Armored Core 5 Discussion

[Mushinronja]

Any of you in or leading a team plan to have all team members use the same color scheme and emblems (the main difference in them being the member #)? I'm probably going to make my own team, and I'll probably do that. Mercenary work that isn't necessary, but i feel everyone using the team colors and emblem would make build a stronger connection and may even add to intimidation factor.

 

Sort of like the Yellow squadron in Ace Combat 4. If there are Yellows in the fight, some serious stuff is gunna go down.

 

I wish you could pick from multiple team "entrance cutscenes", like where your team of 4 could fly in using glide boost as opposed to being carried in by helicopter. Then it could be like enemy ace squadron entrances in Ace Combat Zero.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe7BlZCY_bM

[Moon Walker]

That's my plan once the team gets too big ( or I find out there are a ton more players than I expected online )

 

Team with a unified colour and emblem for territory-related missions ( be it our own team attacks or mercenary ) and everyone free to use their own colours and emblems in matches.

[Mushinronja]

I'd try to call people by their numbers too, it may be less personal, but i think it is more involving and intimidating, lol. Not that the enemy can hear your chatting. Maybe that could be an Operator abilty: hacking into enemy communications, lol.

[Moon Walker]

You will be using numbers in most cases for quick orders and getting the player's attention rather than calling out "ROFLMAOSAUCE_34Z move to beacon C and get into sniping position"

[Mushinronja]

Yea, be like the Ace Combat games again where you say the squadron name then the number, like Mobius 1 or Yellow 13.

 

I'm thinking of the team name Muspell (Moo-spell) or Nifl to get some Norse myth up in here, lol, and Muspell Zero or Nifl Zero both sound pretty cool

[Red Shirt (Grayscale)]

That thread is sort of different, being about if Armored Cores were the real world. But In this I think we are talking about ACs in game against Jets in the real world. Now if you say lasers from ACs can be put on a jet, long range missiles and radar systems can be put on an AC.

 

Lol just hijack the thread! I doubt the TC would be back anway.

 

 

Just so I can criticize for the sake of complaining and whining, I think they've poorly designed the chat macro for the game. Sure, it's universal that you could use it whether during a sortie or not, but they could've emulated something like what Konami had with Metal Gear Online. From Software just put a big flat fucking list of chat choices that aren't categorized (at least you can fully edit them than simply choosing), making them less accessible than it should be.

 

Example, I replaced some of the choices with "High-Def KE AC spotted", "Flanker spotted", "Get to beacon 1/2/3", "I'm alt-QQing F U" or some shit like that, then apply with just two d-pad inputs whenever the situation calls for it.

 

Now I'll have to get another headset again (the one I have sucks).

Edited March 17, 2012 by Red Shirt (Grayscale)

[Aokiryu89]

I'd try to call people by their numbers too, it may be less personal, but i think it is more involving and intimidating, lol. Not that the enemy can hear your chatting. Maybe that could be an Operator abilty: hacking into enemy communications, lol.

 

 

 

NUMBER ONE!!

YOU HAVE THE POWER!

[Mushinronja]

Hmm, I'm now planning the team being an over-arching group, while each squad of 5 is it's own squadron. Like for instance:

 

Team Name: Heimar

 

Squadron 1 - Muspell 00 - 05

Squadron 2 - Nifl 06 - 10

Squadron 3 - Jotun 11 - 15

Squadron 4 - Alf 16 - 20

 

Each member would have a squadron-unique emblem. 00, 06, 11, and 16 would be the team leaders chosen by skill or experience, and operators would be chosen based on member preference or something.

 

Each member would use a squad-colored AC with their squad emblem during territory matches, and the AC name would be their squad & number + what variation it is, for instance:

 

Name: Muspell 00. This would be Muspell 00's normal mech, the one they like the best. This is subject to change.

 

Name: Muspell 00 (TE). This would be Muspell 00 but in a TE damage-based mech, not what he usually uses but figured would be suited for the task at hand.

 

Name: Muspell 00 (HM). This is Muspell 00 using the Huge Missile.

 

 

Stuff like that. This is probably way too organized for most people to be interested in doing though, lol.

Edited March 17, 2012 by Mushinronja

[KORTOKtheSTRONG]

tanks would just fall over

[Moon Walker]

Hmm, I'm now planning the team being an over-arching group, while each squad of 5 is it's own squadron. Like for instance:

 

Team Name: Heimar

 

Squadron 1 - Muspell 00 - 05

Squadron 2 - Nifl 06 - 10

Squadron 3 - Jotun 11 - 15

Squadron 4 - Alf 16 - 20

 

Each member would have a squadron-unique emblem. 00, 06, 11, and 16 would be the team leaders chosen by skill or experience, and operators would be chosen based on member preference or something.

 

Each member would use a squad-colored AC with their squad emblem during territory matches, and the AC name would be their squad & number + what variation it is, for instance:

 

Name: Muspell 00. This would be Muspell 00's normal mech, the one they like the best. This is subject to change.

