Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Smith

Slowing the Pace, Raising the Stakes: Re-Balancing Ticket Bleed, Vehicles, and FOB's

Recommended Posts

I've noticed something about Squad, as tactical as it is, it's hard to play out strategies that involve taking time, everyone has this constant urge to rush. It's evident when we see people constantly sprinting about. I also notice losing vehicles or FOB's doesn't really distress anyone. I think that should change.

 

I'd like to introduce an idea whereby Ticket bleed is reduced by an order of magnitude or more, I think that it should be a relatively small bonus received by the winning team. The reason being that it will slow the pace of the game to allow for squads to coordinate more interesting strategies, people won't feel rushed by the ticket bleed. 

 

Vehicles: To maintain balance vehicles need to be worth more tickets, losing an APC should be a loss that's felt by the whole team. It would highlight the significance of vehicles and penalize improper or inappropriate use. It would also force Squads to think twice about simply abandoning a Vehicle on the battlefield, something done far too often. Instead of rushing a vehicle in and everyone jumping out, deploying troops will have to become a more thoughtful and strategic task. There should be a scale to that though, with Armor costing the most and say transports costing the least. 

 

FOB's: Failing to defend your FOB should hurt, I'm talking 150 tickets or more kind of hurt. That should be a legitimate "mission" or "objective" within a match, to take down FOB's as not only a means of cutting off quick reinforcements but also devastating the other teams ticket count. This would increase the FOB's significance and force teams to choose their FOB's location more wisely.

 

Okay but now there's a problem, without ticket bleed what incentive is there to focus on capturing and holding points? What if the opposing team is getting absolutely rolled and they can't come back from it and the match just needs to end? To this I'd like to introduce a final capture point that ends the game, the enemy Main.

 

Once ALL points are successfully captured there should be a countdown timer in which the opposing team has a few minutes to set up their final defense/counter attack. Once that timer is up the Enemy Main should be open to capture, once captured the game is over regardless of ticket count. If the Enemy force is able to successfully counter-attack and recapture their first point then their Main becomes Off Limits again.

 

I believe that with these adjustments there will still likely be the initial rush but after that rush things will slow down and allow for more realistic game play and strategy. I also believe that rushing will be altered in a positive way due to the increased penalty for losing a vehicle. Typically during a hard rush one team loses some of it's vehicles, teams may think twice if losing 3 or 4 vehicles means losing 25% or 30% of your teams tickets. In all, this system would raise the stakes considerably and force each team to truly think about how it utilizes it's assets as over committing to a poorly planned strategy could be catastrophic.

 

This will open up each map to new strategies and tactics, allowing for strategies geared toward attrition or domination. It will create new game play opportunities that no longer center around just the objective points but legitimize groups interested in hunting FOB's or ambushing vehicles. It will add a new dimension to Squad.

 

Thanks!

Edited by Smith
Format, Punctuation, Minor Additions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Smith said:

whereby Ticket bleed is reduced by an order of magnitude or more, I think that it should be a relatively small bonus received by the winning team. The reason being that it will slow the pace of the game to allow for squads to coordinate more interesting strategies, people won't feel rushed by the ticket bleed.

i see in most vids that the teams are far more sidetracked by concern over ticket count, rather than getting on with playing the game. How many rounds have ended too early due to ticket counts effecting players willingness to keep playing that round?

22 hours ago, Smith said:

Vehicles: To maintain balance vehicles need to be worth more tickets, losing an APC should be a loss that's felt by the whole team. It would highlight the significance of vehicles and penalize improper or inappropriate use.

agreed, but instead, how about reducing the number of vehicles available? eg: 1x APC per round, 1x logi per round, etc. - now that would make peeps take far more care with their wheels, no?

22 hours ago, Smith said:

Okay but now there's a problem, without ticket bleed what incentive is there to focus on capturing and holding points? What if the opposing team is getting absolutely rolled and they can't come back from it and the match just needs to end? To this I'd like to introduce a final capture point that ends the game, the enemy Main.

Unfortunately tickets have overridden the true objective of the AAS game - to take and control CP/zones. Advance And Secure (AAS) should be the singular reason/incentive to focus on CP's. Tickets are the reason that AAS does not get played as AAS in Squad. Adding the Main's to the capturable zones will not fix this, it will just turn the Mains into meat grinders for the amusement of the opposition team, just like always happened in BF's & BF:BC2 games and add nothing of worth to Squad as a whole. What should happen in true AAS is that the last contestable CP ends the round - there is no consideration for tickets in this decision. Tickets are a broken mechanic hold-over from BattleField(s).

