Jump to content
Beringtom

Why are role selection made as it is?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

This is not ment to be anything negative about the way roles/kits are made available ingame, but more a few questions about how roles are made available.

 

So playing squad i noticed that a max squad consists of 9 people, lets say 50v50 game, that leaves 5 squads of 9 and a squad of 5 on each team.
Currently the kits become available the more people that join a squad, allowing only 3 support roles being taken.
Why are kits available based on squad size?

 

I played a scout and a mate played a marksman, this combo worked out great as an overview spotting squad for our team, but it felt handicapped in that I could not make any marks, or communicate with other squads knowing I had a great view from my little hilltop.
Why are small squads not allowed to make use of the whole arsenal that squad gives access to?

Edited by Beringtom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point, I just have to assume that since the website brags about 50v50 it will happen some time.

 

But base on what I have read in other threads there seems to be a lot of ideas on how to improve/optimize squad formation.
Surely I got one as well, but it would have to make the whole squad making process a bit different.

When making a squad the SL first have to pick a role that will determin the size/kits available to people joining in.

  • FIreteam
    • Normal SL kit
    • 9 member max
    • All roles available (not scout/marksman/heavy Anti-tank)
  • Overlooks
    • Semi-autorifle (think m14) 4x scope.
    • 2 member max
    • Limit this squad type to avoid 25 snipers.
    • 2nd member is marksman
  • Engineers
    • Engineer SL kit, sub-machinegun, tripmines, tank mines.
    • Only one to build mortars
    • squad is 5 people.
    • normal kits + heavy AT
    • only people in this squad can refill Logi trucks.

I know this seems to narrow it down, but that's how I would try to do squads.

how would you do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Simply make all the roles unrestricted and let the squad leader decide what their squad is comprised of.

 

Also, make build admin commands into the game that allow restrictions on particular roles. This would allow hosts the flexibility to run sniper only games on infantry maps for example. Nothing new or revolutionary about this either.

Wait are you suggesting no limitations on kit selection whatsoever?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is dictated by the general composition of infantry squads, i.e. modeled after the real world.

In the other topic I pointed out why removing the rifle isn't the best of ideas, for multiple reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Beringtom said:

how would you do it?

 

Kitless Loadout System.

It would allow much more flexibility in squad composition while restricting the team's total kit access to a fixed amount. That way you can have a LAT in a 2-man squad, but you can't have 9 LATs in a 9-man squad.

Edited by Tartantyco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Of course. This is a game for adults right? Shouldn't squad leaders be allowed to pick their squads load out? Shouldn't the squad leader exert ultimate hegemony over his/her squad as stated in the OWI server guidelines?

 

 

I agree to some extent, but you'd need some kind of limitations so you can't have 8 LATs.

 

Also the squad structure is supposed to be somewhat realistic meaning at least for US and RU there are specific specialist designations and members can't really customize their loadouts outside of minor weapon changes and magazine count etc.

Edited by jellyswim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

So yeah, "Realism" isn't an A la carte system where you can pick and choose which components you want. Within that narrative what's it going to hurt to have unrestricted role selections when a squad leader would ultimately have control? I mean isn't any video game ultimately about having fun?

Read the squad kickstarter page. Realism is one of the main focuses of the devs and it's clearly stated. Sure this kind of warfare probably wouldnt happen, but that doesnt mean that they can't make other aspects realistic. 

 

Aside from that, your idea of "fun" is entirely arbitrary. You want freedom and the ability to do whatever the **** you want? Fine. You're entitled to that, but a lot of players including myself prefer to have some limitations for the immersion, and that's one thing I don't think you realize is important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

In the real world theres a pile of crates full of LAW's, AT-4's or RPG's and they are requisitioned based on need and then thrown into vehicles. 

 

So then I think having a vehicle and FOB inventory system would be good, rather than a LAT kit. You could load a few launchers in a vehicle and when you use them they're gone for good. If a squad could choose 9 LAT kits, they'd be invincible and I really don't think that would be good for balance. 

 

I suppose AT missiles like LAWs and AT-4s are an exception because regular rifleman can carry them IRL, but all the other kits are designations in a squad and they are assigned a weapon based on their M.O.S., meaning the squad wouldn't requisition extra 240s or DMRs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You seem to have trouble grasping the concept of a game and what is feasible within software development.

Define 'fun'.

'Squad has evolved into a completely science fiction fantasyland " You mean like WoW or Narnia? The similarities are endless (sic). When did this evolution take place?

Edited by Nimbus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zylfrax791 said:

The closest Squad ever got to psuedo realism was when it was an infantry only game. If it would have had no rally points & fobs, gore & gibs and only one life then it would have came very close to simulating a small unsupported platoon engagement. However nobody would have played that.

 

Instead, Squad has evolved into a completely science fiction fantasyland where players and assets magically materialize from thin air which makes it fun. Having more choices like unrestricted roles simply makes it even more fun.

 

 

That's your opinion of what makes it fun and I have no problem with that. However as far as I can tell, the devs are not going to take that direction because regardless of how outlandish you think the overall combat is, there will still be a heavy focus on realism in terms of equipment and faction authenticity which includes squad structuring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things that make Squad stand out from Battlefield is the restrictions, I really like those, I was only questioning why they where so limiting when you are less then 9 people in a squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Beringtom said:

One of the things that make Squad stand out from Battlefield is the restrictions, I really like those, I was only questioning why they where so limiting when you are less then 9 people in a squad.

Just to Stop  multiple 2/3 man Squads having all the good gear. So basically the more player's in your Squad = the more kits available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No kit limitations will only work in Clanbattles, but in public gameplay.. no way. there are not enough matured ppl around, to throw the ristrictions completely away.

A CoreInventorySystem would be great and gives more freedom on how to equip yourself or youre Squad.

but in my mind, there is a need of some Team and Squad Limitation, at least in public playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I doesn't saw this. But sounds to me like an exploit. And if Adam Riese is Wright the 1st option needs only random 9ppl(if I count 1SL), the 2nd needs 16 who played organised together.

Edited by Jaghammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A science fiction fantasyland? Well, I better pick up my ray gun from the ammo crate.

 

There is a worst case scenario that breaks the game with unlimited kits: your ideas are for the wrong game audience.

 

Having an all out sniper war on a small infantry map is not a main feature of Squad. I'm sure that the players in those "similar games" will enjoy it immensely though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rifleman without optics is the least useful role when not operating a vehicle....That needs to change....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Doesn't everybody understand my point that these organized group of people (clans) in public matches are already effectively overriding the role restrictions by joining and leaving the squads thus building more power small squads that have all the "good gear"?

 

What part of the fact that organized groups of people are basically cheesing a system to defeat a role balancing system don't you guys understand?

 

Please explain to me the big difference between one squad with 8 rocketeer's and one rally plus unlimited ammo fobs over 4 separate squads with 8 rocketeer's, 4 rallys and unlimited ammo fobs?

 

Well right now you do not get that 2nd LAT slot until you have 8 people in the squad... which means in order to have 8 LATs on a team (assuming you're not cheesing the system), you would need roughly 36 players on your team. That's a pretty big difference.

 

That said, given how many hits some vehicles take, how many vehicles some factions have (map dependent) and the limitations with the LATs (kits/# of rockets), some change here would be a good thing. At the very least the moment that 3rd fire support role opens up (5/6 players?), squads should be able to take that 2nd LAT kit. The fact that you need to wait for 8 players to get it is ridiculous.

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

×