Yep yep this was a good discussion.

I actually started thinking about this idea a while ago while working on an Biomassed blog post (coming soon) discussion player counts in game modes. More specifics on this when the article comes out, but it effectively speaks about a maximum effective game size and that after a certain point, more players requires more space to a point where your average player will never directly interact with most of the players in the match simply because they're too far away. At which point I ask....why bother having them there?

So yes you could have very large player counts like the game MAG did (which sported 128 vs 128) player battles, but even those fighters were segmented into 4 quadrents, so the battle was effectively 32v32 where the outcome of your own battle would help your collective team win the whole battle. Could Nova take this approach? Sure, but I feel like that's such a waste given the lore and local we have to work with.

We already know the battles in Nova will be something like 16v16 and honestly that's OK. But why not take it a step further and have those battle interact and remain persistent? One group could fight inside and orbital satellite, and if they gain control they can fire orbital strikes at the planet to help through ground team. One team could activate a power relay in one battle and speed up spawn time for their team in another. The options are really quite diverse.

Hell, you could even link battles of different sizes and play types. For example a small elite 4v4 battle could take place in the depths of complex to capture an energy node while a linked 16v16 battle rages on the surface above.

---

Plus there is the idea of the coveted "Commander Role". For example you could have 3 linked battles going on at the same time, all fighting for a common goal and activating secondary objectives to help their allies in the other battle. But what if there was an extra person on each side? One that didn't participate directly, but rather oversaw the larger scale strategic gameplay? The Commander would in charge of monitoring all the battles simultaneously, allocating resources and using abilities to help allies or hinder enemies in specific battles. For example if one battle is going poorly, the Commander could move resources that battle to help compensate for the weakness.

In short Commanders would in charge of the strategic coordination of the whole war, while the individual Battle Commanders would be in charge of the tactical execution of their respective battles.