Qualifying for Positions

[Talonsbane]

The recent release of the Nova had me thinking (rare though it is) that wouldn't it be great to develop a qualification system, where players could apply for training and pass some sort of test that says to others who would hire them, that they know what's involved in any particular position?

Great idea! Let's properly teach our members how to TESTify through repeated rounds of drunken shenanigans when & where ever possible in the Verse. Cheers!

And here I was thinking it was a failure. If you can walk away then it means it could have been a bigger explosion.

Define walking away please. Because I'd count a TESTie drunkenly (or concussed) swaggering away from anything a victory.

How about drunkards and imbeciles? Not saying there is not the possibility of a fairy or two in our ranks, just we have no metric for such things as the only qualification was. Can you crash your ship and submit a join request.

Not all drunkards are imbeciles & not all imbeciles are drunkards, but when those 2 combine, you've got a special kind of crash TEST pilot.

I know the popular opinion is that the M2 is better suited to deliver tanks to a battlefield. When I was looking into if I wanted the M2 or C2 I have to say while in theory the M2 would have better survivability on paper my question was how much longer would it last under any sort of fighter or ground AA engagement? Are we talking a few seconds were even if the mayday was answered there would be no way for even an escort to do anything about it beyond taking note of where the wreckage landed. Or would it give enough time for possible evasive action on the Herc pilot and possible return fire from the escort to enable any sort of increase survivability that would not be found in the C2 model.

While it is known that they would like ballistic damage to be mapped to its pentation score and armor would reduce the damage done beyond the surface its not known how much armor the M2 has nor how impactful it would be against protecting critical components. Would energy weapons just overload the components and bypass armor once they brought down the shield (both ships have 2 size L shields) so armor would only have an impact on ballistic damage?

In the end for me being able to carry 33% more cargo seemed to be a better option than the possibility that the M2 variant will be able to take a couple more shots (a few more seconds) before it too became a flaming wreckage. After all these are not ships I would recommend flying into a hot LZ nor would they be good to fly unescorted as they are huge targets of opportunity. So I plan on bringing troops, supplies and tonks to a forward operating base but let the Valkyrie enjoy being shot at.

When I saw the 1st person load up a Nova into a C2, the 1st thing that I thought of was ...

 

[Han Burgundy]

I'm not so sure that an overarching qualifications system is really the right fit for test. It is pretty much inevitable that sort of thing will eventually decay into elitism and a really sad form of moto-dorkary. I DO, however, think some form of pre-flight readiness check to run positions on YellowJacket missions and the like (small group) wouldn't be a bad idea. That ties more into training, though, instead of a test you'd have to pass.

 

[vahadar]

Just reacting to @Talonsbane I am glad to see you back I thought something bad happened !! Cheers to a nice poster

 

[Stevetank]

The recent release of the Nova had me thinking (rare though it is) that wouldn't it be great to develop a qualification system, where players could apply for training and pass some sort of test that says to others who would hire them, that they know what's involved in any particular position? So for instance, each of the three positions on the Nova could be trained and tested, and TEST could compile and keep a list of players who have qualifications for whatever their expertise is. If you're head of a ground assault group using tanks, wouldn't it be great to have a master list of TESTies who qualify so you know who to contact and how to organize a group? You know it's true, when you challenge everyone you challenge no one. If however, you have a list of players skilled at TONK techniques, that's something you can work with.

What Nautilus owner wouldn't want a master list of TESTis trained in expert minelaying and retrieval?

My guess is there are a LOT of these kinds of positions, that are going to take some special effort to truly master. How many hours will it take to say you are a competent tank commander? Should be a fair few I'd say.

I think this kind of thing would make TEST a more potent force in the future. I'm not suggesting any one person write the qualifications, but rather those who have been training and continue to, are each probably the best players to write qualifications for their individual fields.

So if you've been training on the Nox in order to be ready to put the X1 Force into battle, you're the person to write the qualifying guidelines for the Assault Biker specialty, etc.

A the least, shouldn't we find a way to train people at turret gunning?

I have a lot of ships and pairs of ships that I have been collecting for the purpose of training TEST pirates and other TESTies.

