What it means to be a Clan Warrior, Revisited, AGAIN. Reposted

[Arkansas Warrior]

How so?

A Warrior is one trained in the art of killing.
A Warrior is one who kills without regret.
A Warrior is one who leaves dead enemies in his wake because he knows the dead can never harm him.

The Clan's are different from one another.  They all do things differently.  EVERY warrior in every Clan should have this mindset (above) in common.  This is the point you are missing.

So you never take bondsmen?  Leaving dead enemies in your wake doesn't leave terribly much room for taking prisoners, after all.  That bit right there would have every trial become a trial of annihilation.  Some Clans are like that, sure.  But definitely not all.

[Daishi411]

How so?

A Warrior is one trained in the art of killing.
A Warrior is one who kills without regret.
A Warrior is one who leaves dead enemies in his wake because he knows the dead can never harm him.

The Clan's are different from one another.  They all do things differently.  EVERY warrior in every Clan should have this mindset (above) in common.  This is the point you are missing.

There is a lot in common between the Clans and Inner Sphere in this regard.  The difference is how it is applied.  Clan Warriors don't have families to worry about.  A Clan warrior will keep fighting until he is dead because Glory is the only thing that matters in their short life.  There is Glory in death.  If you survive impossible odds there is even more Glory.  You must achieve the most honorable victories, otherwise, you have lost.  Otherwise, you are washed out and replaced by a fresh new Warrior.  If an Inner Sphere warrior gets this far he'll be honored by his nation depending on what he did.  This is NOT always the case with the Clans.  Becoming old is a boon in Clan society.

He's complaining about the Clans being played too soft and how the Clans are being portrayed through gaming and the new material, is what I grasp.  Is playing too soft REALLY power gaming?  I mean, he probably used to see epic battles like a Warrior challenging a whole lance of spheroids in a final act to win an objective.

He also portrays this through the player perception of "surviving long enough to earn a bloodname."  If a Warrior is worried about surviving it's not going to happen.  A warrior is not going to earn a bloodname with even battles throughout his or her career.  The Warrior has to stick out.

Pretty much, but to really grasp the Clans and play as them you have to have some kind of a knack for roll playing.  I didn't play a lot of BV games back in the day...  it was BattleTech with some RPG elements for me.  With a huge universe, IMO, it's kind of bland just to even things out with BV (but this is a topic for another thread).

that first part is not what you were discussing however. notice how i didn't disagree with you on that

as for the second part, i really hate it when people tell me (or anyone else) that they have to play something a certain way, or they're doing it wrong, as far as that part is concerned i disregarded it completely.

i don't play bv games either, and i agree with you that the game it more than pieces on a board, bv is unrealistic. i can imagine playing a game with you would be cool for the RPG part since i've read your stuff and it's exemplary.

the fact is, and i stated this before, i could write a counter essay if i gave 2 ***** to do it. unfortunately i don't care enough to do it. fortunately, i do hold my own view of the clans, and i don't agree with this essay for the most part, it's silly, limiting and entirely incomplete. you said earlier i missed the point, and that he wasn't talking culture, well bad news for deathshadow, the essay can't be called what it is of he's missing the most important part of the clans: their different cultures, and homogenizing them is a poor way analyze them, plain and simple.

like i said, this is going to become a **** fest later on, i'm glad you're able to keep it civil and succinct, i'm concerned about later when it spirals. i'm not going to agree with the people that like it, and they aren't going to agree that its bad, so i suggest we leave it at that

[Fear Factory]

So you never take bondsmen?  Leaving dead enemies in your wake doesn't leave terribly much room for taking prisoners, after all.  That bit right there would have every trial become a trial of annihilation.  Some Clans are like that, sure.  But definetly not all.

Not even true.  Take this scenario.

You defeat the Clan Warrior and he/she survives.  Everyone else is destroyed and he/she lost the battle.  You can either:

1 - Realize his/her use and take his/her as your Bondsmen.
2 - Dishonor the warrior by leaving him/her with the same of defeat.

