Jump to content

Recommended Posts

--Preface--

With a different FPS background than the large PR crowd here, I have been taking some time to get to know the game that brought this all together and have been spending some time playing 1.3 recently, since it is easier to get my current compatriots in with the standalone install. This experience, as many of you PR-vets have expressed, is not the "ideal PR experience," being on the more chaotic level of play compared to the smaller community afforded by its prior obscurity.

 

That being said, I want you to consider that there are going to be a lot of similarities in community to present PR, post-standalone, and Squad when it hits release. There are going to be piles of noobs, and I'm not talking noobs to "Squad" (which we will all be together,) but there will be noobs to AAS, and team and Squad-organized gameplay. This game has gathered a lot of attention outside of its heritage PR community, and thats good.

fluff

My experience in PR thus far can be summarized in this statement: When you have a Squad Leader that knows how to play, the game is incomparable. When you don't, the game is a nightmare.

Easy fix though, right? Just make sure we have good Squad Leaders. Done?

Well, actually, that would do a lot.


--Discussion Topic--

 

PR has a pre-round timer. Its usually filled with idle banter. What if we take this and capitalize on it to cement in the team structure that will be crucial to a team having a fighting chance.

  • 4-5 minute pre-game timer:
    • 1-mintue for connection negotiation, the team sits in silence (piss break, or just getting in the zone, looking at the map, or mentally putting together a plan.)
    • 1-minute for squad-formation, and for the selection of a commander.
    • for the remaining 2-3 minutes, only the leadership can speak, and they have an empty map on screen which they can use drawing utilities to plan their operations, and cooperation.

The idea here is that:

  • the SLs are carrying the game. If only the SLs can talk, then the competence of your team-leadership will become readily apparent.
  • Players will have the ability to move to squads that have leaders that they want to work with.
  • If someone who knows how to play feels that there is a lack of competency in the Squad Leaders available, he can create a squad, and start chiming in with his suggestions.
  • Server administrators will have the opportunity to see which SLs and commanders are assisting in the teamwork structure necessary for success.
  • Perhaps the team could Mutiny against the commander before he is needed. (Though I dont think there should be a mutiny option available against the CO, unless there is someone who has checked a box being willing to step up and take his place).

That's what I'd like to discuss.

 

I know there are some inevitable flaws in this suggestion, and some smart contributors on this forum, so maybe we can refine this and it will be useful, or maybe not. As it stands though, Finding a good Squad-Leader in PR is rough. Unless we do something different to facilitate good SLs in public servers, I don't know if Squad will be any different. The community needs to grow faster than the time it takes for everyone to become a veteran, so noob-servers at this point are inevitable. What can we do about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this Idea, but how about the squad lead has the option to mute everone? Because often he wants to know if someone wants to take special roles like the medic, AR, light AT and such and for that talking would be nice.

 

I think such a pre game system would benefit the game alot! Realy good Idea you got there mate! :) +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last 2-3 minutes are the point where squadleaders should be able to set a their respective squadnumber symbol on the map to show everyone where to go. It should also be possible to mark vehicle so that you can easily see wich squad want to take wich vehicle and where they want to go.

 

edit:

 

I really would like to see such a system. If you have Defend, Attack, Fob and Mine Markers, Squadnumber Symbols to show destination or mark vehicles you got a basic system where you can easily show the whole team what happens and that is hard top abuse (no dick paintings)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, it is the server admins responsibility to monitor this, playing on a server like NEW, or TG back in the days, you'd be told to STFU or get kicked as SLs are discussing either with sq members or other SLs. With Squad, a more simple option would be to have an option that lets you adjust individual volume channels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, it is the server admins responsibility to monitor this, playing on a server like NEW, or TG back in the days, you'd be told to STFU or get kicked as SLs are discussing either with sq members or other SLs. With Squad, a more simple option would be to have an option that lets you adjust individual volume channels.

I completely agree that a server's administration and "regulars" are able to achieve this without any pre-structuring. How many servers are there going to be like that in 1 year? 2 years? How many players will get this type of experience, being new to Squad? (Being new to PR, I dont get anything close to this. If PR was trying to make sales, I don't think this helps.) If new players don't get this experience, who's responsibility is this failure? Or rather, who does this failure hurt the most?

Just a thought really. Especially if/when Squad breaks into the open-server hosting model, there are going to be a lot of wild servers out there.

