Jobs

[MoleMan]

So, as you may know in my recent thread "This is why we can't have nice things" We were pondering how to give people a sense to what they were doing without implementing classes. So, why not have a job system while still letting players chose there equipment. This could either be a game-mode or Gamewide, and servers could turn it on or off.

Upon startup after choosing your team, you are presented with a job selection screen. Jobs are as follows:

Builder
Defender
Recon
GI

Builder's: build. This can range from defensive towers too offensive bridges.

Defender: defend the teams territory. This typically mean's they won't see too much action, and can help build in there spare time.

Recon: Basically act as a scout to monitor enemy movements/disrupt said movements. If Mortars are implemented, call in strikes on enemyies.

GI: Basically serve as the all around soldier. They can hang back and defend, or go out and set up forward bases. The only issue is they may be too bland, and end up acting like current decues do, running into battles and dieing. Hopefully if the other team has efficient defender's and builders, they will need to rely on teamwork with other GI's.

To keep everyone from playing certain jobs, each job has a limit.
Limits:
Builder-4
Defender-6
Recon-4
GI-8

Note that these don't add up to 16. This allows for flexibility and different styles of team.

"But wait, what if I don't want to be this job?"
If you somehow end up unlucky enough that you get an undesirable job, I would just try and wait it out. Someone will disconnect at one point, and if not, it will teach people to be patient, and that they can't always be a single job. Being stuck outside of a combat class is impossible at the moment, you will at least have 3 extra combat slots. If you want to be a builder, don't worry. A benefit of this system is flexibility. Even if you don't get to build, you can join defender or G.I. and at least kind of help builders, by not necessarily building at base but on the front lines.

Now here's the other issue. X isn't doing his job! instead of doing recon, he's building!
The first thing would be to nicely ask them to change job. If they aren't complying, just votekick.

Your whole team isn't doing the right jobs?
You may be in the wrong kind of server.

Everyone on Every Server isn't doing there job!
Well, this is not an issue. We are back at square one, just as we are today. Because everyone has equal equipment, we might as well not even have the system there. It is something that isn't necessary, but a nice addition to teams who want to get a working system together.

If it's just markers above a teammate's head that the appropriate team can see, fund it to infinity. It wouldn't encourage 'NO ONLY BILDERS BILD' but it would let me relax knowing the builder is probably at the front, building barricades, while I keep the bluesies or greenlins off of him so we can advance forward, rather than no one knowing what everyone is doing, and going solo as a result, with anyone coming along a convenience at best.

[Gorman]

As you said, it isn't necessary, and doesn't guarantee that people will do their job.

So what is the point :I

[SICKfudge]

Yeah, tis rather uneccarcary and will clutter up the game. Some people work together without encouragement (the good players) whereas the bad ones will do their own thing, whatever systems you put in place.

[Articsledder]

did you read the post. Seriously. I put it in bold. The entire point of this suggestion is it is a flexible way of suggesting people to work together. I can guarantee not one of the genuine non troll AoS players would ever consider doing a votekick like the one you described, even if they were 3 years old.

Now that I think about it there shouldn't even be a reason to Votekick because someone wasn't doing there selected job. the entire thing just suggest you do a certain job. The way limits would be balanced, there should never be an issue with someone not doing what they want to do, unless they are an illiterate kid who just picks Recon "for the lulz". Even then, if someone wanted his recon spot they could just do the job as a GI.

I read the post, but there is no way that you can consider restrictions to be more flexible than no restrictions. As simple as that.

People votekick all the time for stupid reasons, and you are specifically telling people to votekick for stupid reasons, I can 100% guarantee that someone will votekick for that.

Classes and pigeon holing are terrible, just let people play how they want to play, and if they don't feel like they have enough direction then let them think "ok today I'm just gonna build"..

This is a terrible mentality. As horrible as it sounds, if we "just let people play how they want to play" the game would be shit, with no teamwork at all, considering more then half of the players aren't interested in helping others, and just want those high Kill streaks and airstrikes. This system is barely affecting people, it just places them in a category,
making it easier for teams to organize. Not to mention servers wouldn't even be forced to use this system.

In other words, this suggestion is a pointless complexity?

This is why I don't like these kind of ideas. Either they are too enveloping and gamebreaking, or they are too meek and pointless (take the example of randomized damage: either it is too much and the game is all about luck, or it is too little and it has no effect on the game, there is no real middle ground possible).

In this case we have a case of "it's optional", "it should be flexible", "it's just a title that does nothing else", so clearly what we have is a pointless suggestion that will never have any effect on gameplay and just attempts to pigeon hole people needlessly.

Sorry but I don't buy that there are only 4 ways to play this game.

You should play some organized matches, it seems like you have only played pubs before.


By the way, if you ever think "servers won't have to do this" you are thinking of a script, not a game modification.

Well this is where ideas die. It comes to the point where someone argues it's a useful option to have around, and someone says it is a waste. I feel however, it is always a good idea to have the option of it around to be used by servers/teams that want to use it. With something like this I highly doubt it adds too much complexity, especially when a server only has turn it on when they want too.


I have played a competitive match before, and while they are fun, a full 32 player match doesn't happen often. Why should we limit teamwork to organized matches when it could be found in public servers using this system?

[Gorman]

If one server wants it they can easily make a script to assign jobs.

Pubs won't have teamwork because they are pubs, sorry but it just won't happen even if you try to force people.

[Leonzable]

How do classes encourage teamwork? It just forces you into playing a certain way.
Unessesary if you ask me.

[DrunkenChild]

So, as you may know in my recent thread "This is why we can't have nice things" We were pondering how to give people a sense to what they were doing without implementing classes. So, why not have a job system while still letting players chose there equipment. This could either be a game-mode or Gamewide, and servers could turn it on or off.

