804 replies to this topic

[Oswin Aurelius]

Seriously, people that are pissed off by this, what the **** are you pissed off about? A damn NAME.

You not getting the NAME you want for your Merc group is going to make you blacklist the best 'mech game (which it will be) that you've been waiting over a decade for?

Mechwarrior: Online says they're going to be following the lore in real time AND YOU CAN BE A PART OF IT, and you're pissed off that they aren't letting you run some of the most famous Merc Corps out there?

You all need to stop acting like you're all decades younger than you really are.

[Hyperius]

Victor Morson, on 03 May 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

I'm rather hoping the Blazing Aces is allowed. We've run that banner in a ton of games, and really, it's not technically canon; almost all of the fiction around the unit (paint schemes, mottos, lance assignments, the majority of history, etc.) we created ourselves entirely. We even redesigned the logo. In fact we picked a unit that wasn't mainline canon because of these reasons, to give us freedom to create our own fiction and creative choices.

If not, we'll have to come up with some creative solution as I'm sure many other units will. Frankly I really, really wish the restricted list was limited to the "big" groups: Northwind Highlanders, Gray Death Legion, Wolf Dragoons, etc, etc. Those are major plot movers and also have dozens of already existent clans that run those names that'd fight over them. I just can't see applying that to some poor group that wants to be Wilson's Hussars.

By contrast there are dozens of canon units that are in no way majorly important to the universe that units have been closely associated to for years and it's a shame to see them locked down.



You are missing the problem as to why people are upset (and it's something I understand): It has nothing, in most cases, to do with RP elements or loyalty to a specific scripted faction, but rather, loyalty to a Clan name they've had for years. Some of these groups have existed with their names since MechWarrior 2 and kept alive through countless titles over the years.

It's upsetting to basically be told that the clan name you've had for seriously over 12 years suddenly won't be allowed. That's where the opposition comes from. Even in less extreme cases such as 6-8 years that's rough and seriously disheartening.

Being disheartened is one thing and completely understandable but when people threaten to boycott the game because they have to make a name change it starts getting a little silly.

[John Clavell]

Oswin Aurelius, on 03 May 2012 - 11:32 PM, said:

Seriously, people that are pissed off by this, what the **** are you pissed off about? A damn NAME.

You not getting the NAME you want for your Merc group is going to make you blacklist the best 'mech game (which it will be) that you've been waiting over a decade for?

Mechwarrior: Online says they're going to be following the lore in real time AND YOU CAN BE A PART OF IT, and you're pissed off that they aren't letting you run some of the most famous Merc Corps out there?

You all need to stop acting like you're all decades younger than you really are.

I think you should consider that some of the groups here have played as a certain names which might now face being rejected for a very long time (10-20 years). It's the identity of these groups which is being threatened. It's not so much about the name it's self. Not everyone, more so newer people to Battletech or MechWarrior, are going to care about that. But at least try to consider this fact. It's not nice to have your identity removed. This is not really a big shocker of an announcement. PGI did say from the beginning that unit canon names would be locked out. We have more meat to that bone, and it certainly is going to be hard for many to swallow.

[John Clavell]

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

It's a complex set of filters, simple character swaps will be addressed automatically. More creative names will be dealt with by Customer Service staff, and we expect players to report a bunch as well.

I am looking for away to support communities that use canon names. I think there's an easy win along the lines of an AKA in your merc corp. "about" info.

To MechWarrior groups who are very long standing members of the community and who now face your identity being removed I say this. Outside of MWO's eco-sphere you can still hold true to your units identity. PGI cannot take that away from you.

To PGI, and to Bryan I do ask you consider units identity. Give us the ability to let members of the community within your eco-sphere see who we are, and who we were. You know how deep the communities passion goes, and how long many of us have been playing. I'm sure everyone here is happy to work with PGI's plans for MWO. However, please consider our identities were forged long before MWO was a tinkle in the eye of anyone. Many people have sunk a lot of time and money over the decades to host websites, pay for domain names and build the structures around their units and that units name.

