Future plan of expanding team size?

[Ronarch]

Forgive me if there are threads on this topic, because I couldn't find one.

 

Have been in the game for 2 weeks and most aspects of the game really impress me.

The right degree of hardcoreness, the realism, the hard demand of teamwork and communication and the general community are all great.

One thing I hope is the player limit be expanded slightly, to 50v50 or 60v60. 

To me even the existing maps are large enough to support more players to operate tactically and strategically. Increase in team size could also reduce the downtime for every player.

 

Of course, it's just an opinion from a newbie like me. But I wish to know how you veterans and more importantly the dev think. Thank you

[Pluto is a planet]

50v50 is already in the pipeline afaik,

[Guan_Yu007]

50v50 is confirmed and been planned from the start, tho i do hope for a bit more than that, maybe as a server option.

[Psyrus]

+1 to Guan_Yu... I really hope we can get something like 80v80 etc for some of these massive maps that are being created. 38v38 is getting spread pretty thin these days. 

[Noobgamer]

Before increasing the server player limit, it would be prudent to substantially size up the squad to, say, 12 players each. The gameplay experience depends heavily on the quality of SLs, the lack of which would result in players getting stuck with noob leftover SLs, and increasing the player limit per squad would lessen the chance.

[Ronarch]

Glad to hear all those.

Any news from Dev on when they will implement 50v50?

Should be in coming weeks？

[SamWise]

29 minutes ago, Ronarch said:

Glad to hear all those.

Any news from Dev on when they will implement 50v50?

Should be in coming weeks？

There have been some testings in regards to 50 v 50 

AFAIK, implementation is tad far out rather than close. 

[Noobtastic]

 

10 hours ago, Noobgamer said:

Before increasing the server player limit, it would be prudent to substantially size up the squad to, say, 12 players each. The gameplay experience depends heavily on the quality of SLs, the lack of which would result in players getting stuck with noob leftover SLs, and increasing the player limit per squad would lessen the chance.

I haven't played since the new release.  Over the last few months, every time I've connected to a populated server I've found all of the squads full and/or locked.  In the past, I had just created a squad called "Leftovers" and did what I could.  Put together some great squads of people that way, on very, very rare occasions.  But it seems like everybody is playing the new maps, and without any experience on them, I don't feel comfortable starting a squad, even a "Leftovers" one.  So I join a server, see the teams' squad makeups, get disheartened, and quit.

 

So what I'm getting at, is maybe an increase in squad-size would be a good thing?

[Zylfrax791]

Somewhere in dev notes 50v50 is related to the complete conversion to UE4.21 if I recall correctly...

[Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX]

You missed out on the 100 test server back in 2015,those were da Days.

 

 

Here is the Link but Unfortunately the thread was Closed...Why oh Why...

Sweet smell of 100 guns firing.

 

[Noobgamer]

11 hours ago, Noobtastic said:

 

I haven't played since the new release.  Over the last few months, every time I've connected to a populated server I've found all of the squads full and/or locked. In the past, I had just created a squad called "Leftovers" and did what I could.  Put together some great squads of people that way, on very, very rare occasions.  But it seems like everybody is playing the new maps, and without any experience on them, I don't feel comfortable starting a squad, even a "Leftovers" one.  So I join a server, see the teams' squad makeups, get disheartened, and quit.

 

So what I'm getting at, is maybe an increase in squad-size would be a good thing?

The importance of SLs is what differentiates Squad from Post Scriptum and makes Squad such a rarity among all the military-theme games(BF, Insurgency). Due to the lack of pre-set spawn points and the requirement for logistics, "no functioning SL" = "no gameplay". By sizing up squad, ineffective and self-centered SLs would be left alone doing less harm to the team.

[fuzzhead]

Yes we are still diligently working towards 50 v 50 player servers

[TheRed]

Yes, I wonder where we might end up numbers wise in the longer term, too. I totally recognise the post about locked squads etc.  I feel this has actively become a problem, to be honest.  So many games have multiple squads of 1-3 people, locked, that aren't in vehicles and are apparently only really intent on their own micro game. It genuinely damages the game experience. 

[Guan_Yu007]

It does hurt the gameplay experience yeah, but a good fix for me is to just join servers where it's not allowed, with some exceptions ofcourse (tank squad on Belaya only needs three players).

