734 replies to this topic

[Eagle HH]

No there will be non of that unit/regiment/clan creating either.... that's just too unrealistic because in MWO it is a new game and you can't just claim a name that exists in the BT world. And then proclaim yourself the leader?! Psha, how dare you! The nerve of some people......

[sarcasm off]

See it's funny the simplest things people get upset over. "You can't do that", "That's not fair!" (lol i added that myself) "But the devs..." You see the best part about it is the fact that some of you are going so far to belittle, condescend and dismerit just to try to prove a point when likely you are only creating targets on your back. There are some here that run a lot thicker than just a tag on their uniform and that means something....

Be a bigger person and check the attitudes at the door, unless you want to make your problems worse than they already are.

The topic is to unify Dav and get those that are serious about declaring for their house to work together amongst ALL the leaders yet people want to complain that some have more experience than the other and why should that be allowed and as far to say "everything you did before this shouldn't matter". Give me a break, most people in the BT community have history behind their "player life". Enough of the discreditation and on with the unifying. And if you've already said you don't agree then you've made your point so get the hell out of the way for those that enjoy having house relations and not just a "look at my powerful reg!"-fest.

I couldn't keep myself from stopping by again, such a fun thread. I do have to say it sure is nice to see my brothers' welcoming party is off with a flare.

[LordRush]

::POP:: ::Rush taps yet another Keg::

[Dihm]

Eagle, you miss my point, yet again.

All I've been trying to do is point out the facts of MWO. It is people WHO HAVE DECLARED FOR DAVION which kept bringing up the other issues about egos and the "good ole boy establishment".

This seems to be labeled as an attempt to "belittle, condescend and dismerit" and being "holier than thou" and cause all sorts of angst. For some reason you (the "old guard") have all circled your wagons and decided to attack me and call me names. That's fine, I can handle it. In the mean time you're ignoring all of the other people, including those within your own Faction who are saying the same thing or bringing up additional issues. I'm not entirely sure what "attitude" I brought in with me when I came through the "door", other than stubbornness to actually try to make people see what the Devs have stated will be the nature of the game. I didn't come in here spouting off about how I've done X or Y so you should be quiet, fall in line, or get out of the way. I didn't come in here hurling insults at other members of our community.

I didn't derail this thread, I didn't set it on the path it was already on. I popped in a couple times to try to bring some sanity and point out what we know about the game. THIS was my first post, on page 6:

Dihm, on 06 February 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

I do have to ask how much any of this discussion will have any bearing on MWO anyway.

From what we know so far, players cannot command faction units, only merc units. There won't be a Davion, Kurita, Liao, whatever, CoC within the game. If there is one, it would all be external to the game, and have no ability to accept, reject, or kick players from the Davion faction, or from the units within the Davion faction. The only player-controlled units will be mercs, though they have said they MAY add player-controled faction units at some point post-launch.

It was ignored.

My second post, on page 8. It was posted in an attempt to bring up the issue that seemed to still be ignored:

Dihm, on 10 February 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

Since players will not actually be able to control faction units (they'll have no authority to approve or deny anyone from joining a faction unit, will be unable to boot out offenders, will be unable to enforce their orders), I'll be quite interested to see how this works.

Anyone who joins the faction can join whatever faction unit they desire, if they have the Loyalty Points to do so, and are not bound to follow the orders of other members of that unit who have a higher rank (higher Loyalty Points). The only player-controlled organizations are merc units, for now any way.

I'm seeing a trend here, and I'm not seeing any of this belittling and insulting you folk seem to think I've been doing.

My third post, page 10:

Dihm, on 05 March 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

Meneiupptus, on 05 March 2012 - 05:23 AM, said:

This is directly out of the FAQ. If Mercs start out as House, then there will most likely be House warfare as well because they assuredly will not have any money or skills when deciding to go merc.

And they've also said that players won't be running the factions.

Still not seeing anything insulting or belittling or holier-than-thou.

