23 replies to this topic

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I have seen a number of different views expressed in various threads and thought it might be interesting to try and put some numbers on it.

Edited by Nik Van Rhijn, 06 December 2011 - 12:24 PM.

[Halfinax]

Well I don't know about forcing "ranks" or officer status, but I will undoubtedly be working in a team that communicates and coordinates.

[CaveMan]

Both.

[Red Beard]

Teamwork. When that breaks down, I go rogue.

[Dihm]

Poll is odd. Option A is for Conquest, Option B should be for the other game mode. I don't think that there should be totally random Conquest matches.

I'll be doing my best to recreate the "good ole days" of MPBT:Solaris with my unit. Hopefully as other FRR units come online we'll form a larger "Free Rasalhague Republic" entity outside the game. We don't have a built in House structure like the other 5 do from the previous incarnations of Mechwarrior/Battletech.

That said, I'm sure I'll be doing random, non-Conquest battles to pass the time/level.

[Threat Doc]

Halfinax, because of the Command Structure thread I began some time ago, which received quite a few really good answers and then died, I put together the following >>> http://www.wolvesau.net/AU/rank.php <<< for Armageddon Unlimited. This was inspired greatly by John Clavell's post at http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__40987 .

For my part, though I understand there will be those who do NOT want to participate in any unit, or at least not right away, except for Solaris VII, BattleTech is a team sport, and I think that's every bit as important, here. Dihm is also correct in what he said, that option A is for Conquest mode, a necessity, and option B is for Missions mode, especially Solaris.

[Dihm]

"Missions Mode", gah, I can never remember what it's called, can only ever remember Conquest.

[Kyll Long]

I should point out in my vote for I don't believe there should be any reason not to have the ability to drop anytime you want. Whether it be on Solaris or in combat somewhere your House is fighting. Heck if you belong to a Merc unit they have to be fightin somewhere in order for ya to drop anyway, not including Solaris.

[Haeso]

If they make the Houses work anything like FoM where it's player run rather than an invisible organization that makes arbitrary decisions by the devs, I'll play directly for a House. If it's just standard fair and houses are little more than a stupid flag and a color on a map? Mercenary.

Either way playing with a group though.

[Halfinax]

Kay Wolf, on 06 December 2011 - 01:34 PM, said:

Halfinax, because of the Command Structure thread I began some time ago, which received quite a few really good answers and then died, I put together the following >>> http://www.wolvesau.net/AU/rank.php <<< for Armageddon Unlimited. This was inspired greatly by John Clavell's post at http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__40987 .

For my part, though I understand there will be those who do NOT want to participate in any unit, or at least not right away, except for Solaris VII, BattleTech is a team sport, and I think that's every bit as important, here. Dihm is also correct in what he said, that option A is for Conquest mode, a necessity, and option B is for Missions mode, especially Solaris.

You seem to have misinterpreted what I meant. I will be participating in "conquest mode" with an organized team (note the sig), but I don't think there should be a forced "rank" system. I just don't see the point beyond grinding for rank. My guild/Merc Corp. are perfectly capable of determining who is in charge from one match to the next. We don't need the software to tell us that "Silent is a Major General" for us to decide that he/she should be in charge or not. That's what I was saying.

Don't force ranks on us, but yeah I will be working with a coordinated team that likely will make full use of the various roles offered.

Edited by Halfinax, 06 December 2011 - 02:29 PM.

[Silent]

I voted for ranks and organization, but only because I think it should be an option given to creators of a Merc Company or House. I don't necessarily think that these ranks should be enforced by the game or have any gameplay effects, but should be there as an organizational tool. The creator of the group could have the option to create a bunch of ranks and then hand them out to people if he/she wants. If the creator just wanted to keep it organic and have no rank structure then there could be that option as well.

Edited by Silent, 06 December 2011 - 02:56 PM.

[Threat Doc]

Kyll Long, on 06 December 2011 - 01:53 PM, said:

I should point out in my vote for I don't believe there should be any reason not to have the ability to drop anytime you want. Whether it be on Solaris or in combat somewhere your House is fighting. Heck if you belong to a Merc unit they have to be fightin somewhere in order for ya to drop anyway, not including Solaris.

I've actually advocated for something of a Ghost system, where when you're not fighting for your own unit, and you have no duties, improvements you'd like to make, mini-games you'll be playing, etc., there should be an interface available for you to ghost into an NPC 'Mech slot, or take out a 'Mech allotted to the mission that's not already occupied, etc. Not sure how well that would work, but I would at least think it's worth a try.

