Jump to content
Elad

promoting teamplay

Recommended Posts

I think the game right now is allowing lone wolfing and bad teamplay  to be played because of its mechanics, in my opinion the game should promote teamplay like resupplying a squad as an APC crew, or giving a squad a ride from A to B, right now as this thing may help the team win it does not have a direct impect on ones gameplay. in other words as a guy who is driving  an mrap around, all he normally cares about is shooting enemy's and I dont really blame him, the game does not promote directly giving one supply's. we need some actual game mechanics in order for more players to better help their team and not just them self's. 

 

I have many more ideas on how to implement this what do you guys think, I am getting tired of seeing this game turning out to be played like battlefield by most players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive said this a few times already the issue is trying to balance  giving players freedom of choice whilst building the game around a TDM style ticket based attrition system, is skewed in favour of those that want to do whatever they want and requires admins to make a decision on whether those actions are a kickable offence or part of the game.    With  tk  as I see it, the only hard coded server side action that can automatically punish a player for what I will call unsportsman like conduct.  There are per server rules not hard coded but announced during play from not camping base to 2 man vehicles only   to minimum squad locking size.  

 

People will obviously say 'I bought the game I should be able to play it how I want'  which I understand, but I dont believe that Squad was ever meant to be the same as Red orchestra but does feel as though its been ground down to that level at times.   If people are offered that freedom without consequence then the game turns into the same old gameplay as the others.  

 

The whole vehicle thing is kinda screwed up imo... if you allow players the freedom to take vehicles without consequence attributed to them rather than the whole team then we end up where we are.   But there are other threads on vehicle use vs ticket loss vs punishment.

 

I agree that there should be consequences for your actions and not always good, there are problems with locked squads that should require a minimum no. of players before they are locked i.e vehicle crew kits should be able to be locked at 2, and any infantry squad should not be lockable with less than 4 players. Now we get one man locked SL completely pointless.   I have seen to many times small locked squads which provide little to no effective help to the team.

 

Other things are gradually being addressed but teamplay in a positive way should be rewarded and vice versa

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New mission created, your vehicle is tagged.

ACCEPT/DECLINE

Transport infantry from area 1 to area 2

 

Accepted...

 

Vehicle destroyed...

 

MISSION FAILED

 

Missions Accepted 5

Missions Failed 1

Missions Completed 4

 

I'm going to call this "Doing a Tarantula"

 

Edited by suds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, embecmom said:

Ive said this a few times already the issue is trying to balance  giving players freedom of choice whilst building the game around a TDM style ticket based attrition system, is skewed in favour of those that want to do whatever they want and requires admins to make a decision on whether those actions are a kickable offence or part of the game.    With  tk  as I see it, the only hard coded server side action that can automatically punish a player for what I will call unsportsman like conduct.  There are per server rules not hard coded but announced during play from not camping base to 2 man vehicles only   to minimum squad locking size.  

 

People will obviously say 'I bought the game I should be able to play it how I want'  which I understand, but I dont believe that Squad was ever meant to be the same as Red orchestra but does feel as though its been ground down to that level at times.   If people are offered that freedom without consequence then the game turns into the same old gameplay as the others.  

 

The whole vehicle thing is kinda screwed up imo... if you allow players the freedom to take vehicles without consequence attributed to them rather than the whole team then we end up where we are.   But there are other threads on vehicle use vs ticket loss vs punishment.

 

I agree that there should be consequences for your actions and not always good, there are problems with locked squads that should require a minimum no. of players before they are locked i.e vehicle crew kits should be able to be locked at 2, and any infantry squad should not be lockable with less than 4 players. Now we get one man locked SL completely pointless.   I have seen to many times small locked squads which provide little to no effective help to the team.

