Shadow_

Looking to the future: Asset Squads.

65 posts in this topic
6 minutes ago, dolmaface said:

not only does it organize everyone

 

It does literally nothing to organize anything. It just means that people who want assets will make asset squads. The same people that currently waste assets would still waste assets, only they'd do it in your fancy-pants asset squads for more organized asset waste.

 

6 minutes ago, dolmaface said:

it gets rid of the annoying vehicle claim system in the game.

 

No, it doesn't. And what on earth makes you think that letting players make squads that gives them direct access to vehicles would make asset waste less common? Instead of someone currently joining a squad and then only having access to whatever vehicle(s) that squad has claimed, the player now has access to any vehicle? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

First of all, PR did not have such a system. As you say, it was community enforced, and that's a huge difference.

Not really that much of a difference. If you went against the community enforced you ended up being banned or kicked. A properly implemented coded system would just prevent you from doing things that would otherwise get you banned or kicked. Either way, there was a way to prevent infantry from taking the tanks. 

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

If a server's vehicle rules don't work out, they can change them in a day. If the game itself enforces these rules through game mechanics, any change is slow and possibly never happens.

Sure they can change them in a day. But then everyone who joins that server has to relearn how to play the game according to that ruleset. And then if you get tired of playing with those people you have to join another server with an entirely different ruleset. Right now in Squad's development we need to be setting a standard system and set of rules for the standard servers. Custom/modded servers are coming later for a reason, but the game will not grow if new players come in and are forced to relearn the game according to each server.

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

Asset squads are bad because they restrict strategic, tactical, and organizational options in the game, affecting gameplay variety. Further, it introduces all kinds of balancing issues in terms of what kits and equipment is available to different squad types and factions. Lastly, it does nothing to solve the issue.

As others have said, it is tried and tested. Squad exists because PR's gameplay made it unique in that it promoted communication and coordination between assets. I believe that separating assets into different squads is why it was able to have that gameplay in the first place.

 

Obviously there are issues that come up if you implemented a system exactly as OP described it, but that's the great thing about the "FEEDBACK AND SUGGESTIONS" board, you can give feedback and suggestions. I suggested that APCs can be shared if the APC squad has extras that they don't need. That itself would remove many restrictions and allow for way more possibilities while still keeping things organized. 

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

Introducing asset squads does nothing to stop bad players from making an asset squad and being just as wasteful with an asset as they are under the current system. Nothing in the proposed system stops random players from joining an asset squad to grab an asset. There is literally nothing in this suggestion to that in any way affects the issue it is trying to resolve. If anything, it makes the issue worse.

OP's post isn't about bad players wasting assets. His post is about adding infrastructure to the team so that vehicles can easily work together by sharing common goals and information. And all you have to do to stop random players from joining asset squads and taking vehicles is to kick them. A squad lock would also be a must for this system to work properly. I feel OP would have included it but forgot it was a possibility.

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

You'd end up with a bunch of people making asset squads without there being assets available for them, then you'd just have a bunch of ill-equipped and useless squads running around. 

That's why it would only be one squad per type of asset, or maybe the limit increased to 2 squads in if there are, say, 4+ APCs (which I doubt there will ever be on one team).

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

Now, the current system is bad and requires a replacement, but nothing about the proposal made here is in any way an improvement over it.

I agree that OP's proposal would not be an improvement if you implemented it as it is in that single post. However, I'm sure that by discussing it's issues we can use his as a basis and fill in the holes to make a complete system that both promotes teamplay and prevents misuse.

34 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

 

I read yours over and I feel that it solves the issue of vehicle misuse, but it does next to nothing to promote teamplay, add team structure, and create the intense and rewarding experience that Squad is going for.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

It does literally nothing to organize anything. It just means that people who want assets will make asset squads. The same people that currently waste assets would still waste assets, only they'd do it in your fancy-pants asset squads for more organized asset waste.

 

It does nothing to organize anything? I think you need to read some of the posts above this one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Flat896 said:

Sure they can change them in a day.

 

You think they're going to push a global patch every time they come upon a balance issue? You think that's how game development works?

