Jump to content

Merc Net Rosters Hire/Fire


30 replies to this topic

#21 Anita Chess

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • LocationHungary

Posted 31 March 2012 - 02:50 PM

K/D ratio is a bad idea

I play a bit Battlefield P4F, I am a terrible shooter, but I specialized in spotting enemies and being a "mobile respawn point" (reinforcement ability). I am at best usually in the medium range of the resulting ranking, or worse. At the same time using tactics and strategy, and activating respawn at the best time at flag capture or behind enemy lines often leads to overall team victory. Also while it is not me who takes a spotted enemy down it is still often a lifesaver for others, or it takes down someone near our flags before they get captured.

So, in that game those with most kills have highest ranking, especially if died the least, those get the most points, XP, and credits. At the same time I noticed they don't really care most of the time about the overall team situation/match, and hunt enemy down while ignoring objectives (flag capture/defense), or specialize in helicopter attacks while not doing any proper ground support or similar.


If we have something like Objectives in this game, the mercs definetly have to show success rate for those, perhaps even bonus onbjective success, if not, then I guess a less clear up to Elite would be good instead. Simple people and kids tend to think K/D ratio is most important, I don't want that to decide what players are accepted for various missions, especially as in my own case I am more the "focus on objectives and support role" kinda player and that would also make me suffer too.



btw, can I make my own Merc Group? I don't know if that is possible (including naming them ingame and perhaps also adding insignia) but I worry about this option as I see lots of canon-named groups recruing, while I believe creating your own group and enriching the existing world story is more fulfilling

Edited by Anita Chess, 31 March 2012 - 02:51 PM.


#22 FinnMcKool

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,600 posts
  • Locationunknown

Posted 01 April 2012 - 09:26 PM

there are Corp. forming already , but how we will do it in game is still a mystery.

http://mwomercs.com/...um/60-outreach/

Check it out .

#23 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 02 April 2012 - 05:17 AM

Oh, there's more than just that link, Finn, though that's a good one. Here's a place Garth Erlam started and has been taking care of to request your Merc Corps prior to game launch... http://mwomercs.com/...merc-corp-page/ and the Merc Corps Recruiting Forum at http://mwomercs.com/...orp-recruiting/ . At the top, you'll notice the Hiring Hall thread that's been pinned, for mercenaries to find a place to be; NOTE, that thread is NOT for registering just because you're a pilot, but because you're trying to find a Merc Corps to be part of.

#24 palebear

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 352 posts
  • Location750 km East of Vancouver but only 10km from Russ' Mom's house

Posted 02 April 2012 - 07:22 AM

KDR just doesn't mean much to me in a game with tactical objectives and no respawning.
I'd rather see a plus-minus system to see the frequency of player objectives being completed versus stopping opponents from achieving theirs.
Perhaps in-game XP will be enough to see this, but it sure would be interesting to see what percent of a player's XP was gained from each type of source - combat vs scouting vs game mode objectives etc.

#25 JackRabbtT

    Member

  • Pip
  • 14 posts
  • Location3rd Gear

Posted 04 April 2012 - 05:52 PM

The funny thing about this post is everyone has a good point on K/D. The prob with K/D it most games like COD or WOT is K/D is really the bigest/only thing that is followed or looked at. You get camping tards and people who do not work together becouse of K/D but people like being able to follow it. So what to do? K/D can't not be the ONLY thing tracked in your personal file or corp history or what have you. Give good Merc leaders the tools to weed out the tools.

#26 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 04 April 2012 - 06:05 PM

View PostJackRabbtT, on 04 April 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

Give good Merc leaders the tools to weed out the tools.
Holy crap! I could not have said it better myself.

#27 Michael Rosario

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 69 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII... isn't everyone?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 12:54 AM

I only skimmed through the above posts, so if this has been brought up, I apologize.

Personally, I don't believe you should see all these exp/kill/death/omgwtfbbq stats when you look on the "hiring board". Since MW:O seems to be trying to be more of a sim than a game, why don't we try something a bit more realistic. When you apply for a job, or hand out a resume, your employers don't see how many hours you spent carrying rocks around or how many days you were off work because you caught the flu. You know what they do see? Previous education and job experience, personal merits, and character witnesses. Why not try something like that? Instead of having kill/death/assists/exp counts, why not have the character's name, their previous work experience with notes by their previous commanders, any awards/merit's they've been awarded, and a short bio they wrote? Maybe a little note on how long they've been looking for work... You want to know how good a guy is before you hire them? Go the extra mile and talk to those who fought along side them. It'll probably be a bit more accurate than some numbers on a piece of paper... especially since those numbers don't exactly tell you things like: are they good at following orders? Do they have personal issues that will come up in battle (like my character's habit (yes, I am going to be roleplaying in this) of taunting any clanner he comes near over open coms, regardless of what weight-class of mech he's piloting)? Do they excel in certain areas and fail horribly in others?

