Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ok, guess its been threaded to death but here goes another one :) Also, i'm aware of this tread http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/1589-teamsquad-management-radio/?hl=%2Btask+%2Bforce+%2Bradio#entry31468 but since i felt i expanded too much i decided to post it as new thread. I sincerely apologize if it should be placed only as new post there :(

 

Let's start:

For now, when there is 50vs50 or less, current limit of 9 squads is ok but once that number can be surpassed, this would make a lot of sense: platoons! Since in one of early interviews on yt, Chuc and Irontaxi mentioned that one of reasons there are 9 squads limit per team is because of communication (like in PR), I also discuss how comms would work with platoons/squads/fireteams.

 

TEAM ORGANIZATION

 

Introduction of fireteams

 

At the moment, devs are saying there will be 9 man per squad (i guess, 1 squad leader [sL] and 2 fireteams [FT]). I think SgtRoss hinted in some thread, they are seriously discussing to include fire teams also as standard. This is inline with USMC doctrine but what about others countries? Actually, probably only USMC have this number in squad. How about US Army? Do they still have 3 FT (12 man in total per squad)? Some countries have 10 man per squad as standard, others 6 or 7. So what would be correct number to select? Hmmm...why not make it selective then? Let SL decide how many players and fireteams he want in squad. Maybe don't even make default per faction? For example, if Russian players come to USMC team, maybe let him to lead number of men he is accustomed? Maybe make only minimum like 6 and/or maximum 15 and let SL decide when to lock or set number of slots available in total?

 

Introduction of platoons

 

Furthermore, it would be cool if two or more squads could make platoon. Simply stacked in one group (player that created platoon decides who will join by invitation or just leave it unlocked). That would promote even more teamwork. Currently in PR, on public servers, squads wont communicate much. They would report mostly contacts to each others. If the leaders are really good (or same clan), they would cooperate and attack from different directions or one will fix the enemy while other flank. But that is somewhat rare. Platoons would make that much more occasional (something natural to do as at squad level with fireteams).

 

Maybe this is next big thing that Squad should really bring in relation to PR? Another level of teamwork? Teamwork at team level as natural as in squad?

 

Bonus: Keeping communication to 3-4 men is easily managed

 

Just try to recall when you first played PR as SL in full squad, how confusing was to remember all names and who is doing/carring what. There would be usually only few people really talking and you would relay on them. They would get important kits and you will remember them. Also, remember how difficult was to keep control of 12 man squad during testing periods of 128 ppl server in PR? Introduction of fireteams is more than welcome! Then you would talk to fireteams leaders [FTL] with squad radio and they would manage their group (another 3 ppl) on local just as in PR when you divide your squad like this. So, why not to do same at team level? Make platoons! Platoon leader [PL] will communicate, again with only 3-4 men so he will have time to asses the situation and command.

 

Bonus: Why stop there? Introduction of company? Or buddy teams?

 

In reality, although UE4 is great, this probably wont be mmo in terms of players per server. Will there be more than 100 players per side? And more than few tanks or APCs? Guess not... but only then, company level organization will be interesting. For now, team commander have that company level command and more than that is not needed. But if needed, same principle with platoon could be applied to company. Buddy teams (less then fireteam) are not needed really, people could use local to organize at that level.

 

CONTROL (RADIO COMMS)

 

Ok, so we have mess of platoons and squads in teams, right? How do they communicate? Two suggestions:

 

1) FREQ per squad

 

How about this: once squad is created it will automatically be assigned with few digit number (think of it as frequency number). Then you have Radio UI (or let it be part of Map/Squad selection UI) where you type in those freq and assign them to certain num key. So, before squad attacks objective or any other prolonged action, they would look at map and try to figure out which squads are near them and they gonna need. There wont be need for more than 9 different freq for sure. Just think how many different squads you contact during one action in PR. And there could be number for quick memo of FREQ. For example, in somebody contact you to report enemy incoming, that squad FREQ would be stored in automatically in key "/". Big pro for this is flexibility but cons are its not fluent as current PR system.

 

2) Make platoons mandatory as squads are in PR currently

 

How about this way? It forces squad to work with more teamwork. No squad should be island :) And that is happening in PR a lot in public servers as commanders are rare. Especially, when they attack or defend. Anyway, when match start, players can only make platoons and max number is nine of them. Just as in PR, when people name their squad first and properly, players tend to join there. That can be reasonably expected to happen with platoons also (PR is there for a long time and tested this nicely)! After platoon is made, people join in and create squads inside. Just as with kit selection in squad, platoon leader will suggest what squads he want. Yeah, there will always be silly people that will take sniper kit and lonewolf. In platoon, they may be tempted with planes or other special stuff. But they get filtered out soon in a way that sniper grabbers do in PR community. Reported and kicked. Option to respawn asset if its wasted, could be useful (by admin).