 

If the pre-round timer can be optimized to set the stage of the game for teamwork before the game even starts, then I think that you will see a dramatic increase in games where teamwork was applied. I think that will do a lot for player experience, in a game where teamwork is literally the crux of the game. Ideally its done in a manner that would already mirror what productive server cultures do by nature, and thus it wouldn't burden or even change anything for these servers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

Four Minutes total.

 

2 minutes connecting phase (local talk enabled)

 

2 minute squad formation/leadership (local talk disabled.  inter/intra-squad talk enabled).  

 

Servers can tweak it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I really want to see a off-line training system similar to America's Army. That would save everybody (the new players and the experienced ones) from a lot of headaches and problems in game such as "how do I fire this?" or "how does this kit work?" and so on. Also, a short offline class teaching the basics in squad-leading or obeying SL orders would perfect! Once in a real game, it would help everybody.

 

Once the server loads a new map, I think 2 min to organize squads just allowing squad-mates to talk. Then, 2 more minutes but ALREADY DEPLOYED IN THE MAP, with all players with weapons lowered and able to walk around the main base only. You can talk locally with other squad leaders and players. I think it would make a interesting and different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good idea, like it but it schould be Serverside. So the Admin can choose the options, if he want to have this System or not. Its help alot for new Players, you can teach them a little bit before they go on the battlefield. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I really want to see a off-line training system similar to America's Army. That would save everybody (the new players and the experienced ones) from a lot of headaches and problems in game such as "how do I fire this?" or "how does this kit work?" and so on. Also, a short offline class teaching the basics in squad-leading or obeying SL orders would perfect! Once in a real game, it would help everybody.

 

Unless it's required, people skip training systems and head straight into the game. More people playing Insurgency play their training campaign after hours of multiplayer gameplay than new players. I don't think there's anything wrong with forcing a new player's first game to be a training map. It gets rid of a lot of noob questions and as long as it's not too long, I don't think people mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's required, people skip training systems and head straight into the game. More people playing Insurgency play their training campaign after hours of multiplayer gameplay than new players. I don't think there's anything wrong with forcing a new player's first game to be a training map. It gets rid of a lot of noob questions and as long as it's not too long, I don't think people mind.

Just the basic for each asset. The advanced stuff you do if you want. Imagine all those choppers which could have been saved in PR if only a mandatory take-off training was required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giving the ability to SLs to put / draw markers before the round starts is definetly the best. Come to my mind the Wargame pre-round timer, where you can see the areas and usually people put markers for CP with a small description / caption.

Also the possibility that only the SLs can talk in "global" voice channel is a good point, but at the same time they can hear their own squad mates.

Thinking about "noobs", maybe the SLs could "lock" some kits within their squad. So you can have more "specialized" squad, like AT squad, building / engineering squad, recon squad and so on... Instead having randoms that jumps in squads and grab sniper, marksman, AT and go lonewolfing or use these kit in a bad way and waste them.

If the SL and only the SL could assign kits the new players are "forced" in a soft way to learn teamwork. I made this suggestion on the base of PR kits distribution (so 2 snipers, 2 HAT per faction and so on...)

BTW, what Unfrail said is almost 100% good for me, more powers to SLs, but at the same time, a little bit of relief if you are leading a squad of new players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with OP, one of the issues I find on pr is the lack of co ordination between squad leaders. When I make the infantry squad i just told my guys to get a transport and figure out what everyone else is doing and make a plan while driving to the objective the planning phase would be a good help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mango Flame and Ragmanolo's 2 min and 2 min sounds nice.  Enough time for HQ to come up with a strategy and for Squad leader to relay execution orders.  The last 2 mins being in base would allow for forming the vehicle convoy and sorting the tactical issues.  Regardless, 3-4 min combined is enough time to bathroom, get a drink, take out the trash, other quick honey do's, etc.

 

Training mode has been verified in the stretch goals.  For beginners, requiring hardly any instruction or training beyond configuring buttons would have a negative effect.  A simulator, assembly line style that whipped you through the forms (soldier, driver, pilot) centered mostly on button config would actually be nice and save in game time.

 

Kicking players for being stupid is unconstructive.  Kicking players for being abusive or cheating is good.  I'm certain the game is being structured to limit people's stupidity and still allow dynamic, satisfying game play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving everything up to server admins is great in theory, but not so great in practice. I often play on servers where no admins are available, or none are doing anything about the pre-game verbal diarrhea. 

