Will heroes be their own class or be any class?

[Amerikaner]

Yes I agree with this, I think your score on the leaderboard should coordinate with your rank....

Players in the 25% lowest section should be recruits.

Players in the 50% middle section should be "regular" soldiers, not fresh but not real grizzled either.

Players in the 20% higher section should be veterans, more grizzled.

Players in the top 5% should be hero's, really grizzled.

On top of that I think that....

Hero's should get first pick of all classes.

Veterans should get second pick of classes including tanks, marksmen, and elite classes, but only command classes that are left over from the hero's.

Regulars should get third pick of classes including support classes (MG, AT, engineer) but only higher classes that are left over from veterans.

Recruits should get fourth pick of classes limited to riflemen and assault and only get whatever specialty classes are left over.

This is not what I meant. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

I was thinking everyone has the standard rank up that is based on pure progression, which, like other fps leveling systems is easier to rank based on how good you are. Since it takes a certain amount of time, higher ranks will mean a player has more experience, thus they are considered a "veteran" (currently called "elite" I believe).

Still, this is not a good show of how skilled a person is after the game's been out awhile because mediocre players can simply "put in their time" and will eventually rank. The truly skilled players would be set apart with "hero" status by being in the top percentage of all RO players based on a score which is comprised of teamwork and k/d points. This would make them more rare thus more desired and more exciting to see in a server. To avoid having one hero on a server with a special weapon it could just be that the special weapons are unlocked only when two heros, one per team are present. I don't know all the facts yet of course I just am not sold on the idea of seeing heroes all the time during 64 player battles. Even just 2 heroes (1 for each team) for every 64 men seems like they'd be too prevalent.

 

[hockeywarrior]

This is not what I meant. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

I was thinking everyone has the standard rank up that is based on pure progression, which, like other fps leveling systems is easier to rank based on how good you are. Since it takes a certain amount of time, higher ranks will mean a player has more experience, thus they are considered a "veteran" (currently called "elite" I believe).

Still, this is not a good show of how skilled a person is after the game's been out awhile because mediocre players can simply "put in their time" and will eventually rank. The truly skilled players would be set apart with "hero" status by being in the top percentage of all RO players based on a score which is comprised of teamwork and k/d points. This would make them more rare thus more desired and more exciting to see in a server. To avoid having one hero on a server with a special weapon it could just be that the special weapons are unlocked only when two heros, one per team are present. I don't know all the facts yet of course I just am not sold on the idea of seeing heroes all the time during 64 player battles. Even just 2 heroes (1 for each team) for every 64 men seems like they'd be too prevalent.

YES! Finally a person who sees the same way I do. This is exactly how I think the system should be implemented.

Any moron can grind his way up the rank ladder. But a Hero's (of the Soviet Union? ) status should truly reflect his skill in battle, not just an arbitrary ranking that everyone eventually reaches.

That way, when a Hero joins a server, it really is like "Oh s hit guys, we've got ____ on our team." Not: "Well, it appears that 2/3 of our team are Heroes. Awesome."

 

[Nicholas]

This is not what I meant. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

I was thinking everyone has the standard rank up that is based on pure progression, which, like other fps leveling systems is easier to rank based on how good you are. Since it takes a certain amount of time, higher ranks will mean a player has more experience, thus they are considered a "veteran" (currently called "elite" I believe).

Still, this is not a good show of how skilled a person is after the game's been out awhile because mediocre players can simply "put in their time" and will eventually rank. The truly skilled players would be set apart with "hero" status by being in the top percentage of all RO players based on a score which is comprised of teamwork and k/d points. This would make them more rare thus more desired and more exciting to see in a server. To avoid having one hero on a server with a special weapon it could just be that the special weapons are unlocked only when two heros, one per team are present. I don't know all the facts yet of course I just am not sold on the idea of seeing heroes all the time during 64 player battles. Even just 2 heroes (1 for each team) for every 64 men seems like they'd be too prevalent.

This, I still think higher ranks should get first pick of classes though,

 

[Nimsky]

This is not what I meant. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

I was thinking everyone has the standard rank up that is based on pure progression, which, like other fps leveling systems is easier to rank based on how good you are. Since it takes a certain amount of time, higher ranks will mean a player has more experience, thus they are considered a "veteran" (currently called "elite" I believe).