 

2 minutes ago, Aniallator said:

It does nothing to organize anything? I think you need to read some of the posts above this one...

 

You think that because there's an asset squad, that squad is immediately better run than any other squad? Please tell me how these squads magically make people behave differently than when they're part of a normal squad.

 

This stuff is the kind of silliness that shows you guys don't even think things even 5% of the way through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

You think they're going to push a global patch every time they come upon a balance issue? You think that's how game development works?

 

 

You think that because there's an asset squad, that squad is immediately better run than any other squad? Please tell me how these squads magically make people behave differently than when they're part of a normal squad.

 

This stuff is the kind of silliness that shows you guys don't even think things even 5% of the way through.

 

Again, I think you need to thoroughly read the posts at the end of the last page because I'm not sure you even have a proper understanding of what's being suggested.

 

Let's not resort to insults.

Edited by Aniallator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Aniallator said:

 

In Squad right now, the vehicle claim system does exactly what is was designed to do; stop any player from just grabbing a vehicle and driving off. While I agree that vehicle claiming wouldn't be necessary for heavy asset squads, I think it absolutely needs to be kept in place for Infantry Squads. The only reason randoms lone wolfing a vehicle is Squad right now is rare is because of the vehicle claim system, even if it can be annoying at times.

 

Yea but its so annoying when for example a logi spawns at main and you can't direct a squad member to spawn at main to get it alone.

 

Maybe it would be best to keep the claiming system, but have it only require one player instead of three. This way players can't drive off in vehicles without Squad leaders permission.

Edited by dolmaface

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dolmaface said:

 

Yea but its so annoying when for example a logi spawns at main and you can't direct a squad member to spawn at main to get it alone.

 

Maybe it would be best to keep the claiming system, but have it only require like one player instead of three. This way random players can't drive off in vehicles without Squad leaders permission.

 

Well I think it should really be at least two, so that there has to be a level of teamwork involved. Which by the way is the number it currently is, the amount of people required to have next to a vehicle to claim it got lowered from 3 to 2 in one of the last updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I dont understand is that people around this forum are constantly saying the community and general player base seem to be leaning towards a very Battlefield franchise type of game play, yet when suggestions to fix this are made, they simply get met with nothing but animosity. While I can understand that most of the regulars might get sick of seeing similar posts, this isnt one asking for a zombie mod, or a SquadLife mod. And anyone who takes the time to come here, read, and give ideas and contributions to the community in hopes that maybe it makes the game better in the long term for everyone has to have the interests of the game, their game, the one that they boot up after a %^&*(@ day at work or school or whatever just that much better and more relaxing and enjoyable.

 

Seeing how the game currently plays, its an unfortunate fear for most of the players that enjoy this game on a more organized level, that once heavy assets come into the game, without some sort of control or management system, the game will simply become "BF4 without EA."

 

To be fair to all players bring back the rule from most PR servers-no asset Squads before a certain time. This lets people with both faster gaming rigs and sufficient computers time to load into the map and to be able to have a chance to make the squad they want to be a part of. Hardcode it in. No squads before 1:30 remaining.

 

Secondly: As Shadow is suggesting, have a way you can select the Squad you want to make broken down by class/vehicle. And possibly even limit the amount of people in that squad, by the number of assets on the map.

 

The players only get to take kits that pertain to what they are doing. We dont need a tank Squad full of snipers. At the same time we dont need infantry grabbing crewman and pilot kits.

 

My only suggestion would be to make APCs an infantry squad asset. Have it so 2 riflemen are needed to crew the vehicle. No medics or other specialty kits. This lets them run motorized or light infantry.

 

Tanks/IFVs/Fire support vehicles/tank destroyers should be crewed by a tank squad.

 

CAS should be manned by a CAS squad. Trans manned by trans. And at the same time, CAS cannot grab a trans chopper or vice versa.

 

The only grey area I see is for the mortars that are coming. I think the ability to create a designated mortar squad should be an option, but at the same time they should traditionally have infantry kits (such as a medic) and in PR, having that one guy with a recon kit running silent and telling you where the sweet spots are/helping you guide your shots is definitely a bonus. But supposing down the road we make a recon squad an option. They should be able to jump on Squad Comms and say "Hey E6 key 5 got a whole squad plus looks like they're fobbing it."

