92 replies to this topic

[dyrewolfe]

Strum Wealh, on 20 May 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

IMO, such a "Clan Honor System" would have to be a non-optional element coded into the game itself; for all the reasons outlined in this thread as well as the other thread on the same subject; anything less (e.g. relying on the players themselves to enforce such an honor system) is ultimately doomed to failure.

The Clans' customs are a defining feature of what makes the Clans who and what they are, and are a large part of why they didn't just proverbially curb-stomp the IS during the initial invasion.
Without that element, they're just "the faction with generally better toys than everyone else, but otherwise the same".

Your thoughts?

Don't think I'd object to that, but I think the developers might worry it would limit the appeal of the game. I imagine they're wanting the game to attract as many people as possible...munchkins included.

Perhaps having something like a fine system. For every dishonourable act committed / violation of Clan codes of conduct, the player loses X number of C-bills?

[DaMavster]

Or all IS vs Clan matches penalize the Clan team (I'm thinking, keep the Clan mechs as powerful as they should be, but then impose tonnage limits where the Clan team only gets 7/8 or 3/4 the tonnage the IS team gets. Or heck, make it 4 v 3. Just, please, don't nerf the Clans. That's the point.)

Regarding legging, shooting in the back, etc, being unfair... I'd never call being an accurate shot cheating. Getting shot in the leg? Deal with it. Stand on hills so your legs are hidden. Getting shot in the back? Improve your situational awareness and stop exposing your back! And heck, if you're in an Atlas and I'm in a Jenner (if I can't run away), you better believe I'm gonna circle behind you and shoot you in the back: to heck with honor! I'm a Light fighting an Assault: That should be honorable enough.

Edited by DaMavster, 20 May 2012 - 07:22 AM.

[dyrewolfe]

Hmm. Might make for more balanced gameplay but any kind of penalty for Clans, with regard to tonnage or damage just doesn't seem fair. It should be like in the novels where the IS players have to overcome the odds with sheer skill / inventiveness.

I was thinking along the lines that there should be a selectable option to engage zellbrigen rules and once selected, players would be penalised (whether Clan or IS) for breaking them.

That way, those that want to play "properly" can do so, while the munchkins can run around blasting people at will (before hopefully getting ganged up on and stomped into the ground )

I'm also thinking some sort of bonus for playing by zellbrigen rules might be in order.

Edited by dyrewolfe, 20 May 2012 - 07:35 AM.

[Name54678]

It's my understanding (I'm a newby) that the clans have rules, regulations, social customs, etc. that Kerensky taught them to live and fight by. If a player chooses to play a clanner but then ignores those rules and customs, that player would be a pariah amongst his clan. The developers could code in some penalties such as doubling the price for repairs or new equipment for players who behave this way. There are most assuredly going to be players who jump into clan mechs at the first chance, blow away casual players like me and then brag about what a
bad*ss they are. If you want to be a clanner, the developers should hold you to clan standards.

[Ghogiel]

If anything it should be server rules. That way any one who is so butt hurt about getting shot in the back to play no holds barred can play their queensbury rules on their special server.

I don't get it anyway, it's not like any of legging, backing, heading, arming, glassing their whole planet is some exclusive special ability, If you put your back to me, I will make you pay for that mistake. If the game is balanced well none of those locations will need to be off limits.

In TT it's valid tactics, so all the uber neckbeardies are probably raring to take that purdy atlas from behind in a fast light mech.

As for clans v IS. Would something like 2 stars v 3 lances be an appropriate balancer? I think it would go a long way.

[Drakkhen Cross]

I agree with all the players saying: playing the Clans by humans - WONT work! As someone else already said... younger players will choose, cause better toys - easier kills. Honor system would be required, but how?! But i think, the main problem would be: reading all the forums shows me - about 60% of all players want to play the clans... the few IS players remainig would die as fast as you can say "hello"...
The only thing stopping the clans was: massively overwhelming amount of IS Mechs... and a relation of 40% IS and 60% Clans... you know what i mean?!
the IS would be down after - one month? And hardcore IS players like me would leave the game sooner or later cause IS Mechs have no chance aganist Clan Mechs... and always loosing is no fun at all...

[LackofCertainty]

Kay Wolf, on 20 May 2012 - 07:13 AM, said:

I disagree. There is a way to build physical-hits-over-time into the system, though even I have to admit it would likely be relatively difficult to do. Legging, heading, back-shooting, firing on shut-down/knocked-down 'Mechs, etc. If an individual fires on a location so many times within a certain time-limit, it's considered deliberate by the game, and some manner of penalty is marked.

