Gasp! *cringe*

Actually, not really. In theory, it would help flesh out certain popular concepts and give GMs some influence on what it means to be a soldier, for example.

Especially for GMs who like justifications for certain types of gear and skills.

-Siege

Uniformity of what military? There are lots of militarys with lots of different ways of doing things.

The purpose of a tool or a rule should be to make something easier, more realistic, or allow for something that isn't allready allowed for under another rule. These packages could end up being nice guidlines for new players, and in that capacity I think they would be good. But SR is pretty close to a no training wheels system.

Yeah. I hate that. I sometimes find it easier to plan out entire campaigns than to come up with a single street name I like.

Just read the rest of my post. I go on to talk about making different requirements... blah blah blah... it's all there for you dude.

Yes. One thing A GM I know of thought about doing, was having other people come up with a character's street name.

As a book I read once pointed out... People sometimes have 3 names:

1) The one they were born with,
2) The one they call themselves, and
3) The one they earn.

You seldom see runnners with name #1, for obvious reasons. You seldom see runners with name #3, which is a pity. You do get a lot of runners with name #2, which often makes them look like a poser.

"Hi, I am ....
1) Michael Nagato, Billy Rae McCormik, Sandy Billings, Juan Valdez...
2) Darkstalker, Nightwalker, Shadowknight, Mr. Death, Blur, ...
3) Goose, Jackrabbit, Dumbass, Thud, Bilge, Cheeto, Jeez, Fly, Mr. Congeniality..."

I guess my point here is that military training sometimes is, "Here is a gun, here is a uniform, goodluck and serve the generissmo well." all the way up to special forces.

This works, and I agree that skill sets should match backgrounds. But do we need a formalize package to do it? Some people would love this. Just not me

I have known a few PC's who should be called dumbass. What I really want to know is how do you get the name Bilge.

We play in an ongoing Aftermath! campaign where if you don't name your character, and name him something decent one of the NPC's will start calling you an appropriate name. And all the PC's better use it. Spaz and Spanky are the two names that come to mind.

I don't see these as classes. Mechwarrior 1 & 2 RPGs did something similar to these packages.

A character could take "(military) university" or "(military) academy" skill packages, which gave a group of fixed-level skills at a lower cost than purchasing the skills separately.

Note:
1) The skills in the packages were a bit vague, like giving "piloting-3 and gunnery-2" The player would then have the option of deciding exactly what kind of piloting and gunnery skills those were - if the player wanted a fighter pilot, the piloting skill would be Aerospace Fighter Piloting-3.
2) There were always left over skill points to spend on other skills, OR to enhance the package skills.
3) After taking the package at character creation, the package had absolutely no further effect on the character. The player was not constrained to spending points on "class" skills or having easier access to those skills.
4) Except for influencing starting skills, the package did not determine the character's saves, combat abilities, or future character development.
5) At no time was it required a character take a skill package (unless the GM required it, to get characters with similar backgrounds). It was just cost-efficient to do so.

Essentially, all the "package" of skills did was give the PC a bunch of skills at somewhat lower cost, with the drawback that the skills were from a limited list.

That, to me, is not a class. It's just a means of outlining the effects of a group of characters going through the same military academy (or other training).