I wanted to make sure that our pirates were so well trained that they can perform well even while drunk. Training other TESTies is welcome too.

I have war ships and cargo ships galore.

Jav
Idris P+K
Kraken
Privateer
Naut
Hammerhead
Polaris x2
Perseus x2
Hull E
Hull C
M2 x2
A2
Carrack x3
Caterpillar x2
Gemini
Orion
Crucible
Reclaimer x2
Vulcan
Vulture
Prospector x2
Endeavor master set
Corsair
Buccaneer x2
Ares Ion x2
Ares Inferno
F8c x2 (yes people can train in these)
Cutlass Black x2
Cutlass blue
Cutlass red
Redeemer x2
Herald x2
Terrapin x2
Tonk x2
Ballista x2
Cyclone MT x2
Taurus x2
Gladiator x2
MSR x2
Pioneer
(Reserved for the ones I forgot)


Just don't touch my Auroras!

 

[Radegast74]

Wasn't that the guys who came into the forums here to air their dirty laundry? lol... I was hoping to forget that.

IKR? Who says that growing old and forgetting things is necessarily bad? lol

 

[Shadow Reaper]

I'm not so sure that an overarching qualifications system is really the right fit for test. It is pretty much inevitable that sort of thing will eventually decay into elitism and a really sad form of moto-dorkary. I DO, however, think some form of pre-flight readiness check to run positions on YellowJacket missions and the like (small group) wouldn't be a bad idea.

Any way a player gains a badge of approval that says to those who don't know them that they're competent at a given task would be fine. If you're test averse, methinks TEST is the wrong place for you (pun intended) but what I'm describing is completely voluntary. If any given player doesn't want to avail himself to it that's up to him, but a merc looking for work will want to be on as many people's lists as possible.

Something we short change when thinking aboutships and professions is that most of the profitable enterprises in SC will require groups. The more you can show you're competent to any group leader, the more work you'll have. People love to buy big ships, but I have to wonder how many of them will fly regularly. And seriously, would you want to take a Jav and a pair of Idris into Vanduul space knowing most of your crew has never used a turret or a cap class scanner?

 

[Bambooza]

Not all drunkards are imbeciles & not all imbeciles are drunkards, but when those 2 combine, you've got a special kind of crash TEST pilot.

Its what makes Test the best!

Now to get the C2 looking like this.

 

[Bambooza]

And seriously, would you want to take a Jav and a pair of Idris into Vanduul space knowing most of your crew has never used a turret or a cap class scanner?

My first knee jerk answer is Yes of course, why not go and see what happens. If nothing else the mission debriefing would be a hoot. After all we don't remember all the successful raids but everyone remembers leeroy jenkins.

But I understand you are attempting to bring a degree of seriousness and it is a valid idea. To have some sort of basic cert program saying that you have shown a degree of proficiency in a given task and this would be helpful to those forming groups or bringing on crew know you are at the minimum be as good as a basic NPC. I also agree with others that if such a program was introduced it would be limited to basic training and not used as a tier system as that has always ended in poorly.

As we get into beta and beyond I have a feeling there will be sub groups that will form and players on their day to day, week to week play will form groups based upon their play style and expectations. While players like @Black Sunder could easily form a low stress mining operation that can allow any players willing to participate and do well. Other groups like @Stevetank operating in a far more high risk environment will not be able to take on any player as a chaotic personality would cause far to much trouble for the high risk profession of being a mercenary/pirate, that I am not even sure having a badge would be enough to accept them into the days activities.

So with this in consideration I have to say that a badge system while neat in concept doesn't really accomplish anything. As those groups who would be willing and able to accept unknown test members into their activities would most likely be able to accept anyone even without knowing their badge qualifications or being green. While those who would benefit from a training and certification system would still only bring in players that have been pre vested and have someone vouch for. I would not expect to be able to log in and join @Stevetank's group on a raiding party without first showing him or a member of his group that I was a) a skilled player and b) going to be making taticaly sound choices and not be looking to shoot everything that moves.
On the flip side when I am in my Orion helping out @Black Sunder I'd be willing to pick up any lfg in discord/guided and as long as they were willing to help or at the minimal not be too disruptive to the mining process and not be a jerk on comms let them remain.