Still, this is not a good show of how skilled a person is after the game's been out awhile because mediocre players can simply "put in their time" and will eventually rank. The truly skilled players would be set apart with "hero" status by being in the top percentage of all RO players based on a score which is comprised of teamwork and k/d points. This would make them more rare thus more desired and more exciting to see in a server. To avoid having one hero on a server with a special weapon it could just be that the special weapons are unlocked only when two heros, one per team are present. I don't know all the facts yet of course I just am not sold on the idea of seeing heroes all the time during 64 player battles. Even just 2 heroes (1 for each team) for every 64 men seems like they'd be too prevalent.

I like.

 

[Ender]

Well I like Kaners idea for making heroes rare and even locking the rare weapons to them but that would mean it only address the grinders part of the time. Picking a class based on rank is ok most of the time but like he said eventual some people are going to have a higher rank just for the fact that they played not that they are any good at it. I was hoping that your current skill level would be more of a factor in picking a class then rank. Maybe current skill could still be a factor when picking a class. Just that heroes would be the best of the best.

 

[gyps]

The problem with the most skilled getting any kind of extra ability is they are the one's that need it least. If your good, your good and giving you something that makes you even quicker at killing is only going to make you better. If you make the difference between those at the top and those at the bottom to hard, people will give up and i know the arguement over reality vers balance, but in the end this is a game and games are supposed to be fun.

This would be better if you aqquired this status for online time, so in fact the real veterains with the most online time get it, not just the quickest or best. Dev's more info on how exactly this work and what it entails would be handy ?

 

[Nicholas]

The problem with the most skilled getting any kind of extra ability is they are the one's that need it least. If your good, your good and giving you something that makes you even quicker at killing is only going to make you better. If you make the difference between those at the top and those at the bottom to hard, people will give up and i know the arguement over reality vers balance, but in the end this is a game and games are supposed to be fun.

This would be better if you aqquired this status for online time, so in fact the real veterains with the most online time get it, not just the quickest or best. Dev's more info on how exactly this work and what it entails would be handy ?

Rare weapons aren't necessarily better.

 

[melipone]

This is not what I meant. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough.

I was thinking everyone has the standard rank up that is based on pure progression, which, like other fps leveling systems is easier to rank based on how good you are. Since it takes a certain amount of time, higher ranks will mean a player has more experience, thus they are considered a "veteran" (currently called "elite" I believe).

Still, this is not a good show of how skilled a person is after the game's been out awhile because mediocre players can simply "put in their time" and will eventually rank. The truly skilled players would be set apart with "hero" status by being in the top percentage of all RO players based on a score which is comprised of teamwork and k/d points. This would make them more rare thus more desired and more exciting to see in a server. To avoid having one hero on a server with a special weapon it could just be that the special weapons are unlocked only when two heros, one per team are present. I don't know all the facts yet of course I just am not sold on the idea of seeing heroes all the time during 64 player battles. Even just 2 heroes (1 for each team) for every 64 men seems like they'd be too prevalent.

The problem as I see it tho is theres little besides K/D ratio and overall scoreboard points that TWI can use to assess a persons gaming ability.

You can't measure someone's gamesense or teamwork with a rank system. No matter how detailed it is it just won't cover all the bases. K/D ratio isn't even enough to show how good someone is at killing, it might only show how good you are at surviving in some cases. Some kills are more valuable than others too and its not just a case of where abouts the kill is. Sometimes sacrificing yourself and getting no kills can be more valuable than someone sitting in a cap zone if theres already plenty in the area to cap for eg, and running at the enemy wave after wave might ruin your K/D ratio but eventually you wear the enemy down so your team mates can cap etc

People will find loopholes or ways to "play the system" in order to get higher rank too, and I just feel its not worth it. Unfortunately the alternatives aren't that appealing to me either, but its better than the game artificially shaping the way people play.

Without a decent alternative I would prefer a normal progression system based on time played, but I would also consider a small additional variable like "game wins". But again then you might find people modifying the way they play and quit the game rather than lose, or stack onto a team they think will win.

