Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rayyaan

Asset/Role Based Auto (or Standardised) Squad Names

Recommended Posts

Auto Squad Names For SPECIFIC Roles/Assets or Standardised Squad Names

The idea is basically about improving the organisation and understanding of the team layout and the job of each people in each squad. The practical game-design aspect may involve restricting kits, vehicles to an automatic or standardised squad name.

 

Practical benefits of doing this:

 

  • No arguing over asset allocation in automatic or standardised system
  • No admin troubles related to the above issue
  • Commander will know which squad has which asset (difference between Support or Logistics - current PR non automatic/non standardised system or the difference between tank and armour squad - as per current confusing free for all non sensical player named PR non automatic/non standardised system)
  • Squad leaders will also be able to identify who to contact for whatever is required due to Auto squad name/asset system or standardised squad name system
  • Players will have a much better idea of the purpose of each SQUAD before joining it
  • There may be other benefits I haven't thought of

 

I haven't thought deeply about the negative aspects of this system so forgive me if the idea sounds really stupid.

 

So I would to give a few examples of how an Auto name system or standardised name system could work. Mil. advisors would probably be able to produce better organisation than my list below:

 

  1. SUPPORT - Logistics truck, (or at least 1 logistics truck for logistic/eng squad and not assault squad who also happen to take the logistic truck) Mortars, Transport Heli, Infantry Carrier (or at least 1 infantry carrier for infantry carrying squad and not assault squad who also happen to take the infantry carrier), Intelligence Role (if there is one EG ICOM - listening to selected or random enemy channel if implemented),Ammo carrier (or at least 1 ammo carrier ......)
  2. ARMOUR - Main Battle Tanks, Anti Air Vehicles, Anti Tank Vehicles (my bad categorisation at work here)
  3. RECON - Recon vehicles (BRDM, Scimitar) Sniper (or at least 1 sniper.......), UAV Controller, Recon Helis if implemented (usually the small helis or lightly armed ones)
  4. CAS -  Helicopter 'gunships' Apache/Hind, Little Bird, ALL JETS (all jets are potentially CAS due to cannon)
  5.  MECH INF - BMP/BRADLEY/BTR/WARRIOR

Just an example here and I did hitn my categorisation would be bad.

 

However, as you can see and try to organise it is something difficult to organise and that's why I suggested this because it would be much more helpful if Squad developed a standardised or automatic name system. Not every vehicle would have to be associated with an auto squad name due to multi purpose or use of some vehicles or the commonality of them or variants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this like the 40th time this has been suggested. I don't want this, my squad must have a retarded name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Shut it down. Stop trying to impose organizational restrictions with your suggestions, people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leave this to server rules. There are servers in PR with no asset rules and each server has their own rules about squad name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I can understand why you would want sth. like this I doubt it will have the outcome you`re aiming for.

 

Players will learn very fast which asset to grab so the squad gets the intended name. Thus it will be no more than the "first come - first serve" we have on most PR servers right now. Plus all the problems that come with it (endless discussions - wasting of assets, etc.)

 

For serious play:

Give the "Commander" of the team the possibility to name units and assign assets. He should be responsible for "his" tools and decide when and where to use them. I would even go so far and have the assets locked until a CO is in charge and assigns the tools to a unit.

 

For public play:

I dunno. I troll on public servers and don`t expect anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds extremely boring and restricting.

Things like support will not happen because there is rarely anyone doing 24/7 logistics in a truck all match. It is not fun driving (at least in PR) a round trip of 5000+ meters all match. I used to do this quite often.

It will not work at all and you will see infantry in, for example, a support squad because they don't bother looking for the correct name.

This has been suggested a million times and don't get why people would want this crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nope

Ditto!

 

 

Sounds extremely boring and restricting.

Things like support will not happen because there is rarely anyone doing 24/7 logistics in a truck all match. It is not fun driving (at least in PR) a round trip of 5000+ meters all match. I used to do this quite often.

It will not work at all and you will see infantry in, for example, a support squad because they don't bother looking for the correct name.

This has been suggested a million times and don't get why people would want this crap.

 

Agreed sir!...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of suggested something similar saying

Computer should assign kits and squads at start

Because we dont know players skills and abilities til

They earn skill badges and earn rank by completeing

Missions....once they do so then they could choose to

Select a role and kit and squad based on first come.

So if your a rookie....computer chooses your spot

And kit......once your a vet its who gets the slots first..

Of course eventually all players will become vets down

The road and computer selections will be obsolete

Or maybe much greatly reduced need for...

Having a framework to start for rookies...is not such a bad

Idea....

Also maybe once everyone gets rank and skills the competition

For slots and SL roles will become more intense...computer

May have to force people into slots people will not want to

Play as....example someone who only wants to play sniper

Role may not get to all the time...how will he be forced to play

A different kit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't this like the 40th time this has been suggested. I don't want this, my squad must have a retarded name.

my squad names when playing in GAZA (Hummus for hamas , jews for idf)

this is the best part of the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should stay the way it is in PR, it is a perfect system in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm kinda split on this idea. What if they were to keep preset squad names from a drop down or something, but with the additional option of adding a squad description (and find a way to not clutter the UI)? This way, you can still have predetermined roles and avoid useless or confusing names and still add your own description to it (for example, "serious players only", or for an infantry Squd, "recon and intel")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please no standartization. Keep freedom will. Becouse this kind of standartization destroy human creativity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think this would work, but a system is needed.

Just thinking about a server full of new playes is going to answear why we need it. PR works only becouse of community rules, and fails on every no asset rule server, like the russian ones (not targeting anyone but it is what it is.).

It needs to be a first come first serve kind of system, noting else really works. But letting the commander assign squad assets is just calling for abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×