(itallic highlight above): so the match just needs to end ... but you want to prolong it as well ...? makes no sense.

23 hours ago, Smith said:

allowing for strategies geared toward attrition or domination.

you already have this, it's exactly what the Tickets are for and what they drive.

23 hours ago, Smith said:

... opportunities that no longer center around just the objective points.

so, you want more focus on CP's ... but you also no longer want this ...? again, makes no sense.

 

there's a few threads around here on AAS and it's implimantation in Squad as well as Tickets, have a search ;)

 

Share this post


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

i see in most vids that the teams are far more sidetracked by concern over ticket count, rather than getting on with playing the game. How many rounds have ended too early due to ticket counts effecting players willingness to keep playing that round?

That's the whole point, take Ticket Bleed and make it much, much slower so that loss of Tickets is actually in the hands of the player(s) instead of in the hands of whomever manages to get the one meaningful CP. If a person builds a FOB in an easy to find location and fails to defend it than the direct result is a large loss of tickets. An action a player, a squad, or a team took would then have direct, tangible consequences. The game would be more about how the team utilizes the map and their resources as a whole instead of just a giant boxing match to see who can hit hardest at one CP. If people are playing smart than ticket count won't worry them as much because they won't have to deal with a fast rate of bleed, that'll give them time to get back on their feet even if they've been pushed back a few CP's.

 

1 hour ago, LaughingJack said:

Tickets are the reason that AAS does not get played as AAS in Squad. Adding the Main's to the capturable zones will not fix this, it will just turn the Mains into meat grinders

I disagree on both counts. AAS doesn't work because on most maps it's too linear. The natural point for a conflict is right in the middle of a map, so why would anyone take their time in back-capping when they know they won't see anyone until they get to the middle anyway? And remember, there is a caveat and a big one, to removing the safety bubble around a Main, all other points must be captured first. It's very rare for a team to make a comeback once they've been pushed to their final point, this would allow for the game to end quickly and cleanly without dragging on. There was also the second caveat, the team get's a short breather to prepare a last stand/counter-attack.

 

 

1 hour ago, LaughingJack said:

you already have this, it's exactly what the Tickets are for and what they drive.

But they don't. In my rendition Attrition would be the act of killing enough of the enemy team, destroying enough vehicles, and eliminating enough FOB's where as Domination would be forgoing that to capture each point until their Main could be dominated. The way you'd allocate resources would be very, very different. In it's current state Vehicles and FOB's aren't worth enough tickets to make them a viable focus over that one golden ticket bleed CP.

1 hour ago, LaughingJack said:

so, you want more focus on CP's ... but you also no longer want this ...? again, makes no sense.

It doesn't make sense because that's not what I said. Working from my above statement of why AAS doesn't work due to the linear nature of CP's: Having FOB's and Vehicles worth more tickets creates dynamic objectives. They're not pre-placed, you don't know where they are until you find them. This gives the player a credible reason to go do things other than just duking it out over the one meaningful point on the map. It creates any number of meaningful opportunities to change the tide of a game. To win you could focus entirely just on the linear CP's, or you could forgo them almost entirely, dedicate one or two squads to defending a point while your other squads search and destroy enemy resources.

 

When you give real value and real consequence to player actions you create an environment ripe for dynamic and emergent game play. That's hard to accomplish when really the only way to effect anything is to fight over one point that dictates the game. I'm in favor of greater, more open options, not fewer, restrictive ones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, LaughingJack said:

people won't feel rushed by the ticket bleed.

I agree, ticket bleed is unnecessary and distracting element to the game.

Was removed from PR a long time ago, and the game plays more fluidly.

FPS player psychology will always prevail in that a players patience to find a good position and holding it, will rarely ever outlast their desire to get into the fight....

 

The incentive to attack is already there..... the enemy team loses 20 tickets when they loose a flag, and your team gains 20 tickets when you capture a flag. The rest is taken care of by FPS culture to always push towards the enemy. Defense and the act of staying motionless is a very unnatural behavior in FPS gaming... so the systems in game dont need any mechanism to ensure players dont defend too much or stay too still, there is no worry about that, quite the opposite in fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2018 at 6:12 PM, Smith said:

Vehicles: To maintain balance vehicles need to be worth more tickets, losing an APC should be a loss that's felt by the whole team. It would highlight the significance of vehicles and penalize improper or inappropriate use. It would also force Squads to think twice about simply abandoning a Vehicle on the battlefield, something done far too often. Instead of rushing a vehicle in and everyone jumping out, deploying troops will have to become a more thoughtful and strategic task. There should be a scale to that though, with Armor costing the most and say transports costing the least. 

