Outfit Structure, Perks and Mechanics

Grognard · 2012-03-03, 05:25 PM

I dont want to hijack another mans post, so I am starting this one since none of the searches looked like they contained what I was looking for...

I am curious about what kind of depth there will be in the mechanics of the outfit systems... I never ran an outfit in PS1, and back when I did there was no in-game structure for it (Netmech, Jade Falcons, Olaf Pryde).

1. I understand that there is a rank naming feature, because I have seem some crazy schemes for ranks in some outfits... I assume they will be editable with whatever structure an outfit requires, yes? Also I think there should be a small field where the description of the rank as it pertains to the outfit as a whole could be written in order to make it clear what you do, "responsibilities" if you will...

2. Permissions... There will be an invite/kick system, of course, and are these seperate permissions in PS1? Personally, I would prefer for these to be set on different permissions. I would also like to see "promote", and "demote" put on different permissions, too.

3. Also, I am curious if there is anything like an associative flag, that would indicate a members affiliation with say armor, or infantry, or whatever an outfit uses for structure. Perhaps color coding affiliations. One such affiliation could even be disciplinary, as a visual tool only the outfit leader could see as a cue that someone could be a potential problem child. Etc. etc.

4. I think it would be a nice feature, doubtful as it is... that there is a box that can be pulled up, much like a talent tree box, but with many editable fields that can be dragged into a table (of organization). This would show, as a visual aid, looking like a geneology tree, the structure of the outfit, complete with pulldown menus that allow you to pick a member for that slot. This way, an outfit leader can make an editable organizational chart that shows who does what in the outfit. For instance, setting up a battalion visually...

HQ
CO / XO / Top Sgt
Alpha Company
CO / XO
1st Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
2nd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
3rd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
Bravo Company
CO / XO
1st Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
2nd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
3rd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
Charlie Company
CO / XO
1st Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
2nd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)
3rd Platoon
1st Sqd (members) / 2nd Sqd (members) / 3rd Sqd (members)

4 continued... Newly added, and unassigned members would go into a pool that would be easily recognizable, for assignment to a department or element, whatever...

5. Also, members should be allowed to have a very short field where they could put a small blurb about whatever. So if they want to put a mini-resume, or just a "gunna be gone for a week - dont delete me..." in there, it would show up on a mouse-over.

I am sure that I have missed a lot of good features, so what else would people like to see, from an administrator, or member point of view?

Xaine · 2012-03-03, 05:31 PM

While i really like this idea and i think that it would work for a more 'serious' outfit, i think that on the whole this is a little too structured.

Most outfits i've seen have more of a pick-up-and-go attitude about them.

However, everything you've suggested here is really good and something i'd love to see and be a part of.

DayOne · 2012-03-03, 05:33 PM

I think having a system where the player can save different cosmetic armour customisations would be good. This would make room for a feature where you allow the outfit to change your characters look to fit with the outfit.

This would be another few permission sets that allow designing of the armour look and assigning it to different people or groups (the whole outfit or a specific company/platoon/squad/person).

Zhane · 2012-03-03, 05:35 PM

I'm sincerely hoping to find an outfit that has some serious structure, as well as a chain of command. I am a PS1 vet, but I didn't play for years, and I want the confidence of someone who knows their stuff telling me what to do in the field.

I'll even say sir over comms, if you really want me to.

Grognard · 2012-03-03, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Xaine

While i really like this idea and i think that it would work for a more 'serious' outfit, i think that on the whole this is a little too structured.

Most outfits i've seen have more of a pick-up-and-go attitude about them.

However, everything you've suggested here is really good and something i'd love to see and be a part of.

You know, you are right. So, make it a one-time pay feature. I would pay to be serious, seems worth it.

"Outfit Depth Pack"... I would buy it, if its reasonably priced.

DayOne · 2012-03-03, 05:39 PM

The important thing here is that the command structure be totally free form. Let the players decide how many structured companies or platoons if any.

They should be aloud to set a strict chain of command or have a couple of leaders and everyone else zerg plus everything in between.

