Coming Clan Tactician Role Changes [Pc]

[[DE]Rebecca 171,228]

Tenno,

 

We will be making a change to the Clan Tactician role within Alliances based on feedback from Clans and Alliances playing the Dark Sectors.

 

Current Structure:

 

- Alliance Warlord can give Tactician permission to Clan

- Clan Warlord is Tactician

- Clan Warlord can promote members to Tactician

- Tactician is only Clan Tactician but not Alliance Tactician

 

New Structure (next update):

 

- Alliance Warlord can give Tactician permission to Clan

- Clan Warlord is Tactician

- Clan Warlord can promote members to Tactician

- Tactician is both Clan and Alliance Tactician

 

Simply put, the next update will allow Clans with the Tactician permission at the Alliance level to have Tacticians who will be able to execute on decisions for the Alliance.

 

 

 

 

 

[YouHaveShamedYoFamory 5,621]

cool beans

[MDRLOz 2,275]

Another step forward for dark sectors. 

 

However still not much for these tacticians to do. 

 

Also why does this need a news & announcements thread? Surely it will just be revealed to all when the patch hits?

 

or does DE really think we need this information ASAP so we can start deciding/promoting people to these lofty, important but ultimately useless positions?

Edited May 21, 2014 by MDRLOz

[Morec0 19,458]

Another step forward for dark sectors. 

 

However still not much for these tacticians to do. 

 

I'm hoping for a layout design, that would be dope.

[Xenogelion 428]

Hopefully we'll get clan colours at some point in the future

[Issun135 1,440]

Another step forward for dark sectors. 

 

However still not much for these tacticians to do. 

 

Also why does this need a news & announcements thread? Surely it will just be revealed to all when the patch hits?

 

or does DE really think we need this information ASAP so we can start deciding/promoting people to these lofty, important but ultimately useless positions?

yea pretty much:/

[tveeggad 6,884]

Soooo when can we remove Loki from trophy room? Irrelevant, but heck.

[Paul_Pianoff 1,936]

I didn't understand anything but I agree 100%.

[-JT-RozovyyRulik 281]

I didn't understand anything but I agree 100%.

+1

[Jithvan 693]

My Mind Just Exploded....

[gavdl13 78]

cool!

[Megakruemel 2,469]

okay.

[Haiova 703]

coold

[-CdG-Nova 554]

Nice.

[Nama_Sui_Seijin 179]

sweet ^^

[Panelope 160]

This is nice because my clan's Warlord hasn't been able to deploy a rail. He keeps coming up with an error message.

[--SD-- 15]

AWESOME

[Llyssa 14,365]

Er, request to have that be optional?

 

That is, the alliance leader should still have the ability to decide whether or not clan tacticians can be allowed as alliance tacticians as well.

 

If you want to allow clan X to have only their warlords be alliance tacticians, you can. If you want to allow clan X to have their tacticians as alliance tacticians, you can.

 

It shouldn't just be forced, as that can become an unwieldy issue for larger structures/organizations--if you have, say, 50 clans in your alliance, you previously had to decide on the merits of 50 people. Now you'd be forced to contend with the merits of 50 people, plus all the people in their clans whom they may trust.

 

The change, as-is, sounds like it's just begging to be a drama storm.

 

Allowing alliance leaders to pick "Okay, Bob is good at picking tacticians, while Steve is merely a good tactician" is much more suitable. Alliance Tactician power could still be extended, but it would allow you to have some recourse between "NONE of your clan can be AT" and "ALL of your CT are automatically AT, too".

[Cannamancer 720]

Sounds like a good plan to get more activity in the Dark Sectors, looking forward to the next patch!

[MSD3000 776]

What would make the Dark Sectors far more interesting is if they involved actual pvp instead of all this passive aggressive back-stabbery.

What if you had it set up like many of the faction invasion maps (two smaller maps joined at a choke point in the middle). That would basically be either factions light rail boarding each other.

Aside from the joining/docking room, tacticians could design the layout of their side of the map before hand.

 

Combat could be 4v4 teams (or 2v2 if the engine can't reliably handle 8 peeps on a map). It would play out similar to mobas, with each side leading hordes of fairly braindead fodder, each with different abilities. One of which would look similar a captive, and would be an engineer. The point being to protect him to the other side's core or whatever, at which point he would hack it and win the match.

 

OR because the AI is currently a bit inadequate for that job. Make it similar to UT2003/2004's bombing run mode. (the best damn mode in those games, that I dearly miss) An item spawns in the middle of the joining room and Tenno must grab it and successfully run it to the other team's core. And of course it applies a debuff to whoever is carrying it, and maybe only allows them use of their side arm (no melee...you coptor'n so and so's) And of course still spawning waves of chaff enemies to mess with you as well.

[RadMystical 16]

Am I a moron for not understanding 100% of what this post is about? 

[What_is_your_ip 183]

Sweet we still can't see who is in what clan.

[drunkpunk222 131]

sectors are very easy and very boring, also some players cheat there,someone from opposing  side coming in and taking key and in a jump disconnecting so no one cant take it anymore so means abort, key just flying , its stupid, they can better run rails against then waste time