 

Name: Muspell 00 (TE). This would be Muspell 00 but in a TE damage-based mech, not what he usually uses but figured would be suited for the task at hand.

 

Name: Muspell 00 (HM). This is Muspell 00 using the Huge Missile.

 

 

Stuff like that. This is probably way too organized for most people to be interested in doing though, lol.

 

 

Not entirely true. Honestly I'm all into that kind of organization personally, heck I might actually just end up joining you team and take my own squad with me.

 

But there'll be a lot of people online for the first couple of months so for now, I'm just going to go around advertising ACU/MV and get as much people signing up to the forums so we wouldn't have any shortages of members when breaking into own individual teams.

 

-ignores KORTOK on purpose-

[Mushinronja]

Take your own squad like you already have a team, or you mean you would be the leader of one of the squads? Either way works, lol.

 

The names aren't set in stone though, I like them but I also don't. Muspell and Nifl I like, Jotun and Alf meh. Possible replacements for those 2 are Svartalfa and Vana. I don't really wanna use Asgard, Midgard, and Hel though, because calling out the name with a number sounds weird in my head.

 

Actually, based on this pic

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Edda_9_Werelden.png

 

Muspell, Nifl, Vana, and Jotun make the most sense. Another team could be made with Asgard, Alf, Svartalfa, and Hel. Though maybe change Asgard and Midgard to just As and Mid.

[Moon Walker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=9SyOL-r7rnk#t=405s

 

Close enough.

[Aokiryu89]

tanks would just fall over

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/395287c7-ae31-4b7b-bf7e-729fe1470295.jpg

Treads are so impractical.

 

Mushi Mushi try 2 man teams. Set up a Wing Man system. Trying to get a whole team to pull off something like that at first may seem daunting but starting out with a partner doesn't seem like much of a bad idea.

 

Plus I think we should use the story and order missions to this "building of camaraderie". Could really help out when it comes to getting some of the real fresh pilots to stick with the game instead of wimping out.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Ogawa Lou

[Mushinronja]

@Moonwalker - Well they have the emblems almost how I imagine (I don't think they were numbered). I like that team name too, Dark Souls ref ftw

 

@Ogawa Lou - Well maybe the first 8 people would become Muspell 00 & 01, Nifl 05 & 06, Vana 10 & 11, and Jotun 15 & 16. This would work on team building in Story and Order missions, but for 5 people team missions there would be 3 teams on one mission. That would be fixed when it reaches 10 people though.

 

 

Maybe there could even be a ranking system where we keep track of individual and team statistics. That would let us see where people need work and set up friendly competition and rivalries between squads. It would also help with switching people around to balance out teams if necessary.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Mushinronja

[GodlyPerfection]

In my experience I've always found that trying to force a system like that just creates more work and confusion than it is work. I do agree with the wingman system though as that is simple enough to where it won't overwhelm people. All you really have to make them realize is that they play better with a partner. It also is much more flexible than a squad system... someone could make a strong wingman for several people. That way you only really need to groups of wingmen to play efficiently. Coordinating a whole squad like that is extremely difficult as there are very few times that you will get everyone together and then get everyone being serious enough to improve with each other. It is much easier to get familiar with one other person than working with 3 others. Sure you get more of a benefit out of a coordinated squad, but the chances of that happening are slim to none and then if something happens to one part of the squad it is hard to get a good enough replacement and get them integrated.

 

However things typically fall apart long before any one squad becomes truly established. I learned this in my early days of AC4 and ever since then I have been a big supporter of the wingman system instead. Much more efficient, much more realistic, and much more flexible in practice. Adding or removing someone from the team is much easier in a wingman system than a squad system. And with games you always have to consider loosing players to various things. And adjusting for variable play times is much easier and overall makes your team's effectiveness much better on average. Squads that rely on a particular member end up loosing a ton of effectiveness. In squads players are a lot more specialized and thus more powerful... however that also makes them vulnerable when they lack one of their players.

[Mushinronja]

Well I'm having some trouble understanding what you mean by the wingman system now. When I think wingman system, I now think of 10 groups of 2.

 

 

Anyways, it would be much easier to just have everyone play randomly, lol.

 

 

Maybe instead of 4 groups of 5 it could be 2 groups of 10. Then there would be more of freedom in who you can play with.

 

 

Hmm, maybe then

 

Team Name: Ragnarok or Aldar Rok

 

Squad 1 - Muspell 01 - 10

 

Squad 2 - Nifl 11 - 20

 

 

It would first be only Muspell until we reach 10 members, then it would break off to Muspell & Nifl.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Mushinronja

[GodlyPerfection]

Well I'm having some trouble understanding what you mean by the wingman system now. When I think wingman system, I now think of 10 groups of 2.

 

 

Anyways, it would be much easier to just have everyone play randomly, lol.

 

 

Maybe instead of 4 groups of 5 it could be 2 groups of 10. Then there would be more of freedom in who you can play with.

