Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I searched and searched for something relating to my idea, but all I could find were "radio noises", or of the sorts.   But I don't mean that.  I could give two bags for sounds...this role is a sincere and legitimate role I propose to bringing to the battlefield:

 

 

My question(s) for you guys:

 

What does every Team/Squad/Platoon (etc) have in every branch of EVERY service around the world?.......Signal Soldiers!  (maybe I am a bit biased, I used to hold a comms MOS ;) ).  I won't go too much into details (unless someone asks), but the premises of the role I will cover:

 

What will the RTO bring to the SQUAD?

Another support role, designed to promote teamwork!  

How can a Squad leader(SQLDR) call for supplies if his radio is malfunctioning?  What better than an RTO(or forward observer in a Sniper squad) to troubleshoot the communication equipment?  

Setting up a Forward Operating Base(FOB)?   Well, how can you set up a FOB without a Communications Specialist?

Communicating to another SQUAD/PLT/CO?  If you are busy leading troops, how can you make sure your comms are squared away AND lead your troops at the same time?

 

 

How is this role different than your standard rifleman?

One RTO(kit) per squad.  In order for your SQLDR to call for support(outside squad echelon).  RTO MUST be present(within 25m of SQLDR/FOB blueprints) in order to establish comms to other units/ "construct" FOBS,In-Direct Fire(IDF)/Arty/CAS(again not devulging into details)..etc..etc. They don't need a shovel, but rather some "lineman's" pliers or something of the sort.  

 

As far as armaments goes, they could be equipped with your standard Carbine/Assault Rifle (with choice of Iron Sights or CCO[depending on faction's technology]), a set of pliers(or Gerber/Leatherman), your man-pack radio(and any applicable supplies needed for maintaining comms should come with the class/kit taking place of any offensive grenades),  IFAK, X amount of Mags, X amount of Incendiary 'nades(maybe a smoke 'nade if you guys feel generous, but just 1),  For secondary:  K-BAR, Pistol, breaching shotty or Grapnel hook(soldier picks depending on map/mode)Or depending on SQUADS' SOP/code.

 

 

Why should we incorporate the RTO role?

This franchise is based on teamwork and communication....Again, intra-squad comms(and the local area comms) would NOT be affected should your SQUAD fail to have an RTO.  If another squad had an RTO near a different SQLDR, he can cover down(like medics).  

 

Would you NEED an RTO in your squad to win?

No!  But if you want to build FOBS, call for IDF/Arty, or ANY kind of support other than Local Area Comms(which is what 25-50m?) you do! 

 

The game isn't broke, why fix it?

Well, you guys are all about teamwork and communication....This would be another "coveted" kit/High value Target added to the sundae of ooey gooey goodness!  Your RTO is down, give a chance for your basic rifleman to pick up a kit and contribute other than another mindless grunt!......This would be just another role that needs support from his SQUAD, and a role that PROMOTES ultimate teamwork(besides the medic) to fill the role and support the team to accomplish the mission!

 

 

 

Again, these are just the foot notes, or questions I would ask myself about this role.  Should you have any questions, or care for me to elaborate let me know!  I also have an idea for an ENGINEER class, but you tell a grunt to fill sandbags, he will build you a great wall! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like a lot of the ideas in this thread. It's a very well written OP. :)

 

But unfortunately, any game mechanics that could prevent players from communicating (eg. RTO is dead, so SL can't call supplies) are not something the devs are interested in. The reason for this is that there is no possible way to prevent players from making use of 3rd Party VoIP programs to get around the problem--"cheating". So the only solution is to never hinder comms between players, to remove any incentive for cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the 3rd party VOIP programs, very valid point */wrists* ;)  

 

But if there are limited RTO kits (1 per squad),  your squad would still be limited to it's role on the battlefield without an RTO.  Your SQLDR would NOT be able to call for supplies, CAS/IDF, Extraction/transportation, build a FOB, without an operational RTO kit.  Sort of(not all the way though) like a SQUAD can NOT survive without a Medic!  A squad can NOT "talk(to other sections)" without an RTO.

 

Again, squad comms, and local comms would NOT be affected by having/NOT having an RTO(or even if RTO were incapacitated).  The only thing the RTO is there for is for LONG range comms(as long as RTO is within X=range of SQLDR), and setting up/maintaining COMS(betwixt the team), and extablishing FOBS. 