 

Regardless. There will always be some guys who take the assets and TK or abuse them. But if there is some kind of system in place, it is my belief that it will help players understand the mechanics of the game and the way of gameplay in the game. It wont be for everyone, but for some, it might turn them into stellar players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rayman1230 said:

The only grey area I see is for the mortars that are coming. I think the ability to create a designated mortar squad should be an option, but at the same time they should traditionally have infantry kits (such as a medic) and in PR, having that one guy with a recon kit running silent and telling you where the sweet spots are/helping you guide your shots is definitely a bonus. But supposing down the road we make a recon squad an option. They should be able to jump on Squad Comms and say "Hey E6 key 5 got a whole squad plus looks like they're fobbing it."

 

I've thought about dedicated Mortar Squads a bit, and to be honest I think it's better to leave it to regular infantry; if there's a squad that'll want to use mortars it'll probably be the infantry squad that built the FOB anyway. Heavy assets squads absolutely, but at least IMO I think Mortar Squads would be getting just a bit too specialized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aniallator said:

 

Well I think it should really be at least two, so that there has to be a level of teamwork involved. Which by the way is the number it currently is, the amount of people required to have next to a vehicle to claim it got lowered from 3 to 2 in one of the last updates.

 

I think 1 is enough. Many times a squad member might be alone and need to deliver a logi/other vehicle to the rest of the squad, and he can't. Permission from squad lead should just be enough.

 

4 minutes ago, Rayman1230 said:

The only grey area I see is for the mortars that are coming. I think the ability to create a designated mortar squad should be an option, but at the same time they should traditionally have infantry kits (such as a medic) and in PR, having that one guy with a recon kit running silent and telling you where the sweet spots are/helping you guide your shots is definitely a bonus. But supposing down the road we make a recon squad an option. They should be able to jump on Squad Comms and say "Hey E6 key 5 got a whole squad plus looks like they're fobbing it."

 

Fixed assets should be available to Squad leaders of any squad. For example, when the tank squad is waiting for their tank to respawn they can do logistical work and make FOBs/AA/Mortars/what ever else to help the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

You think they're going to push a global patch every time they come upon a balance issue? You think that's how game development works?

I said that in reference to your comment on servers changing vehicle rules changing in a day.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aniallator said:

 

I've thought about dedicated Mortar Squads a bit, and to be honest I think it's better to leave it to regular infantry; if there's a squad that'll want to use mortars it'll probably be the infantry squad that built the FOB anyway. Heavy assets squads absolutely, but at least IMO I think Mortar Squads would be getting just a bit too specialized.

 

Its always been a weird sort of asset. It was my pass time in PR. Even back then it wasnt uncommon to see about 8 guys in a mortar squad with 3-4 on the tubes with the others pulling security with a medic trying to hold down the fort. Or to be manning a TOW or MG near the FOB. Best was the AA. The enemy air would find you and CAS would start trying to piss you off if you were really hitting them hard. I remember one round I had a few of my opfors air assets littered around my FOB all burnt up. Called them my lawn ornaments. xD

 

However this isnt PR. It would make sense that an inf squad defending a FOB is the one in charge of the tubes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

It does literally nothing to organize anything.

 

only they'd do it in your fancy-pants asset squads for more organized asset waste.

 

 

That's a pretty glaring contradiction IMO.

 

Asset waste isn't something that can magically be removed, merely contained and having the offenders localized to a single squad would make things easier for admins to remove the offenders instead of trawling through 5-6 different squads trying to find the one guy who is stealing the asset.

 

18 minutes ago, Tartantyco said:

 

You think that because there's an asset squad, that squad is immediately better run than any other squad? Please tell me how these squads magically make people behave differently than when they're part of a normal squad.

 

 

Have you actually played PR in an asset squad? Tank squad leaders push and pull their machines like battleships on the high seas, Trans heli squad leaders assume the role of ATC and are constantly making risk assessments for their birds. They are nothing like a regular infantry squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just start making a pr2.0 mod. Jesus. Tons of pl would play it. We aren't just limited to vanilla squad. So shut up and learn ue4 and the sdk. The devs will make the game they want and give you the ability to make the game you want. 