Upon startup after choosing your team, you are presented with a job selection screen. Jobs are as follows:

Builder
Defender
Recon
GI

Builder's: build. This can range from defensive towers too offensive bridges.

Defender: defend the teams territory. This typically mean's they won't see too much action, and can help build in there spare time.

Recon: Basically act as a scout to monitor enemy movements/disrupt said movements. If Mortars are implemented, call in strikes on enemyies.

GI: Basically serve as the all around soldier. They can hang back and defend, or go out and set up forward bases. The only issue is they may be too bland, and end up acting like current decues do, running into battles and dieing. Hopefully if the other team has efficient defender's and builders, they will need to rely on teamwork with other GI's.

To keep everyone from playing certain jobs, each job has a limit.
Limits:
Builder-4
Defender-6
Recon-4
GI-8

Note that these don't add up to 16. This allows for flexibility and different styles of team.

"But wait, what if I don't want to be this job?"
If you somehow end up unlucky enough that you get an undesirable job, I would just try and wait it out. Someone will disconnect at one point, and if not, it will teach people to be patient, and that they can't always be a single job. Being stuck outside of a combat class is impossible at the moment, you will at least have 3 extra combat slots. If you want to be a builder, don't worry. A benefit of this system is flexibility. Even if you don't get to build, you can join defender or G.I. and at least kind of help builders, by not necessarily building at base but on the front lines.

Now here's the other issue. X isn't doing his job! instead of doing recon, he's building!
The first thing would be to nicely ask them to change job. If they aren't complying, just votekick.

Your whole team isn't doing the right jobs?
You may be in the wrong kind of server.

Everyone on Every Server isn't doing there job!
Well, this is not an issue. We are back at square one, just as we are today. Because everyone has equal equipment, we might as well not even have the system there. It is something that isn't necessary, but a nice addition to teams who want to get a working system together.

That already happens when you have a good team

[Articsledder]

How do classes encourage teamwork? It just forces you into playing a certain way.
Unessesary if you ask me.

Classes encourage teamwork by giving reason to help others. As a builder you help your team by building, as a recon you provide your team with info, etc. Again, it is not forcing you into playing a certain way when you have a choice of your job.

That already happens when you have a good team

And since when have you played a game where your team has balanced tasks and worked together? It just doesn't happen anymore.

If one server wants it they can easily make a script to assign jobs.

Pubs won't have teamwork because they are pubs, sorry but it just won't happen even if you try to force people.

Ok, I wouldn't mind if it was a script, but once again, it isn't doing any harm if it is optional in the default game.

Again, just giving up on the subject of public servers having no teamwork isn't what we should be doing. We should be trying to fix it.

[armandux1]

But aren't "jobs" the same as classes ? It's basicly icing over puke.

[Articsledder]

But aren't "jobs" the same as classes ? It's basicly icing over puke.

Classes are when each different "class" has different equipment, and is generally widely different from the other classes. this job system would only deal with task, and not equipment.

[Moonkey]

*shakes head* @Above comment : A few words: It's a dumbed down version of classes, just leave it at that. If you ask me this makes the game un-friendly to new FPS players who just want to play tactically while moving at a fast pace. Yes, this game is still tactical no matter how you look at it :P. If you dig/build to somehow get the intel/defend it. That is the basics of tactics. Tactical work isn't all about moving slow and taking time to plan. But it's also about split second thinking and decisions to defend/attack a base. Or so that's how I play :D. Jobs: Un-needed at THIS moment. Maybe further along the lines when the possibility of vehicles/other ideas are created with scripts/models. *rests case*

[GreenDeuce]

*shakes head* @Above comment : A few words: It's a dumbed down version of classes, just leave it at that. If you ask me this makes the game un-friendly to new FPS players who just want to play tactically while moving at a fast pace. Yes, this game is still tactical no matter how you look at it :P. If you dig/build to somehow get the intel/defend it. That is the basics of tactics. Tactical work isn't all about moving slow and taking time to plan. But it's also about split second thinking and decisions to defend/attack a base. Or so that's how I play :D. Jobs: Un-needed at THIS moment. Maybe further along the lines when the possibility of vehicles/other ideas are created with scripts/models. *rests case*

*Insert CoD players\mentality are killing AoS comment here*

[Articsledder]

*shakes head* @Above comment : A few words: It's a dumbed down version of classes, just leave it at that. If you ask me this makes the game un-friendly to new FPS players who just want to play tactically while moving at a fast pace. Yes, this game is still tactical no matter how you look at it :P. If you dig/build to somehow get the intel/defend it. That is the basics of tactics. Tactical work isn't all about moving slow and taking time to plan. But it's also about split second thinking and decisions to defend/attack a base. Or so that's how I play :D. Jobs: Un-needed at THIS moment. Maybe further along the lines when the possibility of vehicles/other ideas are created with scripts/models. *rests case*

It is not a dumbed down version of classes. Again, classes would add different equipment and various items you need to learn.

This system is barely unfriendly to new players. It's as simple as the weapon select screen. All the job names are straight forward (aside from G.I., however that isn't a final name). If a player can't figure out what a name like "Recon" or "Builder" means, then I really doubt they could even figure out what "Intel" or "Control point" mean.

Yes, small things like that are tactical, but they don't require teamwork. Teamwork itself doesn't require time and planning, it requires people assisting each other to reach a common goal.

I wouldn't be apposed to this being at a later time, I strongly feel however it would be nice to have some sort of system that allows players to organize themselves, similar to how squads do.

[MrMeow]

Why not just have a weapon select then gear?

[Articsledder]

Why not just have a weapon select then gear?

Because at that point it limits freedom to play how you want.