 

[Vavrik]

My first knee jerk answer is Yes of course, why not go and see what happens. If nothing else the mission debriefing would be a hoot. After all we don't remember all the successful raids but everyone remembers leeroy jenkins.

That's hilarious on too many levels for me. My wife still plays, and we still have friends that date from those days waaay back then.
But nowadays, even in WoW a certain proficiency is needed for mythic dungeons and raids - even for casual guilds.

I'm not entirely sold on how it should look... and I know there's precious little of that from a combat perspective that I would be much good at... but I still think it gives you a way to separate players who have put some effort into skills, from those that you are going to need to treat as raw recruits for a while - and it still doesn't stop any personal favorites kind of groups from forming. Those are just going to happen because it's human nature.

 

[Sky Captain]

Leeroy Jenkins. Damn, I thought I was already an older gamer then. Yikes.

 

[SoloFlyer]

My first knee jerk answer is Yes of course, why not go and see what happens. If nothing else the mission debriefing would be a hoot. After all we don't remember all the successful raids but everyone remembers leeroy jenkins.

I just want to put it out there that my plan to take out the enemy may involve dropping a hand grenade down my pants and giving them a hug.

Seriously though, I know putting time into increasing my skill level is going to be tough so I don't plan on trying to get into a hardcore group where I'll get -50 DKP if I can't shoot the eye out of a Vanduul from 100 yards. I'll probably be focusing on non-combat stuff for the most part anyway. If I do join some folks doing a combat mission I would probably look for the folks who are semi-serious about it but mainly looking to have fun. I mean, even if I did eventually become proficient in whatever skill I'd probably need to get experience from somewhere first right?

 

[Han Burgundy]

Any way a player gains a badge of approval that says to those who don't know them that they're competent at a given task would be fine. If you're test averse, methinks TEST is the wrong place for you (pun intended) but what I'm describing is completely voluntary. If any given player doesn't want to avail himself to it that's up to him, but a merc looking for work will want to be on as many people's lists as possible.

Something we short change when thinking aboutships and professions is that most of the profitable enterprises in SC will require groups. The more you can show you're competent to any group leader, the more work you'll have. People love to buy big ships, but I have to wonder how many of them will fly regularly. And seriously, would you want to take a Jav and a pair of Idris into Vanduul space knowing most of your crew has never used a turret or a cap class scanner?

I totally get what you're saying, and agree for the most part. I've just seen too many "Badges" and "Honors" within online communities become just a weird wannabe drill-instructoresque auto-fillatio session for the ones conducting the "Tests". And the whole reason I chose Test at all was the fact that it seemed FURTHEST away from taking the game so seriously that we'd be doing tests and qualifications. The mere concept just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But, then again, I'm just some fuckin' guy on the internet with apparent baggage on the subject, so what the hell do I know? I would just hate to see TEST devolve into some petty pissing contest like so many other orgs seem to. I mean, also, the game itself will have a reputation system built in that will track your deeds and proficiencies pretty well it seems. So there's that to go off of too

Just my $0.02

 

[Thugari]

I was thinking what is the qualification process. If you walk away from the crash does that count as a failure?

any crash you can walk away from is a landing.

 

[Bambooza]

any crash you can walk away from is a landing.

And a landing is not a crash which i believe is our main purpose. To test by crashing.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

I've just seen too many "Badges" and "Honors" within online communities become just a weird wannabe drill-instructoresque auto-fillatio session for the ones conducting the "Tests". . .The mere concept just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

That about makes you the perfect guy to figure this out. IMHO, the best guys in leadership most often did not want the job. They just knew how to do the job right. Sounds like that could be you.

So look, Harry buys a Polaris. He needs an EM warfare/scan guy, a navigator, a couple engineers, half dozen turret gunners, a really sharpshooting gunner for the chin mount and missile launchers, and a Master Sargent to lead a couple other PCs each leading small teams of marines. About a dozen guys, presuming the marines are NPCs. The captain of that ship knows he's not going to get the same dozen guys every time he has available, so he'll be drawing from some sort of lists of who can do those jobs. If he can't organize that kind of small group regularly, he won't be playing his game regularly. He'll throw up his hands and go solo mining. This problem grows exponentially with growth in ship/crew size.