Fourth post, page 11, in response to a conversation about someone's real life military credentials and their ability to lead:

Dihm, on 06 March 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

FYI, this is a computer game played for fun. Military credentials not necessary.

We are not actually "soldiers" or "warriors". We are gamers.

Again, nothing belittling or insulting.

And that brings us up to Monday, where I yet again, said nothing insulting yet somehow became to focus of all of your ire.

Dihm, on 02 April 2012 - 05:52 AM, said:

I know I know, I'm a broken record, but I'll say it again.

Why are people still ignoring the fact that it has been repeatedly stated that players will have no control over the house/faction units? The only units players will have any control over are merc units. It's all fine and dandy to say you have a House CoC, but there will be more players in the faction that ignore it than who willingly accept serving under it. It will have no teeth. There are no restrictions on members joining factions or the units within them (assuming they gain enough loyalty points). Due to the nature of the game, you're going to see a higher population than we ever saw in MPBT or in any of the Planetary Leagues, and I can guarantee you that a majority of them won't be interested in following orders.

Given what we KNOW (you can't control the House without concent of the player, and many players won't concent), how do you see this CoC actually functioning? Wouldn't it be more profitable to work on setting up a Merc CoC/Council, for units that work soley for House Davion, than by trying to herd the 5+ digit amount of cats that will be the House Davion faction players?

If not, then another question. How do you plan on enforcing the authority of the House Davion CoC?

Seriously, what I've posted is a TINY FRACTION of what has gone on in this thread. I've been pretty damn consistent in my message. It has been heard by LordRush, but it seems to be lost on many people.

Edited by Dihm, 04 April 2012 - 03:50 AM.

[Vargyr]

I think we should just let the RP happen. As long as it doesn't limit my or my unit's gameplay, I don't have a problem with it going on. Hell, I may even get into it.

And as for galaxy-spanning 'empires': just make sure you take care of the Goonsquad when they show up.

[Meneiupptus]

Goons... love em or hate them they sure unified their enemies like no others.

Well for those against the Chain of Communication because someone is going to lead it... Is there a CO in your unit? CO = Commanding Officer for the non-regimental. If so send them this way. See from all that I have read no one asked the pertinent questions...

Will we be able to vote on our leadership? Having a say in leadership is part of the process and allows all the CO's to be measured and weighed according to their abilities and histories.

Once this question is answered we can move on to the next questions which are pertinent.

Clarification: I am not against an alliance started and led by one person this is just to see which way we are going.. elected or militaristic?

Edited by Meneiupptus, 04 April 2012 - 05:56 AM.

[Jack Gallows]

You do know that I was only against a chain of command because a few people demanded that their leaders be the leaders of the CoC by default without any real outside input?

That was what started this whole mess. I saw the idea of a CoC, thought it might be fun...but was incredibly wary of a handful going "you're nothing because we don't know you, our leaders are what's going to happen." You don't know me, I don't know you or those involved, approaching that situation and going "trust me" might work in a real military, but here it's a fool's game. Coming together as equals, without listing who's better then who because of years spent playing video games/being leadership in those games (because many people have solid leadership skills in multiple games/jobs/real life vocations,) so that everyone can talk and see who is who. It didn't go that way.

I've only been about equality and fairness, and I couldn't give a Drac's behind what kind of experience ANYONE says they have. I've decided to stay out of deciding the CoC, but my reasoning for that is I've come to see those that would support certain individuals or those individuals themselves who would be the leaders as unfit for such things. And to be clear, I've never once wanted to be seen as a candidate for a leader of this "House CoC" (which was probably a big mistake in the naming...), and even though I've removed myself and my unit from participating in selecting it's leaders, I still post here from time to time to watch and voice my opinion in the event that things turn around and get better.

As for people jumping on Dihm because he wanted a say....what the heck? We're all part of this community regardless of faction alignment or player type. Hostility only advances the breakdown of communication, and fosters discontent with what should be a better community regardless of imaginary drawn lines. I offer advice here, and in other faction forums...even the Clans. We're fellow battletech players first, and everything else second. Some people just want to see everything go well, and like conversing/debating different aspects of the IP.