Haeso, on 06 December 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:

If they make the Houses work anything like FoM where it's player run rather than an invisible organization that makes arbitrary decisions by the devs, I'll play directly for a House. If it's just standard fair and houses are little more than a stupid flag and a color on a map? Mercenary.

Either way playing with a group though.

Haeso, I thought you were playing for Kimble's Terminators, anyway? Everyone, according to all I've read, will BEGIN in a house, regardless of whether that house has a live person in charge or it's run by the devs, which I don't personally think is a bad idea. I don't know how, yet, they will deal with setting up Mercenary units, but I'm certain it's going to be something 99% of people are going to ***** and complain about it, but they'll do it, anyway, just so they can get past the training and into the action.

Halfinax, on 06 December 2011 - 02:28 PM, said:

You seem to have misinterpreted what I meant. I will be participating in "conquest mode" with an organized team (note the sig)...

Yeah, I thought that's what the banner in your sig was all about, hehe.

Quote

but I don't think there should be a forced "rank" system. I just don't see the point beyond grinding for rank. My guild/Merc Corp. are perfectly capable of determining who is in charge from one match to the next. We don't need the software to tell us that "Silent is a Major General" for us to decide that he/she should be in charge or not. That's what I was saying.

Don't force ranks on us, but yeah I will be working with a coordinated team that likely will make full use of the various roles offered.

I don't think our hosts will force anything on us, unless it's very explicit rules, and I don't believe the Merc Corps HQ will count as very explicit rules. If I read it correctly, in early November, the devs expressed that the Merc Corps HQ would be the place where commanders would set up their lances, their rank structures, their awards, and it would be where stats would be kept and see, where resources would be developed and purchased, etc. I don't think you'll have to worry about that, if you don't want to have ranks.

[Dlardrageth]

Good luck to force a random person playing a game from his basement and having not left it for a week prolly (yes, stereotype here, I know) to sign up for some hierarchy. Having said that, those voluntarily doing that should be thrown a bone. Like the option to join a "random" battle as a lance e.g. Or, if there will be 36 vs. 36 battalion-sized battles, even fielding a full company as an option.

Enforcing on random players who maybe just want to kill 2 hours on a rainy saturday any structural/hierarchic overlay will not make the game very popular for sure. Giving an option to do such and having a game mode where it pays out (strategic/mission/campaign/conquest mode) would be something else though.

[Thorqemada]

I believe that the range of mission should also include single mech and two mech missions and i would play them occasionally/frequently.

[metro]

I am still hoping the Devs will offer it all up at some point.

[Threat Doc]

Agreed. I think the widest number of play options, in missions, 'Mechs, skills, types of play, etc. is the best way to bring in more people, and I hope our hosts will broaden our horizons as much as corporately possible, hehe.

Metro, within one post of one another, hehe... you're at 608 and me at 609, when I was ten down just yesterday. No, it's not a race, but I feel like maybe you were off your game yesterday or something, hehe.

Edited by Kay Wolf, 07 December 2011 - 07:36 AM.

[Black Sunder]

WTB: Team Training Simulator if only to test fits and to hone teamwork.

[Dragorath]

I would hope both is possible.

Mercanary or house soldier. Maybe also to change, but only once.

[Haeso]

Kay Wolf, on 06 December 2011 - 08:23 PM, said:

Haeso, I thought you were playing for Kimble's Terminators, anyway? Everyone, according to all I've read, will BEGIN in a house, regardless of whether that house has a live person in charge or it's run by the devs, which I don't personally think is a bad idea. I don't know how, yet, they will deal with setting up Mercenary units, but I'm certain it's going to be something 99% of people are going to ***** and complain about it, but they'll do it, anyway, just so they can get past the training and into the action.

It's an assumption regarding how they're going to do it - I don't really expect the game to be very deep. Plus the site and name are more for fun than serious - Kimble + terminator = John Kimble (Kindergarten cop) = Arnold = Terminator. So, I expect houses to be little more than colors and a flag, and the company represents that expectation, but if it's not, we wouldn't be adverse to making it an unofficial deal or even a house unit instead of Merc. Wouldn't be the first time a Mercenary unit got absorbed into a House.

[Threat Doc]

Haeso, on 07 December 2011 - 08:34 AM, said:

Kimble + terminator = John Kimble (Kindergarten cop) = Arnold = Terminator

(ashen faced) I have been a major Terminator and Schwarzenegger fan for most of my life, so I'm extremely surprised I didn't catch that.

That's it for me in this thread, all.

Take care.