804 replies to this topic

[Glory in the Highest]

For the sake of clarification, what exactly counts as "circumvention" of the rule, beyond simply subbing a 4 for an A or a 0 for an O? The use/reference to canon material of any kind?

This is a bit of a challenge for teams who have run for over a decade under the same name (whether that name be exact canon or refers-to-canon); trying to figure out how to retain identity while following the rules. I totally understand and more or less agree with the intention behind this idea but am still a little confused by its exact implementation.

Edited by Glory, 03 May 2012 - 12:40 PM.

[Threat Doc]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

I'm very open to the idea of including units such as WD and GDL in MWO as non-player run factions. This makes a lot of sense, and is fair.

Okay, so does this mean you might make the Canon units available for people to join, but not to command, sometime down the road?

[Tronchaser]

Happy Happy.... I would have loved to been a fly on the wall at the staff meetings debating on how to roll this news out.

[Bryan Ekman]

Glory, on 03 May 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

For the sake of clarification, what exactly counts as "circumvention" of the rule, beyond simply subbing a 4 for an A or a 0 for an O? The use/reference to canon material of any kind? This is a bit of a challenge for teams who have run for over a decade under the same name (whether that name be exact canon or refers-to-canon); trying to figure out how to retain identity while following the rules. I totally understand and more or less agree with the intention behind this idea but am still a little confused by its exact implementation.

It's a complex set of filters, simple character swaps will be addressed automatically. More creative names will be dealt with by Customer Service staff, and we expect players to report a bunch as well.

I am looking for away to support communities that use canon names. I think there's an easy win along the lines of an AKA in your merc corp. "about" info.

[Max OConnor]

Since we are discussing this on our forum. Can I get a definitive yes or no on the use of the word NORTHWIND in our name, is ok or not?

[Bryan Ekman]

Kay Wolf, on 03 May 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

Okay, so does this mean you might make the Canon units available for people to join, but not to command, sometime down the road?

It's under consideration yes. Our long term goal is to slowly introduction a way for players to run the NPC factions as well (hugely ambitious and highly risky).

[Felicitatem Parco]

What about derivatives of Merc Units, such as claiming to be part of a non-canon-existent branch of a canon Merc Company?

Edited by Prosperity Park, 03 May 2012 - 12:47 PM.

[Bryan Ekman]

maxoconnor, on 03 May 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Since we are discussing this on our forum. Can I get a definitive yes or no on the use of the word NORTHWIND in our name, is ok or not?

Northwind is just a word. So I would assume you could use it. Again, I leave the policy to the CSRs.

[Threat Doc]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

I am looking for away to support communities that use canon names. I think there's an easy win along the lines of an AKA in your merc corp. "about" info.

Perhaps a dba... eg. Suchandsuch dba Northwind Highlanders; is that what you mean? dba, of course, meaning Doing Business As.

[clutchgetspaid]

So would a planet name like Northwind be off-limits completely? Would the word Highlander be off-limits? A unit couldn't name themselves <Northwind Highlanders SOMETHING ELSE>?
My purpose in asking this is not to cheat or game the system, I'm just trying to understand the parameters with which we have to work.

Edited by HighlanderClutch, 03 May 2012 - 12:50 PM.

[Firefly]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

I'm very open to the idea of including units such as WD and GDL in MWO as non-player run factions. This makes a lot of sense, and is fair.

As a member of the Dragoons alliance, I'm curious how this would be implemented, especially given that the Dragoons had a number of sub-units and independent commands. Would everyone just be a level-climber in the Dragoons? Or would you allow it to function like alliances in MMOs, where the alliance is basically a structure with individual guilds?

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:36 PM, said:

I would guess (don't hold me to it), it would clear. But if a GM looked at it, and determined the intent was to represent a canon unit, they might ask you to change it.

I think that's a risk I would take. From this thread:

Quote

Just a quick point: our unit did not take its name from the canon BattleTech merc unit. The name came about incidentally. We understand that there is a Black Widow Company in BattleTech, we also understand that way back in the day 14-15 years ago there was a BWC playing in some AOL gamer den. That's not us. We've been around since 2002, doing our own thing.

[ColonelKiel]

I've never until now been ashamed of being a Mechwarrior fan. I've essentially just been told, "Grow up and stop playing cowboys and indians. YOU ARE NEITHER!"

Ok Dad!

It would be one thing to say "You can not claim THE canon unit for yourselves exclusively" it is a completely different thing to deny variations and iterations on a canon unit's name. I totally understood that we would not be able to lay claim to the entirety of NWH. I was completely cool with it. But I genuinely never in a million years would have thought PGI would slap every loyal and diehard fan straight in the face and tell them **** off with our fan-boy shenanigans.

It blows my mind that I'll be in a TOS violation for having "Northwind", "Grey Death" or "Wolf's Dragoon's" in my merc unit title. Meanwhile "Clan Purple Starfish" Or the "Jack-Ash Holes" is considered an appropriate and acceptable name?!?

***?

Seriously, Why do this? what point other than to smack us?

I'm seriously missing something fundamental in this calculation.