One of the huge advantages we have in TEST is the raw SIZE of the org. How much work could it be to find the guys who know how to do those tasks, and ask them to design one to two hour training programs that people get certified from once they invest that time? Once it is up and running, players will take pride in their training and it will evolve. It my take some care to assure it doesn't evolve into something anal, but just saying true, Montoya is the last thing from anal. I doubt he'll let that happen.

And I'm thinking of this now not because of the Polaris, but because of the Tonk. It really needs three trained players to be effective, or maybe five for three tanks. The tanks aren't worth anything without skilled players, since nobody I know likes to lose.

 

[Sirus7264]

The recent release of the Nova had me thinking (rare though it is) that wouldn't it be great to develop a qualification system, where players could apply for training and pass some sort of test that says to others who would hire them, that they know what's involved in any particular position? So for instance, each of the three positions on the Nova could be trained and tested, and TEST could compile and keep a list of players who have qualifications for whatever their expertise is. If you're head of a ground assault group using tanks, wouldn't it be great to have a master list of TESTies who qualify so you know who to contact and how to organize a group? You know it's true, when you challenge everyone you challenge no one. If however, you have a list of players skilled at TONK techniques, that's something you can work with.

What Nautilus owner wouldn't want a master list of TESTis trained in expert minelaying and retrieval?

My guess is there are a LOT of these kinds of positions, that are going to take some special effort to truly master. How many hours will it take to say you are a competent tank commander? Should be a fair few I'd say.

I think this kind of thing would make TEST a more potent force in the future. I'm not suggesting any one person write the qualifications, but rather those who have been training and continue to, are each probably the best players to write qualifications for their individual fields.

So if you've been training on the Nox in order to be ready to put the X1 Force into battle, you're the person to write the qualifying guidelines for the Assault Biker specialty, etc.

A the least, shouldn't we find a way to train people at turret gunning?

This is a great idea honestly. Maybe set standardized testing to see which players perform certain manuvers the best also such as time it takes to get over 3 certain mountains or firings the main cannon on moving targets or staionary targets.

 

[Bambooza]

That about makes you the perfect guy to figure this out. IMHO, the best guys in leadership most often did not want the job. They just knew how to do the job right. Sounds like that could be you.

So look, Harry buys a Polaris. He needs an EM warfare/scan guy, a navigator, a couple engineers, half dozen turret gunners, a really sharpshooting gunner for the chin mount and missile launchers, and a Master Sargent to lead a couple other PCs each leading small teams of marines. About a dozen guys, presuming the marines are NPCs. The captain of that ship knows he's not going to get the same dozen guys every time he has available, so he'll be drawing from some sort of lists of who can do those jobs. If he can't organize that kind of small group regularly, he won't be playing his game regularly. He'll throw up his hands and go solo mining. This problem grows exponentially with growth in ship/crew size.

One of the huge advantages we have in TEST is the raw SIZE of the org. How much work could it be to find the guys who know how to do those tasks, and ask them to design one to two hour training programs that people get certified from once they invest that time? Once it is up and running, players will take pride in their training and it will evolve. It my take some care to assure it doesn't evolve into something anal, but just saying true, Montoya is the last thing from anal. I doubt he'll let that happen.

And I'm thinking of this now not because of the Polaris, but because of the Tonk. It really needs three trained players to be effective, or maybe five for three tanks. The tanks aren't worth anything without skilled players, since nobody I know likes to lose.

I am liking where this is heading, so long as there is ample training opportunities as you are right the Tonk does require people who know how to operate each station to make it even remotely effective.

 

[Han Burgundy]

That about makes you the perfect guy to figure this out. IMHO, the best guys in leadership most often did not want the job. They just knew how to do the job right.

