Will lore and storyline be build around the player? Will NPC-s talk to the player and call him ‘Commander’ or something like that? Will there be some cut scenes where someone will be telling ‘us’ (the players) about something? Xenonauts did it after FiraXCOM.
1 Like
I’d prefer it if this wasn’t the case. Let the player imagine his/her own interactions with the Project personnel.
And, above all else, don’t glorify the player character like XCOM 2 did. I was not a fan of the Commander-worship in that game.
4 Likes
I don’t want any glorification. Just creating some immersion that ‘we’ are there. But can live even without it. Just asking. 
I so agree with this. This is a battle of humanity VS an outside threat, and the war will be won by many individuals and groups, not a glorious master individual.
I’d say Firaxis built upon the commander’s popularity among the fanbase (just look at the fanfic to get an idea) but I think they went over the top.
However, if I had to look at FiraXCom, I’d have to say that Bradford annoys me more. Not the character himself, who’s ok, but his role as a “commander by proxy” in cinematics. I understand he is needed to build cinematics the way Firaxis wanted them, but having Shen and Vahlen reporting to him and him vetting their ideas doesn’t help making you feel like you run the show as the commander.
It was the fans who started the Commander Worship in fan material and so on after EU/EW, after which it - unfortunately - bled into the actual game come XCOM 2.
Precisely, but what was fun in fanfic didn’t work that well in the game. That said, it’s not overly intrusive either, just not something I’d emulate.
I think it would be interesting if you were one of the soldiers on the field, but still as the commander.
Perhaps have your character hard to kill, or they only go unconscious.
The new Battletech tried this, I don’t think it was a good choice, but that may be only me.
I don’t know about Battletech. It could work if you play a lance of Mechwarriors and don’t really lose men, but lose mechs instead, but I’d absolutely hate to have this in Phoenix Point.
It’s immersion breaking to have a trooper that you know won’t die no matter what. Whenever a trooper would get sliced up lengthwise by a giant alien pincer, this dude just goes prone. Hit by a blaster bomb a ground zero? Rendered unconscious.
Moreover, what does it bring?
Lorewise? The game isn’t telling a story about an individual, what we have so far presents the phoenix project as something that has endured over the ages despite the frailty of mankind, not thanks to a single person.
What about gameplay? If a unique named immortal character is required on mission, it means you can hardly have multiple teams running unless the commander is this superhuman unit with no fatigue, no recovery time, not even mentioning how it clashes with psychological trauma rules that have been hinted at.
Please, please, leave the commander out of the Battlefield!
1 Like
There’s definitely something to be said for having the commander be as light a presence as possible. Even in XCOM 2 it was a lil excessive, IMO–as mentioned above, too much of “one individual responsible for saving the world” in a dramatic sense. Also, the less your commander says and the less he/she seems to interact with the world, the more room there is for putting yourself in the Commander’s shoes, which is an appeal
2 Likes
In BT, it can get injured, incapacitated just like other mechwarriors (taken out of combat while in battle), but it can’t be killed (post-mission result), and will heal in the medbay after months/years. It can be taken out of missions for a long time, but still doesn’t add much to Roleplaying (mods can fix this, but that’s modding), so I don’t think it was worth the effort.
But at least you can ignore it and not use it (I believe he’s not required in any Story-mission, random contracts need it even less), so you can ignore it.
In BT, it can get injured, incapacitated just like other mechwarriors (taken out of combat while in battle), but it can’t be killed (post-mission result)
Well, I dislike “too much commander drama” (and to be honest the same for psy warrior that was able to move the ship away) and in my eyes it was modern standard of pushing players ego.
But I do like idea to “lead by example” (not the EW perk) but that you should be among the soldiers. And why it shouldnt be realistic that if commander dies new can be appointed (next in rank) but all lose morale and willpower severely - in fact first line around has to panic until new commander arrives.
Leading by example is a good incentive to include officers and a chain of command in the tactical layer, but that’s as far as it goes.
There’s no reason to expose your top brass to the front lines and I don’t see the commander joining every single operation. If the commander’s skills lie in managing the PP project on a strategic scale, handling supplies, logistics, diplomacy with other factions, prioritizing ops and planning the campaign, why would you risk such an asset’s life on the front where his skills are wasted.
Unless we get back to “the commander is a superhuman being who is a top notch soldier on top of being a mastermind, he’s also good at dancing tango and cooking lasagna by the way”
EDIT : There could be ONE scenario where the commander could play a role, and this is if the main PP base gets attacked. You could have him playable with Game Over on death but, once again, is it needed or is it a gimmick?
3 Likes
Throw away this false EW ego booster. Officer is high ranked soldier that leads the squad. There should be no situation like one soldier dies - project terminated. As usual only by main base destruction or lost support/funding overall.
We tend to forget as long as Xcom/PP given fraction lives, battle goes on with some less powerful squad/rooster as punishment.
So I would take officer development slowly, and as I expect them not to be “generals behind” they could somewhat influence combat (but not by giving extra actions as in oversimplified EW)
Makes sense to me that if the main base is attacked that the commander could help with the base defence in person. Heck, in Firaxis Xcom 2, they even get the soldiers out of the hospital beds to help out!
1 Like
Guys I’m not sure if you went too far. My original thought was just about immersion of the player, not some additional immortal soldier. Don’t make it an RPG where we will be main character. Let our personnel just comunicate with the player, and that’s it. 
Surprisingly, Commander did exist back in 1994. Source: Ufopedia Wiki
[Commander is the highest rank that can be gained from any of your troops within X-COM. Naturally, a commander accompanying your soldiers on a mission will provide some hefty morale boosts, or severe morale penalties if he or she is killed, so you may want them to hang back as a Rear Commander.
When you have thirty soldiers or more (combined from all bases), and a vacant position, then the best eligible Colonel is promoted. There can only be one commander at any time. ](http://Commander is the highest rank that can be gained from any of your troops within X-COM.
Naturally, a commander accompanying your soldiers on a mission will provide some hefty morale boosts, or severe morale penalties if he or she is killed, so you may want them to hang back as a Rear Commander.
When you have thirty soldiers or more (combined from all bases), and a vacant position, then the best eligible Colonel is promoted. There can only be one commander at any time.
2 Likes
If there was an Avatar for me, I’d prefer to use it for diplomacy and negotiations, mostly. It might be fun for a protect the VIP and it should be normal not a super soldier. Not a make or break feature.
EDIT: I would like faction leaders to be characters (king pieces, as it were). I think an amazing mission would be you collecting intel that says the Synod of Learning is at Fort Sibling (for example). You send in the cavalry, and capture the Synod and whatever opportunities that might open up. If we had an avatar character, would losing him/her/non-gender-specific-mutant be an instant loss?
As for Commander worship, I twist a famous Metal quote:
Do you think self-love can bloom on the battlefield?
I’d like it if instead of an Overall Commander if players assumed the roles of two different officers one in charge of the project overall (deals with the geoscape stuff) and another one in charge of coodinating the ground teams (the tactical layer).
I always though having to juggle both aspectsin x-com would have been so draining and too much for a single person to have to deal with.
It could even allow for an interesting co-op mode later down the line. (I know they aren’t planning a multiplayer at the current time but who knows in the future ) with player one dealing with the geoscape the other the tactical layer.
1 Like