[Thegreenzzz]

On 1/9/2019 at 8:50 AM, Noobtastic said:

 

I haven't played since the new release.  Over the last few months, every time I've connected to a populated server I've found all of the squads full and/or locked.  In the past, I had just created a squad called "Leftovers" and did what I could.  Put together some great squads of people that way, on very, very rare occasions.  But it seems like everybody is playing the new maps, and without any experience on them, I don't feel comfortable starting a squad, even a "Leftovers" one.  So I join a server, see the teams' squad makeups, get disheartened, and quit.

 

So what I'm getting at, is maybe an increase in squad-size would be a good thing?

Unrelated but I have been in your squad a few times

[TheRed]

Yeah Guan, obviously I do that. It just seems to be really common at the moment and it does seem to be groups of 2-3 mates wo want to play together - fine - but don't bother with the team at all, or the effect it can have on the game if it's clearly 10 squads doing that. Servers can stop it, sure, but I guess I hope more do, to be honest.

[Wicca]

100v100 when?

[Noobtastic]

22 hours ago, Thegreenzzz said:

Unrelated but I have been in your squad a few times

I’m sorry for being a terrible squad lead with a nasally voice.  Hope you had some fun.  

[Thegreenzzz]

On 1/11/2019 at 8:22 AM, Noobtastic said:

I’m sorry for being a terrible squad lead with a nasally voice.  Hope you had some fun.  

Hey, you aren’t as bad as me

[Wicca]

I had some really great matches with 200 players on Project Reality:

 

 

 

 

These are old videos, but if the gamedesign is good, you can manage 11 people in your squad, and 9 squadleaders. We had split the teams into 3 platoons, and the communication was to some degree split between the SLs in teamspeak. And then the global channel for SLs was reserved for priority targets and Command/Platoon leaders.

 

I am sure if this is something that can be accomplished gameplay wise on an engine from 2006, it can be accomplished in modern day squad. But the limit is server hardware/software, and client hardware/software.

 

200 players is really really immersive, since it increase the potential number of good squadleaders, and commanders. And it also just fills the map/sound combat with much more conventional tactics. Well atleast in the open, CQB fights usually work the same as they do with less players.

 

Mostly it's about seperating the players, since noone wants to fight over 500m with 200 players, there should be roles for behind the lines troops aswell as objectives that spread out the effort of the team.

 

[Thegreenzzz]

19 minutes ago, Wicca said:

I had some really great matches with 200 players on Project Reality:

 

 

 

 

These are old videos, but if the gamedesign is good, you can manage 11 people in your squad, and 9 squadleaders. We had split the teams into 3 platoons, and the communication was to some degree split between the SLs in teamspeak. And then the global channel for SLs was reserved for priority targets and Command/Platoon leaders.

 

I am sure if this is something that can be accomplished gameplay wise on an engine from 2006, it can be accomplished in modern day squad. But the limit is server hardware/software, and client hardware/software.

 

200 players is really really immersive, since it increase the potential number of good squadleaders, and commanders. And it also just fills the map/sound combat with much more conventional tactics. Well atleast in the open, CQB fights usually work the same as they do with less players.

 

Mostly it's about seperating the players, since noone wants to fight over 500m with 200 players, there should be roles for behind the lines troops aswell as objectives that spread out the effort of the team.

 

With more player would/could we get multiple objective trees?

[WARti0k0ne -BG-]

100v100 leek can be heard.. 

[Ronarch]

12 hours ago, WARti0k0ne -BG- said:

100v100 leek can be heard.. 

with 12 men maximum in one squad and a designated commander post. It will be perfect.

[[IN3]=4=ever]

On 2019/1/9 at AM11点51分, Noobgamer said:

在增加服务器播放器限制之前，谨慎的做法是大幅度增加小队，比如每个12名玩家。游戏体验在很大程度上取决于SL的质量，缺乏这样会导致玩家陷入残留的剩余SL，并且增加每队的玩家限制将减少机会。

12 squad will much more hard to manage...... 

[Shekkles]

I wonder if there is an exponential issue with the player count. So 38vs38 is fine but 1 more player and it just goes downhill from there.

 

Or I wonder if there's a technical bottleneck and once it's broken they can stack on the player count like there's no tomorrow.