My day job essentially revolves around explaining shit to people who are woefully unprepared to receive said information, so I have seen a lot of my coworkers over the years fall to their Ego. They were picked because of their skill at the task-at-hand, not their proficiency in dealing with people; So they will often forget that not everyone will find the same things easy. The key would be to build on successes instead of dwelling on failure. Real millineal shit, I know, but it encourages those below the skill floorboards to keep trying and gradually improve to a workable level. As long as the certification process is run in a way that keeps it light and informative over exclusionary, it could be a fantastic asset to have. Hell, you could even make up little discord badges for when you're shopping the main channel for crew. But the whole experience would hinge on how that training is conducted. Remember; We're a gaggle of drunkards with internet spaceships and a light deathwish.

\$3.50

 

[Shadow Reaper]

. . .not everyone will find the same things easy. The key would be to build on successes instead of dwelling on failure. Real millineal shit, I know, but it encourages those below the skill floorboards to keep trying and gradually improve to a workable level. As long as the certification process is run in a way that keeps it light and informative over exclusionary, it could be a fantastic asset to have. Hell, you could even make up little discord badges for when you're shopping the main channel for crew. But the whole experience would hinge on how that training is conducted.

Well, I have never suggested making any training mandatory, and I'm not even sure we need to be graded. Grading is a very complex subject not undertaken lightly. We shouldn't pass over it simply to avoid all unplesantries. I may well be there are some skills easy to grade and some that are impossible, or some that hold consequencs that requires some sort of grading and others not. It's a complex issue. I do think we already have a couple or three different kinds of training, and awarding players who have put in the time with a certification may be all we can do. Past that, word of mouth and experience should help people figure out who to contact when Fred can't make Saturday night at the turret.

Anyone interested should contact Montoya. In the meantime, spitballing here may have benefits. First off what kind of list of skills might we make so the powers that be (nothing is happening without Montoya behind it) can search for field experts, and can anyone describe the successes at the fighter school? That is really the pioneering effort along these lines so far as I am aware.

 

[Han Burgundy]

Well, I have never suggested making any training mandatory, and I'm not even sure we need to be graded. Grading is a very complex subject not undertaken lightly. We shouldn't pass over it simply to avoid all unplesantries. I may well be there are some skills easy to grade and some that are impossible, or some that hold consequencs that requires some sort of grading and others not. It's a complex issue. I do think we already have a couple or three different kinds of training, and awarding players who have put in the time with a certification may be all we can do. Past that, word of mouth and experience should help people figure out who to contact when Fred can't make Saturday night at the turret.

Anyone interested should contact Montoya. In the meantime, spitballing here may have benefits. First off what kind of list of skills might we make so the powers that be (nothing is happening without Montoya behind it) can search for field experts, and can anyone describe the successes at the fighter school? That is really the pioneering effort along these lines so far as I am aware.

Okay, you've got me convinced. My suggestion would lie along the line of maybe different level certs that signify that you've undergone the corresponding training(Feather in cap vs 'I'm the bestest there ever was!'). Like tier 0 would be akin to no cert, just an informative session to learn how everything works. Tier 1 would be learning some of the finer points of your role (tips/tricks to be more efficient). Then Tier 2 could be a more involved training that highlights more of the big-picture command type stuff for that subject and so on.

For example; Turrets

Tier 0
Participants will learn how to power their turret, change gimbal modes, cycle targets, and understand what overheating is (Done in a fun "target practice" sort of fashion)

Tier 1
Learning different firing modes, different tactics/methods for target tracking/destruction, complying with firing orders and command direction, active power & heat management, and comms etiquette (Done in an Arena Commander sim session)

Tier 2
Learning the philosophy behind weapon choices, learn large vessel turret fire coordination, battlefield IQ and recognizing developing risks/opportunities, airframe identification and the corresponding tactical knowledge to adapt to their presence, defensive triage, cross-unit coordination, ect. (This one lives more in the classroom)

Tier 3
Command group. You are now actively reviewing training courses and designing new material. You are also interfacing with the Yellowjackets and others with in-verse experience to develop cross-company exercises and training events. It will be your job to oil the gears of our war machine with the blood of our enemies and assure that we always have new horrors to unleash upon them. (This is where the rubber meets the road and you are actively shaping our live combat strategies)