Rules of Engagement: Confused?

[RaZ Vader]

Greetings members of the Forerunner Conflict,

I ask for feedback on our current rules of engagement, and your thoughts of it. Many people turn away from it, and do not bother reading it.

Granted, if you are just an officer or regular soldier, this does not affect you a great deal, but in the past, the rules of engagement and battle map was much more easier to follow. We did not have brigades, auxiliary battles, etc. These things I mention was always a dream I had when we were in halo 2 and 3, but did not have the resources until recently.

We tried many different ways to make the war feel larger then it is. I think we succeeded.

The question I ask is if the community wishes to return the wars to a much simple time? Keep how it is? Or even care. Answer in the poll provided, and comment any suggestion or thoughts on this.

Current Rules of Engagement (http://fcwars.net/forums/showthread.php?8794-FC-Rec1-Rules-of-Engagement)

Depending on the results, will depend what I bring to the War Council. IF it is voted that you wish to make it more simple, I may bring to the table of bringing back the simple battle map, "Pick and Attack" there will be no troop numbers, brigades, perks, nothing.

Of course, it will lose much dynamics. There are positives and negatives to each situation.

Personally, I am fine with either, but I want the community's opinion. :vader1:

[xXReiBearXx]

I brought this topic up to Mythonian a month ago about the clearness of the RoE. We both worked together to type up a more detailed version. he had said he was gonig to bring it up in WC back then but I guess he did not. Either way i feel that making the RoE clear and more detailed of the do's and don'ts would help let people know exactly what you guys mean. Also it helps to keep those type of people who look for loops holes to not have any. Basically whatever it says in the RoE should be the rules enforced and we need to know every bit of detail that you guys want from us making it less likely for people to tip toe around them and get away with it.

[Jam Cliché]

Now that I understand how it works in practice, I like it very much. It gives the vCash system a lot of purpose, for instance, and on a whole it is not difficult to learn. If I got the hang of it with no previous war experience, I don't think anyone should have a problem.

[Nicholas Sapien]

I know I said we should return to much simpler times, but we continually evolve as a community. I fall either way. either we keep it or change it back, I think everything will still be the same. As I was told earlier, this was for the Field Marshal cause he couldn't play battle nights.

[Jam Cliché]

I know I said we should return to much simpler times, but we continually evolve as a community. I fall either way. either we keep it or change it back, I think everything will still be the same. As I was told earlier, this was for the Field Marshal cause he couldn't play battle nights.

That makes sense. The Field Marshals get to apply strategy to an otherwise boring job of making attack plans, because they themselves do not get to take part in the attack.

[KazuhLLL]

They way it is now, the enlisted and officers that don't care about the details can fight just as effectively as they did back in the days without vCash. Just like on a real battlefield, you don't need to know the details behind every decision (such as why attack a particular map over another). Those like Jam who do choose to know the theory behind the attacks have a much richer experience, and display a drive befit of an officer, without interfering with those who could care less. So I'd say we should just keep it how it is.

[Gargoyle]

That makes sense. The Field Marshals get to apply strategy to an otherwise boring job of making attack plans, because they themselves do not get to take part in the attack.

Being there to help make attack plans with unlucky, I can say (to me at least) that it is confusing as hell.

You make a mistake about something you didn't know or don't really understand, you can lose a whole map out of it.

I'd like the strategy a lot more, say if we had like a youtube How To video describing how everything works.

[Anarchy]

I brought this topic up to Mythonian a month ago about the clearness of the RoE. We both worked together to type up a more detailed version. he had said he was gonig to bring it up in WC back then but I guess he did not. Either way i feel that making the RoE clear and more detailed of the do's and don'ts would help let people know exactly what you guys mean. Also it helps to keep those type of people who look for loops holes to not have any. Basically whatever it says in the RoE should be the rules enforced and we need to know every bit of detail that you guys want from us making it less likely for people to tip toe around them and get away with it.

I think you're making the RoE out to be a document of rules rather than an instruction booklet to a board game. There's nothing to get around in the RoE, really, and there's nothing really to enforce from it.


The RoE isn't hard to read, you just have to take a scholastic approach to it. It's a 4-5 page document, which really isn't that long. I wouldn't mind making a "Rules of Engagement for Dummies" thread to stick somewhere to explain the majority of it, but if you want to understand it, you just have to carefully read it and have patience. There's nothing trick in it. It's really straightforward with:
-Here's when you can move a brigade
-Here's the ways you can attack
-Here's what happens after the battle.
-Here's how to end the war
-Here's how your army earns money
-Here's the shit you can buy
-Here's some battle night procedures.

[Jam Cliché]

I think you're making the RoE out to be a document of rules rather than an instruction booklet to a board game. There's nothing to get around in the RoE, really, and there's nothing really to enforce from it.


