Jump to content

Logistical Control for IS units: How much or how little?

Started by MagnusEffect, Nov 13 2011 01:24 PM

15 replies to this topic

Poll: Logistical Control for IS units (105 member(s) have cast votes)

Assuming you can "freelance" solo with an NPC faction, how much do you want to be responsible for your own mech:

  1. No responsibility (don't have to buy my equipment), but I still want to customize its loadout (2 votes [1.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.90%

  2. No responsibility, but I'm okay with minimal/no customization as I don't technically own my mech (makes more sense). (6 votes [5.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.71%

  3. Some responsibility; I shouldn't have to pay for my mech or repairs, but I don't mind paying for "unsanctioned modifications". I am risking my neck afterall in this thing. (23 votes [21.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.90%

  4. Full responsibility; I am not a lowly grunt! I am a successful mechwarrior! I'm under contract and expect to be paid up front, but I will handle my own supplies and repairs! (74 votes [70.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 70.48%

If you are running your own player merc company or unit, how much logistical control do you want?

  1. Full logistical control: a unit leader should be able to manage jumpships, dropships, spare mechs, spare weapons, ammunition, etc. Give me my sim-mechwarrior game i always wanted! (while still keeping it fun) (69 votes [67.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 67.65%

  2. Partial logistical control: managing mechs, weapons, ammunition is fine, leave out transport though. (25 votes [24.51%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.51%

  3. Minimal logistical control: I should have to keep track of a supply of mechs for my unit to use, but weapons, ammo, etc. is too much. (8 votes [7.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.84%

While under the employ of a player corp/unit, how should personal logistics be handled?

  1. Allow the unit commander to stipulate how much compensation (parts, repairs, credits, etc) those under his command receive. Individuals are encouraged to work out an acceptable deal with their commanders. (52 votes [53.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.06%

  2. A commander should be responsible for all things except the replacing of mechs. Replacing of mechs should be left optional. Pilots still receive a small paycheck for their time. (20 votes [20.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.41%

  3. Strictly personal logistics: everyone pays for their own stuff, all players have the option to "gift" mechs to others. (26 votes [26.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.53%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 MagnusEffect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 404 posts

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:24 PM

bump... FOR SCIENCE!

Nov. 14th update: Part 1 and Part 2 of this poll have been updated. please recast your vote as needed. thank you :)

Part 2 is here:
http://mwomercs.com/...ge-and-repairs/

More fun polls can be found here:
http://mwomercs.com/...eference-guide/

Note for Clanners: sorry to leave you out on this one, but I did it for good reason. I believe the Clans should play fundamentally different as far as rewards, upgrades, mech access, etc. For example, as a Clanner, you should not have to "pay" for a mech. Clans aren't about getting paid. Rather, you should earn the right to pilot whatever mech based on glory, prestige, and honor you have gained. But more on that later... we are still TWO years from seeing the Clans afterall. If you are mostly a Clanner, just try to vote from an IS perspective. :D

Everyone keep in mind that this is for actual "research", but also for fun! I'm hoping to collect enough data to produce something useful for reference. Tell your friends to vote!

Edited by MagnusEffect, 30 November 2011 - 06:18 AM.

#2 vasile

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMendoza, Argentina

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:31 PM

All the way responsable, this has to be a simulation not another quick satisfaction.

#3 Bansheedragon75

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,230 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:42 PM

The more control I have the more realistic it feels to me.
The more realistic it feels the more fun I have.

There is a limit too though, I dont want to have to micro manage everything.
There is such a thing as too much control.

#4 Alistair Steiner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 516 posts
  • LocationFlorence, SC

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:52 PM

I like full control. Though I agree with Dragonlord, I don't want to have to micro manage everything, but the more control (read: detail), the better.

