Rename the "Fighter" units?

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Na'enthos
Posts: 401
Joined: June 13th, 2004, 8:02 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post by Na'enthos »

Taking some of the suggested names/naming suggestions from this topic:
Dwarven Recruit (emphasising Dwarves' physical power by equating a rookie dwarf to L1 like a skilled human such as a spearman)

* Dwarven Soldier or Dwarven Serviceman. Dull, but accurate.

* Merman Sorrow (reflecting that they are a peaceful race and regret that they must go to war).

* Maybe we could make the L2 Naga a "Wardancer" and free up the title "Warrior" for the L1?
On the recruit? No. Dwarves are of a martial nature. They should have a standing army/armed forces sufficient that recruits do not serve at the front lines until they can join the regular armed forces. Well, that and it sounds wrong for dwarves. ;)

Sorrow.. too vague.

The naga suggestion, however, may be usable.
I would like clan warrior for the dwarves to emphase their togetherness.
Perhaps not that hot but I've always thought most good unit names are a kind of nicknames.
Oh, I like that. It's not necessary, in my opinion, and it might be too detailed. But I think it's a possibility, to be sure.
Merman Conscript- Descriptions says that warriors/lvl2 are the standing army, so the lvl1 must be something else. Although obligatory service may seem awkward for peaceful Mermen, i find solace in the excuse they are tested for the standing army, or have other requirements (do they have a treaty for supplying military help to the Loyalist army, maybe?).

Elvish Militant/Guard- If Elves are naturally graceful, makes sense most of them do know something about a sword or bow, and just answer the call to arms. It could also provide a more natural progression to Hero, since the first rank ain't really a drilled force, and leaders (Captains etc) emerge naturally.

Dwarvish Recruit/Infantryman- Dwarves have a very organized feeling to them, so there must be a rank before Steelclad. The progression from low cadet to plate-clad defender feels very exploitable. Incidentally, given Dwarven archetype, Fighter seems a good enough name.

I'm blank on Drakes. Squire/Vassal?, they do have a certain feudal flavor to them.
Mermen: This actually sounds nice to me. Mermen seem not all too warlike and not too numerous. So, conscription may be necessary.

Elvish militant/guard: No. Militant seems too agressive to me and guard is more fitting for a 2nd level unit (and elves have good names for their 2nd level units already).

Dwarvish Recruit/Infantryman: recruit.. no. See my reply to the first post I quoted. Infantryman sounds more fitting for humans (what with the 'man'at the end). So, I'd say no to that one, too.

Drakes: What, I didn't know they had knights, kings, queens and princesses? Do they have jousting tournaments, too? ;) Sorry, just don't think it fits too well.
* Skeleton (the melee one) should gain "fighter" in its name, to further separate it from skeleton archer, as skeleton as a racial term can include them both.
* Drake Warrior needs to be renamed, warrior is almost synonymous to fighter.
Skeleton warrior sound better to me. Then again, plain skeleton never bothered me, personally.

Personally, I think Drake fighter as a unit name is fine, as is Drake warrior.. but together they sound odd. Perhaps a new name could be thought up for either the level one or the level two drake unit (the fighter or warrior).
- Dwarven Recruit, Trooper
- Elven Footman
- Merman ... Recruit, Armiger (lit. "one who bears arms"), Guard, Protector, Defender, etc.
- Naga ... ?
- Drake - ?
Heh, of the suggested dwarven suggestions, I like the infantryman the most. Perhaps Dwarven Axer would be more appropriate.. I see the 1st level dwarves as capable soldiers more than those of teh other races, and given they have multiple melee fighting units, some name denoting their specific style/type of fighting (like the Ulfserker) or their task (like the Guardsman) would be more appropriate, I think.

Footman also sounds too 'feudal' to me. Also, I must say I do not mind the Elvish Fighter at all.

Protector sounds okay. But perhaps conscript is more appropriate?

[EDIT1]
-Axer/Axeman obviously won't work.. I forgot they also had a hammer. Dwarven Soldier/Infantryman/or something like Wayfarer suggested may work, though.

-Keep the elvish fighter. It fits and I haven't (yet) seen any suggestion I would see as an improvement, personally.

[EDIT2]
Yay, I forgot to add.. that I wanted to say that the Dwarvish Steelclad may need a new name as well. Makes me think of a boat, not a warrior-type figure..

Multiple posts edited together for Na'enthos since he's having technical difficulties editing --Irrevenant
Last edited by Na'enthos on June 18th, 2007, 10:33 am, edited 3 times in total.
He who would travel happily must travel light.
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
User avatar
irrevenant
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 3692
Joined: August 15th, 2005, 7:57 am
Location: I'm all around you.