 

Mic drop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flat896 said:

When did anyone in this thread claim that Squad is a sim? 

 

Never said anyone did, just think many have trouble thinking outside that particular box. - Purely based on the level of complexity some would see added to the game, above and beyond what it is now, turning it from a thinking, tactical fps into an ArmA clone.

Having seperate dedicated squads for every single little thing in the game, with such levels of control and micro-management over them, as intimated herein, will turn Squad into a defacto ArmA clone, or near enough to it. I mean, seriously, dedicated Mortar squads?! - how much will they actually get used, how much point in actually having them, what happens to the players in the Mortar squad when mortars are not required? - well they have to change squads of course, but then, does this not negate the premise of these specialised squads, if peeps can just leave one to make the other? These ideas(added complexities - coz RL . . ) are being based on things like "well, an INF grunt can't possibly drive a tank/truck/mortar, coz he's not trained to" and vise-versa and etc to that - but at the same time you can magically change "professions" by simply changing to the Logi/Tank/mortar squad. Can you not see the double standards here?

 

As for mods: not PR2, but hopefully JO2.

Edited by LaughingJack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, LaughingJack said:

 

Never said anyone did, just think many have trouble thinking outside that particular box. - Purely based on the level of complexity some would see added to the game, above and beyond what it is now, turning it from a thinking, tactical fps into an ArmA clone.

Having seperate dedicated squads for every single little thing in the game, with such levels of control and micro-management over them, as intimated herein, will turn Squad into a defacto ArmA clone, or near enough to it. I mean, seriously, dedicated Mortar squads?! - how much will they actually get used, how much point in actually having them, what happens to the players in the Mortar squad when mortars are not required? - well they have to change squads of course, but then, does this not negate the premise of these specialised squads, if peeps can just leave one to make the other? These ideas(added complexities - coz RL . . ) are being based on things like "well, an INF grunt can't possibly drive a tank/truck/mortar, coz he's not trained to" and vise-versa and etc to that - but at the same time you can magically change "professions" by simply changing to the Logi/Tank/mortar squad. Can you not see the double standards here?

 

As for mods: not PR2, but hopefully JO2.

 

The OP's suggestion was for Mech Inf (APC), IFV, and Tank. Logie and mortar squads were not part of it, and yes, those would be unnecessarily specialized and complicated for Squad. But when it comes to tanks? People will create squads called "TANK" and lock them anyway, why not make it that much more easy and fluid???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Aniallator said:

 

Could you be any more shallow?

What I am getting at is all the people complaining when the ability to create what they want is all there is quite strange. The devs need money to produce so they want to create a vanilla version that brings people in. Then they open it all up to be able to mod and create the various things people complain about. So yea people need to quite there bitching, bring people together and start learning to mod the things they want, like a pr2.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, grimshadow said:

What I am getting at is all the people complaining when the ability to create what they want is all there is quite strange. The devs need money to produce so they want to create a vanilla version that brings people in. Then they open it all up to be able to mod and create the various things people complain about. So yea people need to quite there bitching, bring people together and start learning to mod the things they want, like a pr2.0

 

1. Google "define complaint" then Google "define suggestion", and compare the differences.

 

2. By your logic we shouldn't even have a Feedback & Suggestions subforum... because you know, the devs are just here to make the vanilla game that brings people in; anything the community wants should be left to modding.

 

3. With all due respect, telling people to "quite there bitching" and "shut up and learn ue4 and the sdk" are probably two of the most senseless things you could post on this subforum.

 

If all you have to give to this thread is to say that people should shut up and mod and not suggest things you disagree with, why even comment? If you have some actual dialogue to add to the discussion I'm all ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only red the first post. 

 

If you want this to work, squad locking must be implemented, so random greifer does not waste asset. Like Tank crew driver gets out, greifer gets in driver seat and goes yolo towards enemy positions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rayman1230 We've had this disucssion tens of times already. Nothing about asset squads makes gameplay better. That's why we dismiss it. There's no shortage of actual suggestions that provide actual solutions to issues.