[SilentObserver]

Werewolf Fetladral, on 03 May 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

Lone Wolves vs. New Players vs. Old Players.
Lone Wolves 1 point.
New Players 1 point.
Old Players 0 point.

Thank god for that. For while there it looked like the old guard had already set up shop and was making decrees. and the game hadnt even entered beta yet.

Werewolf Fetladral, on 03 May 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

I can personally say that myself being a 13+year 13th Wolf Guard veteran, I do base the majority of my enjoyment by being part of the unit and not just on the game play. I got the majority of entertainment from my wingman inside the game, then the game itself. Ogre is not ******** the fact that PGI is being over obsessive with their product (imo they probably are).

Also, if anything you look and smell like a NEWBIE and I will be fragging your arse when I get the chance (Just on principle for speaking out of line).

John Clavell, on 03 May 2012 - 11:45 PM, said:

I think you should consider that some of the groups here have played as a certain names which might now face being rejected for a very long time (10-20 years). It's the identity of these groups which is being threatened. It's not so much about the name it's self. Not everyone, more so newer people to Battletech or MechWarrior, are going to care about that. But at least try to consider this fact. It's not nice to have your identity removed. This is not really a big shocker of an announcement. PGI did say from the beginning that unit canon names would be locked out. We have more meat to that bone, and it certainly is going to be hard for many to swallow.

I'm sure you realize you would have the exact same issue if someone went in on opening day and claimed "your" units name first. You'd still have to change your name. Thats the chance you take when you pick a popular, straight out of the book name. I suspect that most of the folks here that are doing the most ******** somehow thought they had a special in so that they would get the name first. to hell with the other group thats also been playing under that name for X number of years.

Not getting the screen name that you want should not be a surprise. Folks need to act like grown men (or women) and deal with it. Put a MWO AKA on your fancy website. stirr up a little creativity and come up with a different name.

[Sassori]

John Clavell, on 03 May 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

To MechWarrior groups who are very long standing members of the community and who now face your identity being removed I say this. Outside of MWO's eco-sphere you can still hold true to your units identity. PGI cannot take that away from you.

To PGI, and to Bryan I do ask you consider units identity. Give us the ability to let members of the community within your eco-sphere see who we are, and who we were. You know how deep the communities passion goes, and how long many of us have been playing. I'm sure everyone here is happy to work with PGI's plans for MWO. However, please consider our identities were forged long before MWO was a tinkle in the eye of anyone. Many people have sunk a lot of time and money over the decades to host websites, pay for domain names and build the structures around their units and that units name.

That groups identity isn't the name of the group, it's the group itself. If the group has a different name they're still the same people regardless. Getting names taken in an MMO is just a fact of life, especially when names are popular.

Sure it sucks (I guess) but it's not a reason to not play a game. If anything this arbitrary decision is the fairest way possible to handle it. I've been playing BT since 1989 and TT RPG's longer than that, in Mechwarrior especially there've been long running campaigns that sometimes were linked to in game merc units (Specifically the Eridani Light Horse in that case), Even if we'd been playing that campaign since 1989 that doesn't give us some right to the name Eridani Light Horse.

In essence: Those names aren't anyones. Nobody has a right to them. It's better that nobody gets the name rather than giving control of it to a small group of people. We have over 70,000 people registered already, even 100-200 people is a small fraction of that and thus to be fair to all we have to accept that we're all not going to get what we want.

At least everyone's in the same boat, we can all start fresh, and it's not like anyone is even taking away something that was /yours/. Clan Wolf (For example) was never owned by those who claim to be Khan, ilKhan or whatever.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand or come to terms with. Make your merc units, just make a new name that's original.

Edited by Christopher Dayson, 04 May 2012 - 12:05 AM.

[John Clavell]

SilentObserver, on 03 May 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

I'm sure you realize you would have the exact same issue if someone went in on opening day and claimed "your" units name first. You'd still have to change your name. Thats the chance you take when you pick a popular, straight out of the book name. I suspect that most of the folks here that are doing the most ******** somehow thought they had a special in so that they would get the name first. to hell with the other group thats also been playing under that name for X number of years.