In summary (since I'm too tired to finish this post), numbers are a decent idea, but have a bad habit of causing commanders to ignore the really important things.

#28 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 05 April 2012 - 06:45 AM

The problem with that is this is a video game, as you put it a simulator, not a shooter, and so it's not real-life. As a real-life commanding officer I would have the ability to see all of the foibles, I would have a file on each individual under my command, any information I could glean from their former life packed up inside, attached to one side of the folder, while having their training, medical, and active duty pages attached on the other side of the folder. Their CV might be on top of the history, but their history, including how many tons and/or what types of 'Mechs, vehicles, aerospace fighters, etc. they've killed, what battles they've fought in, what records they have for insubordination and commendation.

I pay attention to every bit of that information, and every other CO out there is going to pay attention to, and collect, their own levels of information. A lot of units out there have an interview process, while I put everything about how my unit operates in a few pages on the front of our web site and expect whomever comes to the unit to read them before making a decision whether or not to join. My figuring is this... if they read the pages, and like what they read, and decide to join us, they're informed and have made a decision to join us, anyway, hehe. If they didn't read and just decided to join up, that's on them if they find they don't like what they see; and then I will have had their services for a while and it's all good. If they didn't read because they were lazy, or for whatever other reason, and decided to not join up, then they likely weren't a good fit for us, anyway.

You can send me your resume, a cover letter, and jump through all my hoops if I'm one of those guys that believes in selecting only the best, only those who tell me they are King Kong on steroids when it comes to MW4: Mercs (bleh!), except for two things, especially with regard to the fact this is going to be a game, whether a sim or straight shooter: 1) you can tell me absolutely anything you believe I want to hear, you can pump up your skills so much it's stupid and then, come play time, you are an ***-hat, a liar, and I can't stand to have you in my unit, and 2) I can't get to know you, as a person, become friends with you and build a team we can have fun together with, by words on paper.

These things being said, one of the ways I use to gauge promotion points and the ability of someone to move up, is in their ability to knock 'Mechs down, whether that comes in the form of points or Kill Ratio, though they are also gauged on their battlefield conduct, loyalty, dedication, and service within AU. I believe Kills/Points, Tonnage, Battle Value, whatever system of statistics PGI has decided to use on a MechWarrior's Service Record, will be an absolutely necessary part of how I gauge a MechWarrior's ability to move up in rank, and will assist me in placement in my ranks, as well. However, this must, in my opinion, be used in conjunction with other aspects and attributes of an individual MechWarrior's service, not as the sole informer on how they will gain rank, position, MechWarrior Quality, or where to place them.

#29 Michael Rosario

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 69 posts
  • LocationSolaris VII... isn't everyone?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 11:17 AM

View PostKay Wolf, on 05 April 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

The problem with that is this is a video game, as you put it a simulator, not a shooter, and so it's not real-life. As a real-life commanding officer I would have the ability to see all of the foibles, I would have a file on each individual under my command, any information I could glean from their former life packed up inside, attached to one side of the folder, while having their training, medical, and active duty pages attached on the other side of the folder. Their CV might be on top of the history, but their history, including how many tons and/or what types of 'Mechs, vehicles, aerospace fighters, etc. they've killed, what battles they've fought in, what records they have for insubordination and commendation.

I pay attention to every bit of that information, and every other CO out there is going to pay attention to, and collect, their own levels of information. A lot of units out there have an interview process, while I put everything about how my unit operates in a few pages on the front of our web site and expect whomever comes to the unit to read them before making a decision whether or not to join. My figuring is this... if they read the pages, and like what they read, and decide to join us, they're informed and have made a decision to join us, anyway, hehe. If they didn't read and just decided to join up, that's on them if they find they don't like what they see; and then I will have had their services for a while and it's all good. If they didn't read because they were lazy, or for whatever other reason, and decided to not join up, then they likely weren't a good fit for us, anyway.