1. As many have said Zelbrigan goes out the window once the enemy violates it.

2.Punishing a person for being accurate or doing their best to win in a FPS is asinine.

Quote

I'll explain the same thing to you that I explain to all of the MechWarrior's in Armageddon Unlimited who ask me about this: it began back in Mercs-2, not MechWarrior 3, and it's been a staple of the community ever since. With those games, it was super-simple for a twitch-gamer -that term started about MW3 time-frame- to take off an opponents leg, to shoot them in the head, the back, etc. It became dishonorable in the community, on the whole, and the only reason it didn't remain as such in the late Pirate's Moon to MechWarrior IV time-period was because so many whiney baby twitchers cried it down. Starting with the end of MW3 and the advent of Pirate's Moon, the lore of this game, as has been displayed on these very forums, became less and less important, and the only thing that became of importance was being able to bang the hell out of one-another using whatever means were necessary.

So what you're saying is that legging was overpowered in previous editions essentially. Okay. now let's go to the next point.

Quote

Recently, in the Twitter chat, it was expressed that PGI will not just keep it's head in the sand regarding dishonorable battlefield conduct, and have worked to make MWO a close amalgam to the BattleTech board game without sacrificing the fun. Kudos to them for keeping this in mind. However, I will keep the rules of DBC in-mind when this game goes live, and will believe it when I see it.

Why would you think that PGI "addressing the issue" would be to leave an unbalanced/overpowered tactic in the game, but assign penalties for using said tactic? That would be like if they put a golden gun into the game and anyone could use it, but it took 500$ from you everytime you killed someone with it. (In other words, completely silly)

If Legging is overpowered, then PGI will tweak armor/internals for legging until it becomes a viable option. I much prefer the idea that legging -intelligently- could become one of the myriad of options, rather than making it "Well... the mechs have legs but you can't shoot them or we'll give you a fine."

The methods used in previous mechwarrior games were to address the symptoms, not the problem.

Quote

EDIT: Oh, and if you're 'good' enough, read twitch enough, to deliberately shoot an opponents legs, head, back, etc., for an unfair win, then you're probably good enough to win without resorting to those sorts of cowardly tactics.

Possibly, but why would I risk additional damage to myself and my fellow mercs if I can drop an opponent that much quicker? In most games, people will use the best option available to them which results in the most damage to the enemy for the least cost to themselves.

Honestly, I thought maximizing damage and minimizing cost was one of the cores of the clan philosophy. If A clanner could take off a leg and then make his opponent surrender, he ends up with a win and relatively low damage to both his and his opponent's mech.

This sort of thought process just goes back to the previous problem of addressing a symptom instead of a problem. Balance is what we want, not a myriad of complicated systems to try and keep people from realizing that the core game balance is wonky.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 20 May 2012 - 08:14 AM.

[CloudCobra]

Even in the clans themselves there was no concensus as to how zellbrigen should be used will the "honorless" inner sphere. Once your oponents focus fire on you its open season anyway. Clan v Clan it is more strickly observed.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Tremor, on 20 May 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

I think it should also be mentioned that even honorable clanners ignore Zellbrigen when engaging dishonorable foes. (IE: pretty much all I.S. combatants)

Edit: and even if they DID choose to fight I.S. forces with honorable rules of combat, they are ignored the second opposing forces break the rules. Knowing I.S., this would pretty much be immediately anyway.

ah yes the catch-22 no clan player talks about. They all talk big about playing by 'clan' rules...but when one reads zellbriggen, then looks at the I.S. tactical doctrine; Zell basically states that it is not applicable to I.S. opponents. Even if zell was enforced on clans against the I.S. for this game, it wouldn't be effective: because when the chips are down, and a team is losing, that team no matter who it is will do anything they can to win. If this team is clan, then my base assumption is they would take the 'hit' (penalty to honor) if it meant they would get the win (vindicates losing the honor), so again, zell is useless.

Zell was a nice thing for the canon, and led to some neat foes for the I.S. to fight in the novels, but is almost unworkable in practice. It sounds nice now to say that one would like to play with 'one hand tied behind their back.' But if that leads to some serious consecutive losses in the actual game later...then that practice will be abandoned by all but the most hardcore clan players, and they are small in number.