Not getting the screen name that you want should not be a surprise. Folks need to act like grown men (or women) and deal with it. Put a MWO AKA on your fancy website. stirr up a little creativity and come up with a different name.

How have I acted in anyway not like a mature person here? Go read the other threads I have posted in reply to about this very subject, and then come back here and make the same accusations. My view has been consistent from the outset, I have not been rude, or trolled anyone here so please don't throw that at me, as it's totally unwarranted.

I know this. We have ALL known this form the start. I'm not saying anything against that. As I have said before, MWO will be ONE big community. MechWarrior 2, 3, and 4 where smaller communities broken up into different leagues and areas of play. So you had many different people playing as the same group. Clan Wolf lets say. But in fairness they still coexisted by tagging the league they were in. So let's say Clan Wolf [NBT] Clan Wolf [UTS], people still knew them for who they were. If I have to change my name fine. If I have to rename the unit, OK. I will challenge the GM's but I will respect their final verdict.

Names can be powerful things, are you, and other so surprised that there is some back-lash? PGI said from the beginning, Canon names would be locked out. So anyone who took the name of big Merc units from the lore like Northwind Highlanders Grey Death Legion or whatever should of understood the risk. But in fairness I don't see why there is so much hate towards people who want that affiliation to the lore and the canon. We all have love for units in Battletech. Having outwardly support for them in MechWarrior games past and present is hardly uncommon is it.

In cases where there was overlap, well that is a failing on the part of PGI to give better context from the start. It is also a failing of the said units in questions to discuss the issues. No one has any more right than the other to use a unit canon name. As such, and as I have said before I support canon names being locked. But I do respect the cumulative identity of these groups, PGI should try to consider them.

Edited by John Clavell, 04 May 2012 - 12:41 AM.

[John Clavell]

Christopher Dayson, on 04 May 2012 - 12:02 AM, said:

That groups identity isn't the name of the group, it's the group itself. If the group has a different name they're still the same people regardless. Getting names taken in an MMO is just a fact of life, especially when names are popular.

Sure it sucks (I guess) but it's not a reason to not play a game. If anything this arbitrary decision is the fairest way possible to handle it. I've been playing BT since 1989 and TT RPG's longer than that, in Mechwarrior especially there've been long running campaigns that sometimes were linked to in game merc units (Specifically the Eridani Light Horse in that case), Even if we'd been playing that campaign since 1989 that doesn't give us some right to the name Eridani Light Horse.

In essence: Those names aren't anyones. Nobody has a right to them. It's better that nobody gets the name rather than giving control of it to a small group of people. We have over 70,000 people registered already, even 100-200 people is a small fraction of that and thus to be fair to all we have to accept that we're all not going to get what we want.

At least everyone's in the same boat, we can all start fresh, and it's not like anyone is even taking away something that was /yours/. Clan Wolf (For example) was never owned by those who claim to be Khan, ilKhan or whatever.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand or come to terms with. Make your merc units, just make a new name that's original.

I think your taking me out of context somewhat. And I feel some of my previous reply covers this also. I will say again, no one has the right to a unit name, only the trademark holder does. But names are a powerful thing, and unit identifies while forged by the people in that unit, are to the community known by the name which they play by. If I say Clan Wolf [UTS], many people here will know who that is. But if I just say a few names of members of that old unit, most people wont know who the hell I am talking about. It's part of what makes the game in a very small way. Sure we can all have new names and forge new reputations, Hell our own unit as done the same.

Edited by John Clavell, 04 May 2012 - 12:42 AM.

[Eagle HH]

Just my opinion... flame all you want I really don't care because it won't change anything for me.

This decision is only going to detract from the competetive "guilding" community because it is essentially removing anything "BattleTech" about the naming of your unit. It will split the community between RP and those who want to player-run compete. I really don't care because I'm not a role-player, however to deny teams the right to participate in the theme of the game is just counter-productive especially when there's a whole universe of lore that is created in the books.