 

Other things are gradually being addressed but teamplay in a positive way should be rewarded and vice versa

 

 

+ 1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much in agreement too, embecmom. I'm not ure why it has got so bad lately, but it does seem that every single pub game is beset with at least 3 or 4 squads of 1-3 players, and that does not include those doing things that are very clearly for the good of the overall match or team. It really damages the game profoundly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How you want promote teamwork ? Give player some points at score board ? Ok ... for example i will teamwork even withouth scoreboard. Because i dont look at points :D but for me teamwork is alfaomega of this game and reason i play it.  I cant imagine that those point could motivate me to be more teamplayer. 

Or some highlighting or leaderboard (PR - best squad promotion) ? ok thats nice. But why should people care ? its just for 10 second of glory ?  

Quality of game depends on quality of players not "mouse aim skills" but how thay think. I say this for years.

Best kit in this game is players brain. 

Low avarage level of inteligence of team and see you. Team suck. And how this start? From grunt. Logistic is backbone. In some reason people think that killing is backbone (but its lie. reason is pretty obvious).Its so funny watch how people think in this game. Its better than any psychological material because people when thay play thay dont controll them so much and thay show stuff which would never show.

Share this post


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

How you want promote teamwork ? Give player some points at score board ? Ok ... for example i will teamwork even withouth scoreboard. Because i dont look at points :D but for me teamwork is alfaomega of this game and reason i play it.  I cant imagine that those point could motivate me to be more teamplayer. 

Or some highlighting or leaderboard (PR - best squad promotion) ? ok thats nice. But why should people care ? its just for 10 second of glory ?  

Quality of game depends on quality of players not "mouse aim skills" but how thay think. I say this for years.

Best kit in this game is players brain. 

Low avarage level of inteligence of team and see you. Team suck. And how this start? From grunt. Logistic is backbone. In some reason people think that killing is backbone (but its lie. reason is pretty obvious).Its so funny watch how people think in this game. Its better than any psychological material because people when thay play thay dont controll them so much and thay show stuff which would never show.

that is the problem.. TDM ticket based attrition leads to a TDM mentality and focus on kills... which fits with a group of players that a lot of the times are not concerned how to help the team but intent on getting that kill streak.   So if they lose a vehicle or die 15 times in a match they dont care but it impacts the rest of the team.  So it requires a method where by their actions are limited as much as possible.  Good teamplay can be rewarded with supply drops, tanks linked to being available at certain flag being taken or pts etc, or keep tickets above x and then tanks or airstrikes available.. as a team..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many people do you think would stop playing Squad if there weren´t any K/D score???

 

I mean...NOT EVEN AT THE END OF THE ROUND...

 

I would definetely keep playing.  I think some would keep playing in a less TDM oriented way. And I think many would just quit the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree why would you need k/d in a tactical shooter 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know. I think most people wouldn't quit because KD wasn't there. Just having a points total would still surely indicate some things and be kills-factored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, I mean - personally, I'd genuinely not care. Just thinking some people would - but for those that would, maybe having at least a score would be a palatable middle ground. Hey, could it even simply be enabled or not at server level?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nightingale87 said:

How many people do you think would stop playing Squad if there weren´t any K/D score???

The scoreboard must be comprised of the stats that reflect teamwork performance. Not just KD as killing is only 1 of many ways to win a game. 

 

Number of:

 

- Supply runs a person did with the logi.

- Tickets lost vs tickets taken. Can be percentage (-13% or +71%). So a person who wasted 3x warriors with a 20/3 KD will be in negative percentage. 

- Tickets saved (revives, already in the game).

- LAT forced armoured enemy away from battle (If the target crossed X-amount of meters after being hit, allocate those meters crossed as points to the LAT that delivered the shot)

- LAT blowing enemy vehicles....how is this not a stat....

- FOBs saved.

- FOBs uptime. This one is for SL's to show good/bad FOB placements. 

- Enemy FOBs attacked/taken down.

 

.....and so much more....

 

 

Share this post


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

- Tickets lost vs tickets taken. Can be percentage (-13% or +71%). So a person who wasted 3x warriors with a 20/3 KD will be in negative percentage.

