Jump to content
Rich08809

Required experience for being a SL

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, elerik said:

yep i also thought about it. Not ranking but something like popularity. But it has one dark corner. High popularity lead to potential personality destroy. Proud, ego, blabla and dumb haughty behavior . 

And also in long term (thousands of hours - years in game) its not accurate and motivating if your "star rank" is diluted. 

 

 

so we end up with a game that's like dancing with the stars/strictly come etc. marks for performance... at the mercy of trolls ...

 

and what difference does it make?  if only a few of the 5 star guys are online in that particular server you are still left with the probability that a new player will take the role... people need to get over this fixation with SL ranking/experience etc.. if you don't like the SL then leave the squad or create your own.. if you don't like to SL then tbh tough.. you cant complain about others taking the role and he wasn't experienced yet never do it yourself (this is in general not directed at you personally Elerik!)

 

In every game there will be a Squad doing something somebody doesn't agree with, whether the SL of that squad is  experienced or not , restricting in anyway the SL role just limits the no. of people that can actually do it, when the no. of players willing to do it is low in anycase... just seems like having a door that can only be opened when your favourite doorman is on duty .... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, embecmom said:

so we end up with a game that's like dancing with the stars/strictly come etc. marks for performance... at the mercy of trolls ...

 

and what difference does it make?  if only a few of the 5 star guys are online in that particular server you are still left with the probability that a new player will take the role... people need to get over this fixation with SL ranking/experience etc.. if you don't like the SL then leave the squad or create your own.. if you don't like to SL then tbh tough.. you cant complain about others taking the role and he wasn't experienced yet never do it yourself (this is in general not directed at you personally Elerik!)

 

In every game there will be a Squad doing something somebody doesn't agree with, whether the SL of that squad is  experienced or not , restricting in anyway the SL role just limits the no. of people that can actually do it, when the no. of players willing to do it is low in anycase... just seems like having a door that can only be opened when your favourite doorman is on duty .... 

People must get out of ranking behavior anyway because it is just advertisement distraction to keep people play a game. Leveling in any way is just marketing. Solid statistics are different story which are not present in any game. Many triple A company now push those garbage in games and push people to play it to death through illusion of rankings/leveling/reputation/ and other low humans quality. 

 

If we look to theme from another perspective. Personal edification coming from making mistakes. If bunch of SLs play poorly thay have several options. 

- Run away from selfreflexion and dont accept that they failed as a group of SLs and blame every others 

- Think about it. 

 

And thats it. honestly we dont have to think twice about most of situations. Its easy to run away from responsibilities. Its just game anyway. But those habits are taken out in  to real life (believe or not). If we take deep view what support mass ranking/leveling system in humans its not nice. But people are able to lie themselves pretty well. 

What i understand is that there are many poor players who want push others to accept responsibilities. But its slow process globally and its not good use any kind of force to do that. So any kind of motivation should support "that" better in humans. But also, who know what is it we have just assumptions. 

 

At the end of day. SL who made everything possible to keep equal fun - responsibilities - teamwork and team even lost will be silent anyway and guys in his squad will know that because thay had during game personal experience with him. SL who will complain like chicken well let him to do that. He will grow up eventually or leave a game completely.  Therefor its counterproductive has there any kind of ranking/leveling/ratting. 

 

Is there anything above SL in this game ? just their will to cooperate during game and thats it. SLs are game creatora, fun creators, story creators for others. Like in Dungeons and Dragons. 

Edited by elerik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/01/2018 at 4:45 PM, elerik said:

People must get out of ranking behavior anyway because it is just advertisement distraction to keep people play a game. Leveling in any way is just marketing. Solid statistics are different story which are not present in any game. Many triple A company now push those garbage in games and push people to play it to death through illusion of rankings/leveling/reputation/ and other low humans quality. 

 

If we look to theme from another perspective. Personal edification coming from making mistakes. If bunch of SLs play poorly thay have several options. 

