Then how about rewards that are calculated based on everyone's performance pooled together and you can the amount shown without splitting it. Say your teams performance nets 5000 of each point and all of you choose gold as is the usual case. A system where each person would get 5000 instead of 1250 would seem to snuff out some problems. At least you feel like you got what you deserved. Of course, there can always be problems and some we must accept.
Thoughts?

An interesting idea that could make the game less rage inducing.
However, the only concern I have is how this will affect the antagonist. Will it make it harder or easier in the end?
Still, I think that this idea is worth considering at least for a test run.

In my previous threads in the feedback section, I explained why antagonist mode was unfair and unfun. However, an idea sparked from this discussion and I thought of something that could help the game mode if the devs haven't thought of it yet. Why not let the antagonist be able to command NPC's to attack or pull back when it suits the antagonist needs. This way they have more control of the battlefield that doesn't overtly break the balance of the game.  Of course, there will be limits on how many in all, but the principle idea stands. Also, There is the idea of using your accumulated aleph to affect the mission just like in the mission The Enemy Within where you can accelerate the Fifth Councils mission progression. An example of implementing this could when Uru Gal is being escorted, the antagonist could make use of the raiders absence and use aleph to take down his shield making him vulnerable. This would split the raiders concentration on the battle and give the antagonist some possible breathing room. This is just an example, but the antagonist being able to influence the game this way would make the mode more fun and less frustrating. I hope the devs read this and keep the idea in consideration at the ver least.

I see your point as much as it vexes me. I play Alicia primarily and I see merit in what you say.  The Sargon mines is an area that amplifies on this concept of stalling and allowing the npcs to stack and crush the raiders, especially in the second half. I guess what it comes down to is the raider composition and what steps need to be taken to counter them.
Her ability to be seen no matter where she is on the map is still a disadvantage I still need the understanding to overcome. You can't ambush the opponents, but they can do it to you. I have tried the stay in the air tactic, but teams that know what to do can easily just slaughter you regardless of what you try.  I think you are right in her viability and I'm just coming across some teams that really know how to counter antagonist in general. A team that knows how to hunt antagonist is not something that simple to overcome since I do this all the time.
In regard to patients, how do you do that when the enemy can alway see you and in many cases do what I do and crush them when they are susceptible? Really, lets agree that a lot of circumstances that determine how you will do with her depends on the map. An example I come across is the Kuzzman boss battle where the arena is low ground, wide open areas, and not much that allow your wall jump ability to be utilized to the max. You could say to have Kuzzman help, but I have found him unreliable against a team that takes cover often and aggros the boss wherever they please.
To summarize I agree that there is the fault on my part for how I see antagonist mode, but I would still like to see mechanics that can make the mode more interesting and allow different approaches to the game. Say you could direct troops, but the raiders could team-based abilities that they can activate with aleph. Instead of accepting the system as is, why not give it more flexibility to keep it interesting. Thanks for the feedback Jojoe, it stuff like this that can help things improve. Still vexing though.

This is why I created this thread. I just want a more diverse antagonist system that has more tools that can allow you to alter the flow of battle if you have the skill for it, without making it one-sided as stated above. The ability to direct some NPC's would allow actual strategy and teamwork while giving antagonist players a better chance at winning, but making it through skill and not through cheap stat buffs and the like.
In regards to Alicia's viability, she doesn't make a good antagonist simply because her stress is always maxed. This allows the raiders to see her coming from anywhere and react accordingly; if they stay together and watch her movements, she is at a huge disadvantage. Also, the effective range of her shotguns and the damage drop off put her in range to where if she tries spraying them, the raiders will do the same. She can handle 1v1, but anything more and she will fail. Because she is a wardog is the reason she isn't a very good antagonist against a grouped team, which is the point of this thread.

I understand what you mean. However, harassing does not mean victory since you still have to either kill them or stop their mission, which usually requires killing them anyway. Even when harassing I find it difficult to do that with lycus or Alicia considering their range of effectiveness. If they are always near each other, any real strategy bears no results since you are one person. If they introduce more missions where you can more actively disrupt the objective, that will make the mode more diverse and less heart-wrenching.

Many people complain about this invader system (that's what I'm calling it). My complaint is how easy it is to punish and there is virtually nothing you can do about it. The way to always beat the system, well almost always, is to simply stay with your teammates and you have won. This is unless the level has elites like the ones in the sargon mine or hanging by a thread, in this case the antagonist has a greater edge. Anything short of this and the antagonist cant stop your mission and rarely kill you in the process. Hell, in a 1 v 2 and they lose no matter who they play or what they do so a head-on fight is just plain impractical. This makes lycus and Alicia weak picks in that regards, no matter the map. Long range raiders them such as Shae, Harec, and in some capacity Konstantin have better sustain so long as they keep their distance, but this prevents them from stopping the mission as long as the other team takes cover. They try anything else and they will die. Hans gets a pass because he can get in and out with good damage and range to sustain him. However he still cant take on a team that sticks together. Mikah suffers from all of this too. This is only taking into account that they are reasonably close to each other, no strategy or coordination required. If a team does this then the antagonist game is virtually lost before it really even started. This means that the invading system is only good for dealing with uncoordinated teams that like to scatter across the map. The conclusion is that being the antagonist is only really good in some games and not so much in others which makes the mode inconsistent in how it feels. This makes being the invader an unfun experience when you can only face a team that is disorganized with a good chance of success while playing with people that have the sense to stay together makes it near impossible to win. This inconsistency is what makes the invader system unfun, it's not game mechanics which are fine, but the fundamentals of the game and the invader system.
My proposal create an antagonist exclusive system that gives the invader an edge that won't break the game into a million pieces such as; antagonist exclusive cards or abilities. Would like to hear thoughts and opinions. something constructive would be nice.