Another way to do it would be for people to be promoted to hero status only based on actions in the current game. But again I don't want to see people "point farming" to spawn as the Hero rather than doing what they think will help their team win

Hopefully tho this whole "hero" thing will be very minor once the game releases, and people really won't care too much about it. I don't want stuff like that on my mind while i'm playing anyway

 

[melipone]

Also, whatever system they use they can still limit how many heroes there are presumably, similar to normal class limits. So I don't see the number of them being an issue. I don't want to see loads of "heroes" running around spoiling the feel of the game, but I don't want them chosen for the wrong reasons or people playing selfishly to rank up.

 

[Amerikaner]

This would be better if you aqquired this status for online time, so in fact the real veterains with the most online time get it, not just the quickest or best.

So someone who has no job, lives in their mom's basement, and plays RO all day gets preference?

The problem as I see it tho is theres little besides K/D ratio and overall scoreboard points that TWI can use to assess a persons gaming ability.

You can't measure someone's gamesense or teamwork with a rank system. No matter how detailed it is it just won't cover all the bases. K/D ratio isn't even enough to show how good someone is at killing, it might only show how good you are at surviving in some cases. Some kills are more valuable than others too and its not just a case of where abouts the kill is. Sometimes sacrificing yourself and getting no kills can be more valuable than someone sitting in a cap zone if theres already plenty in the area to cap for eg, and running at the enemy wave after wave might ruin your K/D ratio but eventually you wear the enemy down so your team mates can cap etc

People will find loopholes or ways to "play the system" in order to get higher rank too, and I just feel its not worth it. Unfortunately the alternatives aren't that appealing to me either, but its better than the game artificially shaping the way people play.

Without a decent alternative I would prefer a normal progression system based on time played, but I would also consider a small additional variable like "game wins". But again then you might find people modifying the way they play and quit the game rather than lose, or stack onto a team they think will win.

Another way to do it would be for people to be promoted to hero status only based on actions in the current game. But again I don't want to see people "point farming" to spawn as the Hero rather than doing what they think will help their team win

Hopefully tho this whole "hero" thing will be very minor once the game releases, and people really won't care too much about it. I don't want stuff like that on my mind while i'm playing anyway

I agree measuring combat worth isn't black and white. Yet at the same time you don't see members of the top clans on the bottoms of the scoreboards. Sure a guy who led a diversion and got blown up could have made a game changing move but if your putting together a star team you don't have a guy whose only job it is is to die. The best players would know when to sacrifice, when to stay back and camp, when to push forward against bad odds, etc. But they are also the ones that are more often than not in the upper levels of the scoreboard.

 

[Floyd]

The problem as I see it tho is theres little besides K/D ratio and overall scoreboard points that TWI can use to assess a persons gaming ability.

You can't measure someone's gamesense or teamwork with a rank system. No matter how detailed it is it just won't cover all the bases. K/D ratio isn't even enough to show how good someone is at killing, it might only show how good you are at surviving in some cases. Some kills are more valuable than others too and its not just a case of where abouts the kill is. Sometimes sacrificing yourself and getting no kills can be more valuable than someone sitting in a cap zone if theres already plenty in the area to cap for eg, and running at the enemy wave after wave might ruin your K/D ratio but eventually you wear the enemy down so your team mates can cap etc

People will find loopholes or ways to "play the system" in order to get higher rank too, and I just feel its not worth it. Unfortunately the alternatives aren't that appealing to me either, but its better than the game artificially shaping the way people play.

Without a decent alternative I would prefer a normal progression system based on time played, but I would also consider a small additional variable like "game wins". But again then you might find people modifying the way they play and quit the game rather than lose, or stack onto a team they think will win.

Another way to do it would be for people to be promoted to hero status only based on actions in the current game. But again I don't want to see people "point farming" to spawn as the Hero rather than doing what they think will help their team win

Hopefully tho this whole "hero" thing will be very minor once the game releases, and people really won't care too much about it. I don't want stuff like that on my mind while i'm playing anyway

Well said.

 

[Mormegil]

Don't forget Ramm mentioned you can score points by simply following your orders. That's something in addition to k/d ratios that can decide who is a hero.

 

[Amerikaner]

Don't forget Ramm mentioned you can score points by simply following your orders. That's something in addition to k/d ratios that can decide who is a hero.

Plus there will still be giving ammo and capping objectives points right?

 

[Merin Redplate]

Plus there will still be giving ammo and capping objectives points right?

It would make sense, yeah.