Post by irrevenant »

Na'enthos wrote:Skeleton warrior sound better to me. Then again, plain skeleton never bothered me, personally.
"Skeletal Warrior" has a nice sound to it, too.
Na'enthos wrote:Also, I must say I do not mind the Elvish Fighter at all.
Agreed. The Elvish Fighter is a uniquely elven role. No other race has an L1 Swordsman/Archer hybrid and 'fighter' sums up his all-rounder status. I'm open to a better name if it comes along, though.

[EDIT] Warrior :arrow: Swordsman as per EP's point.
Last edited by irrevenant on June 18th, 2007, 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

"Warrior" is no more specific to melee combat than "Fighter" is.
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
User avatar
Ken_Oh
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2176
Joined: February 6th, 2006, 4:03 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Post by Ken_Oh »

Here's one: Elvish Guerrilla, since it implies unorthodox fighting and implies being a rebel.
khamul
Posts: 164
Joined: February 28th, 2005, 5:21 pm
Location: Somewhere solid, looking for a long enough lever

Post by khamul »

FWIW:

I like "Dwarven Clansman" for the dwarf fighter.
For me, it emphasises the unique dwarven flavour: the clan stands together. Everyone, man and woman, is expected to bear arms and armour, and stand to defend the clan in times of need.

"Merman Sorrow" I love - it's a great, evocative name, that adds masses of flavour a depth to the unit all by itself. It's sufficiently strong in terms of flavour that the rest of the merman names would probably need changing to match.

I like the idea of naming elven fighters along the lines of 'militant' - I just don't like the ideas suggested. At least "Elvish Fighter" has "freedom fighter" overtones.

I don't have a problem with "Skeleton", because it makes it plain that the simplest thing you can do with an animated skeleton is have it pick up an axe and go kill someone. Animating a skeleton to use a bow and arrows is much more significant technical challenge.
If life gives you Lions, Make Lionade.
User avatar
Redeth
Art Contributor
Posts: 338
Joined: January 21st, 2006, 5:08 pm
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Post by Redeth »

I like the sound of Dwarven Trooper, but there's already a Shock Trooper... dang. Dwarven Soldier seems ok.

For the Merman I'd go with Conscript or Trainee, because I think they wouldn't see the fighting as a professional military career to follow but rather as a temporary occupation during times of war, so their level 1s would be really rookies in warfare (trainee="Someone who is still in the process of being formally trained in a workplace"). Some of them eventually learn and evolve to become true warriors, of course (level 2).

For the elves and dwarves I wouldn't use "infantryman", "footman", "sentryman", "clansman" and the like, for obvious reasons (btw I think the Dwarvish Guardsman should be called Dwarvish Guardian).

For the level 1 elves... hum, low ranking elves on their own would be suited for little else than escort duty and standing guard, but in desperate times they could also be useful as some sort of dismounted scouts, though, so Elven Tracker, Elven Wanderer, Elven Marauder or Elven Roamer would be nice.

On a sidenote, I think that "dwarven" and "elven" sound way much better than the currently used "ish" thingies...
- Rojo Capo Rey de Copas -
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Rhuvaen »

Dwarvish "Clansman" clashes with the later Dwarvish "Lord". Clans are ruled by the head of the family, not by an aristocracy. The word adds more confusion, and doesn't convey the unit's role as a "fighter" (it has no military connection whatsoever).

How about adding a nordic touch to the Dwarvish fighter line? I'm thinking of:
Huscarl > Thane > Jarl

Huscarls are (military) household retainers. Thanes are an in-between of freedmen and nobility, while Jarls ("Earls") are actual nobility.
Velensk
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 3991
Joined: January 24th, 2007, 12:56 am

Post by Velensk »

I kind of like that proposal.
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."
khamul
Posts: 164
Joined: February 28th, 2005, 5:21 pm
Location: Somewhere solid, looking for a long enough lever

Post by khamul »

Rhuvaen wrote:Dwarvish "Clansman" clashes with the later Dwarvish "Lord". Clans are ruled by the head of the family, not by an aristocracy.
Fair point. I'm not sure that it matters, though.
Rhuvaen wrote:The word adds more confusion, and doesn't convey the unit's role as a "fighter" (it has no military connection whatsoever).
Exactly. That's the point.

The idea is that there's no such thing as a Dwarven "fighter" unit: some dwarves are specialists, some aren't, but in times of need _all_ dwarves pick up axe and hammer (or a specialist weapon), and go to face the enemy.