 

This role is designed to minimize the amount of "default(oh crap I died, let me get this kit...or I spawned late(have an HDD and not an SSD) I am stuck with BASIC kit)" rifleman kits out there, and to instill MORE teamwork and SQUAD integrity than is already there!

 

Even if you use 3rd party comms software, you still need an RTO "shadowing" a SQLDR, like in real life with ANY "leadership" role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that localVOIP and squadVOIP are not dependent on the RTO. But what I don't understand about your reply is this: If the RTO is dead, then SL2 cannot talk to SL5, so what stops SL2 and SL5 from both having TeamSpeak installed and just communicating that way instead? And knowing that helicopters are player-operated, how do you stop them from using TeamSpeak to tell the pilot where to drop crates off at?

 

To make it clear, I totally think it would enhance BluFor gameplay to require the RTO to be present (within 50m of SL) in order to deploy the FOB Spawning Radio. This would make it impossible for a lone SL to "solo-build" spawn points for the team. Same for calling in artillery.

 

Just another thought: Maybe the Insurgents could have a special assymetrical advantage by not requiring a RTO in order to build a FOB or call arty (since they use basic cellphones instead of radios)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the RTO is incapacitated, the SQLDR can talk to other squads/support chains if he is within range of the KIt. or another squad member picks up the RTO kit....

 

I guess you guys are missing my point with the RTO class.

 

And I will use the medic to help clarify:

 

Your squad has just taken fire, bullets flying, 2 members go down, medic revives one, then medic goes down.........what should EVERYONE do??  Get the medic kit(after area is clear) to support your squad/team.

 

So you can't take a bullet without a medic in your squad(or should I say 2 bullets;) ), without bleeding out.........So if you DON'T have an RTO, why should you be able to call for supplies, build a FOB, without the proper radio frequencies or COMSEC?

If you don't have a medic, why should you be able to revive troops?

 

This would allow for diversity when having a mortar squad....or logistics squad, or a transport squad!  Not only diversity, but another class(that isn't a meat shield) that has a vital role on the battlefield.  Not only would this role be vital, but again it would integrate closer knit squads or at least fire teams!    

 

 

As far as Insurgents, their RTO class (like you said with cell phones) may have ability to bring Electronic Warfare (EWF) to the fight.  Whether it be displaying misinformation(key for ambushes), or the ability to affect inter-squad comms through Jamming.  

 

Like I said, this isn't about all the details, but just food for thought on another class that is VITAL in accomplishing the mission, while relying on your squad/teammates to allow you to do your job.  Maybe the thought of the RTO would be "too" realistic....But I am sure with enough thought/input, RTO or EWO(Electronic warfare officer for insurgent forces) would prove a valuable/prideful class to bring to the battlefield!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**caveat** to the 3rd party software....not everyone has a clan that plays the same games they do.  Not everyone has machines awesome enough to run a bad@ss game + 3rd party voip/recording/streaaming software.  So we cut corners and prioritize......One of the things with modern day FPS is INGAME-voip!  IT IS NON EXISTENT!  If SQUAD nails the in-game...it will limit the use of 3rd party software,  entice FNGs to PR to utilize "in-game voip" and from there, get to 3rd party.  

 

If you are playing with a group of buddies that you met on other games or 3rd party voip(because other games dont have in-game voip),  you guys are gunna be pretty much bad ass no matter what.  No cheating involved.....You guys learn to know who plays what kit, or who does what when certain things happen.  You sort of form a natural SOP amongst your buddies.  

 

Coming from a few years of server admin, if you are more worried about exploiting 3rd party VOIP software over 3rd party HACK software........I may need to find another debate partner ;)   <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 And knowing that helicopters are player-operated, how do you stop them from using TeamSpeak to tell the pilot where to drop crates off at?

 

 

Well, all Pilots take a 928724hr course on Radio operating/maintaining...so by default, if he is flying he can hear it!  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from a few years of server admin, if you are more worried about exploiting 3rd party VOIP software over 3rd party HACK software........I may need to find another debate partner ;)   <3

I think both are very important for a game like SQUAD. And even if I didn't think that, the OWI devs have already stated they don't want to do anything that could possibly encourage players to shift from ingame VOIP to TeamSpeak. I'm just regurgitating previous statements made by the dev team. So even if you were to convince me 3rd Party VoIP is OK, we still can't do anything about it. :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea BUT... Signaller should not affect voice communication (Devs really hate any idea of 3rd party communications, no chances).