 

Not necessarily 10 groups of 2... but have each player be very very comfortable playing with 3-5 people in a pair with wingman tactics like bait and switch. They will typically be good at playing with others who play at around the same times as they do. Then when you need a full team together you grab two pairings that are online and trust that they will work well together in pairs because they do it all the time anyways. And then the operators job can also be made easier cuz now you can have callouts for pairings as well to have them watch their flank or notify them to move or something.

[Mushinronja]

Well that's sort of like having one person being comfortable playing with the other members of their squad, but being able to help another squad when they need it. Well it's sort of like that but more flexible.

[GodlyPerfection]

Well that's sort of like having one person being comfortable playing with the other members of their squad, but being able to help another squad when they need it. Well it's sort of like that but more flexible.

 

Exactly, you create dynamic squads out of good pairings.

[Densuo]

Just got my copy. It's taking some getting used to.

[Moon Walker]

I'd try not to stretch the flexibility too much otherwise you'll just create a lot of jack of all trades and pre-set "tactics" rather than pairs... Like sniper and sentry placer as a set tactic that "any" two people will learn to pick up rather have a defined sniper and defined sentry placer.

 

Hmmm, it has its ups and downs..... I mean a completely specialized sniper ( provided he heavily relies on his partner the sentry placer ) would probably lose his effectiveness if his partner is missing. Or a better example is like a move/gen jammer + CQC AC killer/Tank. The latter could still perform but not at the same level as with his partner who is specialized in that skill.

 

Pre-set tactics would be good because it alternative members to take on required roles but then it'd be hard to know where his true calling is at.

[gandalfrockman]

I have run a couple of large guilds/clans and some smaller playgroups as well.

 

I think as far as flexibility goes, its more important to be flexible in mindset than design, particularly for commanders.

If your territory gets attacked and all thats available is three guys who always play lightweights and another guy that plays a qaud sniper, then you need to be able to roll with it.

 

I have been paying attention to common archetypes developing in the JP vids as well as common strategys, and with a team that can think and act flexibly, I dont see any completely untenable mix of unit except for 4 heavys, and even then that would only be a problem on offense, I think it could work on defense. It seems to be pretty intentional, From soft has avoided creating a situation where every team has to have a specific balance of combat types. is it going to be optimal? no, and super hardcore teams will go for that optimal combination, they will also enforce minimum hours of play standards and nightly scrimmage attendance though.

 

 

It occurs to me that most folks are going to have a particular play style they are good at and/or prefer, and telling people that they should play something else for the good of the team isnt likely to work out except in the most organized and competitive groups.

Those usually arent the groups for folks with familys, or jobs that require a large time commitment.

 

As far as organization and breaking people into sqauds, I think its a bad idea to ASSIGN people to groups initially.

Dont start with any pre-ordained groupings. Play. Work together. Those 'Wingman' and 'Sqaud' groupings will form organically al on their own, When members want to formalize them thats great and the team leadership should support it.

 

Example: Mushinronja has signed on for my team (yes this is indeed the same gandlafrockman from gamefaqs), he and another member are always on at the same times, and frequently work well together. They begin to develop the sort of near psychic shorthand and ingame codependence that is beneficial to the group. The sqaud leaders should recognize this and start pairing them up when possible. If they come up with some horrific pun to refer to them as a pair (references to norse mythology also work I suppose) then thats fine too. When the same thing happens with 3 or 4 members thats good to.

 

I guess what I am saying is its unwise to push this stuff unless your a super hardcore group playing 8 hours a day.

It works better to just let it happen naturally.

 

PS: Hello Im this guy, that has played alot of armored core and has been looking forward to ac5 since ac4fa came out.

I'm forming a gfaqs team as soon as my copy arrives. (hopefully the 20th, but maybe as late as the 22). Hopefully we can get a full roster before the traditional GFAQS gamelaunch trollfest starts.

[GodlyPerfection]

Team stuff...

 

What this guy said all the way. That's why I prefer a loose wingman system. Players naturally find people the pair well with and knowing who that is and focusing on that is much simpler and more flexible than trying to setup a hardcore squad.

[Mushinronja]

Did I sign up for the gamefaqs team?

 

 

EDIT: Oh, my bad for the misunderstanding, but when I posted in your topic I was just explaining that a team was set up during the 2 days of online play when the demo was released in japan. Currently I am signed up as a reserve in the Reaching Perfection PS3 team (the site godly talks about all the time). Well that means I'm not techinically on the team, I plan on playing the story and order missions first so an opening may be... open.

 

Well, we'll see when I'm done with solo play, lol.

 

And I never mentioned telling people to play with a certain type of mech. And I do like the idea of people forming their own in-team squads on their own, something i was considering would happen too. That would basically be like my squad idea except more natural.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Mushinronja

[gandalfrockman]

I thought about creating an account at reachingperfection.. but I'm a level designer... it would feel weird. Edited March 19, 2012 by gandalfrockman