This is interesting, even though we know a lot of people will be turned off by it. In most games you get Kill and Death ratio followed by "Net percentage". Would be smart to just produce the "Net percentage", either you're in the positive or negative (true contribution) value. Rather than just gloating over K/D when in the end the performance is truly the "Net Value". K/D consolidated into one ticket percentage column. 

Share this post


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

The scoreboard must be comprised of the stats that reflect teamwork performance. Not just KD as killing is only 1 of many ways to win a game. 

 

Number of:

 

- Supply runs a person did with the logi.

- Tickets lost vs tickets taken. Can be percentage (-13% or +71%). So a person who wasted 3x warriors with a 20/3 KD will be in negative percentage. 

- Tickets saved (revives, already in the game).

- LAT forced armoured enemy away from battle (If the target crossed X-amount of meters after being hit, allocate those meters crossed as points to the LAT that delivered the shot)

- LAT blowing enemy vehicles....how is this not a stat....

- FOBs saved.

- FOBs uptime. This one is for SL's to show good/bad FOB placements. 

- Enemy FOBs attacked/taken down.

 

.....and so much more....

 

 

+ 2 love your IDEA , can we hear a dev reply on this or there is no chance ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PROTOCOL said:

Would be smart to just produce the "Net percentage", either you're in the positive or negative (true contribution) value. 

This is an interesing discussion. 

 

The problema with trying to get NUMBERS to tell us something from reality is always tricky. And I think there´s a key with that PROTOCOL says about TRUE CONTRIBUTION.

 

Eg. Last weekend, Playing in NARVA. Me and the lat were pinned in the busshes and the nmy apc was around, really close. They knew we where around but not exactly where. The apc was about to start shootign at the bushes we were in "just in case" and it was gonna kill us. I was AR, so I said "**** it"...

 

I told the lat I was going to distract the APC. So i ran out of cover away from the lat and got the APCs attention….of course, i was killed in seconds, but the lat got a rear shot on the APC. 

 

2 things here. That´s quite a contribution. That´s teamwork. That cant be measured in any way by any number or system or percentage. (I really don´t care, I dont need any system to measure anything)

2nd thing. That is a sacrifice I probably woudnt have made if it was real life :)

 

Now about points to "reward" logi runs. I DONT NEED THEM. From time to time I volunteer and I expect everyone to do the same. People who usually don´t volunteer to do it wont do it even if you give them a 10000000 points for a logi run. 

 

In my opinion, the only system to measure teamwork efficienci is WHO WON AND WHO LOST AND BY HOW MANY TICKETS. Give or take some chance factor...thats it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what research or whatever else is used as a basis to include scores etc. I have no idea if that's actively been done or if it has been included at all because of assumptions and legacy. I have no complaints if it is solely based on the idea that it had to share basics with PR, given the genesis of the project; just interested.

 

I agree with you, Nightingale, in that there are so many aspects to what 'positive' could be that it simply couldn't be tracked meaningfully.  Likewise to what constitutes 'negative'. There are loads of issues with this, as has been widely discussed. Even now, as an example, the squad scores, while they can be indicative of what a squad has achieved in terms of playing the caps, often mean very little. I've had squads get 25000+ points and I've had them end up with 200, both in games where the contribution was genuinely worthwhile to the overall team's outcome. Squads with huge scores probably have to have done something right, but that doesn't mean squds with much lower scores haven't actually done even more important things at times. I've equally seen squads with, say, 10000 points or so who have actually made terrible contributions to the team effort, not bothered to co-ordinate strategically at all, etc. This clearly suggests the scores generally have an, at best, limited value. I think this is widely understood. It is interesting, really. Another facet to that is that players rarely look at their overall score anyway - and yet do look at squad score!! It certainly muddies the waters if scores are generated in other ways as well - even if we try to include values for 'saving' a FOB, how does the game measure that? How can it be sure that this is what really happened, that the player contributed? How can the game know that the griefing idiot standing in a capzone isn't actually playing an important role? The logi driver who takes his supplies to the wrong FOB repeatedly to get higher scores? The squad that spends an entire match screening a flank without ever going in a capzone? The more complex a concept, the more complex it will always be to assess merit or error and represent things aptly.