 

OK, so now we don't have mix of squads and platoons (platoons get in effect after certain number of players on server). Also, there is 9 platoons max. There could be also 9 squads max in single platoon. Then, current PR system of num keypad comm will work fine. Commander communicate with PL same as in PR. PL communicate with squads as commander did in PR. Squads communicate same way they did as in PR. But what if you have to communicate with squad from other platoon? Simple, you have to comm with PL or on local talk to squad in question. This is hard/unnecessary/prolonged, you say? Well, yes but isn't that what can happen in real life also? And squads that are around you, are probably in same platoon and available trough num keypad comms. Ones that are most important and you depend directly, anyway. Hey, but what about this: let say that APC is passing by and you need ammo or immediate transport? Well, first of all, there is single person (PL) on platoon that is overlooking your progress, needs and organizing you (you and others squads). You will report to him that you need something and he will try to take care of it. If you still need that speedy arrangement with nearby squad, there is local. In real life, actually most APC and tanks have phones on them so infantry can communicate independent of element they belong. Another point is, system is flexible, squad could just join to that platoon while in area of operations [AO] of platoon.

 

Wow, wait, that's the same way as in PR, you just suggest another layer of command, you say? Basically, yes. So what difference dose it make? Cooperation on squad level, much more involved than it is currently in PR. In a way, it is a next big thing. Why PR is so special? Teamwork. And in this way it is spread over bigger part of team. You keep communication between 3-4 man no matter what is level of command, which is ok even for new player. Platoon leaders are mandatory just as squad leaders are. Lets say there is disconnection problem/rage quit with PL: let it handle same way as in PR squads. Next one jumps in. Three things usually happen in PR for squad: 1) squad dissolve as nobody in squad have leadership ability; 2) people wait for some time for previous leader to come back or 3) one guy form squad is happy to lead and everything goes on. Same would happen for platoon, except leader will be more likely to be found because leaders of squads already got it (leading quality). And as match progress, leaders get more confident and in event of PL quitting, it will be more easily to be replaced.

 

Oh, its easy, let do not do all this and make commander mandatory! He will select what squads he needs! He will take care about squads progress, needs and organizations! Yeah, but that didn't solve anything. Then you have one man that have to track 9 other people. What, you say? But having your way, he still interacts with 9 platoons, which is even more complicated!?! Well, not really. Since there will be 50-70 players per side they can effectively make only few platoons. Others will dissolve soon as match progress or relocate to others more significant platoons. There is still only two-three flags (and that is not so occasional, its mostly two flag) to be capped or two caches to be defended. People will tend to group around platoons that are there at flags or doing something related to them.

 

Bonus: squad allocations of hardware

 

Also, something very important for this to work: let squad to allocate special hardware (planes, choppers, trucks, APC, tanks, special kits). In a way, first come first served. Same way its done in PR, properly named squads claims right to proper hardware. If somebody misbehave, they got reported and kicked. If its functioning in PR, why not here? But with one exception: players doesn't have to rush for vehicle or kits at the beginning of match, they can spawn in. That would be good, because once you organize your self at that level (might be as large as: platoon=3-4 squads=20-30 players) you don't want to lose time because somebody snatched some crucial hardware as transport truck for example. This could also bring new meaning for ACP or transport truck organic (part of) to platoon. Platoon would have choice to spawn in at the beginning of match. All other spawning expect at beginning of a match is same as intended by dev team or PR currently.

 

 

SUMMARY

 

So, all said and done, is it worth the effort to include platoons and proper comms? I think so, its fundamental as teamwork is for Squad. No more nor less. This system, i hope, promotes teamwork, that existed in squad level of PR, to be present on wider scope.

 

EXAMPLE

 

Here is gamey example for full 50vs50 server (lets say PL is squad size):

 

- att platoon (in total 26 players)

  • APC (2 players) (PL - lets say this squad made platoon and serves as platoon leader)
  • squad (9)
  • squad (9)
  • mortar/fob (6)

- armor platoon (4)

  • tank (2) (PL)
  • tank (2)

- def platoon (11)

  • squad/fob (9) (PL)
  • APC (2)

- support platoon (4)

  • chopper trans (2) (PL)
  • heli/plane CAS (2)

in total 45 players (team-oriented)

 

It would be much more cool if we get at least 64 limit per team...that would make much more sense and this would be much more useful.

 

Damn...lot of read...sorry for that... but would be happy as puppy if some Dev take time to read this and respond :)or anyone for that matter :D

 

EDIT: intro a little more clearer, section Control/2)Make platoons... got some bold letters and italics for more clearer view, added example, italics for last line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The platoon idea is interesting, strange that I've never seen someone suggest it before! For squads seeking to cooperate with other squads a platoon thing would be great. Squad members would get a better idea of which squads they're about to stick together to, and the SL would get less radio communications to deal with (right now it can become overloaded). But I think simplicity is key, having platoons, and even companies, demands more leaders, what if there are very few leader type people online some day? And how many people would appreciate the low action role of the platoon leader?