That, and this thread is a good diversion until the game comes out, can use it to see who's level headed and isn't, and who I should be friends with and who I shouldn't. Information is ammunition after all, right?

[The Bounty Hunter]

This thread amuses The Bounty Hunter. But it also saddens The Bounty Hunter that it seems to be the same in most Houses/Factions other then the FRR. Dihm is the voice of reason in here and pointing facts out to you all, on many occasions, yet you ignore him and continue on this path of a CoC that the Devs have clearly stated wont be there. And really how can you create a CoC when you still have no real clue of how Factions will work other then player XP in a faction will help determine what "special units" they can join?

You should look to your real leaders once the game has started. Not posting gurus here on the forums, but those who actual SHOW they know what they are doing in the GAME. I repeat, the GAME.

[Eagle HH]

Dihm, on 04 April 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

Eagle, you miss my point, yet again.

All I've been trying to do is point out the facts of MWO. It is people WHO HAVE DECLARED FOR DAVION which kept bringing up the other issues about egos and the "good ole boy establishment".

Dihm, you totally made your point and the thing is, like you've stated in your own post, you sound like a broken record just as many of the other people that come here to try to prove the same point. I am sorry you got thrown in with the same group needless to say there were still those that took offense and felt the need to tear down banners by calling them egos. I just do not understand why some people are so quick to disrespect, so my comments were not aimed at you but yet in your general direction.

Quote

You do know that I was only against a chain of command because a few people demanded that their leaders be the leaders of the CoC by default without any real outside input?

It was already clarified that there would be no "Default" leader and as I look around I see nobody demanding a leader. Sounds like emotion is flared rather than taking a real look at who is trying to do what.

Did you ever think that there are people that will make SOMETHING work because they have strong ties? How do you think units come ready-made before the game even releases? And maybe not you yourself have gone to the levels that others have but you still persist in making the same argument over and over when people just don't care because they know they CAN.

Quote

"Dihm is the voice of reason in here and pointing facts out to you all, on many occasions, yet you ignore him and continue on this path of a CoC that the Devs have clearly stated wont be there. And really how can you create a CoC when you still have no real clue of how Factions will work other then player XP in a faction will help determine what "special units" they can join?

You should look to your real leaders once the game has started. Not posting gurus here on the forums, but those who actual SHOW they know what they are doing in the GAME. I repeat, the GAME."

Again, why should anyone have to wait to get their units started? In the same respect you should all quit your groups until we have the game because we just do not know what to expect. Be real and stop looking for excuses why you don't want to see something formed. Maybe there will be no CoC but the communication will not stop and there will be cohesion on a larger community basis so just stop ranting about it, they don't need a game or anyone's approval to do so, not even the almighty Devs. Truth...

[Eagle HH]

I have put some quotes that are from some others, not just Dihm, in my last post. Sorry if that is confusing.

[Angus]

Angus HHoD ready and waiting...waiting...waiting

[xMarshallx]

A few points have been raised but there's so much text to filter through to quote I won't mess with it. The Dev's came out and said there will be no player run CoC, which is fine and I think everyone can agree that is a true statement. The reality of the situation, and someone said we were missing Dihm's point, but you guys are missing the point others are making. My fiance drives me nuts with this all the time, everything has to be so black and white and there is never any room for grey area, but folks, that's what we have here. Is a formal CoC going to be recognized, or do we even know how to implement it? No. On the other hand can anyone truly sit back and say the house with no CoC structure, be it a gentlemens agreement or other, fare the same as a house that has no structure or guidance to it? The point the MPBT folks are trying to make is that we as a community were able to make and follow a strategic shell through our respect and cooperation the players had via a gentleman's agreement and that's what they're looking to accomplish here.

