>>712615625Combat is now. Taking as much into consideration as possible. Whats most important most prominant, most catered to.
Problem solving. Refusing wrong rule.
I've done relevant examples in recent posts. Getting players to assist newbies to gain higher scores that help win matches. New players score more, bad players score more, old and better players have to try harder to make up for their actions rewarded less. Older, more experiwnced, better players play support to new ones. They keep them going, make their actions mean something. Lead them and sheild them for objectives.
Foster a form where progression has at at it's furthest progressed form, concern with serving. With making whatever is with you work. With making them win.
Too perhaps new players, or new to a group serving the experienced. If so massively rewarded. Old players getting the best loot when looting. And new players more powerful when supporting, fast as them, their fire when upon the leaders target increased.
The sense that others winning matters. Their part secondary. Still seems a little like OP. Still need to iron out wrong.
Games shouldn't all be Army.
But when so: 100% robot. Leader can be human, what interacts with others. You're their right hand man. Reliable, faithful, hard and controlled. Thinking in terms of doing what the leader would want. Roger, negative etc. No pressure upon leader. Except to treat you as a capable machine. No need to admonish, you do it yourself when you fuckup by doing better immediately. Or explain what led you to doing the wrong thing, that you recognise it's wrong, won't happen again, info they can use for others to program them ready for such confrontation, having a prepared response to recall and enact. Yours.
Form a bond with your team. Wordlessly doing what is needed, not token gestures, though firing on their target is a good way to start, even if it isn't needed. Moving to behind and side, staying there no matter what they do. Silly maybe but