 

In a perfect world, global chat would be available until you join a squad, and then all the noise goes away so you can talk to your squad. The CO and SLs would also be able to communicate among one another to set out a general battle plan.

 

If you leave all 100 people in chat to discuss it, you get at least one guy playing the radio, another guy beat-boxing, and all of that just feeding the frenzy.

 

If I could just block out all the other noise so I can talk to my squad, I'm a happy SL.  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4-6 minutes for preparation ahead of time is an excellent idea.  Not sure what the "sweet spot" as far as time is concerned but ideally to have time to :(Quoting OP)

 

 

  • 1-mintue for connection negotiation, the team sits in silence (piss break, or just getting in the zone, looking at the map, or mentally putting together a plan.)  maybe 2 min
  • 1-minute for squad-formation, and for the selection of a commander. Perhaps a couple and figure out objectives while you are at it
  • for the remaining 2-3 minutes, only the leadership can speak, and they have an empty map on screen which they can use drawing utilities to plan their operations, and cooperation.Have an option for leadership to open up channels to the remaning team to A)discuss tactics B)Hype the team C)Share a dirty joke

Someone had mentioned server admins kicking people for not strictly adhering to the above and other rules.  Keep in mind someoen can be the biggest idiot and still shoot the nuts off a fly from 300 yards I would like to think people will/should only be kicked for being disuptive, abusive, or other legit offensive things.  Just because someone is making piss poor decisions one moment does not mean they won't make a fine leader at some point in the near future is all I am saying

 

If anything comes of this the ability to clearly indicate targets and objectives would make the overall experience 20x better for those unfamiliar with the tactical shooter as nothing is more frustrating than what to do but no idea where you should be to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about having a SL-commendation system? After a map is over you give players the option to commend their SL if they think they did a good job, no scale ranging from 1-5 etc. as that would surely be abused in some scenarios to downrate people - instead you only let players commend for a job well done/good effort. Then players who are joining squads can see the number of commendations stars behind the SL's name and thus know they are in good hands.

This will obviously require a bit of framework/database entries, but could be worth it maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This in conjunction with the other guy suggestion about drawing on the map would be all we need to effectively coordinate an initial plan of approach .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. With Squad, a more simple option would be to have an option that lets you adjust individual volume channels.

 

This went unmentioned, but is a stellar idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much like the idea of a structured, ready up time. With an open air BS time, squad only squad/role selection and SL/CO strategy periods. I don't think that any of this should take place in game as that would allow distractions, everyone should be focused on the map in the strategy period. Then once in game, you will already know where to head.

 

The commendation idea is an interesting one. Instead of just for the SL, and instead of a persistent typical stat based level up ranking system, what about a rep system for players like in a forum? Anyone could give rep to anyone at the end of the match, maybe role specific, maybe it's general. That way at least, you could judge if a player new to you has a shot at being successful in the role. And, it would be tied to what other players thought of a player, not  straight hours in game or arbitrary stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about having a SL-commendation system? After a map is over you give players the option to commend their SL if they think they did a good job, no scale ranging from 1-5 etc. as that would surely be abused in some scenarios to downrate people - instead you only let players commend for a job well done/good effort. Then players who are joining squads can see the number of commendations stars behind the SL's name and thus know they are in good hands.

This will obviously require a bit of framework/database entries, but could be worth it maybe?

In theory I could see this being a worthwhile positive encouragement element. However I see more harm in the long run than good. Say there's an incredible squad leader that rarely gets a chance to play, so he has few friends in game and few rounds played. Though he could be possibly the best squad leader out there, he may be ranked quite low, improperly representing his skill level.

Now let's say that there is a certain Youtuber, popular player, clan leader, or moderator whom everyone knows and thinks is so cool. He gets to play Squad all day and everybody knows his name. He will be ranked incredibly high, just due to time and friendly stat-padding. He means no harm (let's assume), but ends up far ranked above the Lone Ranger of before, even if he is a much poorer quality squad leader. If both leaders played in a round together, everyone would mass-join popular man's squad like Black Friday, so those left with the Ranger automatically have a tainted view of him, being "second best" to the other "star."

I would hate to see those unable to play often but quality leaders be taken from the opportunities they should equally have just because of a pseudo-valid rank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory I could see this being a worthwhile positive encouragement element. However I see more harm in the long run than good. Say there's an incredible squad leader that rarely gets a chance to play, so he has few friends in game and few rounds played. Though he could be possibly the best squad leader out there, he may be ranked quite low, improperly representing his skill level.