On top of that, the Warrior was bid with confidence that he or she can complete the objective, however, the bidder is ALSO contempt that the warrior CAN and WILL die in the process.

They don't grow up in their sibko learning about how to win pillow fights.  Why do you think so many of them DIE in the process?  The Clan Warrior is a killing machine which follows a code of conduct we all know as Zel.  They don't intentionally aim for cockpits, they bid and use as little as they can to secure an objective, that's for sure, but that is because they like the thrill of a challenge and the glory which follows.  There is glory in death and surviving against impossible odds.  There is shame with an easy victory (without even making it a challenge through bidding) and defeat.

[Fear Factory]

like i said, this is going to become a **** fest later on, i'm glad you're able to keep it civil and succinct, i'm concerned about later when it spirals. i'm not going to agree with the people that like it, and they aren't going to agree that its bad, so i suggest we leave it at that

Fine by me (I am not even mad/heated).   :)

And I apologize if I came across as telling you how to play the game.  I was just trying to express the awesomeness that is the RPG side of BattleTech and a preference I have.

[ShockaTime]

There is shame with an easy victory (without even making it a challenge through bidding) and defeat.

Shameful isn't the right word. there is a loss of honor but in the end a victory is a victory. we have a number of examples of warriors sacrificing personal honor in order to increase the likelihood of a victory, or for an 'easier' victory.

[Ghostbear_Gurdel]

extreme is the wrong word, more like limiting.

as a ghost bear fan, why do you so vehemently agree with this writing?

Because I think he nailed what goes through a Clan warrior's mind while fighting. The only worthy battles are the hard fought ones.  If the battle does not involve losses, either you are literally God, or you have not taken enough risks. Clan warriors should not be concerned with dieing. Those that risk it all and live get the Glory of a Bloodname, those that fail, die and are removed from the system. Sure, it may just be luck, but from my reading of the fiction, the Clans do not believe in luck. The victor is the superior warrior, even if a fluke ensured that victory. After, they must continue to be successful or they fall from grace.

Also, even in the rule books, a Clan warrior on Lvl1 honor will not retreat, that should speak volumes about what goes through the minds of Clansman. That shows that dieing in battle is preferable to the shame of defeat. And who knows, maybe the warrior will get lucky and pull out a win against impossible odds. Victories in impossible situations are the kind of acts that get Bloodname nominations, which is what all Clansmen fight for. Clan Warriors are the ultimate optimists. There is never a situation that if you do not fight a little harder in, you cannot turn around and pull off a stunning victory. So a proper Clan warrior should always give that little bit more, push the heat a little higher, because that 1 ER Medium laser you did not fire? Yeah, that might have been the weapon that finished your enemy and won you the glory. I will be the first to admit that I am arguing ideals here. This is how the Ideal clan warrior should act, and many, hell probably even most, will not measure up, but it is still how I try to play a Clansman. I can say I have lost many mechs to heat induced ammo explosions, but I have also won some surprising victories in some desperate situations, because of that same thought process.

"if we kick and scream and fight like hell, we move forward a little bit."-Simon, TTGL

[StCptMara]

In 2009, I ended up on the Wobble Side of a GenCon Canon Event. I took my Grand Titan, and took down
a Executioner and Timber Wolf, and severely injured a Cauldron Born before I went down to concentrated
fire from the rest of the Ghost Bear Star. The rest of the forces on my side cowered behind their safe cover,
refusing to move out to engage the enemy. I fought like a Clan Warrior should: I saw the enemy, and
I attacked. I used everything at my disposal to make that attack as effective as I could.

That is what it means to be Clan: To hold nothing back. By holding back, you are insulting your opponent,
saying he is beneath your best. By holding back, you also handicap yourself, as what if that opponent is
better then you think he is? A Clan Warrior lives and dies for one thing: A Bloodname. It is what every warrior
seeks. When they earn a Bloodname(for, to say you might not is to admit the possibility of defeat), the Clan
Warrior must then live and die to earn prestige and glory for their Bloodname, to uphold its Glory if it is prestigious,
to redeem it if it has fallen.