The decision that's been made on this may have been intended well for the community but it is my opinion it will do worse than good.

We will always have our organization defined well outside the game, however they are attempting to take away the "pride of our realm" to give it to those that are too lazy to contest and represent for and leave nothing for those that have well invested time/money/hard work in recruiting and building a public image and a niche in the community.

Take SW:TOR for example where they encourage realm/theme play:

Naming policy taken from SWTOR http://www.swtor.com/legalnotices/roc

When creating a character or guild name for Star Wars: The Old Republic, it is encouraged that you select a name that reflects the theme of the game. The guidelines listed below outline the types of names that you can NOT use, and apply to both player or character names, as well as guild names.
1.
You may not use any names that violate the General Rules. This includes the use of names that are hateful, defamatory, racist, ethnically offensive, obscene, vulgar, sexually explicit, or any other language that is offensive in nature.

2.
You may not use names that are harassing or defamatory to other players or employees of EA, BioWare or LucasArts, e.g. EASUX, Timsretarded, and Biowaresux.

3.
You may not use names of any EA, BioWare, or LucasArts employee or service related to Star Wars: The Old Republic.

4.
You may not use names of copyrighted or trademarked characters, materials or products, e.g. Coca-Cola or Dr. Pepper.

5.
You may not use names from popular culture or media, e.g. Lady Gaga or George Lucas.

6.
You may not use names that are religiously or historically significant, e.g. Jesus, Winston Churchill.

7.
You may not use proper names of areas within Star Wars for character names. Guild names, however, MAY use the proper names of specific areas to help promote role-playing and realm pride, e.g. Defenders of Tython or Protectors of Hutta.

8.
You may not use proper names of non-player characters within Star Wars: The Old Republic, e.g. Darth Malgus, Satele Shan, Yoda, Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

9.
You may not use names containing titles or ranks within them, e.g. General Supertrooper, Captain Tim, Darth Timmy, Knight Wakey.

10.
You may not use names that refer to drugs or that are drug related.

11.
You may not use names that contain an inappropriate phrase, sentence or any fragment of a sentence or Leet speak, e.g. uberhaxer, xxspeederxx, lolface, rofl, Noobwhacker, TimmyF**k, ****, ***.

12.
You may not use misspellings or alternative spellings of names that violate any of the above rules, e.g. Hamsolo, Yooda, DorthVader.

13.
You may not use gibberish names when creating character, e.g. ajsdu, rifndsw, qweszs.


If you violate any part of the above Naming Policy you will either be assigned a new name, or given the option of changing the name. In addition to this, your account could incur a penalty up to and including account closure.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Eagle_HH, on 04 May 2012 - 12:41 AM, said:

Take SW:TOR for example where they encourage realm/theme play:

Naming policy taken from SWTOR http://www.swtor.com/legalnotices/roc

When creating a character or guild name for Star Wars: The Old Republic, it is encouraged that you select a name that reflects the theme of the game. The guidelines listed below outline the types of names that you can NOT use, and apply to both player or character names, as well as guild names.

8.
You may not use proper names of non-player characters within Star Wars: The Old Republic, e.g. Darth Malgus, Satele Shan, Yoda, Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.


If you violate any part of the above Naming Policy you will either be assigned a new name, or given the option of changing the name. In addition to this, your account could incur a penalty up to and including account closure.

That part I just quoted there pretty much says SWTOR has the same policy as MWO will. Wolf's Dragoons, Wilson's Hussars, Waco Rangers and so on and so forth are in effect non player characters in the Battletech Universe just like Luke Skywalker or Darth Vader are in the Star Wars universe. In other words you're not given more freedom or encouragment to play within the setting there than you will be here.

[Victor Morson]

Evex, on 03 May 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:

In simple terms players controlling cannon groups could mess with the continuity and the time line of battletech/mechwarrior which would be a bad thing.

You know, this is where I disagree. I hope they give us ways to change the timeline and how things play out, because frankly it falls apart horribly after the start of the civil war and keeps on a straight freefall into the Jihad.