[Listless Nomad]

The Sniper, on 04 April 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:

A few points have been raised but there's so much text to filter through to quote I won't mess with it. The Dev's came out and said there will be no player run CoC, which is fine and I think everyone can agree that is a true statement. The reality of the situation, and someone said we were missing Dihm's point, but you guys are missing the point others are making. My fiance drives me nuts with this all the time, everything has to be so black and white and there is never any room for grey area, but folks, that's what we have here. Is a formal CoC going to be recognized, or do we even know how to implement it? No. On the other hand can anyone truly sit back and say the house with no CoC structure, be it a gentlemens agreement or other, fare the same as a house that has no structure or guidance to it? The point the MPBT folks are trying to make is that we as a community were able to make and follow a strategic shell through our respect and cooperation the players had via a gentleman's agreement and that's what they're looking to accomplish here.

I've tried to remain out of this, and am jumping in to ask only a simple question. It is not an attack, or a troll or anything. Merely a proof of concept question.

Say this CoC gets created. Everyone is happy, we have a leader and everyone is willing to chip in for the greater good. Say the devs choose what planets are being contested from week to week. What exactly will this CoC do? What power will it have other than to tell Davion players to attack planets already highlighted for assault that week. I could see a CoC working as like a council of mercenary groups, working together to expand their territories, but I fail to see at this juncture what a House CoC would even do. I'm not arguing for or against it's creation, merely its role.

I would just like to know more about what someone would plan to do if they formed this CoC and most of the Davion units hopped on board. Even if it is just a gentlemen's agreement - to what end? It would appear to me, that a better option would be to gather up all of your pilots, former leaders, and friends - and just form a merc unit. It can be Davion aligned, but it would give you control over your leaders, and control over what strategic direction you take.

Edited by Listless Nomad, 04 April 2012 - 10:51 AM.

[Azantia]

Thats what normal people do Nomad. But they want more. Bigger Egos need bigger better positions, with more things to control. Pretty simple really.

[LordRush]

Look Az... Enough already. Your personal flames, attacks and unwillingness to support in offering has hit the limit.
All your doing is trolling, enough

[xMarshallx]

Listless Nomad, on 04 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Say this CoC gets created. Everyone is happy, we have a leader and everyone is willing to chip in for the greater good. Say the devs choose what planets are being contested from week to week. What exactly will this CoC do? What power will it have other than to tell Davion players to attack planets already highlighted for assault that week. I could see a CoC working as like a council of mercenary groups, working together to expand their territories, but I fail to see at this juncture what a House CoC would even do. I'm not arguing for or against it's creation, merely its role.

I would just like to know more about what someone would plan to do if they formed this CoC and most of the Davion units hopped on board. Even if it is just a gentlemen's agreement - to what end? It would appear to me, that a better option would be to gather up all of your pilots, former leaders, and friends - and just form a merc unit. It can be Davion aligned, but it would give you control over your leaders, and control over what strategic direction you take.

Two part response, one to each paragraph.

In your first paragraph, you're absolutely correct. We don't know if the game will dictate our every motion. If the players have the freedom to determine where they attack, unity will be essential for the success of the house. These are all assumptions being made from both points of view, those anti-CoC and those for it. With that in mind, those who are for establishing a CoC have asked in the past - if we don't know the full function of the game, and people are mocking the notion of formalizing a player agreed upon CoC, why are units being formed now? I believe that's a fair question - we don't know the answers but becoming organized as a house is probably a good thing regardless of the approach that is taken.

For your second paragraph, and I posted basically exactly what you said a few pages back in this thread, I completely agree. It will be a tragedy to see everyone go down that path but the more and more I'm seeing the houses "roles" and what "power" they will have, merc is the best option especially for those looking for a military aspect to what is a military game.

[Listless Nomad]

The Sniper, on 04 April 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

Two part response, one to each paragraph.

In your first paragraph, you're absolutely correct. We don't know if the game will dictate our every motion. If the players have the freedom to determine where they attack, unity will be essential for the success of the house. These are all assumptions being made from both points of view, those anti-CoC and those for it. With that in mind, those who are for establishing a CoC have asked in the past - if we don't know the full function of the game, and people are mocking the notion of formalizing a player agreed upon CoC, why are units being formed now? I believe that's a fair question - we don't know the answers but becoming organized as a house is probably a good thing regardless of the approach that is taken.