But there are many other communication aspects beside of direct verbal contact.

Radioman can work like passive catalyst between team and squad, which is represented by officer. For example, once you get actual information about team tasks and notifications through map markers, you (officer) need to interact with radioman to refresh markers or make your own visible for whole team, typical SITREP.

Your task as radioman is to give opportunity to your officer to have actual information and situational awereness, proper cords.

Second, radioman can act like self-propelled officer's radio from PR, give him alternate commo rose.

Third, officer can send through radioman requests like console commands: ticket count, available vehicles on the main base etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Coming from a few years of server admin, if you are more worried about exploiting 3rd party VOIP software over 3rd party HACK software........I may need to find another debate partner ;)   <3

 

This makes no sense to me, illegally hacking a system and bypassing a system legally are two different things entirely, what Nightingale is saying is it doesn't matter what you do if you put a limitation on a system ingame which is easily bypass-able outside of the game then people will do it.

 

He was pointing out the flaw in your theory, suggesting that hacking is the same as this is ludicrous because the average person does not think using a 3rd party VOIP software is wrong.

 

To me your idea doesn't work in game because the Radio Operator is just a limp duck, he has no function other than needing to be near the SQL at all times, and if he is able to wonder more than 20m away from the squad leader his function becomes useless anyway because the Squad Leader can't do anything without his hand in it.

 

It's effectively tying a person to the SQL for an entire match for nothing more than being the second signature to a document, but anyone should be able to perform this function in a squad, otherwise you limit a squad's manoeuvrability for nothing more than a title which the squad leader already functions as.

 

It's completely different to a real life situation because instead of 5/6 groups of people to talk to you have 50 or 60 groups, so it has to be given to another person to coordinate with a JTAC otherwise the Lieutenant will get confused with what the Lance Corporals are saying and doing because they are all running around talking to ten different people while trying to breach a compound or house.

 

Again this also comes down to the Squad Leaders ability to delegate, when I setup a squad I always try to get fireteams with fireteam leaders, who will be the ones giving the orders to their fireteam members and pushing the tasks I give them, I as the Squad Leader will be doing the RTO role plus setting up FOB's and coordinating assets while communicating with the commander and other squad leaders, and ensuring my fireteams are doing what I need them to.

 

Giving this role to another squad member would not only seriously limit my operating range of around 500 meters which is how far my squad would be separated, it would attach a squad member to me for the whole match who would essentially be a non combatant because I couldn't risk him dying and limiting our operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will put it bluntly, this idea is too niche and milsim and would do more harm than good. I can elaborate if you feel theres a need for it but i think dale have said pretty much what i was thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the average person does not think using a 3rd party VOIP software is wrong.

 

To me your idea doesn't work in game because the Radio Operator is just a limp duck, he has no function other than needing to be near the SQL at all times, and if he is able to wonder more than 20m away from the squad leader his function becomes useless anyway because the Squad Leader can't do anything without his hand in it.

 

It's effectively tying a person to the SQL for an entire match for nothing more than being the second signature to a document, but anyone should be able to perform this function in a squad, otherwise you limit a squad's manoeuvrability for nothing more than a title which the squad leader already functions as.

 

It's completely different to a real life situation because instead of 5/6 groups of people to talk to you have 50 or 60 groups, so it has to be given to another person to coordinate with a JTAC otherwise the Lieutenant will get confused with what the Lance Corporals are saying and doing because they are all running around talking to ten different people while trying to breach a compound or house.

 

Again this also comes down to the Squad Leaders ability to delegate, when I setup a squad I always try to get fireteams with fireteam leaders, who will be the ones giving the orders to their fireteam members and pushing the tasks I give them, I as the Squad Leader will be doing the RTO role plus setting up FOB's and coordinating assets while communicating with the commander and other squad leaders, and ensuring my fireteams are doing what I need them to.

 

Giving this role to another squad member would not only seriously limit my operating range of around 500 meters which is how far my squad would be separated, it would attach a squad member to me for the whole match who would essentially be a non combatant because I couldn't risk him dying and limiting our operations.

Touchee' on the not realizing VOIP software is wrong,  I am guilty of this....I guess it is second nature to me.  So basically, SQUAD is taking PR(mumble) and bypassing the middle man(other VOP software)?

 

Very enlightening points on the dead weight my proposal has.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I searched and searched for something relating to my idea, but all I could find were "radio noises", or of the sorts.   But I don't mean that.  I could give two bags for sounds...this role is a sincere and legitimate role I propose to bringing to the battlefield:

 

How is this role different than your standard rifleman?