 

And stop saying this has been "tried and tested" in PR, people. You can already do exactly what is done in PR at this exact moment. The suggestion is to mechanically restrict the amount of squad compositions available to a team, with absolutely no benefits. Literally, the only change this adds is that asset wasters have to join a different type of squad to do so.

 

@Shadow_ "Containing" assets wasters to certain squads does nothing to aid in admining. And that has nothing to do with team organization. And do you understand that everything in PR happens without what you're suggesting? So obviously, what you're suggesting is not necessary. And in fact, much of what is done in PR would be impossible with your suggestion.

 

The suggestion doesn't do anything to improve organization, teamwork, or communication. It does not do anything to stop griefing and asset waste. It simply reduces gameplay variability.

 

Nobody is arguing against the fact that dedicated squads improve teamwork and gameplay. What is being argued is that you can already have dedicated squads, that mechanically implementing asset squads will restrict gameplay options, and that the suggestion in no way provides anything of any benefit to the game. As you say, "it works in PR". And PR does not have your system.

 

Server owners are already talking about implementing vehicle squad rules, but we're waiting for more asset variability and squad locking features to make it feasible.

 

Griefing and asset waste doesn't happen because there aren't asset squads. Griefing and asset waste happens because people simply aren't skilled with vehicles and because squads and players don't have to do anything to earn access to vehicles. The suggestion does nothing to 

 

What is needed is the ability for vehicle asset owners to individually grant and revoke access to the vehicle and specific seats. This is not mentioned in your suggestion.

 

What is needed is a system that requires people to earn access to vehicles. Your suggestion does not do this. You can still access vehicle assets just as easily as you currently can in the game.

 

What is needed is that the consequences of asset waste and griefing should be felt directly by the responsible party. Your suggestion does not do this.

 

What is needed to improve teamwork and communication is a system that lets players make squads confident in the knowledge that they will actually have access to the assets they require to perform their task. Your suggestion does not do this.

 

This suggestion does:

And if you want asset squads, you can instead implement a suggestion that allows for that exact thing without any fixed restrictions:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tartantyco said:

 

 

@Shadow_ "Containing" assets wasters to certain squads does nothing to aid in admining. And that has nothing to do with team organization. And do you understand that everything in PR happens without what you're suggesting? So obviously, what you're suggesting is not necessary. And in fact, much of what is done in PR would be impossible with your suggestion.

 

It works in PR because it was implemented when the mini mod was made up of a tight nit community of a couple hundred players playing a slightly modified version of BF2.

 

You do realize that my suggestion is almost a mirror image of most current PR servers? The only difference is that in PR you create an asset squad and lock it, my suggestion is you select the squad you want to make instead of just naming it. This way you spawn in with the kits you need instead of picking them up in PR. 

 

3 hours ago, Tartantyco said:

 

The suggestion doesn't do anything to improve organization, teamwork, or communication. It does not do anything to stop griefing and asset waste. It simply reduces gameplay variability.

 

 

So the alternative would be to allow any squad get in an asset? Yeah, let's see how that works out and how long it takes for smart players to gather together and create squads full of heavy assets. The thing is that you keep chirping on about variability yet have yet to explain what this variability is

 

3 hours ago, Tartantyco said:

 

Griefing and asset waste doesn't happen because there aren't asset squads. Griefing and asset waste happens because people simply aren't skilled with vehicles and because squads and players don't have to do anything to earn access to vehicles. The suggestion does nothing to 

 


I honestly disagree with this to my core and it shows you have completely misunderstood as to what squad is aiming to be as a game. Griefing happens because trolls. Asset "waste" happens because of inexperience. The beauty of PR was that it was an easy game to get into, but a hard game to master and that's what Squad aims to be. I quote:

 

"Remember that squad is a unique game seeking to fill a unique genre, bridging the gap between games like Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Insurgency with more mil-sim games like the Arma series."

 

PR already has issues with elitism amongst CAS players, If you start suggesting that we limit new players from getting in heavier assets because they might cock it up, then you will end up creating a cadre of elitist players that will haunt Squad as they do in PR and cause more problems than good.

 

Squad is supposed to be accessible to everyone, but hard to master. 

