Jump to content

Canon Units, Lend Me Your Eyes/ears


17 replies to this topic

#1 Arcainite

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNew Gotham City, Irurzun

Posted 14 August 2014 - 12:21 PM

I am Tai-sa Arcainite of the 3rd Benjamin Regulars and we are being forced to rename ourselves to the 1st Benjamin Regulars. Some of our unit would like to put out feelers for what the other canon units such as the Shin Legion, Ryuken-Ni, 11th Legion of Vega, 1st Ghost and others are doing. It's possible mergers could be involved, but I know the Shin Legion will probably just go back to calling themselves the Red Buddha. We would like feedback from other lore-lovers who know that House Kurita currently has no mercenaries anymore (even long-standing loyal ones like Greenburg's Godzillas), and we want to keep the license from going off-course as much as a player base can do so with an uncaring developer base.
I look forward to all comments and suggestions.
-Tai-sa Arcainite, 3rd Benjamin Regulars (possibly for the last time as that unit)

Edited by Arcainite, 14 August 2014 - 12:46 PM.


#2 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,684 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 14 August 2014 - 12:55 PM

Niko said that adding something to make the name unique is fine. For example, "Clan Wolf" is banned, but "Clan Wolf International" is fine. Another example, "Wolf's Dragoons of Vancouver " would be fine too.

What i would suggest you is doing something similar to keep your canon name.

Hopefully, with module 2 there will be some kind of joining canon units fighting for factions, but for the moment, we have to find a compromise. But if you can keep your canon name staying within the rules, you should try to find some ideas :D

#3 ManaValkyrie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 507 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 14 August 2014 - 06:58 PM

Niko will have fun with first ghost as one of the founders owns the IP rights to the name supposedly

#4 Lord Ikka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,255 posts
  • LocationGreeley, CO

Posted 16 August 2014 - 01:30 AM

As much as I hate to say this, it has been two years since we were told that there would be no canon named player-run units. All canon named units should have had discussions on what to change their name to, this was not a surprise to anyone.

There have been many arguments for and against this decision, but the fact remains that as of now PGI is standing firm on the no canon names.

Edited by Lord Ikka, 16 August 2014 - 01:32 AM.


#5 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,642 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 16 August 2014 - 03:36 AM

3rd Benjamin Irregulars / 3rd Benjamin Raiders / 3rd Benjamin Strikers / etc, or drop the 3rd altogether.

There is a battletech sourcebook that provides naming conventions for units. Using something like the above, your unit's storyline can be connected to said unit, such as a feeder unit, an offshoot unit/etc, it simply can not represent the canon unit itself.

Basically, it means that in game the unit can not be called 3rd Benjamin Regulars but imho trying to run more than one solid identity can cause confusion down the line, such as in game being 3rd Benjamin's Raiders but outside the actual game, be it at home website still being called 3rd Benjamin Regulars.

Does that make sense?

I think the fun will come in with the Clan naming conventions and many using actual sub-units names/nicknames.

Edited.

The naming convention is in the 1670 Mercenary Handbook 3055. I believe I have seen a few others.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 16 August 2014 - 04:08 AM.


#6 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,684 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 16 August 2014 - 03:36 AM

View PostLord Ikka, on 16 August 2014 - 01:30 AM, said:

As much as I hate to say this, it has been two years since we were told that there would be no canon named player-run units. All canon named units should have had discussions on what to change their name to, this was not a surprise to anyone.

There have been many arguments for and against this decision, but the fact remains that as of now PGI is standing firm on the no canon names.

I believe it would not take, usually, a month to decide how to make one's unit name fitting the rules ;)

#7 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,642 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 16 August 2014 - 02:12 PM


Below is an example of play on words, so all you have to do is change/add something.