For me, that's a unique thing, that gives the race character - making them something other than short nordic humans with big beards.
If life gives you Lions, Make Lionade.
User avatar
turin
Lord of the East
Posts: 11662
Joined: January 11th, 2004, 7:17 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by turin »

khamul wrote:I don't have a problem with "Skeleton", because it makes it plain that the simplest thing you can do with an animated skeleton is have it pick up an axe and go kill someone. Animating a skeleton to use a bow and arrows is much more significant technical challenge.
Which is why a Skeletal Archer costs less than a Skeletal Warrior. :?
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
khamul
Posts: 164
Joined: February 28th, 2005, 5:21 pm
Location: Somewhere solid, looking for a long enough lever

Post by khamul »

turin wrote:
khamul wrote:I don't have a problem with "Skeleton", because it makes it plain that the simplest thing you can do with an animated skeleton is have it pick up an axe and go kill someone. Animating a skeleton to use a bow and arrows is much more significant technical challenge.
Which is why a Skeletal Archer costs less than a Skeletal Warrior. :?
Gameplay > Realism.

Anyway, who says gold has anything to do with how tricky the necromancy involved is? Maybe the higher gold cost for a Skeleton represents the fact that you need better quality, stronger bones if you're going to be swinging an axe, rather than playing with a bow.

Presumably, all the Necromancers involved are sufficiently accomplished that the technical challenge involved isn't significant: if you can write your name on a grain of rice, then it doesn't matter whether the signature box on the form you're filling in is 3cm long, or 1.5cm long.
If life gives you Lions, Make Lionade.
thissneppah
Posts: 67
Joined: December 25th, 2006, 4:11 pm

Post by thissneppah »

Jetryl wrote:Another possibility we could employ would be to drop down the use of warrior so that no level-2 units use it, and it becomes a L1 name
Disclaimer: my last attempt to give ideas for names was quite disastrous so if this proves to be of no use, my apologies.

Orcish Warrior –> Orc(ish) Barbarian (seems pretty fitting to me)
Troll Warrior –> Troll Giant (A big troll, what more to say)

Can’t think of anything I would be willing to stand by for the Drake or Merman though. Hope this isn't useless.
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Rhuvaen »

khamul wrote:The idea is that there's no such thing as a Dwarven "fighter" unit: some dwarves are specialists, some aren't, but in times of need _all_ dwarves pick up axe and hammer (or a specialist weapon), and go to face the enemy.

For me, that's a unique thing, that gives the race character - making them something other than short nordic humans with big beards.
I like this thinking, and I also like "Clansman" (apart from the "-man" syllable for dwarves, perhaps). Perhaps then the line could be:

Clanmember > Thane (or Thain) > Clanchief :?:

I just feel the Clansman wouldn't advance to a Steelclad and then a Lord, somehow.
User avatar
Elvish_Pillager
Posts: 8129
Joined: May 28th, 2004, 10:21 am
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Post by Elvish_Pillager »

thissneppah wrote:Orcish Warrior –> Orc(ish) Barbarian (seems pretty fitting to me)
-> Orcish Brute, perhaps
thissneppah wrote:Troll Warrior –> Troll Giant (A big troll, what more to say)
How about just "Giant"? :?
It's all fun and games until someone loses a lawsuit. Oh, and by the way, sending me private messages won't work. :/ If you must contact me, there's an e-mail address listed on the website in my profile.
User avatar
Cuyo Quiz
Posts: 1777
Joined: May 21st, 2005, 12:02 am
Location: South America

Post by Cuyo Quiz »

Seeing how lively this is getting, should we just decide on focusing on one faction for now?.

Decide faction, ask Jetryl for a summary paragraph for general directions, do a full stampede, rationalize by background/consistency options, give Jetryl headaches each month to decide the worth.

Why couldn't Dwarves have both Clans and nobility?. The Clans are subjects expected to provide service to their nobility/leaders (who hold reign through their fortresses), so the standing army are Clansmen fighting for their Clan and home. Steelclads are the armoured retainers and shocktroops.

It could be a Holy Roman Empire kind of thing, The highest Clan is the Lord clan, the others are nobility (sup prices analogy?), and the lower clans (without serious hope to reach the top) are only referred as Clans.
Cuyo Quiz,where madness meets me :D
Turn on, tune in, fall out.
"I know that, but every single person nags about how negative turin is; it should be in the FPI thread "Turin should give positive comments" =)"-Neorice,23 Sep 2004
Post Reply