#5 Aaron DeChavilier

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,422 posts
  • LocationEisen Unbegrenzt Corp HQ, Rim Collection

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:53 PM

If i ran a merc corp:

Mw2:Mercs command-style control
Manage finances, inventory, roster, contracts, etc

If I ran with an NPC uinit
Mw2:Mercs non-command-style
access to almost all mechs in succession, etc

#6 GreenHell

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 543 posts
  • LocationGrandmas House

Posted 13 November 2011 - 01:57 PM

I voted in favor of full logistical responsibility. Yes this will place a large burden on Merc corps leaders, but this will have a nice side effect. Tactics! What can you send, and where? How many? Can you afford to replace them if you lose them? I love tactical thinking, and it will bring a whole new level of play into the game. Not only are mech pilots battling it out on the field, but Merc corps leaders will be battling it out on a tactical/logistical scale. This means that there are two conflicts being fought at once. The "battle" and the "war". You can lose a battle, but because your overall tactics are better, you can win the war. :)

#7 MagnusEffect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 404 posts

Posted 13 November 2011 - 02:00 PM

View PostAaron DeChavilier, on 13 November 2011 - 01:53 PM, said:

If i ran a merc corp:

Mw2:Mercs command-style control
Manage finances, inventory, roster, contracts, etc

If I ran with an NPC uinit
Mw2:Mercs non-command-style
access to almost all mechs in succession, etc


I must admit, THIS is exactly where I'm pulling a lot of my ideas from. MW2:Mercs was and still is my favorite to this day when it came to unit control. MW4's was retarded.

#8 Gawain Emrys

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • LocationMargate, kent, England, UK

Posted 13 November 2011 - 03:00 PM

I know it doesn't directly relate to a videogame but the Field Manual: Mercenaries from FASA/FanPro/Catalyst (for the boardgame) contains a complete system for creating and running a mercenary unit. The Devs could do a lot worse than institute a simplified and semi-automated version of that system to handle things like operating expenses, salvage, contract terms, etc.

#9 phelanjkell

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina

Posted 13 November 2011 - 03:06 PM

I would love to see allot of options for those who want them in controlling their Merc companies. This is one of the topics we cover in Podcast #2 coming your way soon!

#10 UncleKulikov

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 752 posts

Posted 13 November 2011 - 03:41 PM

View Postvasile"edge" ilinov, on 13 November 2011 - 01:31 PM, said:

All the way responsable, this has to be a simulation not another quick satisfaction.

Right. Training mode is the place for that, time for metagame!

#11 MagnusEffect

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 404 posts

Posted 14 November 2011 - 01:48 PM

bump... FOR SCIENCE!

Nov. 14th update: Part 1 and Part 2 of this poll have been updated. please remove & recast your vote as needed. thank you :)

Edited by MagnusEffect, 14 November 2011 - 01:51 PM.

#12 Frantic Pryde

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Commander
  • 714 posts
  • LocationMiami, FL

Posted 14 November 2011 - 02:02 PM

Great thread...I'm heading over to part 2 now.

I totally agree on the clan thing.

In fact, I think such a system would allow for a natural limit on customization. And maybe clans can just be subject to cannon variants.

#13 Gaius Cavadus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 404 posts
  • LocationNova Roma, Alphard

Posted 14 November 2011 - 02:07 PM

MWO is just a lobby game... you guys are really setting yourself up for disappointment.

#14 Frantic Pryde

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Commander
  • 714 posts
  • LocationMiami, FL

Posted 14 November 2011 - 02:13 PM

Just because it's a lobby game doesn't mean it can't have all these things. Mpbt was a lobby game and had this in a very small way...but there's definitely a possibility for all these things...and if it's not there and we end up with a more traditional zone match type setup the player base can just implement it on its own :)

#15 guardian wolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 1,965 posts
  • LocationOn Barcelona where the crap is about to hit the fan.

Posted 01 December 2011 - 07:33 AM

I like this idea of more control, because the commander's now have to think about more than just battlefield tactics, which is a lot I know, but you now have to get supply lines set up, finances, keep supply lines secure, not to mention, try to get the enemies supply lines figured out, launch some raids for equipment, or just to **** off the enemy commander. Hell with this, I could run a merc unit on a deep recon run behind enemy lines, for quite a while.

Typo

Edited by guardian wolf, 01 December 2011 - 07:34 AM.

#16 Agasutin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 115 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 01 December 2011 - 10:29 AM

This is a "simulator," so why not throw in full logistics as well...
Back to Archive · Next Unread Topic →


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users