8 replies to this topic

[SaJeel]

Let me know whatcha think ^^

To start off they do it like a ladder system, top 10 players in a faction (i.e 10 players with the highest loyalty points) can have the Superior military roles if they are open. Now that said, there needs to be a cap on how much loyalty can be achieved so that someone starting the game has a chance of reaching that number. Lets say there can only be three Colonels, and in order to be Colonel you need 300 LP. Lets say Tom has just reached 300 LP but there are already 3 Colonels in his faction and he really wants to be Colonel. Things Tom could do: No one really likes Colonel X because he has failed his missions repeatedly, Tom could challenge him for his spot via a faction wide vote. if Tom wins the election he becomes a Colonel and Tom is happy.or Tom knows Colonel Y isn't as strong of a mech pilot as he is, so he challenges him to a duel, Tom whips Colonel Y's butt and Tom becomes a Colonel, Tom is happy. or Tom knows that his group of friends (his lance) could take down Colonel Z's best lance, the two lances face of, Tom wins, Tom becomes a Colonel and Tom is happy.

This generates a few problems though, from the Colonel side. Lets say you are a colonel and you don't want to fight or have an election. if the min LP for Colonel is 300 lets say Bill is a Colonel with 400 LP. he can lose some of that LP to forgo a duel or election over his rank.
Also there must be a penalty for challenging your Superiors. So if you challenge someones rank and lose, the person you challenged can reprimand you, by removing how ever much of your LP they see as a fit punishment for challenging them. Someones Leadership should only be able to be challenged once over a set amount of time. and if the process is forgone by the leader paying LP there is no punishment.

Edited by SaJeel, 08 December 2011 - 11:02 AM.

[Amarus Cameron]

I think we need to hear more about the use of LPs before we go arguing for a military structure that is enforceable.

[SaJeel]

Its more just a suggestion on how they could do it.

[GaussDragon]

Amarus Cameron, on 08 December 2011 - 11:33 AM, said:

I think we need to hear more about the use of LPs before we go arguing for a military structure that is enforceable.

Seconded.

[Fiachdubh]

Interesting although a lot of potential for grudges and falling outs with that system.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Being a Colonel has a lot more to do with organisation and paperwork than actually fighting.

[KitLightning]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 08 December 2011 - 01:47 PM, said:

Being a Colonel has a lot more to do with organisation and paperwork than actually fighting.

That is true at least in my experience.

Voting out a member from his position is really a bad idea, it will create a rift in the unit thus dividing the team. For a Clan unit this can be accomplished by a Trial of Position, though this is inferior in my eyes, that it should always be the one whom has the greatest potential to lead and organize that is awarded, not based on LP since that cannot reflect such criteria internally in the Unit.

[metro]

GaussDragon, on 08 December 2011 - 12:21 PM, said:

Seconded.

Thirded.

[TheRulesLawyer]

I just hope they keep limited ranks to player run units. I don't care if we end up with a million generals eventually, but everyone should have the ability to attain whatever rewards there are for the loyalty system. Maybe there can be a couple positions that are by rank or trial, but the additional rewards should mostly be status- perhaps a special skin for your mech, etc. I hope they don't enforce a realistic bottom heavy rank system. That won't be fun for the majority of people.