The RoE isn't hard to read, you just have to take a scholastic approach to it. It's a 4-5 page document, which really isn't that long. I wouldn't mind making a "Rules of Engagement for Dummies" thread to stick somewhere to explain the majority of it, but if you want to understand it, you just have to carefully read it and have patience. There's nothing trick in it. It's really straightforward with:
-Here's when you can move a brigade
-Here's the ways you can attack
-Here's what happens after the battle.
-Here's how to end the war
-Here's how your army earns money
-Here's the shit you can buy
-Here's some battle night procedures.

Yes, and beyond this, the way to execute these actions is determined by the strategist.

[Specact]

I'm not really a fan of how maps can be lost through auxiliary battles. It does add another aspect of strategy but I don't really like how maps can be lost without us actually fighting on them. Also where is the Warmap? I really liked being able to view the Warmap in the past.

Making a "Rules of Engagement for Dummies" would be a good idea. That way people who otherwise wouldn't read the RoE might read them in a shortened format.

[RaZ Vader]

Good stuff guys. Yes there is a war map. Check the battle results. There should be a link somewhere... *cough webmasters cough*

[Al Capone111]

I'd like the strategy a lot more, say if we had like a youtube How To video describing how everything works.

Sounds fair. Someone (or a few people) make a movie about 5 minutes just explaining it. Sometimes that makes it easier for a person to truly get it.

[Nicholas Sapien]

Sounds fair. Someone (or a few people) make a movie about 5 minutes just explaining it. Sometimes that makes it easier for a person to truly get it.

I like this that would help a lot of people out. (I presume)

[VerbotenDonkey]

I do personally think the system does need to be tweaked a bit. Talked to UNLUCKY a bit about it. I feel like the auxiliary attacks are too powerful and affect the system way too much and when you're down, it's way too hard to get yourself out of the losing trend when you're fighting off your opponents basically getting a free Map every week from it because they can afford to keep buying a bunch of stuff.

I wouldn't add too much more to our system though. It's fine where it is right now, but any more and it may be too much of a hassle for people to worry about, especially when a lot of us are juggling college, job, and social life on top of it. I agree there should be something there for HighComm to actually do besides decide which Map to attack, but remember K.I.S.S.

[MedeDust]

For those who are confused on where the Warmap is, it no longer has a specific topic but is link in the Google Doc posted in the attack plans and results.

http://www.fcwars.net/node/warmap/rec1/05/

A direct link from the Navigation bar is being foreshadowed.

[VerbotenDonkey]

For those who are confused on where the Warmap is, it no longer has a specific topic but is link in the Google Doc posted in the attack plans and results.

http://www.fcwars.net/node/warmap/rec1/05/

A direct link from the Navigation bar is being foreshadowed.

Can it please have it's own specific topic? I see no reason not to give it one. >_>

[Nicholas Sapien]

Can it please have it's own specific topic? I see no reason not to give it one. >_>

lol yeah I always have trouble finding that

[KazuhLLL]

I do personally think the system does need to be tweaked a bit. Talked to UNLUCKY a bit about it. I feel like the auxiliary attacks are too powerful and affect the system way too much and when you're down, it's way too hard to get yourself out of the losing trend when you're fighting off your opponents basically getting a free Map every week from it because they can afford to keep buying a bunch of stuff.

That's a good point. Perhaps auxiliary attacks could be kept in, but instead of being able to flat-out win a map with them, maybe a successful auxiliary attack would allow a two-week period in which that map could be attacked with the attackers getting to choose the gametypes?

(The defenders would be "weakened" from the auxiliary attack so they'd lose the defender's gametype advantage for two weeks. Or something.)

[silversleek]

auxilary battles remain a bit iffy for me. I like the idea of having battles outside of what we as soldiers might see, but i'd try adjusting the LOV system a bit, it seems far too easy to just have them as a free win. but i like the strategic aspect.

[bazongaman502]

The RoE and practically like the Terms and Agreements when you download something. They understand the point and what they are doing, but never read it fully lol

I finally read through the RoE like 2-3 weeks ago. I recomend everyone doing it, but not everyone (if anyone) will :(

[Jam Cliché]

auxilary battles remain a bit iffy for me. I like the idea of having battles outside of what we as soldiers might see, but i'd try adjusting the LOV system a bit, it seems far too easy to just have them as a free win. but i like the strategic aspect.
It's not a free win. What Anarchy does to guarantee wins on Auxiliary attacks costs us many monies.

[bazongaman502]

It's not a free win. What Anarchy does to guarantee wins on Auxiliary attacks costs us many monies.

so you buy your wins?