 

 

Edited by Shadow_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shadow_ said:

It works in PR because it was implemented when the mini mod was made up of a tight nit community of a couple hundred players playing a slightly modified version of BF2.

 

No, it wasn't. Squad naming rules aren't even the norm for PR servers right now. They are the norm for popular servers right now, but most servers did not and have not had those squad naming rules. Even popular servers. I've been playing PR since 2007, so don't even start trying to talk that bullshit.

 

Again, server owners are already talking about implementing those exact same squad naming and asset access rules that exist in PR.

 

2 minutes ago, Shadow_ said:

So the alternative would be to allow any squad get in an asset? Yeah, let's see how that works out and how long it takes for smart players to gather together and create squads full of heavy assets. The thing is that you keep chirping on about variability yet have yet to explain what this variability is

 

No, that is not the alternative. I have already linked to an alternative:

Variability means that team can decide for themselves if they want to integrate vehicle asset X or Y with infantry or vehicle asset A or B. It means team get to decide if they want their heavy assets in a single squad, or if they want a separate squad for each heavy asset. The reason why we have a single armor squad with all the armor in it in PR is because the Battlefield 2 engine has a limit on the amount of squads in a team(9 squads). Teams may want to have some heavy assets pooled in one squad while others are in separate squads. They may want to incorporate infantry into various vehicle squads. They may want to mix branches. Again, in PR you frequently have the Transport Choppers in the Logistics squad, so you have somebody flying a chopper, somebody driving a truck, and somebody building FOBs in the same squad.

 

The problem here is that you think that just because any squad can currently claim any vehicle, that means squads are constantly trying to nab every vehicle they can find. First of all, you need 3 people minimum in a squad currently to be able to claim a vehicle. Secondly, you need SL+1 or SM+2 and claim approval to get a vehicle. Thirdly, there are restrictions on the amount of vehicles a squad can have and lose at the same time.

 

The problem isn't people just running around snatching up any vehicle they can find. The problem is people not knowning how to use vehicle assets wanting to use vehicle assets. Your suggestion does nothing to stop this. Nothing about making special asset squads restricts people from just making asset squads to access the asset squads. You don't seem to understand this very basic thing.

20 minutes ago, Shadow_ said:

I honestly disagree with this to my core and it shows you have completely misunderstood as to what squad is aiming to be as a game.

 

Please don't start this shit with me. I've played PR since 2007. I've played Squad since it's initial Pre-Alpha release. Don't come here trying to say that you have some kind of superior insight on the "spirit of the game". The fact of the matter is actually that the developers have looked at the suggestion I've linked to above as a possible system they'd want to implement, and they have consistently rejected proposals to introduce asset squads. You would know this if you had participated in any of the tens of discussions we've had on this forum since Squad was Kickstarted.

 

23 minutes ago, Shadow_ said:

PR already has issues with elitism amongst CAS players, If you start suggesting that we limit new players from getting in heavier assets because they might cock it up, then you will end up creating a cadre of elitist players that will haunt Squad as they do in PR and cause more problems than good.

 

I have already provided you with a link to what I believe would be the superior option, and I have posted that precisely because you would not have to assume what my opinions on the subject are. So please, do me a favor and read it before assuming what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tartantyco said:

This suggestion does nothing but restrict gameplay potential.


Well that's the whole point, isn't it.
If you want to have a squad that has a tank, you'll have to give up the possibility of having AT or a Marksman in your squad.
By introducing restrictions, you can shape the gamplay potential.
Potential is useless, if you don't do anything with it, if you don't apply any rules and limitations.
AAS has the potential to be Conquest, but having restrictions on which flags you can cap, is what makes it AAS and not Conquest.
Perhaps the solution is not to have preset squad blueprints for different assets, but instead introduce restrictions to kit selection that require you to exchange a kit like LAT or AR in return for a Crewman kit that lets you use a particular asset.
While the implementation is different and could seem less restrictive to you, because you can actively choose individual kits that you want in your squad, it's the same premise and achieves basically the same thing, through slightly different means.
And that's what counts in this suggestion, the net effect on balance, not the specifics of how it is achieved.

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