Re: Making Wulfyn's Ranks Permanent

**Kaine904** · 03-30-2006, 01:54 PM

I guess, i'm at a loos as to which method is the simple one

-Kaine

btw, anything is better than nothing!

**Exploding_Silver** · 03-30-2006, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Strag

....The simpler method could be used as "Phase 1." Since it's simple to implement, it could be put into place and tested for a week or so on our server. Then, as we got feedback about how well it did/didn't work, we could either completely scrap the idea or move on to "Phase 2," ....Thoughts?

Several phases, with each one play tested for a week or two, is a great idea. We can tweak and refine between phases. So what about phase 1 admins...when are the SOPs coming out?

**fldash** · 03-30-2006, 02:10 PM

SOPs are coming. I've been extremely busy coding the mutators we have available. I'm going to work on the ServerAds next that will display the SOPS on the screen when you are dead or waiting to join.

**Strag** · 03-30-2006, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Exploding_Silver

So what about phase 1 admins...when are the SOPs coming out?

Soon. We're working on SOPs. There have been a few things that have held us up with these:

- In the past two weeks, it has been hard to judge what SOPs are needed because we've been playing the role of game developer more than that of actual game admin. Much of the feedback we've received from players so far has been along the lines of "I don't like the game because of x." We know there are issues with the game itself that need to be fixed/tweaked, and Tze has been doing an excellent job of addressing those issues.

What we'd really like is more feedback from our players regarding true gameplay issues. Again, these are not things like "I can't figure out which objectives to capture," or "I can't figure out what the various classes are." Instead, we need to hear about more things like the VOIP channel issue that was brought up yesterday -- this is something for which we can create and enforce an SOP.

- We haven't yet had a means to display SOPs to players in-game, but Tze is working on that now in the form of automated server messages. This will make a huge difference in how we're able to deliver information (SOPs) to RO players on our server.

Thanks!

**TychoCelchuuu** · 03-30-2006, 02:40 PM

Not to seem like a meanie or anything, but I don't like this rank stuff at all. The idea that leadership ought to be tied to a weapon does not sit right with me. The person in charge should get to use whatever gun he wants, and those under his command ought to be able to use the guns that best fit their playstyle and the tactical situation at hand, not whichever gun will give them the correct rank. Saying all riflemen are privates doesn't make teamplay easier or something. If you want to direct all the riflemen, just say "all the riflemen go left" or something. A pre-imposed command structure would only work if it does not discriminate based on what gun you're carrying, like Battlefield 2, where the squad leader and his squad members can use whatever gun makes sense.

**fldash** · 03-30-2006, 02:46 PM

Tycho: that's exactly what kind of structure I'd like to impose, one that doesn't discriminate on weapons. However it requires significantly more coding than simply basing it off what class you pick. We are just in the planning/brain storming phase at this point anyway.

**Bubba** · 03-30-2006, 02:54 PM

I myself like a rank structure but not one that imposed. I use different weapons almost each time I play. To have to pick a certain weapon to be a certain rank kind of does not make sense. What if in the middle of the map a person wants to change weapons or picks up a different one on the battlefield? IMO I think we should have volunteers at the beginnig on who is going to command and such and get into the fight.

**Llyranor** · 03-30-2006, 03:39 PM

I agree that this is a good starting point.

More food for thought: instead of having auto-name changes and all the like, would it be possible to have a mutator or something that would incorporate ranks? Instead of Pvt.Llyranor, it would add an additional column in the scoreboard and display the Pvt. status there. So, when you join the guy, the various ranks available pop up, of which you have to choose one. Afterwards, the available classes will pop up (with associated restrictions, perhaps). Hmm?

**Strag** · 03-30-2006, 03:59 PM

All good points. Here are my thoughts on a few:

- Honestly, I would rather not have an imposed rank system, either. However, people have been citing the lack of a rank system as one of the game's biggest problems with respect to teamwork. As the game works right now, people COULD easily choose their own rank based on the rank system Wulfyn proposed, but rarely does this happen. Imposing a rank system would ensure that one exists, and it would also give us something to enforce as part of an SOP that said, "Follow the orders of your superiors." Right now, we have no real way of doing that.

EDIT: Let me add an example related to Battlefield 2, since our BF2 servers have a great feature that few other BF2 servers have. Think of imposed ranks in RO as the same thing as imposed squads in BF2. On our BF2 servers, if someone doesn't join a squad within 60 seconds, they get kicked. This is something that's imposed on players to help ensure teamwork on our BF2 servers, and it works extremely well. An imposed rank system for RO is no different, in my opinion -- it's something that could help ensure teamwork on our RO servers. The two games are obviously not the same, but the concept of imposing some structure to promote teamplay transcends either game.