Now let's say that there is a certain Youtuber, popular player, clan leader, or moderator whom everyone knows and thinks is so cool. He gets to play Squad all day and everybody knows his name. He will be ranked incredibly high, just due to time and friendly stat-padding. He means no harm (let's assume), but ends up far ranked above the Lone Ranger of before, even if he is a much poorer quality squad leader. If both leaders played in a round together, everyone would mass-join popular man's squad like Black Friday, so those left with the Ranger automatically have a tainted view of him, being "second best" to the other "star."

I would hate to see those unable to play often but quality leaders be taken from the opportunities they should equally have just because of a pseudo-valid rank.

 

Yes, I agree. The trick would be to find a way to work around such issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My input:

 

Drawable map + separate side Channel for Squad leader's + Commander = great idea's, the implementation could be better than you've described though:

 

Instead of making it so people who aren't Squad leader's or Commander can't talk during that period, just have separate channels (there's already a high enough chance of people getting bored during this period and potentially leaving) that the 'Higher up's' can jump in and out of.

 

Have the Drawable map presentable to people not in said side channel (like an option for the Squad leader's/Commander to show it to the rest of the team when they've finalised a plan or when a certain time threshold get's reached). While they're waiting for this, have other visual stuff available like a set of standard/suggested battle plan's (presented in the same way as the SL's drawable Map) and other stuff (intel/Briefing). not only could this be useful for new Player's it would give people something to do during this period and make them less likely to leave. 

 

https://youtu.be/KSiCiMrSD2E?t=745

 

Like in that video, sketches/Photo's of area's of interest on the map.

 

 

If done right this briefing period could really add to the Game imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get a bit long winded in my posts, so to clarify, the things that I would really like to see considered are:

  • Silence in pre-round as connections negotiated.
  • Only SLs and CO able to speak during a Squad-formation period.
  • Ability of players to judge based on comms of SLs what squad to join.
  • The ability to draw on map by SLs and CO, to assist in inter-squad planning.

Silence is golden, and people can shoot the shit with their Squads all-game, and with everyone post-game, but pre-round it would help getting people thinking about the game if it wasn't a verbal free-for-all. Server-side options, sure.

 

Quality SLs are really the trick here. I'm hoping that by just hearing who has created a squad, players with more experience will be more likely to step up if they realize during the planning phase that a certain number of their team leadership has no idea what they are doing. The ability to create a new squad, and then as a new SL to chime in and try and re-direct would be the ideal. Real-world? I'm not sure.

I like the idea of SL upvotes, and it has been discussed before. TBH I'm not sure there is a better way to do things, and there are only so many big-name youtubers. If the Lone Ranger is a good squad leader, and he can present his ideas cooperatively in pre-game planning, I think he will get people joining his squad. If his squad performs, he'll get upvotes. He may never have more than super-youtube-guy, but as long as he has more than the average, his worth as a Squad Leader becomes more apparent, and if he's willing and there's a need, then he's needed. Just make them be rather arbitrary, like 5-stars max, and have the upvotes decay over time so it reflects activity as well as capacity.

Drawing on the map is going to help the team visualize and coordinate their strategies. I dont know if SLs need to be able to do Squad only markers however, because they will have in-game move markers that they can set for their squad. I want to avoid giving SLs the ability to sequester themselves from the rest of the team making their own internal plans. Inter-squad planning time is never going to happen again in the round. Intra-squad planning can happen on-the-fly with SL/FTL markers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Instead of making it so people who aren't Squad leader's or Commander can't talk during that period, just have separate channels (there's already a high enough chance of people getting bored during this period and potentially leaving) that the 'Higher up's' can jump in and out of.

 

I understand the sentiment, but I think there will be plenty to gain for the players from listening to the SLs arrange the gameplan, as well as getting situated in their Squads. These rounds are going to last 45min-1.5 hrs. If they cant stand 2-3 minutes of silence... :huh:   But if a concession must be made, I think allowing them to talk to their Squad-Members would be fine, but I think if the volume were halved it would be more ideal. Theres really no reason to facilitate pre-round voip bullshit time when there's FOB building, transport rides and a post-round free-for-all to be had. Thats my opinion however.

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

×