I really don't care if the timeline after the Clans arrive is utterly and completely changed. I'd welcome it.

Edited by Victor Morson, 04 May 2012 - 01:22 AM.

[Attackgypsy]

Vincent Vascaul, on 03 May 2012 - 09:51 PM, said:

MWO has had its first public relations kurfluffle, our little MMO is growing up so fast .

But on a more serious note, first off this does suck for groups like GDL and NWH who I talk with alot on TS3 and honestly run a cool and organised enough outfit that I really wouldnt have much of a problem being in game units. However since the very first Q&A that have said some units would be held back. Now we didn't know it would be all of them and I know that a couple groups recieved missleading information, we all should have at least anticipated this possibility. I do however agree that it would have been better for many if the info had come out sooner but I chalk that up to laywers and sorting out what can and cannot be done with trademarked/copyright material. I am just glad that the Sea Wolves seem to be ok with the aforementioned guidelines.

Thank you for the nice words about us and the GDL.

NWH has formulated a backup plan, and an answer should be had within the week. We just have to poll our members opinions to it.

That's Part 1.

Part 2, well, I can't discuss that. OPSEC violation and all. You know how it is...

[John Clavell]

Damon Howe, on 03 May 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Wolf Spiders are a cannon Battalion, so it is assumed (based off the devs talk) that no, you won't be allowed to use this. Wolf Spider implies the unit, so it will be changed (according to Bryan here; last post by him on this page)

'Wolf Spiders' are not a canon unit. 'The Wolf Spider Battalion' or the 'Wolf Spider Cluster' are canon units. We are not looking to use these unit names, we even made a logo and indent from scratch. The 'Wolf Spiders' is/was the nick name of the '1st Battlemech Company, Black Widow Battalion'. However, I don't know if PGI will also include 'nicknames' to official canon units in their list of banned names. I picked up 'Tales of the Black Widow', and 'More Tales of the Black Widow' (which covers the unit history from both IS and Clan perspectives) to do the research on this to make sure were used a name which was not bang on canon. We actually went out of our way to pick a name which had a connection to our past but was not canon as we knew canon units would not be allowed.

The other question is how far will association to names go? Example, if you used 'Wolf' in your name are GM's going to disallow you just because it might be an association to Clan Wolf? As a further example the Wolf Spider or Wolf Spiders are an arachnid from the Lycosidae family, and we kind of like them, in the same way the Clans from Battletech made an association to totem animals in their founding. I'm not trying to be smart here or toll, but I'm trying to highlight, where is the axe going to fall on this?

[Lima Zulu]

A question from Russian Death Legion - is this name a reference to Gray Death Legion and will be forbidden? I should say, Russian Death Legion has it's own in-game history not connected to GDL storyline.

[Kreisel]

I think their might have been less of a backlash if the rules didn't sound like they we're going to be so strict. "Implied Association' being disallowed seems to be going a bit far. I don't see why a name that indicates being somehow linked to a group should be a problem, I DO see a problem with trying to take a name that would indicate that you represent a Cannon unit as a whole.

A lot of people seem to be offended by the idea their might not be any acknowledged way in the game to be a part of group they have associated with for years. This blow could have been massively softened by an indication that the Devs defiantly wanted to have some solid way in game of linking your Merc Company to the one you want to play as part of (or have the ability to just join them the same way you could a faction) instead of a 'were thinking about maybe doing something that might eventually let you have some connection with this group.' I know where they are at in the game they want to be careful about declaring things will work a certain way, encase they are forced to change it later (since that's always a PR nightmare). Hopefully this is just them playing it careful, and they are strongly determined to do something to let players have their identity as linked to theses groups somehow. (after all... a potential major source of profit for them could be something like just selling the emblem for some of these units to be able to slap it on your mech. It's entirely cosmetic, but man oh man will the fanboys want it). I don't think they want to tell us.... 'you can join cannon merc group X this way...' only to have to come back later and say sorry guys... have to do it this other way instead.