You can send me your resume, a cover letter, and jump through all my hoops if I'm one of those guys that believes in selecting only the best, only those who tell me they are King Kong on steroids when it comes to MW4: Mercs (bleh!), except for two things, especially with regard to the fact this is going to be a game, whether a sim or straight shooter: 1) you can tell me absolutely anything you believe I want to hear, you can pump up your skills so much it's stupid and then, come play time, you are an ***-hat, a liar, and I can't stand to have you in my unit, and 2) I can't get to know you, as a person, become friends with you and build a team we can have fun together with, by words on paper.

These things being said, one of the ways I use to gauge promotion points and the ability of someone to move up, is in their ability to knock 'Mechs down, whether that comes in the form of points or Kill Ratio, though they are also gauged on their battlefield conduct, loyalty, dedication, and service within AU. I believe Kills/Points, Tonnage, Battle Value, whatever system of statistics PGI has decided to use on a MechWarrior's Service Record, will be an absolutely necessary part of how I gauge a MechWarrior's ability to move up in rank, and will assist me in placement in my ranks, as well. However, this must, in my opinion, be used in conjunction with other aspects and attributes of an individual MechWarrior's service, not as the sole informer on how they will gain rank, position, MechWarrior Quality, or where to place them.


I believe you and I are looking at the same problem from different directions. The problem: how to get an accurate view of those you want to hire.

I don't know if I didn't make this clear, but you're not getting this info strait from them. All they get to do is write the bio... you know, so you can weed out those who are obviously morons. All other info I believe should come in the form of previous employment history, with notes from previous commanders or lance mates. Remember... you're not looking to promote them to general right away. You're just looking to see if you can hire them.

The way I see it, battle statistics do two detrimental things:

A. It focuses too much on what a person's numbers are. A guy might have an incredibly high kill-to-death ratio, but it might not tell you that "Timmy has a tendency to run away from the battles until his teammates have almost killed the mech, then run back and get that final shot in. He never actually does anything of major importance, just skirts around the map kill-stealing. He's a decent shot, but a horrible pilot who gets ripped to shreds whenever he engages in any type of combat where the odds aren't stacked overwhelmingly in his favor."

B. It causes commanders to set up a sort of false desirable standard. "Oh, you want to be a merc? Come back when you average more than 25 exp a match and have at least a 5-to-1 kill/death ratio." Never mind that I may not be getting that much exp because I may be one of four scouts in my company, nor that I won't have an especially high kill ratio because I'm a scout that isn't going to be killing things anyway.

That being said, I can see your point, and believe we can come to a pretty favorable compromise. I (begrudginly) wouldn't mind putting in a mechwarrior's service record... provided that it's not the first thing you see. "You want to see those pretty stats of yours? Be prepared to scroll through a couple pages of references and employment history first."

#30 Threat Doc

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bowman
  • The Bowman
  • 3,715 posts
  • LocationO'Shaughnnessy MMW Base, Devon Continent, Rochester, FedCom

Posted 05 April 2012 - 12:09 PM

Yes, you're right, we are looking at the problem from different directions. I see that you want to complicate a MechWarrior entry for a GAME by having people put down a CV, in essence separating and clique'ing folks, excluding people so that you can have that winning experience every single time. That would be a fast trip to shutting the game down, or at least making it so the game ends up like every other MMO on the market, exclusive clique's for individuals whose ONLY concern is not losing.

Both sides of the argument can be seen that way, in fact, but the numbers I am able to access are, at least, not lies or suppositions. Also, there are bloody few community members who have not changed their player name in one fashion or another, and for whatever reason, so you might go back and talk to someone's commander because the pilot you're looking at claimed being part of the unit in their CV, but commanders have changed, they don't recognize the new name of the pilot, and they were there to play the game, not record every good or bad thing ALL of their MechWarrior's did while playing.

I would love to be able to have access to a MechWarrior's resume, to every one that is in my unit, but I just don't believe it would tell me what I really need to know about any of them; that has to be done by experience.

You want to see a resume, how about this one... http://www.wolvesau....member-wolf.php .

#31 Agent CraZy DiP

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 609 posts
  • LocationAZ - USA

Posted 05 April 2012 - 04:31 PM

Kind of sounds like a Free Agent pool for the NBA... How many assists did he have vs actual points scored e.g. how many of those points were scored due to solid assists. ect... Do I take on the free agent contract? ... This opens up headhunting... I'll pay this guild $X and trade them my 2nd stringer to buy their 1st stringer. IDK... This kind of thing could really go either way.

On a side note... KDR doesn't mean jack in this game. KDR is for amateurs that like to play LoneWolf. I'd MUCH rather hire the guy with an average of 8 assists and 1 kill and 2 objt grabs over the guy with 10 Kills and 1 assist and 0 objt grabs.





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users