- As Tze and I have both mentioned, the reason we might tie ranks to player classes intially is because it's the easiest thing to try first. Tycho, if you (or anyone else) would like to help code a more intricate rank system, we would gladly welcome your efforts. We really could use more help with development. Tze is the only one working on these enhancements right now, and he already has more than a full plate. If we started out with this simple rank system first, it wouldn't take a lot of time or effort on Tze's part, and it would give us an idea of how well ranks would work in this game. So, we might try this first just to test things out.

**Bubba** · 03-30-2006, 05:10 PM

I agree that if you do not join either side in a certain amount you will be kicked. As it stands now you can have only X number of spectators. As long as this number does not change we will not have the problem of people just hanging around. What we need to do is find out if a spot is being taken from the time they select thier kit to the time they hit continue to get into the game. If a spot is being taken up during that time then we need to figure out how to drop them if they do not get into the game. Example, if I want to go AFK all I do is hit esc and do what I want with out losing my spot. That make sense?

Again, if we do a rank system let's not impose it upon our players. Let's be able to change kits if condition warrent.

**Kaine904** · 03-30-2006, 05:26 PM

Pvt.
Private (PVT) - if you have no desire to lead in any fashion this is the rank for you. You play tactically by undertaking the orders that are given to you. If you have no assigned rank, or are not a member of the Tactical Gamer Community, this is your assumed rank. If you are using equipment not suited for your rank, either upgrade your rank or choose a different weapon.
Allowed Class:
Rifleman

Private First Class (PFC) - if you have no desire to lead in any fashion this is the rank for you. You use specialized weapons to undertake orders given to you. Sergeants will use this class for specialized tactics, Anti-Tank Infantrerist for example to take out tanks. These weapons require a level of proficiency not usually found in the standard private. Be sure to be able and willing to use your weapon to help the team. If you find yourself unable to use your weapon effectively, please move your rank appropriately.
Allowed Class:
Anti-Tank Infanterist
Sapper/Engineer
MG-Gunner

Cpl.
Corporal (CPL) - you have little interest in leading, but if you are in a group of privates then you would step up to the job. Equipment available to you is higher grade than the standard private. These weapons require a level of proficiency that is not usually found in the lower ranks. If you plan on using the sniper rifle, please include the designation (SNPR), and be sure to use your rifle at the command of the leadership. If you are going to be a tank crew member, please designate yourself as such with a (TC) rank.
Allowed Class:
Rifleman
Semi-Auto Rifleman
Sniper
Tank Crew

If we were going to incorperate the Ranking system i mentioned, i dont think the weapons would be imposed at all. You have three classes which provide access to different weapons, but all have a similar job. These would be the classes most commonly seen. The only limited class is dedicated sub machine gunner, of which there are only three or four on a given map. This limit corsponds to about how many Sgts there will be on the map (squad leaders) and the weapon is both a sign of rank and a usefull way to automatically limit the class (no battlefield of generals)
The bottom three classes all have "little interest in leading," but with a selection of one of the three, you have access to:
Rifleman
Semi-Auto Rifleman
Sniper
Tank Crew
Sapper
MG-Gunner
Anti-Tank
Thats almost all of the available classes, all the rank would do is designate which class of weapon you could have. Even in these classes, the SMG is available to you in the Sapper, and sometimes the Anti-Tank class.

It just seems that everyone thinks that with classes you will be forced into a certain weapon that you dont like. Not the case, you have options aplenty, and these are the classes that the majority will pick.

**Bubba** · 03-30-2006, 05:34 PM

How about after you pick a side or were auto assigned, you pick your rank then chose your weapon.

**Kaine904** · 03-30-2006, 05:37 PM

I think that would be the most workable way to do it.

Side -> Rank Choice (available weapons) -> weapon kit choice

**Strag** · 03-30-2006, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by TG_Bubba

How about after you pick a side or were auto assigned, you pick your rank then chose your weapon.

Here, let me put it another way. If we use the rank system based on kits, it would be for the short term only. We would use it as a simple way to test and see if ranks work effectively in RO. If we see from this test that ranks do work in RO, then we'll make a more advanced rank system that doesn't rely on kits.

What you're suggesting here is great, but it will take a lot of work. We would first like to test the concept of ranks in RO with a simpler rank system that relies on kits. This will be very easy to do and will give us an idea of whether it's even worth it to develop the more advanced rank system you're talking about.

**fldash** · 03-30-2006, 05:43 PM

Ok, I've talked things thru with myself and did some research on feasibility. Here's what we can do.

a) We can call a GUI screen after a player selects their class asking them to pick their rank. This screen can be modified based on what class they picked. When I first code it, I'll probably use my ideas posted in the other thread.

b) We can intercept or add a keybind to open up this new menu.

c) After picking their class we can modify their name.

Notes: We are getting dangerously close to needing to start a full-fledged 'mod' for Red Orchestra. I don't mind going this route but this would mean a client download before the ability to connect to our server.

Thread Tools

Display