For your second paragraph, and I posted basically exactly what you said a few pages back in this thread, I completely agree. It will be a tragedy to see everyone go down that path but the more and more I'm seeing the houses "roles" and what "power" they will have, merc is the best option especially for those looking for a military aspect to what is a military game.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. I think that if players have full control over what and where to attack - then a CoC is warranted. If the Devs control where and when to attack, then I think you and I can agree a CoC is less warranted. I see no problem with people trying to form a CoC as long as it is voluntary, and inclusive to all players. As to the pro-CoC argument of why people are forming units right now when we don't know how things will work, I would say they are silly to do so - unless they are going to be mercs.

The 1st Robinson Rangers, and the Skjaldborg Shieldwall, are merc units. We've formed because, based on the available information - becoming a merc corp was the only way to have any kind of meaningful structure in the upcoming game. I believe that is why we have formed early. It is upsetting that it would appear in order to have full control over our units and membership, we are forced to form merc outfits. Be advised however, that we all all faction affiliated units. We serve primarily the houses we are attached to. We may take contracts that support that house's allies, as the Skjaldborg have offered to do, but none of us will take actions that threaten our house. Look at the membership threads of both units. We are all faction icon aligned. We are not petty merc corps. I ask that if you do decide to form a CoC, you counsel some of the members here who have expressed anti merc sentiments, that we are not to be condescended to.

Those with units who are not merc, and plan to be house units alone I think will find that they will be disappointed at their lack of control. Those forming units with famous canon names, be they house or merc units - I suspect will be severely disappointed when their names are taken away.

Edited by Listless Nomad, 04 April 2012 - 06:18 PM.

[Qin]

Listless Nomad, on 04 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

I've tried to remain out of this, and am jumping in to ask only a simple question. It is not an attack, or a troll or anything. Merely a proof of concept question.

Say this CoC gets created. Everyone is happy, we have a leader and everyone is willing to chip in for the greater good. Say the devs choose what planets are being contested from week to week. What exactly will this CoC do? What power will it have other than to tell Davion players to attack planets already highlighted for assault that week. I could see a CoC working as like a council of mercenary groups, working together to expand their territories, but I fail to see at this juncture what a House CoC would even do. I'm not arguing for or against it's creation, merely its role.

I would just like to know more about what someone would plan to do if they formed this CoC and most of the Davion units hopped on board. Even if it is just a gentlemen's agreement - to what end? It would appear to me, that a better option would be to gather up all of your pilots, former leaders, and friends - and just form a merc unit. It can be Davion aligned, but it would give you control over your leaders, and control over what strategic direction you take.

For me at the moment the CoC is a large blank canvas. Without more information on how the map, and the planetary conquest is going to run, we cannot fill in that part. We will have to be patient about that.

The whole concept though is malleable, from just a communication network to keep everybody up to date to a full blown command structure that takes care of logistics and troop movements.

So how could a communication network help?
This is all speculation/hypothetical stuff.
We are with thousands of players so the chance we only get to fight on 1 world is slim. My bet is on 2 fronts. 1 with the friendly people who like to commit harakiri after you defeated them, and 1 with the poor fellows who life under the joke of the Liao family and who desperately need to be freed from that intolerable tyranny.

So there you are with a company or 2 slugging it out on the planet Whatever. The conquest is going fine till all the sudden you run into a new company who keeps beating your team.
Eventually we will run into those elite groups, people who life and breath mech combat, who enjoy to become the best group out there and be known and feared by all. Our House will have them, and the other Houses as well. Its not good for moral to get your mechs sliced and diced all over the battlefield, so you decide to give one people of the CoC an headsup. He or she then takes look and calls up one of our elite teams and asks them to see if they can do something about that team on planet Whatever.
Afterwards you can have a chat with those guys and talk about what went wrong during the drops, and what you can do to improve your companies.