 

FOB's: Failing to defend your FOB should hurt, I'm talking 150 tickets or more kind of hurt. That should be a legitimate "mission" or "objective" within a match, to take down FOB's as not only a means of cutting off quick reinforcements but also devastating the other teams ticket count. This would increase the FOB's significance and force teams to choose their FOB's location more wisely.

I disagree with the increasing of tickets for Vehicles and FOBs.... because what this is also doing is de-valueing the life of a single player.

So this makes killing and dying, not much worth in game

 

Killing a vehicle now, has much higher value, so this will incentivize APCs to become APC hunters even MORE than they do now, instead of supporting and helping infantry, they will continue to roam and hunt enemy APCs, as this gives the biggest return on investment, as if you get destroyed and you only killed 20 infantry, that is only 20 tickets, but of an enemy APC is worth 30,40,50 tickets etc, you only have to take down one of those to "equalize" the return on investment.

I think there is more effective ways to make vehicles support infantry more, than forcing their value higher thru means of tickets.

 

 

Same with FOBs. in PR, FOBs have no ticket value, and I prefer this. The act of placing FOBs should be a benefit to the team... by placing a signifigant ticket loss on their destruction, it means FOB placement is even more absolutely critical and win or lose the game, which further going to isolate the veteran SL from a up-coming SL, who would be terrified to place a FOB as if its not in the perfect position in the perfect timing, it will lose the team the game quite quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a project reality veteran, I can say I would prefer slower pacing, but I'm not sure if changing the ticket system is going to have a noticeable effect. while your suggestions would theoretically emphasize slower, thought out tactics and planning, it wouldn't necessarily stop players from wanting to be in the action for as much time as possible. The whole problem that creates the faster pace in squad is the mentality of all FPS players and I don't personally think its something that can be dealt with by merely changing ticket counts.

 

Pretty much every PR player out there will praise that game and a whole lot of them genuinely hate squad because its "too arcade-y", which is somewhat true because there is virtually no penalty for dying since the rally point system lets you get back in the fight in a matter of seconds. I love both games, but I think squad could use some elements from PR if they want to see the pace of matches slow down. 

 

The thing that I would change first is have rally points expire after a minute or two and increase the time it takes to reset them. I think that FOBs should be the main spawn for attacking and defending because that would make attacking less like throwing bodies at an objective until you cap or get wiped. It would reward slow and thought out maneuvers and punish irrational and poorly executed attacks. 

 

One other thing I've noticed that slows PR down more than squad is the long engagement distances and the suppression system. This is a combination of many factors including map size and the more open terrain, more powerful and longer ranged vehicles, and the fact that most forces have optics for every soldier.

 

Since squad is still a work in progress, and there are many new game changing features to come, there's a good chance that the pace will slow down to your liking and perhaps your suggestions could be a solution for the time being, but in general, I don't believe that a change in ticket bleed is getting at the core of the problem. With that said, I do absolutely agree that there SHOULD be more incentive to keep vehicles alive and players are much too careless/reckless with important assets, that along with more motivation to stay alive and less forgiveness for stupidity, I do think the immersion factor would increase. 

 

I appreciate the thought that went into your suggestion and I do think its a worthwhile topic for discussion and it certainly is worth the devs looking into.

Edited by jellyswim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for tweaking the ticket bleed mechanics as I have said in many posts before and rally points...  there are many posts on this already.

 

My way of thinking is to reduce the no. of items that actually cause ticket loss and  bring it down to deaths of the soldier rather than vehicle loss or fob loss... BUT increase the reward for capturing a flag 

 

Id also give reward pts to squads to invest in vehicles or fobs.. so it actually means something when you actually do something... and if you lose that vehicle you lose your accumulated pts too... just means that the squad has to take care of its assets more.

 

I also think heals should go to the accumulated pts (enemy action heals NOT ff I can already hear people saying ill just shoot someone and keep getting pts!)... this increases the medic role to something more than a baby sitter... and deaths if you give up come off the accumulated pts too.. so giving up early damages your squads chances of getting that vehicle/fob/air support  etc....

