11 replies to this topic

[Ramblin]

I just need to vent a little bit here...

There is pretty limited info on the "community warfare" facet of this game but, from what little bit I can tell, we arent going to be allowed to use unit names that we have been using for years? In our case for the better part of 15years.

Now, there will be some of you who know the canon and the time line pretty well that will snicker and say "If you want to be the 19AG go ahead." There is also a better than zero chance that MW:O wont even have the 19AG listed as one of the units you can "aspire" to. Thats not the issue here though. There are ALOT of units that have been around as long as we have that will be striped of THEIR unit so that people who have never played any version of the game can come in and claim it through "loyalty" points?!?!

Im not having any of that... We ARE the 19AG and PGI will NEVER take that from us!!! The more I think about it the more hostile and militant I become on the subject...

Please explain to me why I am misguided for showing loyalty to a name we have been keeping alive in MANY different games since the late 90's. I just cant wrap my head around how some people have had to just "give up" a unit name because a developer has said "nope, cant be them." Explain the justice and fairness of that to me please...

[Marineballer]

There were some threads about this topic before.
Nobody will tell you, that you cant name your unit how you want or how your ingame name or your "clan-tag" is. The Point is, that there will be units implemented in the game, wich you can join or serve for. Something like: you have 1k loyality points, so you can join the 19AG.
However that doesn't effect how you call your unit outside of the game.
I don't find the right thread, yet. Sry

Regards.
Marine
Co 2nd company -Storm Eagles- 12 Donegal Guards

[Moku]

19AG was a borrowed name in the first place so it will never be unique and your own. Just adjust it and move on. Although I may seem the total opposite from you in that I change my unit name to whatever the situation is it doesn't really matter as long as you keep your team together. I was also in the 19AG briefly when it started out but my group was separate from your brand new crew. You probably don't realize that most gamers nowadays don't have much loyalty to guilds or anything and will play where the loot is or have the most fun.

If you're holding onto the memory of a member that's passed on, and feel you're not honoring their memory if you change the name that probably is difficult to deal with. I just say you game today and not on memories. You honor them by running a great group that they would be around happy to be in.

Change the A or create a new name and move on and recruit. Would help if you started wearing 19AG on the House Steine Hub Teamspeak server if you really are proud of your unit then wear it, own it, and build it. If your team rather follow a name rather than your leadership then it's not much of a team.

Moku 10SR
10th Solaris Rangers

[Chuggernaut]

Ramblin, on 16 September 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Please explain to me why I am misguided for showing loyalty to a name we have been keeping alive in MANY different games since the late 90's. I just cant wrap my head around how some people have had to just "give up" a unit name because a developer has said "nope, cant be them." Explain the justice and fairness of that to me please...

See, here's the thing... FASA and Catalyst created the 19th Arcturan and kept it alive by continuing to write it into sourcebooks. When you say you "kept the name alive since the late 90s," that makes no sense to me because the 19th Arcturan was an active unit on the rolls of the LCAF before and after that. What you did in whatever Mechwarrior game you played had nothing to do with FASA/CGL's decisions on the fate of whatever unit. You don't have claim on it any more than I have claim on the 2nd Donegal, because neither of us actually created these units that we like, the BattleTech line developers did.

You talk about fairness. It's perfectly fair and just, because they're applying this rule to EVERYBODY. If they singled out specific units, and let everyone else go around "claiming" canon units for themselves, then you might have room to argue, but this way, people can no more be the Broken Wheel CMM than they can the Death Commandos. By reserving canon units for the devs, they can use them in plot events and such. If they let people claim canon units you'd have people screaming their heads off about how they ground Honor to be the Poobah of the Davion Guards and they didn't give the order to attack Great X, and if they couldn't give orders with their rank what's the point? Canon units for the canon events seems much simpler.

If you want fairness, this is the fairest way.

[Edward Ash]

Hold the line, my friend. By excelling as the 19AG/The Resilient/Peace in this game, you will gain recognition as the unit or persona that you adapt. It's true we have to start fresh in this game, but with the pride and history you have, you can rally around that and build a team that will encourage others to recognize you. Keep in mind, with our gaming experience, the recognition of the community has always outwieghed the recognition of the Devs (lots of love to the Devs).

[Ramblin]

Yall's points are well taken. I understand the view that the unit names where not invented or created by us. I get that the histories in the source books and in the novels are not ours... Therein lies my point I think. We have created a history all our own. Far as I know the 19AG of FASA legend never played in the NBT Ladder Leagues nor in SSW nor ISW... They never had characters named Ramblin and Mingus and IceDevil and Fobok and ... well, you get the idea... That history belongs to us. It is not FASA's and it is not PGI's. It is ours... Part of that history involves a name. The 19th Arcturan Guards. You may feel its silly and thats fine. If you can change unit names to fit the times and have no qualms about it thats great. I personally kind of stumble over the thought...

That being said we will adapt. Its what we do but, I cant/wont pretend its ok. I am, it seems in the minority here and thats ok too... Many units have built histories of their own based on canon units that have nothing to do with FASA timelines and histories. If those units dont mind changing names to satisfy the game then great... I mind tho...

We used/borrowed/stole/appropriated (whatever term you think is appropriate) a name from the Battletech universe and made it our own....

[Moku]

Here's the big question. You love calling yourselves 19AG or do you love saying 19th Arcturan Guards?