- Run away from selfreflexion and dont accept that they failed as a group of SLs and blame every others 

- Think about it. 

 

And thats it. honestly we dont have to think twice about most of situations. Its easy to run away from responsibilities. Its just game anyway. But those habits are taken out in  to real life (believe or not). If we take deep view what support mass ranking/leveling system in humans its not nice. But people are able to lie themselves pretty well. 

What i understand is that there are many poor players who want push others to accept responsibilities. But its slow process globally and its not good use any kind of force to do that. So any kind of motivation should support "that" better in humans. But also, who know what is it we have just assumptions. 

 

At the end of day. SL who made everything possible to keep equal fun - responsibilities - teamwork and team even lost will be silent anyway and guys in his squad will know that because thay had during game personal experience with him. SL who will complain like chicken well let him to do that. He will grow up eventually or leave a game completely.  Therefor its counterproductive has there any kind of ranking/leveling/ratting. 

 

Is there anything above SL in this game ? just their will to cooperate during game and thats it. SLs are game creatora, fun creators, story creators for others. Like in Dungeons and Dragons. 

Absolutely LOVE this post :x

You said here all the things that were colliding in my head, but with the simplicity I dont have. Clear, simple and short, nice ;)

 

In fact, the first aspect I see in SLing is the personnal improvement it forces you to make. I have to be a leader, comprehensive, clear and understood in my commands, followed, I have to respect and learn the abilities and traits that will grant me respect form my squadmates, have a global awareness of the battlefield and situations, make quick decisions, communicate, understand and react... + being french, my english speaking is not very good so its not easy to lead an eng squad, thus it gives me the opportunity to improve my level in english.

So many things that may help even IRL.

 

To be honest, I need to improve my leadership for my own business IRL, and Squad, via SLing, is a very good way to train for that :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa, you guys took a phylosophical approach on ranks....

 

On 1/30/2018 at 10:45 AM, elerik said:

If we take deep view what support mass ranking/leveling system in humans

What are you even referring to? The only view is that of a chain of command in a conventional military organization...that's it....lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2018 at 3:13 PM, tatzhit said:

Well, 20-40 kills for a squad of 4 is... not bad, I guess. What is that in an hour-long game, an average of 1 kill per squad member every 10 minutes or so?

 

Now of course these are the best games, so I expect "average" mortar squad performance to be about 2-5 kills or less per member. In other words, far less effective than minimally competent foot soldiers, AND not participating in fighting for caps.

 

Also note that in all but 1 of these screenshots, the team with mortars lost.

 

Of course, one can make the argument that mortar squads don't take losses and therefore don't lose the team any tickets, and tip the game balance that way. But tbh one competent scout or LAT do far more damage than the results shown above, and also takes minimal losses. An ambush squad of 4 can practically shut down most maps, ditto.

 

In other words, like marksmen, mortar squads can occasionally score some kills (in fact I've seen some good marksmen that consistently had 30-40 kills by themselves, and they didn't need a logi and 3 other squad members to do it). But overall mortars are still a detriment to the team and would be more useful either fighting for caps or FOB/vehicle hunting.

I think you may be misinterpreting the point of mortars. They are not a weapon meant to kill everyone in the vicinity of a fire mission,  its a suppressive weapon used for area denial. If you're constantly shelling a fortified position, the last thing the enemy is going to do is push out of cover. Sure they'll still have some firing lines, but it disorientes their ability to react. I've had several pub matches where I coordinate with the mortar team to hit an objective and the second they cease fire, I push in and take the point relatively easily. The fire mission may not have even killed anybody but it forces them to stay inside, and many times clumped up enough that one grenade can do some serious damage. It also breaks down sandbags and razorwire that would otherwise inhibit a quick entry and that can offset the attack on your favor if the enemy has gotten used to not worrying about you coming in through a blocked off doorway.

