[Starting a Clan?]VC Recruiting Wave

Users who are viewing this thread

RalliX

Count
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

I'd also say that most of these new VC groups are going to be modelling themselves somewhat like NW regiments.
They're going to make up arbitrary ranking systems for themselves which don't really have any purpose, and most of them are going to be anachronistic or historically inaccurate.

So I'm just making this thread so that people can talk about the initial stages of growth of this community.

I'm going to give some history and my experience of clan creation, development, and maintenance to share with noobs and vets alike. I'd like the new guys to attempt to learn fast the mistakes not to make, and encourage the old boys to ease up with their normally sarcastic attitude. Feel free to add to this thread, or make your own, veteran leaders.

We veterans want to teach these guys what does and does not work both in game and before game, so that they develop fast, and we can have a thriving and gripping competitive community.

History:
With the beta and then release of Warband there was a wave of clans formed, most of them were small, around a dozen or so guys. None of them knew what exactly they were going to do in relation to each other. This turned out to be just a few things.
Once they started doing those things, they had to learn from scratch how exactly to do them well.

NW came out much later, and the ideas of groups and units(clans) was already established, but carried out by an entirely new community. They didn't know about the tactics and ideas of small scale combat which the Warband clans had. The huge number of new players, and the strong reenactor community encouraged large and strict battles between several different groups at once.

The strict rules of these battles were unnecessary in the eyes of WB clans. Any veteran native WB group could see that any of these formations and rules simply limited the effectiveness of these NW clans. It seemed like roleplay, existing solely for atmosphere. Why must I stand here and get shot with the rest of these guys, when instead I could just go behind this hill or tree just a short distance away, and still keep contact with my unit?

In other words, this way of doing things that NW regiments developed could be fun in a different way, but it was not very competitive in that it does not take advantage of the gameplay elements competitively.

So basically the only things to do as a Warband or NW clan are:
1: Fight other clans
2: Practice for fighting other clans
3: Attend community events as a group(EG: Multiclan battles, Duel Tournaments)
4: Fight other clans in a tournament
5: Populate public servers and work together(pubstomping)
6: Make mods or maps for the game
7: Do something other than M&B as a group

I have no reason to suspect that any of these options will not be viable for a Viking Conquest group.

So let's look at what makes a clan/group/regiment fun to be in and around and part of.
Firstly, you need to do stuff. Like those things listed up there. Nobody wants to be in a group that never or rarely does anything together.

Secondly, people should not feel a need to try to 'level up' their status in the group. The atmosphere should be one which involves learning about the game from each other, and helping and improving so you can beat the other guys, or just have fun(Believe me, Mount & Blade only gets funner when you can fight stronger opponents). If people feel like they have to compete for the positions of 'power' or greater say within the group, there tends to be competition between people in the unit itself, which may result in drama.

Warning: Drama taken in large enough doses can cause the following symptoms.
Moderate to severe anal discomfort
Fractures within the communal spine(playerbase)
Cancer(Endless, pointless drama)

Most native clans have switched over to a role format, formally or informally.
What I mean by a role, is that a person is recognized by the other players in his group as doing a specific job in the group.
This can be playing a certain class better than others, or being an organizer and informing the group about when activities are going to happen as well as setting them up.

It can be being the/a founder of a group, thus having the most say over the group's direction and demeanor, and what the group's long term plan is.(whose opinion will either be respected or drama/group fracture will likely ensue)

Or it can mean being a commander(NA translation: Caller) during matches because the players are confident in your command ability.(Or because you're the first/only person to step up)

Other things, like being a modder or a duelist are not greatly necessary to a group's survival, unless they're a modding or dueling clan.

When you organize your group along a role structure, every player feels like they have a job to do, and that it is important to the group's advancement. There is no arguing over who does what because someone is either good at something or he is not. If there are few jobs to do for a role for which you have more players than you need, the most skilled player for that role will be selected when you need to win, and the less skilled player will be chosen when learning is more important.

Overlapping roles are also useful when multiple players have a skill, but few players with that skill can be present at a particular time.

So basically what I'm saying to you new guys is that none of the veteran players in native look at each other as "King" or "Knight" or "Peasant." Ranks are largely meaningless to us. We play together, and if you can do something well enough, or want to learn it, you will be probably be given more chances to do that thing in the future with the group.

This is why new players just aren't in top tier competitive clans. Because they aren't good at almost anything in comparison to the other guys in the group who have been playing for thousands of hours and have dozens of competitive matches under their belt.

