a slow death or 2) Alleg becomes an unrecognisably different, less complex, less interesting game as a result of attempts to broaden its appeal, then I honestly prefer option 1), and I honestly don't understand people who would prefer option 2). What's the point of saving Allegiance if to do so, you have to ruin it? Do you like this game because of its name? Because of the colour scheme on the forums? Because of the artwork? Or what? Because if you prefer option 2), I can't see how your reason can possibly be "the unique gameplay." For me, at least, the gameplay was the thing that made Allegiance good in the first place.

I just hope there is an option 3) somewhere, but honestly, if Allegiance cannot survive without becoming something unrecognisably different, and worse, then maybe it's time for it to die. Otherwise it'd be like... dragging Stargate: SG-1 on after Season 8 even though the only way to do it was to make it stupider. Better to end it with some dignity.

Wasn't there a similar bible story involving King Solomon, a baby and two mothers? This sounds like the "cut the baby in half" camp. (I'm not sure if that is what was intended, but that is how it came across to me.)

I think the discussion keeps getting side-tracked. People have been asking for #3 for years, long before my gaming PC died.

The third choice is to create options that encourage other people to join, play and stay. True, many of them will never be competitive, but some may grow to be, and the community as a whole will become stronger (thus encouraging more people to join, play and stay).

It is a similar reason to why they start kids playing T-Ball. Learn the game, grow skills, and get them wanting to keep playing.

[NightRychune]

also as for the original idea, replacing a multitude of gameplay facets with mere randomization is a $#@!ing terrible idea, horrible design, and you should feel bad for proposing it

[raumvogel]

QUOTE (fishbone @ Jun 6 2011, 06:56 PM) Nah, I like having commanders.

I look forward to seeing you command more. YOU can put up with half the team not reading the chat while the other half whines because you didn't buy this, didn't do that...whaaa...whaaa...