To admit defeat is the hardest thing a Clan Warrior can do. It must be weighed against the waste of continuing to
try to win a hopeless battle. Defeat is not a shame, but a defeat where one could have won if they continued fighting?
That is a shame. That is the act of a coward.

[Kargush]

I don't see how the post is so hard to understand.  This is a mindset that overrides a political camp.

Wasn't hard to understand at all. My mind went "OK, yes, Captain Obvious strikes again, those are the Clans."

YMMV, of course.

[StCptMara]

Wasn't hard to understand at all. My mind went "OK, yes, Captain Obvious strikes again, those are the Clans."

YMMV, of course.

Actually..the reason as I understood it from the original post was that there are alot of
so-called Clan players who do NOT fight like Clans, even against other Clans. They try
to bring overwhelming force, and, if they do follow a bidding process, they will almost always
answer with heavier 'mechs then their opponent. In other words, if they ask what you are
defending with, and you say a Medium Striker Star, they will send a Heavy Assault Star with
a star of Elementals. (Personally, if I was told my opponent was defending with a Medium Striker Star?
I would bring 3 Mechs: 2 Mediums and a Light)

Then, these so-called Clan Warriors, even from Clans that adhere to strict Zellbrigen, will concentrate
fire, engage in physical attacks, hide(note: not use cover to maximize the difficulty of being hit. I mean
cower behind buildings once they have engaged, move where they and their opponent cannot see
each other). I remember, for example, in the 2009 Trial of Bloodright, the final match, one of the players
was trying to avoid contact with the Summoner C, and made a big, whiny deal about the possibility that
he was going to be stuck in the Shadowcat Prime. (Note: the winner put this guy, his Hunted, in the Mad Dog
because it was more of a challenge...and still ran the coward down before the judges had to flip the terrain).
Me? I would have taken the Shadowcat Prime and LIKED IT, and, in fact, have seen it as a "worthy challenge."
Heck..I took a Stooping Hawk Prime against a Nova Cat Prime, and considered that a good fight. That, in fact,
is, to me, what defines a Clan Warrior: Taking and accepting a challenge and FIRMLY believing, no matter how
badly outmatched you are, that, not only can you win, but you WILL win....or die trying.

The Inner Sphere? They want to go home. What the Clans see as "every day", the Inner Sphere sees as "Heroism."
Ultimately, an Inner Sphere warrior is not going to be able to accept the idea of a viscious fight where his companions
were killed, and then taking one of those same warriors and making him eventually a warrior in your own force. The Inner
Sphere pilot will hold the grudges. The Clan Warrior might, depending on the circumstances, end up sharing drinks with
his opponents after the fight.

[Daishi411]

Because I think he nailed what goes through a Clan warrior's mind while fighting. The only worthy battles are the hard fought ones.  If the battle does not involve losses, either you are literally God, or you have not taken enough risks. Clan warriors should not be concerned with dieing. Those that risk it all and live get the Glory of a Bloodname, those that fail, die and are removed from the system. Sure, it may just be luck, but from my reading of the fiction, the Clans do not believe in luck. The victor is the superior warrior, even if a fluke ensured that victory. After, they must continue to be successful or they fall from grace.

Also, even in the rule books, a Clan warrior on Lvl1 honor will not retreat, that should speak volumes about what goes through the minds of Clansman. That shows that dieing in battle is preferable to the shame of defeat. And who knows, maybe the warrior will get lucky and pull out a win against impossible odds. Victories in impossible situations are the kind of acts that get Bloodname nominations, which is what all Clansmen fight for. Clan Warriors are the ultimate optimists. There is never a situation that if you do not fight a little harder in, you cannot turn around and pull off a stunning victory. So a proper Clan warrior should always give that little bit more, push the heat a little higher, because that 1 ER Medium laser you did not fire? Yeah, that might have been the weapon that finished your enemy and won you the glory. I will be the first to admit that I am arguing ideals here. This is how the Ideal clan warrior should act, and many, hell probably even most, will not measure up, but it is still how I try to play a Clansman. I can say I have lost many mechs to heat induced ammo explosions, but I have also won some surprising victories in some desperate situations, because of that same thought process.