 

Squads picking vehicles is also an interesting suggestion. Why not just make pilot kits only available for a specifically created air squad etc? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About lack of leadership: yes, that could be the case. That can be spotted in PR sometimes, when people are reluctant to make squads and just wait. But somebody just step in and take the responsibility. Something else is interesting also, after few rounds, teams get shuffled and it starts to get even. So, there might be that kind of rounds, yes. As there are in PR but things get right after a few rounds. Commander? No, it wont be populated so easily yet squads will always be made... unless there is squadbug :P:D

Simplicity really is key here! That is why it's suggested that platoons are mandatory and SL and PL doesn't differ that much key combinations and communications. Any SL should be very familiar with PL role, in a way.

Good observation! That role could be low on action! But that made me think... how about medic kit? I was medic quite many times... didn't had a kill for whole match yet had some good times in that role. But you are right, he won't be in front lines. In RL, platoons HQ are usually at squad level. It consist of medic, RO, FO, few NCO and some security forces? Since, RO are not likely to be seen in this game and lifesavers are at squad level, suggestion was that PL role is a place for single player and not squad.

I guess, for infantry platoon, PL might ask for small squad to be made and he might move with them or even get close to enemy (in a way, this is still lead by example role). If he wanted armor platoon, he would jump into one of tanks/APC/and so... His vehicle would serve as HQ vehicle. And this is actually true for tank platoon to be organized this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The platoon idea would still do good without a designated PL, since it gives squads the opportunity to decide from start that they'll go together. This would remove quite a bit of talking at the beginning, people asking if anyone wanna go in a platoon etc. You would just make a platoon and those joining are in it. Leading the platoon could be done together or perhaps one squad is made a lead squad, or all squads just decide to go with the flow but at least stay close all the time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that is good idea... Then PL role is taken by squad actually. Maybe let PL role not be mandatory (as in: single player is not obligated to be there) or just left out completely. But i guess, somebody will have to be in charge as SL is in squad. Maybe first squad that created platoon have admin rights to lock platoon, kick or invite squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great ideas in here ! I'm not fond of everything but it is very very interesting ! And good job on the presentation too, very clear and soaced !

Hope the devs will look at it, there is a high potential !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@simplejack1969

 thank you! I hope they will find it interesting too :)

 

@SnowOficer

thanks for opinion, every thought is important! :)

 

and sorry for bunch of grammatical errors... English ain't my native language (if you even wondered about that) :D

 

anyway, thx for reading, ppl!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things I would get behind is allowing the squadleader to set the size of his squad. Lets say you want to make a mortar squad or a tank squad, you dont need 9 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoiler alert!!!!

 

Just kidding.

 

What is the general IRL structure for infantry,

 

Fire & Maneuver team (2 soldiers)

Fireteam (4 soldiers)

Squad (2-3 fireteams)

Section or Patrol (1-2+ squad)

Platoon (2+ Section, or vehicles)?

 

Platoon can reach up to the 50+ soldier mark, which is the current limit for team size.

 

However, since there are many more services to most factions (CAS, armor, transport, etc.), trying to implement Platoon function into the game would be mostly broken, as usually half the team is fragmented into those other services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Platoon can reach up to the 50+ soldier mark, which is the current limit for team size.

 

However, since there are many more services to most factions (CAS, armor, transport, etc.), trying to implement Platoon function into the game would be mostly broken, as usually half the team is fragmented into those other services.

 

OK, irl platoon can be that big. But some roles from rl can be omitted for gameplay reasons and net code. So, for games, platoon can be a little slimmer :) Even then, 50 players per team is pretty low for platoon idea to work as in rl. But I still think introduction of platoon is fundamental and would promote teamwork even if there are 40-50 players per side. Just think of it as grouping up squads that have common goal (defense, attack, recon, breach, flanking,...). Either PL leader (or group leader if you prefer) is single player or squad, that PL will be in charge and organize action. Currently in PR, squads are too much on their own on public servers. Usually, squad really work together when SL are clan members. With this system it comes more natural.

 

And, you don't really need bigger groups (company=grouping several platoons) than one above squad because of player limit per team won't be over 100 anytime soon. Even if it gets that high, same principle can be used as in platoon.

 

Here is gamey example for full 50vs50 server (lets say PL is squad size):

 

- att platoon (in total 26 players)

  • APC (2 players) (PL - lets say this squad made platoon and serves as platoon leader)
  • squad (9)
  • squad (9)
  • mortar/fob (6)

- armor platoon (4)

  • tank (2) (PL)
  • tank (2)

- def platoon (11)

  • squad/fob (9) (PL)
  • APC (2)

- support platoon (4)

  • chopper trans (2) (PL)
  • heli/plane CAS (2)

in total 45 players (team-oriented)

 

It would be much more cool if we get at least 64 limit per team...that would make much more sense and this would be much more useful.

 

 

I haven't read the topic yet, but im just gonna throw this out here:

 

...

 

Nice graph! I think you nailed it for fireteams... maybe you should check out platoon section of first post and fiddle with that? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My interest in seeing military infrastructure implemented is for different reasons, but I like your train of thought.

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

×