That's what makes a good clan/guild/outfit system in a game. (IMO)

Grognard · 2012-03-03, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by DayOne

This would be another few permission sets that allow designing of the armour look and assigning it to different people or groups (the whole outfit or a specific company/platoon/squad/person).

There are a lot of good ideas out there, and they could really make a lot of money off of stuff like this, cause the "hard-core" folks will back up their outfit needs with a credit card... I would.

There is definately a reason, stated or unstated, for each of those "ideas" I have listed. For instance seperate permissions for promote, demote... I dont want all the honchos promoting friends, or demoting in a rage...

Last thing I need is a Captain gone rogue... pissing 20 people off cause he hates his Fn lasher after a patch...

DayOne · 2012-03-03, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by Grognard

Last thing I need is a Captain gone rogue... pissing 20 people off cause he hates his Fn lasher after a patch...

Agreed. All permissions, related or not, should be separate.

Invite/kick may seem equal in rights but they really, really aren't

Talek Krell · 2012-03-03, 05:50 PM

Selling organizational features in the cash shop could be clever. They'd be a revenue stream then, so developing a rich array of tools would be easier to justify.

Graywolves · 2012-03-03, 05:56 PM

It would be neat if an OL could select the template to use for his outfit's structure. If he wants one big chain of command or if he wants it to have branches with seperate leadership structure.

Grognard · 2012-03-03, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by DayOne

Agreed. All permissions, related or not, should be separate.

Invite/kick may seem equal in rights but they really, really aren't

Agreed again. I might have a Staff Sergeant(s) in seperate departments who serves as a "recruiter" for that dept. This is a one way road... he recruits... he does not kick his dept. head for a coup de grace...

WaryWizard · 2012-03-03, 06:03 PM

Making it where you(outfit leader) would need to buy outfit tools for organization and structure could be useful. The laid back outfits won't have to bother with complicated mechanics, and the more serious/strict outfits can be as organized as the want.

Grognard · 2012-03-03, 07:30 PM

Well, I managed to come up with one idea of my own from the point of view of an administrator. It is a color tool, that is modified by the outfit leader, or an officer with permission, that the member can see anytime they look at their name. The colors indicate a warning that they are in danger of ejection from the outfit. No one sees this color but the player and any officer that has permission to apply the warning. "Praise in public, punish in private"...

For instance:
Normal - green, cooldown - permanent.

1st warning - yellow, cooldown - 1 week.

2nd warning - orange, cooldown - 1 week.

3rd warning - red, cooldown - 1 month.

It can be known that any infraction, whilst in a red state, means ejection. All of these can be edited for any level of hardass-ness a particular outfit wants... immediate red-state, longer cooldowns, anything you want. This would provide continuity to a player that they need to settle down, or go. After a cooldown expires, your state would drop down to next lower, so its progressive / regressive.

This good because there are a lot of clowns that have no control, and its better than arguing with every single jerk that cant cooperate.

Conversely... its not all bad

There could be the exact same thing used for an approval system. Nice colors this time, still with cooldowns... to show approval for doing something badass, or selfless, or whatever. The twist on this is that the whole outfit sees the good colors... Keeping the cooldowns is necessary in order to encourage continued effort / competition, so that one doesnt just get the bitchen purple color, and fuk off after that, cause hes a hero now... Good and bad, both, will fade to normal with time.

This is good so that player will know that they make a difference, and that they are appreciated.

I wrote a lot of words, but in reality this is super-easy to code...

DayOne · 2012-03-03, 07:38 PM

I like the cool down system

Another idea for this is being able to invite/kick anyone in your 'section' of the outfit and that's a lower rank than you? To manage any really big structured outfits that might pop up!

StumpyTheOzzie · 2012-03-03, 07:59 PM

Locking you into a strict organizational structure is a bad thing. Being limited to 1 "general" and 5 "commanders" is a bad thing. I think it should be very very messy with customization up to the founding General. If the founder wants to promote 100 people to general status, he should be allowed to... consequences be damned.

I wonder how hard it would be to have an in-game excel spreadsheet type thing? That way you can be as complicated or as simple as you like?