New players need to join new groups. They then need to learn from the skilled players and groups so they can catch up, and try to get an edge over the other new clans around them. Eventually bad new guys become decent okay guys, and then they become strong experienced guys, able to challenge the old veterans that taught them.

Old and experienced players only do themselves a disservice when they fail to share the secrets to winning with those weaker than them. The only thing in this game more fun than winning is fighting an opponent who is on the same level as you.
Those old players will find that they can't enjoy things anymore when they can't find someone who is as good as them or better.


So TLDR: Let us veterans be the best bros of the noobs, so all of us can have a fun game.

Also, ranks are stupid to have in a game, and do heavy historical research(more than 1 google search) before basing them on real historical ranks. This will lend atmosphere and immersion to yer little RP.
 
In before the multiplayer kicks off  :smile:
But good thread Rallix. A good read and words of wisdom.

Personally, as a group "clan" IMHO historical ranks and/or names are not the main point of events or gameplay. What I mean is we should not try to force the new people of the community to use mandatory ranks or names. Ranks and names are two different things. Ranks I can understand the need for some historical accuracy for a historical clan name. But in-game if I want to keep my MP nickname the same in even public play, is that so wrong? The event I go to for Napoleonic Wars is "relaxed" atmosphere. Rules are enforced and punishments are carried out if broken but no one speaks a word about any other person's in-game name for MP.

Basically we shall see if the clan system of Vikingr mod triumphs for gameplay. As it is a well known fact Viking Conquest and Vikingr have similar goals in mind for their modifications.  :razz:
 
Rallix said:
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

Two clans. Two clan threads have been made to recruit members. You could count a third, Ragnar's, the Jomsvikings clan on Vikingr but that was only to secure the name Jomsviking for his clan by making it public before the DLC hits and someone else "nicks" the name. But yes many more can follow so I see your point, anyway...

Again the pure hatred for rankings and clans can be seen, I respect all of you who have been here from the start, but if people want to make a clan then by gods let them do it, you don't have to get involved, yes I also respect trying to make the clan historically accurate myself, I have helped lead historical clans as well and I find the use of inappropriate ranks to be disrespectful especially when it is quite easy for the real ranks to be found but they still don't bother changing them.
Anyway let them do as they want, and if they are as ridiculous as you say they are they will fail, evidence for this is actually quite recent, the main new clan thread that went up  has been disregarded by everyone for one of the worse ranking systems ever seen in MnB, the use of false propaganda and the use of ridiculous ranks such as the rank SLAVE for newcomers has caused it to fail. and the second closed down in less then 30 minutes due to the stream of hate of the name already being taken, coincidentally that was Jomsvikings. So it sort of shows that if the clan does not stick to the already set principles then the public won't accept them and they will fail, thus nothing to worry about  :lol:
 
BlazingPhoenix said:
Rallix said:
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

Two clans. Two clan threads have been made to recruit members. You could count a third, Ragnar's, the J
Rallix said:
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

you seem to miss the keyword going not are
this is just a taste of whats to come.
 
Amaranth the Druid said:
BlazingPhoenix said:
Rallix said:
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

Two clans. Two clan threads have been made to recruit members. You could count a third, Ragnar's, the J
Rallix said:
I'd say many threads are going to be made by relatively new players trying to recruit dudes into their new Viking Conquest group.

you seem to miss the keyword going not are
this is just a taste of whats to come.

Aye I misread it, my apologies. Ill edit it.
 
Funnily enough, I didn't think "Slave" was the worst offender in that thread. At least in Carolingian Francia, a not insignificant number of retainers would have been serfs, and runaway slaves joining the Vikings was a concern in Anglo-Saxon England (although, naturally, while they stayed with the Vikings they wouldn't be slaves anymore). Other ranks didn't even have that slim justification.

But still, the bigger issue is the confusion between socio-legal ranks, and proper military ranks. I don't think there's really anything of the second kind for this period, and I don't believe socio-legal ranks (like, say, gebur, geneat and þegn) are fitting - they're a bit like having "aristocrat", "peasant", "bourgeois" and "urban worker" as ranks in an NW regiment.
 
There will be those one post threads that people spam recruiting and so it begins. The crackdown on the recruiting spam of our time..