I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing a number of unique unit names followed or proceeded by common abbreviation for Cannon units they are being RPed as linked too. As examples off the top of my head something like '[GDL] The Gray Skulls' or 'Northwind Claymores [NWH]' ect.

As for the talk from the Devs about players taking control of the NPC factions... I have mixed feelings, it depends on what they mean by this. Like how much control are we talking, proposed aspects like voting which planet to attack next if your high enough rank and stuff like that, where it doesn't effect large events or storyline could be cool. Little things like directing factories not core to the cannon tword the production of certain mechs or weapons over others resulting in them being slightly cheaper for players on that side to buy (say up to 5%) would be cool. running the show or controlling over all politics and war effort... I foresee going poorly.

[Uhtredd]

Tbh i am pretty disgusted with the whole way this has been handled..

After posting merc units names and links to websites, after all the dev interaction with some of the afore mentioned merc units, and the time/effort ppl have put in to them, it is outrageous to change it now.

If this was going to be the case why the hell not tell ppl weeks ago..

If it had been clear from the start it would not have been an issue..

[Sleipnir]

From what I've read my understanding is thus:

You can't name yourselves the same as a canon unit e.g. Wolf's Dragoons - or any subunit thereof.

However, you can name yourself something else perhaps in reference to it, then in your description associate yourself like "We RP ourselves as WD". After all, they can't really stop you - if you're on teamspeak and tell your guys; "this is what we see ourselves as" - there's nothing that can stop that.

A rose by any other name and all that...

Yes, there is a strong attachment with a lot of names from the MW4 days.
Personally it just irritated me seeing like seven different groups claiming to be this Clan or that Unit.


Making your own name in this game, and this lore-filled universe should be exciting, some form of challenge!
Give yourself a name and make people fear it, build your own reputation. Don't cry because you can't be (falsely) associated as those legendary warriors from the books. To me, that just makes the canon units look bad, and I'd rather see the Devs playing them out as they should be.

At the end of the day, people will remember the player / unit / clan for how well they played in this game - not for being the first to call themselves Wolf's Dragoon's.

[Chuckie]

Ni !



Ahh the benefits of being a Non-Canon unit..

I guess that said, the NWH could STILL be the NWH ( But name would be something like the North West Headcheeses' )

Edited by Chuckie, 04 May 2012 - 04:28 AM.

[LackofCertainty]

jimsolo, on 03 May 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

I by no means speak for my Outfit but I have no intention of playing the game with this rule in place.

Denying use of Merc Names is wrong. Period.
Major houses I can understand but at the very least a player created outfit should be able to play as:

1) Sub-units of the Major Houses with House logo's/colors.
2) Battletech Lore Merc Units or at minimum Sub-units there of.
Preventing copies is the only rule that need be in place.

If I cannot play under the "Black Widow Company" AND her current logo's then I wont play at all.

END OF STORY

"The Customer is ALWAYS right"

Calm down you big baby. The customer is always right has an addendum to it. It goes something like, "... unless giving the customer what he wants ****** off other customers."

If it's a first come, first serve basis, then you have a mad dash to register guilds when the game comes out. If they have a "don't use cannon names" rule in place, then everyone's on a level playing field.


Edit:
The above quote is an example of a childish response to this info. The quote below is an example of a mature response.

Firefly, on 03 May 2012 - 02:51 PM, said:

What my battle buddy is talking about is the fact that our particular Black Widow Company Widows shares exactly one thing in common with the canon unit - a name. His intent, which is his personal opinion only, is to say that we are not like (for example) Gray Death Legion or Clan Wolf.When we created the unit back in 2002, none of us knew anything about BattleTech. It wasn't until about 2009 that someone asked if we chose the name based on the canon merc unit.

At any rate, I am the unit CO. My decision is that we adapt and overcome. If we can name ourselves something similar that in no way ties ourselves in-game to Wolf's Dragoons, then that is what we will do.

*applause* Bravo Firefly.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 04 May 2012 - 04:18 AM.

[pesco]

I never got the whole "I want to play He-Man" game.