 

Actually id go the other way on FOBS Id make them capturable by the enemy.. like a flag and the insurgency game mode.. the closer the enemy gets to the radio / hab.. a timer starts that increases spawn time for the current owner but as soon as the timer gets to 0 it then belongs to the enemy... they can spawn in and use the current supplied build pts/armmo pts etc .. and supply it... it then makes a hab a strategically important area.. i.e that mortar sitting with a radio all the way back might need better protection because someone captures it and uses the pts to build a hab your in trouble.

 

 

Share this post


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

I'm all for tweaking the ticket bleed mechanics as I have said in many posts before and rally points...  there are many posts on this already.

 

My way of thinking is to reduce the no. of items that actually cause ticket loss and  bring it down to deaths of the soldier rather than vehicle loss or fob loss... BUT increase the reward for capturing a flag 

 

Id also give reward pts to squads to invest in vehicles or fobs.. so it actually means something when you actually do something... and if you lose that vehicle you lose your accumulated pts too... just means that the squad has to take care of its assets more.

 

I also think heals should go to the accumulated pts (enemy action heals NOT ff I can already hear people saying ill just shoot someone and keep getting pts!)... this increases the medic role to something more than a baby sitter... and deaths if you give up come off the accumulated pts too.. so giving up early damages your squads chances of getting that vehicle/fob/air support  etc....

 

Actually id go the other way on FOBS Id make them capturable by the enemy.. like a flag and the insurgency game mode.. the closer the enemy gets to the radio / hab.. a timer starts that increases spawn time for the current owner but as soon as the timer gets to 0 it then belongs to the enemy... they can spawn in and use the current supplied build pts/armmo pts etc .. and supply it... it then makes a hab a strategically important area.. i.e that mortar sitting with a radio all the way back might need better protection because someone captures it and uses the pts to build a hab your in trouble.

 

 

All of those suggestions I think will increase the overall game time to 2h+.....

Share this post


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

All of those suggestions I think will increase the overall game time to 2h+.....

hehe maybe that's a bit much...

Share this post


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

All of those suggestions I think will increase the overall game time to 2h+.....

At the moment the games seem to last around 45 mins on average, which is much too short. At that point things are really only getting interesting. I would prefer closer to 2 hours, but likely a happy medium exists! 

Edited by Jeepo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole points system in Squad have been a bit of muddy (The winner of the round is drawn in semirandom fashion by ticket loss, not lost or gained objectives. Ticket system in general is not optimal decision system for AAS. It were 100% objective based [who owns more CPs after pre set timer hits zero, were it 10 minutes or 10 hours] at the beginning when it did born through UT and DF/JOTR )  There haven't been a clear signal for players that "If I do this, Then this will happen" partly how the ticket system is build in AAS. In insurgency the outcomes of team or squad actions are more clearly visible. Every older forum fellow propably knows by now my stance on Squads AAS implementation so I don't write it down here. 

Edited by WARti0k0ne -BG-

Share this post


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

All of those suggestions I think will increase the overall game time to 2h+.....

I prefer 1.5 - 2h rounds myself... 2h+ if it is a closely evened match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone should find (if possible) the actual numbers for this but I’m willing to bet that:

 

30 min gametime -> 90% stay 

1h gametime -> 70% stay

1h30 gametime -> 50% stay 

 

from what I remember playing Squad.....

 

the player retention drops substantially as the round time increases...this will lead to either empty servers more often, SL’s leaving, important squads doing work leaving not to mention the inevitable disconnected people in general.......

 

just think about it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, CptDirty said:

Someone should find (if possible) the actual numbers for this but I’m willing to bet that:

 

30 min gametime -> 90% stay 

1h gametime -> 70% stay

1h30 gametime -> 50% stay 

 

from what I remember playing Squad.....

 

the player retention drops substantially as the round time increases...this will lead to either empty servers more often, SL’s leaving, important squads doing work leaving not to mention the inevitable disconnected people in general.......

 

just think about it 

I respectfully disagree - we have never had issues like this at all. Heck even last night TacticalGamer had a 1:45 round of Sumari of all maps and the server ended with the same amount of people. Longer rounds give more flexibility - people can always leave when they want. 

Edited by Jeepo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jeepo said:

I respectfully disagree - we have never had issues like this at all. Heck even last night TacticalGamer had a 1:45 round of Sumari of all maps and the server ended with the same amount of people.

How many of those people had a score above say 800 vs how many others with 0?

 

player count may have been the same but the retention percentage must have dropped over time which is the way it usually is... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who's leaving in the middle of a round is replaced by newcomers.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×