3rd Benjamin Regulars - Renegades/Striker Battalion/Company/Unit



Quote

Those players will still have opportunities to register their Canonical name, as long as they add some sort of unique identifier to the name. Examples include:

Wolf's Dragoons [BAD]

Wolf's Dragoons of Canada [GOOD]

Wolf's Dragoons Francais [GOOD]

Wolf's Dragoons Casual [GOOD]

Wolf's Dragoons Strike Force Alpha [GOOD]

Wolf's Dragoons Bed and Breakfast [GOOD]



#8 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 16 August 2014 - 05:59 PM

View PostArcainite, on 14 August 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

We would like feedback from other lore-lovers who know that House Kurita currently has no mercenaries anymore (even long-standing loyal ones like Greenburg's Godzillas), and we want to keep the license from going off-course as much as a player base can do so with an uncaring developer base.
I like it. Actually, I think the developer should have been more strict - see CyclonerM's post. I believe that simply adding some suffix or prefix to a canon name should not be possible as it simply opens the flood gates for all sorts of silly attempts to circumvent a denied claim. For example, I can already see people trying to get through with "Wolf's Dragoons Command Lance" or something like that.

As Ikka-san mentioned, it has been several years since the decision to deny canon names has been locked in, and it was a likelihood right from the beginning.

This may sound harsh, but in my opinion, "lore lovers" who "want to keep the license from going off-course" should cheerfully agree with PGI's decision to reserve canon names, as it prevents players from grabbing popular titles on a simple first-come-first-serve basis. Apart from being a rather unfair approach to other interested fans, this also includes a high risk to misrepresent and even taint that canon unit's name in the game.
It's like random people wanting to play Darth Vader in a Star Wars P&P, and everyone is supposed to believe this would actually add something to the game? Iie, I do not agree.


On a sidenote, I am not sure that the Draconis Combine does not employ any mercenary units in its current era. For example, the Battletech Mercenaries supplemental sourcebook mentions the 789th Striker aka Crater Cobras to remain in the employ of the Draconis Combine, in spite of a "small exodus of small mercenary units" mentioned in the same source. As such, I put forth the theory that the little-explained Death to Mercenaries edict applied only to merc units the DCMS would fight in battle, rather than to ones already in its employment. Bad treatment and an increased stigma would certainly drive away many soldiers of fortune, but not all.

The novel Heir to the Dragon also mentions Tai-sa Tomoe Sakade hiring several merc units on Le Blanc in 3039 to assist in Operation Orochi. Perhaps this has been done without the Coordinator's knowledge and consent - all of us are aware of Theodore-sama's reputation - but the end result remains the same: mercenaries in the employ of the Draconis Combine. You could argue that this might even be a bonus to some people. Who here wouldn't like to work or have worked with the Kanrei and his shitenno?

Lastly, you don't have to be mercenaries, anyways. Community Warfare comes with the option to join the canon regiments, so why would you and your fellow samurai not choose this honourable path? This is what I plan to do as well. And nothing says that this would have any effect on your unit's current cohesion.
You merely have to accept that you cannot usurp command by replacing canon characters with your own persona. I am certain Tai-sa Clifford Allen would like to have a word with OP regarding this topic.

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 16 August 2014 - 06:03 PM.


#9 Stealth Raptor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 466 posts
  • LocationLenexa, Kansas

Posted 17 August 2014 - 09:09 AM

View PostManaValkyrie, on 14 August 2014 - 06:58 PM, said:

Niko will have fun with first ghost as one of the founders owns the IP rights to the name supposedly


Unfortunately it doesn't matter who owns the IP. This is PGIs game so its their rules. If they choose to disallow a game, its not like you could sue the name in

#10 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,684 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 17 August 2014 - 09:25 AM

Well, to be honest i do not agree with this policy, especially if the canon units we will be able to join with LPs choosing Loyalist life will just be a "honorary" thing rather than an actual active unit (and being NPC-guided i do not expect so much..).

There are units that have used the names for decades, so i believe that they should have been already served.

Often, disputes can just resolved claiming part of an unit rather than an entire faction, for example a Galaxy instead of the whole Clan, so different groups can fight under the banner of the Clan as part of canon units.