"if we kick and scream and fight like hell, we move forward a little bit."-Simon, TTGL

here's the thing that i'm not getting the dracs fight like hell, WoB does it, we've seen comstar do it, hell we've seen the lyrans do it. fighting like hell is not what it means to be clan, there's so much more to is than that, and i'm having a hard time understanding why clan fans are being spoon fed this and eating it. this essay's title is incorrect, it should not be called what it means to be clan, because it does not describe that at all, instead it discusses hoe some clanners fight. perhaps i missed something at the end regarding an actual and fully complete analysis on what it means to be clan, i'm guessing i didn't. clearly fighting to the end isn't the only factor in determining the success of a warrior since we hear about unimpressive warriors getting bloodnames and getting good posts. there's also hegira, so clearly they don't always fight to the end, and there's proof for this in fiction, and if clanners always fought to the end then what's the point of hegira. we can assume that perhaps clanner have a lot to lose if they were to die on the one hand. all i'm seeing is a defensive position as shallow as this article because it fails to take into consideration what we know about the clans and what we've seen them do. i remember tassa had at one point posted something regarding being a clanner and it was the best summary to date (if i could find it), on top of that it was shorter and less painful to read, and i hold that in much higher regard than this article that sounds like a complaint editorial because people don't play clan right 

[Skyth]

In the battle of Wolcott, the Jaguars gave up before the battle was truely joined because they knew they were defeated.  Being Clan is a more nuanced thing that just kill kill kill.

The biggest problem with the article is that it is a prime example of people complaining that other people's way of having fun is 'wrong' and creates a divide in the community.

[Ghostbear_Gurdel]

One comment I will make with regard to hegira. Hegira is not something the looser chooses. They are offered Hegira by the victor. If you are offered Hegira it means you have fought well enough that your enemy is willing to give you an honorable way out.

In the battle of Wolcott, the Jaguars gave up before the battle was truely joined because they knew they were defeated.  Being Clan is a more nuanced thing that just kill kill kill.

Yes, but are always exceptions.

Although I do believe most decisions to withdraw come from the top down. I cannot remember any point in the fiction where the rank and file warriors pressured their commanders to retreat. Decisions such as that tend to be made by commanders who take a hit to their personal honor to do what is best for the Clan. However, a commander of any sort has proven successful enough that as long as it is not too disastrous a defeat, they should still have some honor, and can still work on their career.

I am merely stating what I think the best way to RP a clan warrior is, in no way am I attempting to 'divide' the community.

[Daishi411]

One comment I will make with regard to hegira. Hegira is not something the looser chooses. They are offered Hegira by the victor. If you are offered Hegira it means you have fought well enough that your enemy is willing to give you an honorable way out.

this point is not strengthening you argument. i mentioned hegira cause i know what it is, giving a definition of it isn't countering my point, nor proving yours. the article says this:

"One of the keys to the warrior mindset is no surrender, no retreat. If you give up fighting while your body still draws breath, you are violating everything clan training is supposed to instill"

i believe the existence of hegira disproves this particular point, which is what a lot of the essay discusses

[Skyth]

You say exception, I say nuance.  Clan warriors are not a hive mind where they all think and act alike.  And the difference between different clans is more pronounced.

And as soon as you claim something is the 'best' way to play a game, then you are in effect creating a divide between the people who play your way and the people who don't play your way.  You are attaching the moral high ground to your way of playing, and it implies that people who don't have fun the way you want them to are some how inferior.

