PR "Resumes"

[TF6049]

To help squad leaders, people should have a rank displayed in-game. This tells the SL/CO...

-What they are best at
-How good they are with it

Also, if multiple people want an asset and a high-ranker with it is part of them, they get it first (e.x. newbs must wait a minute after round starts to get kits, while the ranked members get "rights" or "dibs" on the kit/vehicle).

How to get them
-You can go on a series of maps with an R-DEV or some other reliable person (E.X. a sniping range)

EX for a sniper
-You have a set amount of targets, and a set amount of shots (EX 30 shots, 30 targets, they all must be headshots to kill)

There are 4 ranks
-None (not been tested in anything)
-Bronze: complete 25% of the test successfully
-Silver: completed 50% of the test successfully
-Platinum: completed 75% of the test successfully
-Gold: completed 90% of the test successfully

Note that you can retest for different/the same skill(s), but you may only have ONE at a time (the idea being not to hog ALL the kits). Also, please add in crewman kits to the system

NEW KIT SUGGESTION
Attack Pilot
-This pilot is the only one capable of flying attack aircraft (helis, jets) and requires a platinum pilot certification

HOW IT'S DISPLAYED
In the TAB menu, there will be an icon next to the person's name with the appropriate kit icon and a background of either bronze (brown), silver (grey), platinum (green for easy IDing), and gold (gold). If they have no rank, it will be an empty icon.

Thoughts?

[DankE_SPB]

sucks, will lead into statpadding

[arjan]

like it

[Priby]

Is it even possible to install that in the game?

[spybaz]

I like the principal of the idea but, to me, PR is all about strategery.

How do you measure someone's strategic ability?

Being able to 'kill' in this game is very much secondary (outside of AT and AA - ability to kill is vital) .

How do you measure pilot ability? As discussed in another thread, being able to take off, fly and land is very much a fundamental - it's how you do the above that counts - again, stategery required and this is not easily measured....

[Viki]

In my opinion, there should be only one statistic, and that'd be the one showing your average teamwork-scores.

All the best,
Viki

[OUT FOX EM]

Terrible idea. I just used a tank for the first time a few days ago, and look at the carnage that ensued on Qwai River:



44 kills for me, 0 deaths for both of us. That's not to mention how many tickets we ate up on the other team by destroying TONS of their vehicles (TOW HMMWV's, Strykers, APC's, and even a couple of choppers believe it or not) that tried to take us down. Plus we capped flags in the tank too.

Now I'm not saying a tank is hard to use, but there were other "more experienced" people also using the other tank that round (the AWG guys) and their scores speak for themselves. They wasted 3 or 4 tanks (one time straight out of the base, losing it in a ditch) that round, and we obviously used only one the entire round.

If you were in charge, I would have had to wait on them to get their kits and grab their tank, and me and xSEEYAx might not have been able to do what we did. This wasn't just one good round that we had -- we've put up a few more like that using the tanks since then too.

[Wicca]

I think the PR community should have something similar, although you have alot of suggestions, they are very hard coded, but what is going through my mind is the idea of the original stats of BF2 vanilla, on ranked servers, where you get promoted and all that.

Well if it was possible to use that to some degree to show what your good at, tank badges etc. (Its all in there)

Even ranks for good SL, seargents, 2nd lieu. etc.

But, honestly think its to much work for something that this small community already have, close knitted relationships to eachother.

Everyone has atleast played once with any other member in PR, so we sorta all know eachother, which is what i kinda like, that people dont judge you from how good your stats are, but from who you are, how you act, and what they have done with you... Thats realistic and is one of those good "accidents" PR has brought with it, sort of a social rank structure.. if you get me ofc.

[badmojo420]

The only stat you need is total hours of play. Then you could easily see who has played enough to know the game, maps, objectives. And almost every stat in video games, boils down to who has played longer anyway.

[TF6049]

@Padding: This has to be supervised, and isn't a numerical score

@"how you do it" - Put someone through a typical cobra mission with sams, team-mates taking tix away, etc and have them all rely on the cobra to do the heavy lifting while avoiding SAMs

[AquaticPenguin]

The only stat you need is total hours of play. Then you could easily see who has played enough to know the game, maps, objectives. And almost every stat in video games, boils down to who has played longer anyway.

I disagree, this would probably lead to people kicking out the newbies. The time that you've played the game doesn't tell people how well you listen + follow orders. I've had lots of newbies in squads I've been in that have listened and learnt and been just as useful as every other player in the team. Fair enough people who've played for much longer are probably better but i think I prefer the average teamwork idea.

~Ed

[*Gunny*]

If people really wanted to see stats it shouldn't be ingame but on a website. I also like the idea of just showing times played but of course some people can be skilled and not have enough time to play all week.

[R0PET0WN]

Terrible idea. I just used a tank for the first time a few days ago, and look at the carnage that ensued on Qwai River:



44 kills for me, 0 deaths for both of us. That's not to mention how many tickets we ate up on the other team by destroying TONS of their vehicles (TOW HMMWV's, Strykers, APC's, and even a couple of choppers believe it or not) that tried to take us down. Plus we capped flags in the tank too.

Now I'm not saying a tank is hard to use, but there were other "more experienced" people also using the other tank that round (the AWG guys) and their scores speak for themselves. They wasted 3 or 4 tanks (one time straight out of the base, losing it in a ditch) that round, and we obviously used only one the entire round.

If you were in charge, I would have had to wait on them to get their kits and grab their tank, and me and xSEEYAx might not have been able to do what we did. This wasn't just one good round that we had -- we've put up a few more like that using the tanks since then too.

I would agree with this statement.



What if i am a gimp at taking tests and cant get a good score. Then i would have to give up my attack huey on BARRACUDA? never!

PS: http://www.gibthis.com Donate! Great server, awesome admins, and all the cool people play there!

[Polka]

There is already more than enough stuff to keep the e-penis growing.

[Tartantyco]

-The only viable kind of "rank" would be a manually added community rank denoting whether a player is "trusted"/"experienced". This could help new players locate players to help them get into the game.

[AnRK]

Yeah that's all I'd really agree with.

To the guy who did well in the tank, obviously you had a good round and supported your team, but the other crewman might have just had a really bad round, doesn't mean they sucked.

Squad leading is a great example of where you can screw up real easily due to bad from or bad luck, I had a few great rounds yesterday leading for 2 of em and I was half drunk, something I never really get away with AND I hadn't played PR in 2 weeks or something and haven't really played properly recently altogether really.

Compare that with plenty of days where I should have been doing fine and had some of the most frustrating rounds ever is kinda testament to how much bad luck and the effect other crappy players on your team can potentially have on you. Another reason this kinda thing is a bad idea.

[UntenablePosition]

If I am understanding the original concept that rank wold bring a responsibility along with the advantage of getting first choice at certain kits.
I think there are more than enough people who can and would handle that responsibility and in some of the examples noted above, turn over the pilot kit or the tank to another player.
But I think most people would agree that a person with little experience in armor and more so in aircraft is EXTREMELY unlikely to get a 44-0 round and would probably lose the asset without getting any kills.

The system, as described, doesn't seem to be open to cheating or statpadding as you would have to have "community" give you this rank, not earn it by going to some kind of " Knife&Pistol Only " server like in vanilla BF.

When you consider that games often last hours and loss of assets impact the entire team I don't think it is unfair to ask that you show some level of ability with those assets.

But even a counter to show total hours played of PR would be nice because while some of you might have the memory to remember everyone you have ever played with I do not.
I think there are over 4000 people playing PR if some chat I read is correct and that is a lot of people to remember for anyone.

[>para<]

no ranks i like the system now