|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:23 pm
LeonDecimus Suicidesoldier#1 ATTENTION: REAL QUESTION! Should I allow the same username to have several different branches or should they have to use a mule in order to be in two or more branches at once? I'm the MCPON and the LT. Col of Air Assault in the UGMF, so...Why not? Really. My other advice. No snipers. Just..please don't go there. Especially considering you number active members. I was a scout sniper. There were 9, count em 9 qualified for my entire battalion. 500-700 men. So, very very very few any. Oh yeah. I plan to make being a sniper a very hard thing to do. First of all, you have to sign up to be a sniper. As of now, I've forced people to be marksmen. Hardly anyone will be a sniper. Also, what about NPC's? There will be a lot of people who deserve to be sergeant but, what about the people they command? I'm trying to decide how to balance that... sweatdrop
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:25 pm
Suicidesoldier#1 LeonDecimus Suicidesoldier#1 ATTENTION: REAL QUESTION! Should I allow the same username to have several different branches or should they have to use a mule in order to be in two or more branches at once? I'm the MCPON and the LT. Col of Air Assault in the UGMF, so...Why not? Really. My other advice. No snipers. Just..please don't go there. Especially considering you number active members. I was a scout sniper. There were 9, count em 9 qualified for my entire battalion. 500-700 men. So, very very very few any. Oh yeah. I plan to make being a sniper a very hard thing to do. First of all, you have to sign up to be a sniper. As of now, I've forced people to be marksmen. Hardly anyone will be a sniper. Also, what about NPC's? There will be a lot of people who deserve to be sergeant but, what about the people they command? I'm trying to decide how to balance that... sweatdrop You could have sergeants lead NPC squads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:32 pm
Yeah, you'll never have the activity to make full player squads.
So, fill it with what you can then jam in a bunch of NPCs.
You could go with the modern US Army setup.
9 man squad.
1 Squad Leader. (SGT)
2 FireTeam Leaders. (CPL)
2 Support Gunners. (E1-E3)
2 Rifleman (E1-E3)
2 Grenadiers. (E1-E3)
A fireteam is
1 FireTeam Leader. (CPL)
1 Rifleman (E1-E3)
1 Grenadier (E1-E3)
1 Support Gunner (E1-E3)
So, depends on what you wanna do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:41 pm
Yes, I think I'll have to.
Sounds great though, it'll make playing more interesting. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:46 pm
I think we should cut the number of special forces organizations down to one. Having separate Army and Marine Corps spec ops is going to create too many roles for every mission to fill. That, and Marines and spec ops don't mix. The USMC may have spec ops, but it wasn't the Corps's choice. Why does an already elite unit need spec ops?
Perhaps the spec ops should be Army?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:48 pm
I think, right now, this guild is in the early stages.
Cut down all branches to only have one company sized element each.
As your active/literate member count increases, you can look at alternatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:52 pm
Both of those suggestions were amazing. I'm getting right on it.
So... one special forces unit...
Sounds reasonable, possibly called SOCOM or something similar.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:59 pm
I'm personally pretty adverse to any sort of spec ops as it alienates other members who may not be good enough.
Especially considering your active member count.
Stick with the basics. Ambition is good but don't stretch yourself too thin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:04 pm
I agree with Leon. Let's build up our active member count, then form a SOCOM unit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:04 pm
LeonDecimus I'm personally pretty adverse to any sort of spec ops as it alienates other members who may not be good enough. Especially considering your active member count. Stick with the basics. Ambition is good but don't stretch yourself too thin. KK. So I should make special operations more linear by creating a single SOCOM force, or a force with a similar kind of objective?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:10 pm
My personal suggestion is just to not make any spec ops units at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:20 pm
Perhaps we could give the guild a little character by giving each unit a name. For example, the Marine Corps ground forces wouldn't just be the Marine Corps Ground Forces, they'd be the 112th Mechanized Cavalry Brigade, also known as the Thunderhorses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:44 pm
LeonDecimus My personal suggestion is just to not make any spec ops units at all. Right. That makes sense. I suppose all of your guys suggestions on this idea is understandable. I shall do something like that later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:56 pm
id agree, for now no special forces, ( and i might go as far and make stealth bombers NPCs... and the black bird a no fly bird as its only a reconnaissance ) and then build up from there, and on another note, i think we'll need something for highly crewed aircraft...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:05 pm
Yes. NPC's for highly crewed aircraft? For now, the bigger planes will designated by officers.
By the way, you can promote people in the airforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