[Daishi411]

And as soon as you claim something is the 'best' way to play a game, then you are in effect creating a divide between the people who play your way and the people who don't play your way.  You are attaching the moral high ground to your way of playing, and it implies that people who don't have fun the way you want them to are some how inferior.

this here is my biggest problem with the article, as i've stated before i find it unimaginably annoying when people do this

[Ghostbear_Gurdel]

well then, since I guess trying to have a reasonable discussion about the game will inevitably and irrevocably create a divide in the community,  ??? I will bow out of the rest of this discussion.

[Daishi411]

well then, since I guess trying to have a reasonable discussion about the game will inevitably and irrevocably create a divide in the community,  ??? I will bow out of the rest of this discussion.

the discussion was perfectly reasonable and rational, its not our problem you see otherwise. nothing was personal and you shouldn't feel like you should have to cop out, you simply believe on thing and others believe something else, there's nothing wrong with that.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Not even true.  Take this scenario.

You defeat the Clan Warrior and he/she survives.  Everyone else is destroyed and he/she lost the battle.  You can either:

1 - Realize his/her use and take his/her as your Bondsmen.
2 - Dishonor the warrior by leaving him/her with the same of defeat.

On top of that, the Warrior was bid with confidence that he or she can complete the objective, however, the bidder is ALSO contempt that the warrior CAN and WILL die in the process.

They don't grow up in their sibko learning about how to win pillow fights.  Why do you think so many of them DIE in the process?  The Clan Warrior is a killing machine which follows a code of conduct we all know as Zel.  They don't intentionally aim for cockpits, they bid and use as little as they can to secure an objective, that's for sure, but that is because they like the thrill of a challenge and the glory which follows.  There is glory in death and surviving against impossible odds.  There is shame with an easy victory (without even making it a challenge through bidding) and defeat.

Are we reading the same first post?  Leaving dead enemies in your wake, because the dead can't harm you.  That doesn't allow for leaving disgraced enemies in your wake.  It involves mudering all the survivors so they don't come back to threaten you later.  That is not Clan warfare.  Warfare is practically a game for the Clans.  Losing a trial is like losing a football game.  "Well, we fought hard but they beat us this time.  We'll come back stronger and get them next time."

[Fear Factory]

Are we reading the same first post?

Yes we are.

Leaving dead enemies in your wake, because the dead can't harm you.  That doesn't allow for leaving disgraced enemies in your wake.  It involves murdering all the survivors so they don't come back to threaten you later.  That is not Clan warfare.  Warfare is practically a game for the Clans.  Losing a trial is like losing a football game.  "Well, we fought hard but they beat us this time.  We'll come back stronger and get them next time."

Has nothing to do with murder.  When you bid warriors to fight you are basically sentencing them to death.  PERIOD.  They are going to fight as hard as they can to complete the objective leaving their enemies in their dust.  The ones that SURVIVE are the ones who say, "Well, we fought hard but they beat us this time.  We'll come back stronger and get them next time" or become bondsmen.  Death washes out the weak and paves the way for the strong.  It's a radical adaptation of "Leaving dead enemies in your wake, because the dead can't harm you."  The dead or "weak" are not going to harm the gene pool and hinder the Clan's performance.  The strong or the ones "leaving the dead enemies in their wake" will press forward.

[Arkansas Warrior]

So, if you bid a trinary of mechs, you expect either victory or 15 dead warriors and/or bondsmen?  If one goes down to a triple-crit engine before doing enough to be made bondsman, he's supposed to get lined up against a wall and shot by the victors, and it's not murder?  Because that's what I'm getting out of "When you bid warriors to fight you are basically sentencing them to death.  PERIOD."  That's not how the Clans do business.  The Clans don't butcher their defeated foes.  Those who aren't worthy of being made bondsmen are sent away.  If they're allowed to keep their gear it's Hegira, if not it's just disgrace, but the Clans don't kill all the survivors of the losing side.

[Skyth]

The kill kill kill mentality flies in the Clans' abhorance to waste.  That is why Heigra and taking bondsmen are there and used.  Fighting a losing battle, or throwing good mechs/pilots after bad is wasteful. 