[Tyr Gunn]

This feels so much like an inelegantly patched together solution for an unanticipated problem.

Yeah, yeah. The Northwind Highlanders have been very diplomatic by saying things like "We are not THE Northwind Highlanders, but we ARE Northwind Highlanders". Now, let me be honest, that sentiment is incomplete because we also WANT to be Northwind Highlanders. We have worked hard at forming ourselves up as Highlanders. We are proud, as Highlanders.

Or we were, until PGI decided to punish us with a tag that effectively labels us as stupid, unoriginal dolts. NorthwindHighlanders does that. It separates us from the hoards of "originals" like the exclusive Clan Purple Ponies and the respected Blackwind Fornicators.

I realize that we could call ourselves something similar, but it kinda defeats the purpose. Especially if we're seen as trying to circumvent the block. This solution gives people that want to be a different group of Highlanders licence to do so, but it also takes away something House players get, a sense of connection to something "real", a sense of belonging. I'd rather proudly represent the Highlanders than I would "own" them.

So the only way for a merc unit to get that same sense of belonging, they have to create the Micky Mouse Club? I say that's no better of a solution than unfairly locking in early birds.

I'd rather the cannon merc groups be joinable like houses. I want to be a Highlander, not own them. I can organize myself and my group outside of the game just like I have in all other Mechwarrior games. I feel, like the FRR, maybe PGI forgot that mercs are important too.

We had planned for this eventuality, what we didn't plan for is a badge of shame, nor did we plan for the inability to even suggest that we're Highlanders.

To summarize, lore-loveing house players get the cake while lore-loving merc players get the crumbs? How can merc corps be getting the short end already?

Edited by Tyr Gunn, 03 May 2012 - 12:54 PM.

[Bryan Ekman]

Prosperity Park, on 03 May 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

What about derivatives of Merc UNits, such as claiming to be part of a non-canon-existant branch of a canon Merc Company?

We can't control people "claiming assocaition", however if your name implies association, it will be changed.

[Shephard]

Why not just have your whole guild play for the house? Playing for a house does not mean you can't play together with your friends. Is your guildmaster that much a control freak?

[Runz]

Zekester81, on 03 May 2012 - 12:14 PM, said:

Wow.....this has caused a massive amount of dissent to this project. So I guess mercs are now second class citizens here. Every one else can be what they want, except for mercs. Thanks.

You cannot reasonably expect to be able to 'lay claim' to canon units, what cos you're the first one to register the name? That's not reasonable in any kind of scenario. How on earth does this make mercs second class citizens anyway?

The idea of 'possibly' having famous merc units as npc factions is a good one and makes sense, perhaps there is a way to affiliate your mech unit with a canon unit similar to the whole Mechwarrior 4 Merc campaign if your rep is high enough (I know MRBC hasn't been created yet but I'm sure the MRB filled a similar role as I understand).

Also, really whats to stop you saying on your teamspeak that as far as your roleplay or unit philosophy goes you just say "yeah we're the *** company, part of Wolf's Dragoons" etc. Similarly (and please correct me if I'm wrong or making an assumption here Bryan) there's nothing to say that your Merc Company can't be the 103rd Nova Cat Dragoons, secret counter project to Wolf's Dragoons blah blah blah, but claiming that you (and your unit alone) represents the entirety of Clan Nova Cat, a faction that isn't even in game yet, seems a little over ambitious.

Everyone's attached to their cannon units from MW4 days etc but this isn't just isolated battles on servers, this is a persistent universe setting therefore claiming canon units wholesale is just unreasonable.

[Rnadmo]

Shephard, on 03 May 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

Why not just have your whole guild play for the house? Playing for a house does not mean you can't play together with your friends. Is your guildmaster that much a control freak?

I think that this is a very important point that many are missing.

[Salesninja]

Post Redacted

Edited by Salesninja, 03 May 2012 - 02:31 PM.

[Zylo]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

Yes!

Faction Player - Passive Participation
Merc Player - Active Participation

This might cause the initial group of players to heavily favor merc groups over house factions due to the coordination advantages of VOIP. I suspect this would result in more requests for in-game VOIP from the faction players as well. The coordination differences I think will push the more hardcore players to merc groups and the more casual to house units. That being said I think this would be a good system to split the casual and hardcore populations a bit. Looks like I'll need to find a merc group at some point.

[Shephard]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

Yes!

Faction Player - Passive Participation
Merc Player - Active Participation

I really don't like the way this sounds. I thought this game was mainly about the houses fighting one another, with a few mercs scattered about the edge for flavor. This sounds as if the game is about the Merc Corps, with the casual players and mouth breathers playing as the houses.

This needs some more explanation. I'f I play for a House, I don't get to decide who, where, or when I fight? It was my understanding that this game's primary focus was the houses fighting over border planets with the ability to take control of them from one another. Is this not the case?

As a house player, once I've gained the right to join a famous House Unit is that nothing more than an achievement? Just unlocking a new paint scheme for my mech? I was hoping that after joining a canon unit you get to fight as member of that unit with a lance/company formed of other members of that unit.

Edited by Shephard, 03 May 2012 - 12:59 PM.