[MATEO FALCONE]

Legging and chaining was a useful tool to make the whiners get mad and play poorly adding insult to injury. The honor system mentioned that was tried in mw4 was the whiners attempt at making rules against killing them too much. I myself love using those tactics and insighting hate and discontent. It brings out agressive game play in my enemies. LOL Can you here them whiners? All those incoming missile beep warnings? And whats that on the horizon? A vulture, with way to many missiles.

[TheVirus]

KingCobra, on 20 May 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

The Virus said=(The whole "honor" thing was tried in MW4. No legging, no chaining, 1 vs 1, no shooting down mechs, all that silliness. It failed miserably. ) The reason it failed is the young new players in MW4 were to immature to understand what the older players were trying to teach them from MW2 or MW3 leagues with RP and planetary.Most Young MW4 kids just wanted to point and shoot and never run out of bullets just like in the movies.Playing from a InnerSphere side and a clan side like i have for so long i can say both factions were very fun to play online what the innersphere lacked in firepower the players adapted by tactics to win battles and league titles.

Actually the players of MW4 wanted to play the game and have fun. Having to follow some silly code of ethics in a game like this is ridiculous. Also, the things you're not meant to do can interfere with gameplay in a negative way. For example the no shooting in the rear, what stops me backing up over a hill to scout a location? If the opposing team see's me they can't do a damn thing as my back is towards them. How stupid is that? I could stand there all day and not get shot. You people seriously think that's a good thing? Another one, no shooting shut down mechs. If I'm losing to somebody 1 vs 1 all I have to do is shut down mid battle and my opponent can't do a thing. What do you say to that? Just a few reasons why your rules won't work.

Maybe you guys should post a list of these rules you want in place so others can see what they're getting themselves into. I can guarantee if the devs somehow enforce silly rules like this you'll lose a hell of a lot of players, myself included.

Edited by TheVirus, 20 May 2012 - 08:14 AM.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

to copy+pasta sarna, and for reference


Rules
The proscriptions of zellbrigen consist of the following rules:
§ Each warrior will issue a challenge to a different enemy. If one side outnumbers the other, then the extra warriors on that side will stand aside until one of their comrades falls in battle. A warrior can challenge more than one unit at a time.
§ A warrior has right to refuse challenges from Inner Sphere units, especially if underhanded ploys are suspected.
§ A warrior has the right to refuse a challenge from an unit of differing weight class if other unengaged units are available.
§ No artillery or other Area-Effect Weapons shall be employed by either side.
§ Intentionally moving out of the line of sight of the opponent is prohibited.
§ Systems that requires multiple units to operate, likeC3 and tag, are forbidden.
§ Moving out of weapon range is prohibited.
§ Failure to fire a weapon when possible is prohibited.
A warrior is also expected to not retreat from inferior foes, or to engage his opponent in melee combat, though these are not part of the formal rules of zellbrigen. Also, though it plays a central role in Clans' combat challenges, the ritual of batchall remains a separate tradition.

explain to me how the bolded rules could ever be implemented, or better yet; how are these at all any fun to have to adhere to?
not only would most of these be boring for clan V clan, the bolded rules specifically allow a clan player to fight an I.S. player however they see fit, thus not zell.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Zellbrigen

the 'Interpretation' section is even more damning:

"How zellbrigen is interpreted depends not only on the individual, but their parent Clan as a whole. At one end of the spectrum, the rules are strictly followed, the only exception being when fighting bandits, pirates or the most hated of enemies. At the opposite end, zellbrigen is figuratively "thrown out the airlock" and used only against other Clan warriors, and even then only when there is an advantage over them. In between are varying levels of adherence; for example, zellbrigen is followed unless circumstances dictated otherwise, such as being outnumbered or thinking one could get away with breaking it"

if the system is free to interpret at will then what is the point?

also I love this point:
"and used only against other Clan warriors, and even then only when there is an advantage over them."

again, talking all high and mighty, but only use the honorable system when there's an advantage, eh?

Edited by Aaron DeChavilier, 20 May 2012 - 08:17 AM.

[Acid Lord]

MATEO FALCONE, on 20 May 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

Legging and chaining was a useful tool to make the whiners get mad and play poorly adding insult to injury. The honor system mentioned that was tried in mw4 was the whiners attempt at making rules against killing them too much. I myself love using those tactics and insighting hate and discontent. It brings out agressive game play in my enemies. LOL Can you here them whiners? All those incoming missile beep warnings? And whats that on the horizon? A vulture, with way to many missiles.