Edited by jellyswim

Share this post


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

I think you may be misinterpreting the point of mortars. They are not a weapon meant to kill everyone in the vicinity of a fire mission,  its a suppressive weapon used for area denial. If you're constantly shelling a fortified position, the last thing the enemy is going to do is push out of cover. Sure they'll still have some firing lines, but it disorientes their ability to react. I've had several pub matches where I coordinate with the mortar team to hit an objective and the second they cease fire, I push in and take the point relatively easily. The fire mission may not have even killed anybody but it forces them to stay inside, and many times clumped up enough that one grenade can do some serious damage. It also breaks down sandbags and razorwire that would otherwise inhibit a quick entry and that can offset the attack on your favor if the enemy has gotten used to not worrying about you coming in through a blocked off doorway.

 

Suppression works on noobs who still think mortars are dangerous. Any minimally competent player knows they present little danger due to small AoE and low accuracy.

Might as well "suppress" with a couple SAWs dumping mags, spamming UBGL at random, or parking armor at render range and shooting at the objective.

 

Yes, mortars have some value in destroying sandbags and razorwire out in the open (which themselves are a sign that the enemy team is clueless, since they have little tactical value and are trivially cleared with 1-2 explosives of any type), but generally, having another squad storm the objective with you from a different direction is FAR more useful.

 

As I've said, yes there are some niche situations when mortars do come in handy - primarily when the enemy are all clustered in an open-topped fixed position (i.e. some sort of a compound, preferably with HAB in the open too). But that is no excuse for having a separate mortar squad that spends 100% of their time on a tactic that's only useful 5% of the time in some games.

If you see that the enemy are all clustered inside the Police Station on Sumari or something - quickly drop a mortar on nearest FOB, dump a bunch of shells into compound to get defenders to clear rooftops and courtyard, move in. Do NOT tie up 4+ competent players and a logi for an entire game to provide "covering fire" (i.e. make a bunch of noise and a few accidental kills).

Edited by tatzhit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have rarely been killed by mortars but they do provide some very good suppression value on tight flags.. and if used correctly offer an ability to stop enemy coming through certain areas of the map which is invaluable when defending.  

 

Personally I don't think the maps are currently big enough for mortars because they are easily tracked and taken out 99% of the time... I would prefer to see more portable mortars which could be used quickly with limited ammo and moved with the player.  (as I have seen IRL).

 

Larger more powerful mortars tend to be called in from main base of operations (certainly from what I have seen and read).. so like airstrikes perhaps there needs to be an off map mortar / artillery... and a more mobile less powerful unit.

 

and as you say..superfobs in themselves are usually quickly taken out if its sandbags.. Id like to see bigger map with larger fob more powerful fobs/defences but not allowed to be placed on flags.

 

but if it was IRL people would not be running through mortar fire or attacking head on an enemy fob etc with the abandon that they do!

Edited by embecmom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CptDirty said:

Whoa, you guys took a phylosophical approach on ranks....

 

What are you even referring to? The only view is that of a chain of command in a conventional military organization...that's it....lol 

yea getting deep into psychobabble... I'm not sure many SLs lose sleep over a crap round... I don't like losing a round and I don't like making poor decisions for my squad but at the end of the day its meant to be enjoyable so don't take it quite so seriously...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the biggest problem with mortars ATM is their pitiful kill radius. IRL a grenade or UBGL has maybe 20 ft incapacitation range, RPG has a bit more (warhead weight is like 5x-10x that of a nade), mortar has at least 100ft both because of a much larger projectile and because of the way it throws fragments (they are distributed parallel to the ground, not willy-nilly).

Ingame all these weapons appear to have similarly tiny kill radii, which objectively makes the mortar the worst of them (lowest mobility, lowest accuracy, highest flight time, highest opportunity cost). It doesn't even inhibit movement all that much, at most you can briefly deny a single compound/road. The same can be accomplished far better by 1-2 fire support classes or a piece of armor.

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

×