[MechTheDane]

I agree with the OP for the most part.

I especially felt the Warden clan's position perplexing and a bit hypocritical/redundant.

As for sanctioning murder...
With so many combats to the death, and so many new generations of clanners born so quickly...
I don't see why they would be so eager to dishonor their fellow warriors by leaving survivors. I doubt they'd very much like to be left alive, and unless they are someone heretical I doubt they'd think it honorable to let another clanner survive a defeat.

But let's get technical, The Clans: Warriors of Kerensky it states;

"Similarly, the eugenics program has desensitized warriors to death, both their own and that of others. A warrior's ultimate goal is die honorably in battle, thereby ensuring that his or her stored DNA will be used in the breeding program. Consequently, the Clan warriors can be suicidally brave and expect much the same of other warriors. They lack the moral baggage associated with civilian causalities, and exhibit little emotional response to death of innocents. They may regret "waste" of personnel or creating new enemies, but it suits them to brutalize or kill non-combatamts, they will. Taking hostages does not work when dealing with the clans; they will let hostages die without turning a hair."

I daresay that supports the argument of clansman killing all their foes, rather than sparing them.

[Arkansas Warrior]

But that's never been what we see in canon, unless it's against a foe who was already under a Trial of Annihilation.  Warriors seek to die honorably, and there's nothing honorable about being mudered.  Death in combat is a completely different animal from being lined up and shot after you lose, or even being stomped on during a trial after your mech is disabled.

[SteveRestless]

I think, perhaps, the above goes a bit far in some places, but overall does a lot to capture some of the mindset of a clanner.

The important thing is that honor and victory in combat are paramount to them. Warriors of the clans are not going to throw away their lives without reason, but they are not going to fear death either. They know that they will live on through their genes and their deeds, their life is only important so long as they serve the clans.

[Skyth]

Another thing to consider is that it is possible to win by forcing someone outside of the circle of equals. 

[Fear Factory]

So, if you bid a trinary of mechs, you expect either victory or 15 dead warriors and/or bondsmen?  If one goes down to a triple-crit engine before doing enough to be made bondsman, he's supposed to get lined up against a wall and shot by the victors, and it's not murder?

And your expecting all of them to survive?  ???

When I send out 15 warriors I expect a few things.  1 - Warriors will DIE.  2 - Warriors will survive and gain no glory for his/her loss 3 - Warriors who survive live to serve their glorious Clan (win or lose) or 4 - Warriors will become bondsmen.  Two things happen to a bondsmen (if the warrior survives combat and is taken as one).  It's either the labor caste or they prove themselves and enter the warrior caste once again.

Because that's what I'm getting out of "When you bid warriors to fight you are basically sentencing them to death.  PERIOD."  That's not how the Clans do business.  The Clans don't butcher their defeated foes.  Those who aren't worthy of being made bondsmen are sent away.  If they're allowed to keep their gear it's Hegira, if not it's just disgrace, but the Clans don't kill all the survivors of the losing side.

They're not murdering anyone.  People die in war and that's that.  The Clans embrace that but they use Zel to minimize their losses.  Just because they use Zel doesn't mean no one is going to die at all.  Less people are dying and less equipment is being risked.  Those who die are weak and will be replaced by a stronger breed.

I never said they are going to kill all the survivors.  They are fighting for an objective, and after the bidding, they will destroy those who stand in their way.  They have an objective that is important to their Clan and will do whatever it takes to win and Warriors will die.  Their death is honored either way because it is a testament to the Clan way.  The Clans embrace death.  If they survive they are not going to be shot afterward so I don't know why you're so hell bent on that.  The Clans have more useful ways of dealing with them (as I expressed above).

[Arkansas Warrior]

And your expecting all of them to survive?  ???