I understand your point about tainting units, but i do not see the issue. In the lore, it happened that an unit badly defeated, especially in the Clans or in the Draconis Combine, would be disgraced or otherwise earn a less-than-glorious reputation. However, even in the Clans a disgraced unit can be redeemed (even by the actions of a single man, see the Falcon Guards). Thus, if a famous Cluster of a Clan loses in the first round of a league, i suppose its members would try to improve their team play and redeem themselves in another one with a better performance, quiaff?

#11 DaisuSaikoro Nagasawa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 973 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationTaipei, Taiwan

Posted 17 August 2014 - 09:39 AM

View PostLord Ikka, on 16 August 2014 - 01:30 AM, said:

As much as I hate to say this, it has been two years since we were told that there would be no canon named player-run units. All canon named units should have had discussions on what to change their name to, this was not a surprise to anyone.

There have been many arguments for and against this decision, but the fact remains that as of now PGI is standing firm on the no canon names.


So very true. We had a huge discussion about this when we first started.

If people haven't prepared for this moment, they haven't been in the game very long.

#12 Darth Buddha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 168 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationUpstate NY

Posted 17 August 2014 - 01:37 PM

Red Buddha we are....

#13 Bront

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 4,212 posts
  • LocationInternet

Posted 17 August 2014 - 01:47 PM

And I shall name my unit.... Steve.

#14 Thorn Hallis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,902 posts
  • LocationUnited States of Paranoia

Posted 17 August 2014 - 02:08 PM

View PostCyclonerM, on 17 August 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

There are units that have used the names for decades, so i believe that they should have been already served.


And some of those units allready have the same names.

#15 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 17 August 2014 - 02:16 PM

*Sees Kyone's well-written post, and harkens back to my own post on a similar subject... :)*

#16 Grendel408

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 2,611 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 17 August 2014 - 02:28 PM

Thread title caught me :) had to re-brand my unit as well, now "Grendel's Blue Star Irrregulars" :ph34r:

#17 Kyone Akashi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,656 posts
  • LocationAlshain Military District

Posted 17 August 2014 - 02:28 PM

View PostCyclonerM, on 17 August 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

Well, to be honest i do not agree with this policy, especially if the canon units we will be able to join with LPs choosing Loyalist life will just be a "honorary" thing rather than an actual active unit (and being NPC-guided i do not expect so much..).
But there is nothing preventing you from playing as an active unit within that canon NPC-guided regiment - that is what I meant with my earlier comment. A full strength DCMS regiment consists of over a hundred Battlemechs. Surely, that must be more than enough room to play as one of its lances or companies, whilst still allowing a window to play with "outsiders" that do not belong to your friends, but still joined the same regiment?

You'd keep your present community and simply attempt to "fit in". In fact, this is a far more faithful representation of a military unit - and it results in more Mechwarriors of the same faction playing side by side, thus hopefully increasing the feeling of belonging to a greater whole (the faction). :)

#18 BLOOD WOLF

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Jaws
  • The Jaws
  • 6,368 posts
  • Locationnowhere

Posted 17 August 2014 - 02:42 PM

View PostCyclonerM, on 17 August 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

Well, to be honest i do not agree with this policy, especially if the canon units we will be able to join with LPs choosing Loyalist life will just be a "honorary" thing rather than an actual active unit (and being NPC-guided i do not expect so much..).

There are units that have used the names for decades, so i believe that they should have been already served.

Often, disputes can just resolved claiming part of an unit rather than an entire faction, for example a Galaxy instead of the whole Clan, so different groups can fight under the banner of the Clan as part of canon units.

I understand your point about tainting units, but i do not see the issue. In the lore, it happened that an unit badly defeated, especially in the Clans or in the Draconis Combine, would be disgraced or otherwise earn a less-than-glorious reputation. However, even in the Clans a disgraced unit can be redeemed (even by the actions of a single man, see the Falcon Guards). Thus, if a famous Cluster of a Clan loses in the first round of a league, i suppose its members would try to improve their team play and redeem themselves in another one with a better performance, quiaff?

aff





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users