[KazuhLLL]

so you buy your wins?

Essentially, which is exactly why Donkey was saying it was a bit overpowered. The army who's winning more battle nights will likely be getting more moneys which will help them win more auxiliary attacks. It's a bit of a vicious circle if one army is losing by any significant margin.

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

I like Auxiliary battles, but the way we currently have them set up is an issue for me. Although it seems as if Silversleek has already voiced my opinion for me.

I'd like to keep them, I just feel they need to be adjusted next war.

[KazuhLLL]

I like Auxiliary battles, but the way we currently have them set up is an issue for me. Although it seems as if Silversleek has already voiced my opinion for me.

I'd like to keep them, I just feel they need to be adjusted next war.

In which ways? It's probably easier for the FM's to identify any weaknesses than it is for those of us who have nothing to do with the aux attacks :P

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

Like I said Silver basically already addressed it.

I do not believe Aux battles should be allowed an instant win (LoV 100). I believe there should be a cap to it. 66, 75, 80, 95? I don't know. But being able to "buy" a win seems unfair to me. Especially when one army gains exponentially more and more army Cr each week. it just makes it easier for the winning army to get maps with little to no work and the losing army has to work harder and harder and hopefully get more War Bonds each week (if they are able).

[Specact]

Finally! The Warmap!. I had been looking in its old home so I thought there wasn't a visible one. Thanks for linking that.

[silversleek]

Finally! The Warmap!. I had been looking in its old home so I thought there wasn't a visible one. Thanks for linking that.

warmap? wut? where?

aha, found it!

[Jam Cliché]

so you buy your wins?

That is a ludicrous statement. The Cr system exists for the FMs to spend to strategically prepare an attack. It's not as if Anarchy is paying the War Council to get victories. The two are not synonymous. He's playing absolutely by the rules, and I merely made it clear that his strategies are granted only by large expenditures of the in-game monetary system. In short, we earned those victories by draining our virtual pockets of vCash for War Bonds.

What you're implying is the same as accusing someone of using money from repeatedly passing GO to put a Hotel on Boardwalk and calling it illegal. The money is part of the game.

[Fuzzy]

Jam, I do believe he was trying to make a joke.

[KazuhLLL]

Jam, I do believe he was trying to make a joke.

^

Lol. Appreciate the fervor though xD

[Jam Cliché]

Jam, I do believe he was trying to make a joke.

JC. Never. Jokes.

http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/195/9/2/SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING_by_B runowskiSigs.jpg

[PanicPhan]

I'm not confused, just don't like the RoE. Specifically, the fact that you can win or lose a map without playing for it.

[Specact]

I'm not confused, just don't like the RoE. Specifically, the fact that you can win or lose a map without playing for it.

Yes, It's not that spending credits to win maps through auxiliary battles is against the rules or cheating, I just don't like how maps can be won or lost without us actually fighting for them.

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

Bazonga man is right jam, but not in the context you took it as.

BLUE has been buying wins with purchases from the RoE which is completely fair. Anarchy has not been paying the WC like you thought Bazonga meant.

At least if Anarchy HAS been paying WC I haven't seen any if that money.

[Jam Cliché]

Bazonga man is right jam, but not in the context you took it as.

BLUE has been buying wins with purchases from the RoE which is completely fair. Anarchy has not been paying the WC like you thought Bazonga meant.

At least if Anarchy HAS been paying WC I haven't seen any if that money.
Lol, I didn't say that is what he meant, but it's analogous to what he was implying.

[bazongaman502]

it was a joke....

[Graycochea]

That was awesome. I learned that JamCliche is a bro. Those were a lot of big beautiful words. +50 Respect

Also, I just found out(thanks to the handy dandy link) that the Warmap for this war, unlike the one for the Reach War, is freakin' hardcore. You can scroll over stuff and it looks like a galaxy. It's pretty awesome. That should definitely be put somewhere someone can find it. It's pretty useless if people can't find it.

The Warmap and stuff like that was explained to me like it's basically a big game of Risk. That worked. I get Risk.

[Relapsive]

Lol i destroy fuzzy at risk.

But either way I've been here for a while and i think the best war engagements we had were in Halo reach. Because i understand that just fighting can be tedious especially for the FM. The ROE where much better and simpler in halo reach i believe. Because it still gave the FM chances to strategies and have fun, without it being an annoy task they must worry about. IDK how anyone else feels but that's how i think it has become.

But i wont lie the old days in halo 3 where we simply attacked was fun.

[Jam Cliché]

it was a joke....

I know, dude. I knew when I posted my reply. >.<

[VerbotenDonkey]

Why so serious, Jam!

:P

[Harry]

What is a "Rules of Engagement"?

Where can I purchase one?