Ultimately I think scores are actually very complex things to try to accurately generate, and the simple questions are, as I see it:

 

1. Does changing things from now really add any value, particularly if everyone is aware of the issues? I think this is a big question. I don't find the scores that important, personally, though I would like to see more things tracked if the current system essentially remains.

 

2. If so, do we need scores at all? DO they really add much to the majority of Squad players?

 

3. If so, how could that be implemented in a way that is either fair for all roles and contributions as far as practicable or simplified to the point where it is at least understood and accurate?

 

As I say, interesting - and I'm sure these discussions have probably been had amongst the devs, perhaps without a solid resolution other than to have what we have now. Clearly, this is a wider discussion in the industry and within different genres and so on anyway - and I'm not convinced a perfect solution could ever exist in a game like this. I like the idea, at times, of peer valuation - upvotes etc that would generally reflect how actions in a given role are perceived by other SLs, by your SL, by squadmates etc. Even if some players would grief. Then again, there are so many issues with that too. A minefield!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler
1 hour ago, Nightingale87 said:

This is an interesing discussion. 

 

The problema with trying to get NUMBERS to tell us something from reality is always tricky. And I think there´s a key with that PROTOCOL says about TRUE CONTRIBUTION.

 

Eg. Last weekend, Playing in NARVA. Me and the lat were pinned in the busshes and the nmy apc was around, really close. They knew we where around but not exactly where. The apc was about to start shootign at the bushes we were in "just in case" and it was gonna kill us. I was AR, so I said "**** it"...

 

I told the lat I was going to distract the APC. So i ran out of cover away from the lat and got the APCs attention….of course, i was killed in seconds, but the lat got a rear shot on the APC. 

 

2 things here. That´s quite a contribution. That´s teamwork. That cant be measured in any way by any number or system or percentage. (I really don´t care, I dont need any system to measure anything)

2nd thing. That is a sacrifice I probably woudnt have made if it was real life :)

 

Now about points to "reward" logi runs. I DONT NEED THEM. From time to time I volunteer and I expect everyone to do the same. People who usually don´t volunteer to do it wont do it even if you give them a 10000000 points for a logi run. 

 

In my opinion, the only system to measure teamwork efficienci is WHO WON AND WHO LOST AND BY HOW MANY TICKETS. Give or take some chance factor...thats it. 

 

 

All fair points. Win/Lose factor only, is going to the absolute extreme, which may not be a bad thing. It will narrow the game to a niche base of players truly focused on "teamwork" which is also not a bad thing (from a gameplay perspective). Seeing that OWI is trying to broaden the appeal (sales) of the game, it's very unlikely they would go to the extreme. 

 

There are some matches were we've lost, but the experience was amazing and a well fought match. There are also matches where I've driven the logi the entire match supporting all squad leaders. All of these matches were equally enjoyable, if you value teamplay. All of that is subjective to the type of player/player-base. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I find myself on a server with no teamwork. I leave. Simple as that. You cant force players to play a certain way.

 

Blame the player, not the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont think there is any need to take away K/D ... of course its important in a shooter but my point is to provide those working as a team the benefit of doing so and limiting the impact  in someway by those that dont care about tickets.   losing vehicles/no medics in a squad/lone wolfing/giving up early/not reviving downed players  these sorts of things ... 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jevski: While I agree with that, I still think that mantra is only so helpful. In the end, it's why mods are still so important much of the time in ensuring a good experience for all - in the end, it's simply social behaviour to allow the majority to enjoy something the way they want. There's also something of caveat emptor about this: if a player buys Squad expecting COD, then more fool them, and they shouldn't simply be given a license to play as they wish if it entirely disrupts the game for others past a certain point. I leave awful servers in the end too, but really there is in my view, a responsibility for the community at large - yeah, the players - to kind of set expectations and standards to a degree.

Edited by TheRed
Clarification of message recipient

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

×