Then reserving a clan name, oh goodness.. a whole other can of worms. Perhaps it would be best to not let reservations happen on the main thread where people will want to post I claim 'Clan Name'
 
I figured calling the rookies "slave" would just be some sort of frat-like hazing and therefore that the rookies wouldn't mind too much as long as they could get out of it and inflict it on the next batch. :razz:

Anyway, folks, do you want to give your members a sense of accomplishment and that's why you want dubious ranks? Easy: have your leader distribute rings and treasure to those retainers who distinguish themselves. Keep a tally. Have someone write poetry to honour your best warriors, even. You don't need no stinkin' badges!
 
hrotha said:
I figured calling the rookies "slave" would just be some sort of frat-like hazing and therefore that the rookies wouldn't mind too much as long as they could get out of it and inflict it on the next batch. :razz:

Anyway, folks, do you want to give your members a sense of accomplishment and that's why you want dubious ranks? Easy: have your leader distribute rings and treasure to those retainers who distinguish themselves. Keep a tally. Have someone write poetry to honour your best warriors, even. You don't need no stinkin' badges!

But how would anyone outside the clan know about these peoples accomplishments, some may argue that without a rank in their in-game name they won't be able to show off their "accomplishments and authority status of the clan to the rest of the world."  :neutral: :roll:

Better yet why not use both. :lol:
 
BlazingPhoenix said:
Better yet why not use both. :lol:
tumblr_mkws36UgVu1ry10fwo1_400.gif
 
You earn your fame through deeds in battle, not through some made up titles no one gives a rat's ass about. If you're good or fun, people know you, if your clan is skilled or fun, people will similarly know of your clan name, even if you don't try to rank members.

I remember many names from all the way back to the Warband beta, dangerous foes and brave friends, and none of those I names I still recall were because someone had some likely fictional or illogical rank next to their name.
 
Úlfheðinn said:
You earn your fame through deeds in battle, not through some made up titles no one gives a rat's ass about. If you're good or fun, people know you, if your clan is skilled or fun, people will similarly know of your clan name, even if you don't try to rank members.

I remember many names from all the way back to the Warband beta, dangerous foes and brave friends, and none of those I names I still recall were because someone had some likely fictional or illogical rank next to their name.
Ulf here gets it. I've never remembered a person by their rank in some group. They walk into a server calling themselves killer and walk out with their ass handed to them? No respect.

A strong enemy's name need not be strong. I'll remember Poof_the_Goldfish if he hands me my ass on a platter.

I think this thread needs a little bump.
 
Nice thread Rallix! Some good points you mention there! Hopefully it can be used to create a more relaxing and enjoyable community.

 
Me as many others eventually tried NW at some point, but I can tell from my experience that there's a real gap that grew bigger and bigger between the two communities (Native and Native mods // NW).

I would say half of the hardcore NW players have bought Warband just because of NW and actually never play Native at all. I knew a lot of them. That's just fine.

The problem with NW teams that often join Native or Native based mods events is that they see those as 'recreation' stuff, where their strict rules doesn't apply, and thus feel free of trolling and cross the small rules of Native MP). Try to cross a rule on a NW event, you'll get instant ban. Why so many NW players don't behave on Native events then?

My guess is that NW teams will play VC on that base, an occasional mod to play, but will stick with their main NW stuff. The two communities in their bases are too separated right now I think.

Just my thoughts. Also don't get me wrong, I had awesome moments on NW with the 1er Grenadiers, mocking Alene for being such a cannon balls magnet while being so good at melee for example xD
 
If someone wants a focus on historical accuracy and atmosphere in their clan and roleplay using ineffective formations like line battles or shield walls all the power to them.

However what I don't get is why when someone doesn't give a damn about historical accuracy or roleplaying and wants to play for the gameplay and the combat system so many people seem to find it unacceptable and demand in outrage that they fit to their historical standard?
 
In my years of gaming I'd say what holds a gaming group together is an insanely dedicated leader that has a weld solid bond to just a few other people.  The first is this 'inner circle' needs to be permanently welded together as well as reasonably good at the game.

The leader needs to have an OCD like obsession with the game of choice and be willing to basically give up their ability to have fun in the game for the group. People look up on the leadership role like it is some ticket to free respect and social proof, and yes, if done well that is earned, but the price for it is heavy.

Members get to just log in and practiced or show up and play at events. Leaders have to have arguments and scheduling conflicts, fix the server, pay bills, deal with drama, fight off accusations, whatever. Gameplay purity drops when the groups get large enough. It can be really rewarding, but really burdensome as well.

But as long as that core group is there, they are the ones that drew in the initial recruits and will continue to do so as long as they continue to play. Lose them and the group fails eventually.

I've seen this in countless groups I've helped lead or been a part of over my 20+ years of internet gaming and that seems to be the most overwhelming destructors are losing leadership or game fatigue.
 
Nice thread men! About help new people especially :smile: thats the way. Anyway, this will be a explosion of clans i guess :s
 
Back
Top Bottom