-
03-30-2006, 01:07 PM #1
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Oklahoma City, OK
- Age
- 32
- Posts
- 998
Ranking Feasibility Topic
Here are my thoughts...
After class selection, assuming you didn't pick the commander or tank commander class, you are presented with a popup showing you which ranks are available.
Based on server population there can only be so many Pvt, Cpl, and Sgts.
One issue I see with this is all players picking Pvt because they don't want to lead, in which case the Commander would have to ask someone to step up and take a lead position. I DON'T want to default those that load last to leading positions.
Slot availability:
Pvt = Players - (Commander + Tank Commander role totals)
Cpl = # Pvt / 4
Sgt = (# Pvt + Tank Commander role) / 7
Lt = 1 (obviously)
Let's say the server is full, 16 players per side. It would allow the following...
Non-Tank Map:
1 Lt
2 Sgt
3 Cpl
15 Pvt (9 Pvts realized)
But, if there were only 10 players per side...
Non-Tank Map:
1 Lt
1 Cpl
2 Sgt
9 Pvt (5 Pvts realized)
Just a thought. The other way, based on class is a fine way to do it. My only thought was that I like to lead but hate playing anything but SMG, Bolt-, or Auto-Rifle.
---
A key could be bound to the new pop-up to allow you to switch roles as needed. Switching classes after first joining does not change your role (unless you change to or from one of the assigned role classes).It is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9/NIV
-
03-30-2006, 01:16 PM #2
Re: Ranking Feasibility Topic
I dont understand what you mean, i'm good with either idea. But if you were using the class system, you would be using the SMG to lead a squad. We could change it up to allow a bolt action to be used by a SGT, but what do you mean?
Originally Posted by Tzefanya
-Kaine
-
03-30-2006, 01:26 PM #3
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Oklahoma City, OK
- Age
- 32
- Posts
- 998
Re: Ranking Feasibility Topic
Well, basically, if we allow multiple classes to be different roles, we have to develop a front-end. And if we develop a front-end, I'd like to do it my way.
The other way was explicit declarations. All bolt- are privates, all anti-tank are corporal, etc... See Strag's post to understand what I'm talking about.
Strag's way is super easy, all I have to do is check their class and then prepend a tag to their name without any interaction. Your way, and my way, both require a GUI front-end.It is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9/NIV
-
03-30-2006, 01:33 PM #4
Re: Ranking Feasibility Topic
Well, i think we are both dead set on the kind of thing we would like to see... We both have our reasons, and they both have pros and cons.
Perhaps we could a poll on the topic? Outline the three options in the post, and see which has the most support?
Though i'm not sure what you mean by Strag's way, which post?
-
03-30-2006, 01:33 PM #5
Re: Ranking Feasibility Topic
I wanted to propose something involving Wulfyn's rank system that would be fairly simple to implement and that would be in the spirit of the game. It seems like Kaine is thinking along very similar lines. If we, as a community, decided to give it a try, it wouldn't take too much time or effort to implement. Then, if it turned out to be a bust, we (especially Tze
Originally Posted by Tzefanya
) wouldn't have lost much in the attempt. However, if it was successful, then we could expand/improve it, as necessary.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)



Reply With Quote

Bookmarks