We could bring people together who are good at training newbies, and new people coming into the game. Or more advanced classes in lance leading. Share information on mech configurations.

Or we could just be a officers club where we can share a beer and tell war stories.

It will depend for a large part on how the game is going to be played, and how much freedom the devs will give us. And till that time we will just have to wait and see.

[nightsniper]

LN your questions are right on the mark and well made Thank you. and The Sniper your response as well.

From all the posts and the info from the Devs we have made this chain of command far more then the game intends it to be and certainly they have revealed little to nothing for a CoC to do. If they read this thread I am betting they are rewriting the manual as we discuss.

It maybe true that a COC has no role in the game we will wait and see. But in the RPG world there is the COC role and it does have value for establishing unofficial treaties or hiring merc units. Will this be true here??????? We do not know that in the past officially or unofficially Battle tech based games board leagues or game console or PC have had a role-play CoC. As I saw it the tread was started to discuss this role and to rally players to the RPG. For some that flamed the fires of who it should be yet that issue seems to have been shoved aside and we went for the mine is bigger then yours so I lead mentality. Please don't make me go back and start quoting. This is getting to be a real labor-intensive discussion as it is.

As I see it at this point of the chief posters we have seen no real discussion about the role and why they feel they can bring the most to the table with a few exceptions. I am very certain that I have overstated my position and the fact that I bring a new unit into the game sort of has me straddling the fence. Merc groups although in complete control do suffer according to the early Dev posts on perks the houses will enjoy (not totally clear or defined yet).

With the exception of my first entry into the Genre I was a clan player Blood spirit in Mech Commander days in the SL league, TCL planetary and TFS. I then moved as part of the role-play in to the reborn SLDF Unit. This continued until the clans moved away and in the Mech Warrior Series I played the role of IS in MW2 on up on Game spy and the Zone and MPBT3025 and either commanded a unit or assumed the role of admin in some of the ladder leagues. I also play the board game in person and on line. The point is that when I stepped out of Mech Commander I found House Davion playing MPBT and latter played with HHOD with many of the same group in the MW4 game. Back then their was no one else that was organized had as large a group and was focused on training new players about the PC game All of these people stepped up in the Role Playing part of this genre. I was never able to find in my searches and game play any competing units and I was an on again off again big gamer. I am also certainly the senior to just about everyone on here since my computer days go back actually to the late 60’s and I played Chess via teletype on an Olevetti Underwood Computer in 1971.
So my reasons and intentions are clear I am sticking with those that brought me does that mean there is not a role for every poster to play certainly not this is a Global game online has grown 1000 fold since the MPBT 3025 days or the AOL, or Compuserv pay to play days and I am supporting Qin as Prince and Lord Rush in the CoC role-playing and if such a role is in the game as it was officially in MPBT then there as well. Mainly because of history and they proved to me they are in the right place.
This is not to say that anyone here may not be a member of the CoC and I would look forward to playing with you in the RPG role anytime. If your willing to pitch in and help everyone. The thread was started as I read it not to debate it but to see who was going to rally to a COC regardless of the game.
Lets all try to get back to the point of do we want an RPG aspect to the game even if the game has no room for one officially and how do we structure it. I for one think the RPG aspect is what brings a whole new level of enjoyment to my hobby and my free time so I am in. I hope everyone else is too.

[xMarshallx]

As just an FYI for some of those saying that an in game CoC could not work and sorry for beating a dead horse, I just stumbled upon this: http://en.wikipedia....letech:_Solaris

Second paragraph. It might explain why some of the folks here are taking this to heart and vehemently disagree with some of those saying an informal CoC cannot take place because the Dev's wouldn't support it. Don't get me wrong, I think it'll be a logistical nightmare dealing with the volume of players this game has a potential to bring in .. but it's been done in the past.

[nightsniper]

Don't get it wrong in or out of the game it is an essential part to the game and Genre that is Battletech