Do not forget hill jumping! Honestly, the people who whined in MW4 about heading and legging were people who did not assign armor to those regions. I especially loved the Mad Cat whiners and the Daishi whiners when I legged them on my Bushwacker.

Sorry guys I am not going to keep pointing my chassis up to hit you square in the chest where the majority of your armor is.
A lot of MW4 people were bad at adapting.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I have an idea: How about the Clans simply honor Zellbrigen?

Don't attack the Inner Sphere until you get attacked first; that's Zellbrigen.

[MATEO FALCONE]

One thing is for sure, and that is: You cant make everyone happy. Rules of warfare and codes of conduct are definately going to be passionately debated once the game is released. I think putting to many restrictions on a pilot will ultimately deminish the games' over all fun.

[Threat Doc]

This is the last post I'll respond to, here.

LackofCertainty, on 20 May 2012 - 07:48 AM, said:

2.Punishing a person for being accurate or doing their best to win in a FPS is asinine.

Of course it is, if you've only played the video games and care nothing for the lore of the universe. GO PLAY SOMETHING ELSE!

Quote

So what you're saying is that legging was overpowered in previous editions essentially. Okay. now let's go to the next point.

Why would you think that PGI "addressing the issue" would be to leave an unbalanced/overpowered tactic in the game, but assign penalties for using said tactic? That would be like if they put a golden gun into the game and anyone could use it, but it took 500$ from you everytime you killed someone with it. (In other words, completely silly)

I didn't say that. They said they are addressing those issues as well as they can, and they themselves have said honor systems like Zellbriggen would be looked at to see if some manner of limitation was viable.

Quote

...why would I risk additional damage to myself and my fellow mercs if I can drop an opponent that much quicker?

Honor.

The rest of your argument is inane garbage to me, and thus I take my leave of this post and this thread. Those of you who are incapable of understanding and practicing honor will, yes, have a more intelligent game, but you lack the better part of what raises men above animals; thus, you are such. Goodbye.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Kay Wolf, on 20 May 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

<of course he leaves, the opposition was making a valid point>

so the best way to get new blood into the game, to garner more profitability, is to be a pretentious d$%^#@...a sound strategy...

in video games, lore matters...to a point. This is not a book, this is not a movie, nor a comic, players must interact with the game in order for it to exist. If players don't interact, you don't have a game. Some of the best games ever sold, have no 'lore'. Whilst a game may have amazing lore, but if it plays like crap, no one is going to play it.

I'm all for incorporating as much lore into MWO as possible, but I do not want to sacrifice fun for some starchy text.

the lore of games should fit the gameplay, not the other way around...the other way around results in Space Marines (which are pretty much the clanners of 40k, and lol they don't have a rules of engagement system otherwise no one would really play them)

Edited by Aaron DeChavilier, 20 May 2012 - 10:16 AM.

[TheVirus]

Kay Wolf, on 20 May 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

This is the last post I'll respond to, here.
Of course it is, if you've only played the video games and care nothing for the lore of the universe. GO PLAY SOMETHING ELSE!

I didn't say that. They said they are addressing those issues as well as they can, and they themselves have said honor systems like Zellbriggen would be looked at to see if some manner of limitation was viable.

Honor.

The rest of your argument is inane garbage to me, and thus I take my leave of this post and this thread. Those of you who are incapable of understanding and practicing honor will, yes, have a more intelligent game, but you lack the better part of what raises men above animals; thus, you are such. Goodbye.

Somebody takes this stuff way too seriously.

[Adridos]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 20 May 2012 - 10:13 AM, said:

...but I do not want to sacrifice fun for some starchy text.

But we can't allow Clans to play the same as us. We'd get slaughtered without chance. OP faction means most people would switch and GG reputation.

Edited by Adridos, 20 May 2012 - 10:17 AM.

[Zylo]

Clans fight clans, IS fights IS.

That's the easiest way to balance things without trying to enforce honor, adjust team numbers or worry about all the players wanting the "I Win" button switching to clan. It wouldn't be the most "realistic" solution in terms of BT history but it would allow players to choose what they wanted without hurting overall game balance.

In the future allowing private matches could work for those who want to do clan vs IS fights without worrying about what damage might be done to the rest of the game.