[Strum Wealh]

Marineballer, on 16 September 2012 - 06:05 AM, said:

There were some threads about this topic before.
Nobody will tell you, that you cant name your unit how you want or how your ingame name or your "clan-tag" is. The Point is, that there will be units implemented in the game, wich you can join or serve for. Something like: you have 1k loyality points, so you can join the 19AG.
However that doesn't effect how you call your unit outside of the game.
I don't find the right thread, yet. Sry

Regards.
Marine
Co 2nd company -Storm Eagles- 12 Donegal Guards

The summary of the Devs' decision and reasoning (including links and citations to the Devs' original statements) can be found here.

The (IMO) most salient of the cited posts can be found here.

[AntiSqueaker]

Garth Ekman said:

Our general stance on player run merc units is simple - create your own legacy! It's very unfair for players to stake ownership over a canon unit, and creates a host of politic and pr issues. So we're avoiding the complexities and edge cases associate with players assuming the role of these units by encouraging you to forge your own destiny.

My feelings exactly. It irks me to no end when people act like they are a special snowflake because they joined a big and prestigious canon unit, like Wolf's Dragoons offshoots, Gray Death Legion, Northwind Highlanders. Not saying the 19AG is a big or prestigious canon unit, but the rules need to be uniform.

Form your own reputation, don't piggyback on the canon's.

I await the flaming I am sure to get with bated breath.

Edited by AntiSqueaker, 18 September 2012 - 04:53 AM.

[Chuggernaut]

Ramblin, on 18 September 2012 - 03:16 AM, said:

Yall's points are well taken. I understand the view that the unit names where not invented or created by us. I get that the histories in the source books and in the novels are not ours... Therein lies my point I think. We have created a history all our own. Far as I know the 19AG of FASA legend never played in the NBT Ladder Leagues nor in SSW nor ISW... They never had characters named Ramblin and Mingus and IceDevil and Fobok and ... well, you get the idea... That history belongs to us. It is not FASA's and it is not PGI's. It is ours... Part of that history involves a name. The 19th Arcturan Guards. You may feel its silly and thats fine. If you can change unit names to fit the times and have no qualms about it thats great. I personally kind of stumble over the thought...

That being said we will adapt. Its what we do but, I cant/wont pretend its ok. I am, it seems in the minority here and thats ok too... Many units have built histories of their own based on canon units that have nothing to do with FASA timelines and histories. If those units dont mind changing names to satisfy the game then great... I mind tho...

We used/borrowed/stole/appropriated (whatever term you think is appropriate) a name from the Battletech universe and made it our own....

I don't want to be mean about this, but it's not their problem you decided to use a canon name rather than make one up. Letting people "claim" units is exactly the sort of entitlement they're trying to avoid, and making exceptions would set a bad precedent if they want fairness in their game. That's the real issue at hand: to be fair, the rules should be the same for you as they are some dude who has never played a game in his life but saw the House Dai Da Chi logo and thought they were cool.

[Gattling Fenn]

Just name is something similar, or abbreviate it. Problem solved.

[Ramblin]

Moku, on 18 September 2012 - 04:02 AM, said:

Here's the big question. You love calling yourselves 19AG or do you love saying 19th Arcturan Guards?

One and the same to me Moku. I do see where your going with the question however and, have considered going with something like the "19th Advanced Guard" or some-such.

Strum Wealh, on 18 September 2012 - 04:27 AM, said:

The summary of the Devs' decision and reasoning (including links and citations to the Devs' original statements) can be found here.

The (IMO) most salient of the cited posts can be found here.

Thank you Strum

AntiSqueaker, on 18 September 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

Form your own reputation, don't piggyback on the canon's.

I await the flaming I am sure to get with bated breath.

We did form our own reputation, just happens to be with a name that we didnt invent... piggyback on the 19th Arcturan Guards reputation? Seriously? They have a HORRIBLE reputation in the canon during this time period... We can only improve their name.

I am guilty of the occasional troll but, I never flame. You are just as entitled to your opinion and voice as I am...

Chuggernaut, on 18 September 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

I don't want to be mean about this, but it's not their problem you decided to use a canon name rather than make one up. Letting people "claim" units is exactly the sort of entitlement they're trying to avoid, and making exceptions would set a bad precedent if they want fairness in their game. That's the real issue at hand: to be fair, the rules should be the same for you as they are some dude who has never played a game in his life but saw the House Dai Da Chi logo and thought they were cool.

I have said before, I dont really disagree with this viewpoint. I cant really because its too obviously correct. My issue is maybe more emotional. We have alot of history. Alot of time. Alot of memories put into a unit that has a name that means something completely different to me and most of the pilots in our unit than it does to anyone else. It is every ones stance that we are laying "Claim" to a canon unit. I cant argue that because you/they obviously dont understand. The 19th Arcturan Guards you picture in your head is NOT the 19th Arcturan Guards I picture. I dont want to lay claim to the canon unit, I want to lay claim to the 19th Arcturan Guards that has existed in my mind for the better part of 15yrs... I guess I cant explain it and, it wouldnt do me any good if I could.

Gattling Fenn, on 18 September 2012 - 11:59 PM, said:

Just name is something similar, or abbreviate it. Problem solved.

Will probably have to break down and do just that Gatt... Im going to take the wait and see approach for now though....