When I send out 15 warriors I expect a few things.  1 - Warriors will DIE.  2 - Warriors will survive and gain no glory for his/her loss 3 - Warriors who survive live to serve their glorious Clan (win or lose) or 4 - Warriors will become bondsmen.  Two things happen to a bondsmen (if the warrior survives combat and is taken as one).  It's either the labor caste or they prove themselves and enter the warrior caste once again.

All of them?  No, but I am expecting some survivors.  Until this post, everything you've said is that you expect them all to die.
 

They're not murdering anyone.  People die in war and that's that.  The Clans embrace that but they use Zel to minimize their losses.  Just because they use Zel doesn't mean no one is going to die at all.  Less people are dying and less equipment is being risked.  Those who die are weak and will be replaced by a stronger breed.

I never said they are going to kill all the survivors.  They are fighting for an objective, and after the bidding, they will destroy those who stand in their way.  They have an objective that is important to their Clan and will do whatever it takes to win and Warriors will die.  Their death is honored either way because it is a testament to the Clan way.  The Clans embrace death.  If they survive they are not going to be shot afterward so I don't know why you're so hell bent on that.  The Clans have more useful ways of dealing with them (as I expressed above).

All your posts have been along the general line of "They win or they die."  I've never seen a battle where all the losers died.  Undoubtably some will simply have their mechs disabled in one way or another.  Since you weren't expecting survivors, that suggests to me you were expecting them to be killed by the victor.  That's why I've been harping on that.  When you make statements like

Has nothing to do with murder.  When you bid warriors to fight you are basically sentencing them to death.  PERIOD.

That tells me you (and others in the thread) expect them to die.  PERIOD.

[Fear Factory]

When you make statements like That tells me you (and others in the thread) expect them to die.  PERIOD.

I do expect my warriors to die.

This sums it up perfectly:

But let's get technical, The Clans: Warriors of Kerensky it states;

"Similarly, the eugenics program has desensitized warriors to death, both their own and that of others. A warrior's ultimate goal is die honorably in battle, thereby ensuring that his or her stored DNA will be used in the breeding program. Consequently, the Clan warriors can be suicidally brave and expect much the same of other warriors. They lack the moral baggage associated with civilian causalities, and exhibit little emotional response to death of innocents. They may regret "waste" of personnel or creating new enemies, but it suits them to brutalize or kill non-combatants, they will. Taking hostages does not work when dealing with the clans; they will let hostages die without turning a hair."

But, just because I expect them to die, doesn't mean that I'm going to shoot and kill all survivors.  There will be enemy survivors and there are more useful ways of dealing with them, or survivors on my own side, and depending on the circumstances there are ways of dealing with them as well.

[Arkansas Warrior]

I think more along the lines of "They may die, but odds are they will not.  Either way, so be it."  Clan mechs still come equipped with ejection seats and auto-eject features, right?  I would neither encourage or discourage their use.  What you've said so far leads me to suspect you would have the warriors disable both.

[MechTheDane]

The kill kill kill mentality flies in the Clans' abhorance to waste.  That is why Heigra and taking bondsmen are there and used.  Fighting a losing battle, or throwing good mechs/pilots after bad is wasteful.

Again, from The Clans: Warriors of Kerensky:

"With the notable exception of people, the Clans rarely waste any resource."

Like the OP said, the clans grow people at need. And as The Clan: Warriors of Kerensky agrees, thats one thing they are not afraid to waste.

That being said there are lots of ways to keep everyone from dying. IIRC in the Refusal War, the war ended when Ulric was killed..since he was the one refusing. The rest of Clan Wolf then stood down and got absorbed. (Minus WIE)

Another thought is the battle of Tukayyid, no clan in that battle fought to the last man. Even the Smoke Jaguars eventually retreated when it became obvious their objectives were no longer attainable. And yet in my Falcon and the Wolf Scenario pack it says that Jade Falcons forces cannot retreat because of their unwavering adherence to clan doctrine (unlike Clan Wolf and their 'flexible' attitude).

Perhaps the reason this argument exists is not because of people misunderstanding source text, but because the text itself is contradicting and ambiguous on the subject itself?