AA "honour" type system for RO

[Quietus]

I think its only fair that people gripe about worthless snipers and squad leaders. I usually try to inquire in a polite manner whether the squad leader even knows he has smoke grenades or how to call artillery. Besides, I think giving advice to the squad leader on where to throw smoke is a good idea in general. At least I like usually like it when someone tells me that smoke is needed someplace more than where I'm currently throwing them. Some maps are nearly impossible to win without smoke and artillery (Basovka, for instance).

Which brings me to my last point. I think it might be nice to chat things like: "Man, how come a general ****s so bad?"

I constantly tell people who need a clue what would be good to do for our teams success like: "hey tanker we need you to put a bunch of HE rounds into those apartments or "everybody go in as one! *load up the halftrack* Or Sniper can you please kill the enemy sniper...please! But I generally only give orders when things are dire and don't feel the need to boss everyone around from the start (like some self proclaimed commanders do). The problem I have is with these guys who believe they are Pattons l33t offspring and think they know what everybody else should be doing and have no problems berating teamates who aren't following their often poor thought out orders. So I could type **** off idiot but I'd rather play the game and save the hassle.

 

[dogbadger]

Nah- not for me this honour, progress, recognition etc.
My take on this game is that regardless of side you become one of the millions thrown into a meat grinder - a bitter costly war and thats it. When I die I'm a re-inforcement statistic and carry on as another nameless soldier. You fight simply to win - that's what I like about RO.
Sure you get to know who the decent players are - and may team up or listen to them.
While the game has scoring I will try to score highly - but I wouldn't be bothered for the scores to be removed either - your side either wins or it doesn't. If the game was scorelees then maybe awards for top players per round in different catagories, but each new map and everyone's back on the same level again.

 

[Ullis]

There could be something to the idea, as in real life most soldiers knew one other in their units. For example, raw recruits probably listened to veterans from the French campaign at the start of Barbarossa and looked to them for inspiration and how to stay alive. They knew who they were. Later on, new and old units on both sides were a mixture of reinforcements and veterans.

We don't have the advantage of knowing our team mates, how well they shoot and whether we can count on them to know something. Long tails of clan tags and what-not are a tell, but they are only an indication that there could be something to the individual. After 10 minutes of any map score usually gives good players away, of course.

 

[[DA]DIZ]

Don't play like a noob, and no one will call you one.....

What i'm trying to say is that when a "lower" level enters a server you can be sure some "higher" levels will call him "Noob" even before he fired one shot.

Dude you never played MMORPG's ??? I'm sure this happens on every rank or level based multiplayer...

 

[MILK]

Common people if you know your good then your good. Statistics are just a useless distraction.

you are very wrong - if you have good statistics than it does GOOD ... it makes people play more... you only need to prevent "point whoring" and all is good.

 

[Solo4114]

Which is basically impossible. Throw in the stats, and you'll have people who will do nothing but pump their stats for their own benefit. One of the major pros of RO is that it DOESN'T have stats, and thus people tend to work more as a team.

If someone could figure out a stats system that couldn't be abused and that wouldn't get people so absorbed in their stats that they forget the rest of their team, hey, I'd be all for it. I just don't think that's possible.

As far as an "honor" system which shows how long a person's been playing:

How long your ass is in the chair is NOT an indication of your skill at the game. For that matter, your score at the end of the round is not an indication of your skill at the game. Often it coincides with skilled players, but it is not in and of itself an indication of skill.

Show me someone who's been playing for 50 hours and I'll show you someone who's been playing for 50 hours -- and that's it. That's all you can tell from his time in game. You can have played for 20,000 hours and still be a worthless player, just like you can have been playing for 15 hours and be a fantastic player.

It's all about how you work as part of the team, not how leet your kills are, not how long you've been playing, not how many points you've got. I'd rather be on a team with a bunch of guys who average 30 points a game but consistently win maps than a bunch of guys who average 60 points a game and consistently LOSE maps because all they're doing is playing for their own score instead of trying to win the round.