Ranking system to bring organisation and progression.

Ola,


In light of our recent squad discussion it still hasn't fully found its way into our gameplay.
While we all have fun, there are still many pieces to pick up in terms of communication, organisation, planning and execution.
When pickals dropped me a comment about a ranking system it got me thinking.
As you all know im all about democracy and equal votes, but on the other side I think having ranks would really help with the organisation on things.
And they can definatly be combined.
You, as a person.. will always be as equal as the guy standing next to you.
This will never change.
With the implentation of ranks and squads, we could set up larger scale events and bring a much bigger variety in terms of gameplay enrichment.
The obvious choice to go with would be militairy ranks here, not because I just so happen to be a soldier, but because it has many ranks and are quite familiar to most of you.
Why do many ranks matter?
Well wouldn't it be cool to have each single rank have it's own objective, effectively giving members the ability to progress up the hierarchy.
Where to get promoted in the lower ranks you simply have to collect basic supplies, and higher up you might have to coordinate a raid on a hospital, making the next rank harder and more difficult than the previous one.
These are just examples, together im sure we can find the right balance and have something unique for each rank.

I definatly vouch for this idea, as I believe it will create another dimension into the game, and alot of awesome adventures of sergeants taking their squad to places.
It would create much interesting story's and lols when a disgrunting private has to swim a few laps in the ocean
Not only that, i think with this method things would get alot more organised and productive.

Here is a image of the ranks, taken from the US army.

I'm not even sure I should be voting this much since I'm only a tryout but there you go

As you guys might have noticed, I'm all towards organization. Not only because it's more effective but because for me it's more fun. IMO, in terms of fun an organized well oiled group > lone wolfing > disorganized group ramboing and shooting zombies randomly.

So that said, I think some sort of "rank" could be nice and would help towards identifying the more experienced etc. Could.

However, I don't think I would like military ranks. It might be a bit too formal, plus I'm not sure it fits very well into the "survival band" organization.

Lastly, I don't think we need loads of ranks. That only makes things confusing and clunky. We already have the tryout, maybe all we "need" considering our numbers is some 3 tiers (maybe 4 if you want to put yoruself Drasqo alone in the highest tier, which I think would be appropriate).

So I'm voting yes, but with these "buts":

- very low number of tiers

- a "ranking" system that fits into the game's environment and story. Def. not military. (damn, sorry I'm not creative enough to come up with an alternative already but I hope you understand what I mean).

I agree with Luis, in a way.

Military ranks can be intimidating to new people, who want to join the clan, at least it was to me.

Before i saw you're thread, Dasqo, i had found a couple of clans i had decided to look into.

What made me turn away from those clans was that on their TS i noticed these ranks everyone had.

I had also played in a BF3 clan before, and their ranking system was just horrible.

You had to go through "trainings" to achieve a certain rank. These trainings were conducted by certain members of a certain rank. of the ~20 "new recruits" we had, there were only 1-2 members who were qualified to "train" us. It was just a very complicated system and wasted a lot of time. All i wanted to do was play with the clan, and get them to teach me while i play.

However, from what i can see, your ranking system is more of a reward system. This would definitely keep the clan more productive.

Drasqo wrote:
...With the implentation of ranks and squads, we could set up larger scale events and bring a much bigger variety in terms of gameplay enrichment...

Did you already think up of how ranks will work in squads? Since we already have thought up of designated roles, how will ranks play into squad play?

Will there be a higher ranking scout, who will be considered the more "experienced" scout?

I figured militairy ranks were easier to identify, as they are most commonly known - I do not care wich ranks we use.
Figured when using custom ranks it might get confusing knowing wich rank is where on the ladder.

They might be a bit too intimidating perhaps, as i do not intended to create a environment similar to the militairy, where orders must be followed and people dont get a say in things.

My intention wich ranks as a whole is 2 things primairly, as listed in the title.
Would we have ranks it might incite the higher ranks to pick up the lead, assemble a squad and do something concrete.
This would bring more organisation as ech role and the objective is clear, with their 'leader' to steer.

The 'many' ranks part was because progression, like:

In order to promote from pv1 to pv2 you must find a hatchet, matches and demonstrate how to use a campfire.
This promotion can be given by anyone who is a higher rank than yourself.

In order to promote from pv2 to pfc, you must find and set-up a tent containing the following supplies:
A main weapon
A sidearm
2 Pieces of food
3 drinks.

This promotion can be given by anyone who is a higher rank than yourself.

In order to promote from sergeant first class to master sergeant, you must kill 600 zombies and have a minimum of 300 headshots.
This promotion will be awarded once a screenshot has been submitted.

in order to promote from captain to major you must succesfully complete mission x, extracting the hostage from a well guarded hospital, using 2 squads.

and so on and so on.. these are just examples, but you get the point.
It gives people something to progress to beside what dayz already provides.

and as always, everything is up for discussion and can be fine-tuned, and alot of creativity can be placed.

As much as you're all for democracy, my experience last night clearly indicated that we need leaders. Now I don't think that we need to have a strict structure with promotional guide. I think that we should have as many low ranked people as possible. Only when a situation actually arrives for the need for a leader should one step up.

We don't need a complex ranking system, what we need is even MORE respect, and team speak priority for the leader. One leader, per party lets say. And then the rest will flow smoothly.

I also think that this "rank" should not be permanent. If a mission is about to take place, the one organizing it, will either become the leader, or choose an appropriate one. That person will be the leader of that group until it is no longer possible (group disconnects, leader has to go, mission completely failed).

I voted yes, not for a ranking system, but for a clear command structure that is formed while in game.

We should use THESE ranks!




But seriously, i think its a grate idea =)

A ranking system would be awesome. I do like the idea of military ranks but I also like the idea of formulating and creating names for ranks.

Also, what is our teamspeak server? I can't seem to find the one that was posted on the Dayz forums, thanks.

Ranking system is great and a lot of fun, I do not agree with setting "requirements" such as collecting a certain item or doing a certain task. That, in my opinion is cheap, and could lead to exploitation. I feel that the higher-ups should keep watch of everyone and promote people based on their actions, and valor.

Vox wrote:Ranking system is great and a lot of fun, I do not agree with setting "requirements" such as collecting a certain item or doing a certain task. That, in my opinion is cheap, and could lead to exploitation. I feel that the higher-ups should keep watch of everyone and promote people based on their actions, and valor.

I agree with this idea

I'd like to see Ranks implemented, but in agreement with Vox and Hansen, I think there should be less requirements, (there should still be some basic things that should be fulfilled: having a tent with equipment is nice, being able to start at any spawnpoint and find base camp, proficiency with weapons etc.), but we must also keep in mind the 'intangible' things; Valor, actions, interactions with squad mates, ability to lead. etc...


I know those were just examples, but just because someone can set a tent. kill zombies shouldn't necessarily give them an NCO rank.

Ranks has been implemented, based on a single number only.

I
II
III
IV
V

5th members have been assigned rank II
try-outs ranks I