IMO, the RP aspect (non-use of contractions, use of Clan-speak, the "attitude", etc) can ans should be moderated by the players
However, the mechanics
of playing Clan (mainly enforcing Zell) should, IMO, be built into the game itself; maybe I just have too little faith in humanity, but I suspect that the proportion of would-be Clanners that would actually pay Zell any mind, much less adhere to it while at the helm of their 'Mech, would be so small as to not be statistically significant.
The proscriptions of zellbrigen consist of the following rules:
- Each warrior will issue a challenge to a different enemy. If one side outnumbers the other, then the extra warriors on that side will stand aside until one of their comrades falls in battle. A warrior can challenge more than one unit at a time.
- A warrior has right to refuse challenges from Inner Sphere units, especially if underhanded ploys are suspected.
- A warrior has the right to refuse a challenge from an unit of differing weight class if other unengaged units are available.
- No artillery or other Area-Effect Weapons shall be employed by either side.
- Intentionally moving out of the line of sight of the opponent is prohibited.
- Systems that requires multiple units to operate, like C3 and TAG, are forbidden.
- Moving out of weapon range is prohibited.
- Failure to fire a weapon when possible is prohibited.
A warrior is also expected to not retreat from inferior foes, or to engage his opponent in melee combat, though these are not part of the formal rules of zellbrigen.
Also, though it plays a central role in Clans' combat challenges, the ritual of batchall remains a separate tradition.
IMO, Clan vs IS should be run at a ratio of one Binary (two Stars, representing a total of 10 Clan 'Mechs) to one Company (three Lances, representing a total of 12 IS 'Mechs).
1.) Similar to Gigaton's suggestion, each Clanner would be able to designate any as-yet unclaimed unit from the opposing team as "theirs" to defeat.
Said Clanner would then be responsible for defeating each of their claimed target(s) by engaging them single-handedly.
One Clanner firing on another another's already-claimed target(s) results in one moderate penalty being leveled against the entire team, AND a second, more substantial penalty being leveled against the offending player for each shot that lands
2.) Any unit that fires on a Clan 'Mech is automatically "claimed" by the Clanner in question.
All IS units and Clan units of a weight class different from that of the Clanner in question "claimed" in such a manner would be designated differently from those actively "claimed" by the Clanner in question; the former would be able to be "unclaimed" if not fired upon by the Clanner in question while the latter must be engaged.
Any not-previously "claimed" unit that the Clanner in question fires upon is considered "claimed" as though it had been actively "claimed" by the Clanner in question.
3.) Use of Artillery and AOE weapons imparts a minor penalty against the entire team AND an additional moderate penalty against the offending Clanner with each firing (regardless of whether any targets are actually hit by said artillery or AOE weapons).
4.) Breaking line-of-sight from all
"claimed" targets for an extended period (ex. more than 10 seconds) imparts a moderate penalty against the offending Clanner.
5.) Starting a round with a 'Mech equipped with a C3 system or TAG unit imparts a moderate penalty against the offending Clanner AND an additional minor penalty against the entire team for each 'Mech so equipped.
All penalties would be levied against any or all of the Clan player's/unit's XP earned, Loyalty Points (or equivalent), and currency units earned.
The intent is to outline a system that makes it not worth would-be Clanners' while "to play as basically IS with starter access to generally-bettter equipment" rather than "to play as the Clans in both spirit as well as in name", while still being flexible enough to address most situations that could come up.
(I realize that my short outline could not possible cover all possible situations, but it's meant more as a seed to promote discussion than to be a comprehensive solution unto itself.)
Edited by Strum Wealh, 15 May 2012 - 05:00 PM.