Skip to main content You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.

WikiFullscreen ChatVoice Chat (Discord)Org PageF.A.Q.

Topic: Proposal: Command Structure Interface (Read 1487 times) previous topic - next topic

  • ArbitrarySketch
  • [*][*][*]
  • Staff
Proposal: Command Structure Interface
As may be evident by my work with the roster, I like to have information laid out in front of me.  The one question that will be on my mind when it comes time for the operation is "Who do I report to?"  There has been discussion of the command structure and how it will be set up, but I am somewhat interested in how it will be displayed and distributed so that everyone will know who is above them and who is under them when the time comes.  I'm still very occupied with the asset roster (and my ambition outweighs my coding skill), so I don't have time or ability to do this myself, but I thought I would put this out there as a proposal if anyone felt like running with it:

Command Structure Interface Software
I know the RSI Organization Manager will have a command structure function, but if that is only determined by the one person at the top, that would be a lot of work set solely on Sailor67.  If we had a program that was more group-driven, it would be a lot more manageable.  We don't need a finalized command structure yet, I realize, but the sooner we have one that can be modified as we make plans, the more complete and organized it will be when op time comes.

Back-end setup: Players are set up as Pilot objects.  Each 'Pilot' object contains a pointer to a pilot that is their direct superior, and a list of pilots directly under them, if any.  Interface functionality as listed below is implemented.

Front end appearance: The interface displays the structure as a tree diagram centered on a single pilot, the logged in user by default.  Navigating up moves the center point to their direct superior, navigating down moves the center point to an assigned pilot, and navigating side to side centers on other pilots in the same command group.  Information on the centered pilot, like RSI Handle, preferred roles, available ships, direct superior, and a list of assigned pilots would be displayed on the side.  Pilots with neither superior nor assigned pilots under them are considered lone wolf and are listed separately from the main tree.

Interface Functionality:
-Pilots may "Search" the tree for a specific name to see where that pilot is located on the tree.
-Pilots may "Request Transfer", which sends a request up the chain to be moved to a specified command group.  All pilots under them move with them.  Requests must be approved by both superiors or a single mutual superior to be completed.  Transfers can be denied (to avoid self promotion).
-Anyone may make changes to the command tree underneath them, like approving transfers, promoting/demoting, reorganizing, and naming their command group for guild identification or operational role.
-Pilots may "Go Rogue", which detaches them from the command structure, and lists them with the Lone Wolves in a different section of the map.  Lone wolves may "Request Assignment" (Approvable by anyone not on the lowest level of the tree.  The pilot is then assigned to them) or request to join a specific pilot's command group.
-If a superior requests a transfer to one of their directly assigned pilots, their positions on the tree swap, effectively passing leadership of that group.  Other assigned pilots do not move in this case.
-New pilots may request to be added to the chart, which puts them in the Lone Wolves category at first.  They may then request assignment like any other.

If this is deemed unnecessary, it will probably work out fine to use the system that RSI puts into place, once multiple organization signups are allowed.  Heck, they will probably make something better thought-out than this.  It just came to mind, and I thought I would put it up for consideration and discussion.  I have not thought about this longer than an hour or two.

Medals, Ribbons, T-Shirts, Patches, Coins, Pins available!!

Be sure to add your ships, resources, and organization to the Operation: Pitchfork Assets List

  • Ratu
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #1
This seems like it would work. I think it could be an idea to have Orgs listed under their leader unless you're talking about strike groups?

I'm seeing
----------------<Unit>--------<Unit>-----------------<Unit>--------------Etc etc etc

Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #2
I like the idea of a tree, but I think it'd be more interesting to make it so you start at Operation level (Main Hierarchy) and then can work your way down to all the different organizations, then their squadrons, then their pilots and then their assets. I think it'll make for easier navigation and we can integrate all the info already on the operation roster.
It's a penguin... with a gun. I'd run if I were you.

  • Benjamin the Rogue
  • [*][*][*]
  • Staff
Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #3
We should stress that it will be less of a chain of "command" and more of a chain of "communication." It's very important that we keep the sense that this is less of an official organization and more of an event for everyone to partake it.

The chain of communication should be more about who is able to process lots of data and are in a position to hand it down or up stream to others than about leadership.

  • Harker
  • [*][*][*]
  • Enrolled
Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #4
Are you proposing to write an app that maps all this out?

A rigid command structure modelled after a heirarchal tree is not the way to do this. Not only will the large majority of participants be casual players or freelancers (where most would be anticipating that playstyle because they aren't keen on military-styled gameplay) but it also relies on the people who fill the roles to be available 24/7 and effective 24/7, or else enough redundancy and overlapping roles (all the while not giving rise to conflicts in responsibility) to account for what will very likely be a haphazard availability from everyone involved.

There will need to be people giving orders, because military command via committee is even worse than designing games via committee. The "command structure" for that would need to be flexible and role-oriented, based around a way of operating that is simple, robust and efficient at managing large player zergs.

Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #5
If there is still interest, BnI has an organization and communication structure I believe will work. The base idea is the formation of a fluid, focused force. For ease and brevity of display, I've fit in the short version;
Pilot - be it one PC on foot or a single seat ship. The one exception is small crew ships (a constellation without the Merlin tagging along)
Lance - a collection of 3 to 6 Pilots (or individual ships as noted above) over seen by a Lance Officer. The Lance should be listed according to the Officer's 'Lance Title' (Such as Rico's RoughNecks) and the LO will relay information down to their lance as well as up to the next tier.
Flight - A collection of Lances headed by a Lance Commander/Flight Officer. The numbers here become more mutable, but should be between 2 and 6 or 8 Lances. A Flight should be focused more or less in a specific direction, either a task or an area. Due to the number of PCs involved, a capital ship may qualify as a Flight despite being a single ship. The Lance Commander will be responsible for directing the Lance Officers and relaying information upward.
This trend continues similarly for Fleet (with a Flight Commander/Fleet Officer) and Armada (Fleet Commander/Armada Officer) levels. The most important aspect of this system will be Pilots operating within their team and 'Titled Officers' being aware of how much responsibility they're taking as they move up the tiers.
What makes this system stable is the foundational idea that each Commander is only relaying information to a small number of people. A Fleet Officer will likely not have his own 'ground level' Lance unless they are acting as his eyes and ears, leaping information up the chain for faster responses.
The truest beauty here is that an entire armada can be built from either direction and large groups can be quickly redistributed or reorganized. It's been proven effective in various raid groups as a means of packing up lone wolves and integrating peicemeal quartets alongside veteran squads.
Thanks for your time, and sorry about the wall of text.

Aside from some relabeling and a bit of polish, the ideas are the same as set forward in the recent cells/divisions proposal. As soon as I have the demonstration video sorted out, I will post a link.

  • Benjamin the Rogue
  • [*][*][*]
  • Staff
Re: Proposal: Command Structure Interface
Reply #6
Ok. It'd be nice to see a video representation of such a structure.