Playing MAG with a group of randoms sounds like a real recipe for headaches. I doubt the game, any game really, can compensate for the number of idiots and assholes found in online console gaming. Giving people bonus xp for crashing assigned objectives is a good plan, but what happens when platoon leaders or squad leaders think their commanders are making the wrong calls? They won't care about the XP, they'll go do what they want, then the whole thing falls apart. And if you can vote out your commanders...I see a new breed of griefers.
Playing MAG with a group of friends, however, could kick a lot of ass. I think it'll depend on the tools the players are given, tanks, air drops, air strikes, etc... and how those tools actually work in the game. If it's a shallow version of rock paper scissors, or if their is an unrealistic strength in things like chopper spawns or enemy bases, I think the game will fall apart quickly, like battlefield bad company did. If the tools have depth and a lot of replayability, this game could be the new standard for multiplayer console shooters.
And on that note, has the idea of a UF coalition been talked about yet? I can't think of another group of clans and shooters I'd rather play MAG with. And not a one of us could field a whole side by ourselves.