One RTO(kit) per squad.  In order for your SQLDR to call for support(outside squad echelon).  RTO MUST be present(within 25m of SQLDR/FOB blueprints) in order to establish comms to other units/ "construct" FOBS,In-Direct Fire(IDF)/Arty/CAS(again not devulging into details)..etc..etc. They don't need a shovel, but rather some "lineman's" pliers or something of the sort.  

 

Why should we incorporate the RTO role?

This franchise is based on teamwork and communication....Again, intra-squad comms(and the local area comms) would NOT be affected should your SQUAD fail to have an RTO.  If another squad had an RTO near a different SQLDR, he can cover down(like medics).  

 

 

 

Nice, but how hard did you really search? We had a similar suggestion back on 15 August..

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/3843-inter-squad-comms/?hl=radio

 

And back on 31 July.

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/3307-should-there-be-a-radioman-per-squad/?hl=radio#entry62239

 

Keep the ideas coming and welcome to the Squad community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I DO like the idea of more specialization roles that augment a forces' fighting capabilities, but as has been mentioned above, we're in a functionality competition with external VOIP applications.

 

I think it warrants a re-think, a new approach compared to what you are presently envisioning, as it has been discussed that these roles are really best in direct control by Squad Leaders.

 

Now, could you incorporate an RTO to intercept enemy radio comms? Could it be uncommon enough to stifle external VOIP avoidance? Perhaps not.

 

Perhaps it could be used to triangulate the position of radio signals, radios being the core-pieces to enemy CPs/FOBs. This is something that wouldn't be circumvent-able. It would need to be balanced appropriately with difficulty of triangulation, as well as lack of individual precision, but what you could do is provide a directional vector for whenever someone spawns on a FOB.

Then, if you and another RTO are a sufficient and known distance apart, the location of the radio could be mathematically triangulated. This patience to wait for spawn, combined with the mathematics required would make it a matter of skill, coordination, and communication. A reasonable challenge, and something that could definitively augment a teams tactical capacity.

This may not be the perfect implementation, but its an interesting, unique role, that would require an investment of manpower and resources that could provide a reasonably balanced Return.

Perhaps there is another interpretation of an RTO that might be worth implementing.

 

I'm interested in what others can come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Touchee' on the not realizing VOIP software is wrong,  I am guilty of this....I guess it is second nature to me.  So basically, SQUAD is taking PR(mumble) and bypassing the middle man(other VOP software)?

 

Very enlightening points on the dead weight my proposal has.  

 

I think you misunderstood my statement and misquoted me, your response to Nightingale was that using a 3rd party VOIP was akin to hacking, which it is not, as per your comment:

 

"Coming from a few years of server admin, if you are more worried about exploiting 3rd party VOIP software over 3rd party HACK software........I may need to find another debate partner  ;)   <3"

 

To me your suggestion falls down when the easiest route forward is perceived, it is very easy to bypass the requirement for an internal structure dedicated towards communication when players can just jump in TS or mumble and talk to each other anyway, and to limit the kit is to physically limit the player using the kit not the team.

 

To me a kit has to be a fun item to use, being a logistics manager in a game is not fun, but being the logistics managers donkey is even less fun.

 

No 3rd party VOIP programs (i.e. TS/Mumble etc) will be used in the main game.

 

Your proposal isn't dead you just need to think of smarter ways to get around the issues presented, you can have a radioman in-game but it needs to be something which can be picked up without detriment to the players enjoyability of the game, following a squad leader around 20m away all game and trying to stay alive because if you don't you completely bugger the squad up is not fun at all.

 

I am not asking you to make it easier either, something can be fun but hard to do, just not monotonous, also try to take out the essentialness from the role, make it partly essential for team success somehow and try thinking of more factors which affect the in-game environment of the squad and the people using the kit rather than what I would consider to be very difficult to control easily bypassed items.

 

Don't give in so easily, just because someone says I don't like how it looks, it doesn't mean it's wrong, it just means it needs more thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

To me a kit has to be a fun item to use, being a logistics manager in a game is not fun, but being the logistics managers donkey is even less fun.

 

No 3rd party VOIP programs (i.e. TS/Mumble etc) will be used in the main game.

 

Your proposal isn't dead you just need to think of smarter ways to get around the issues presented, you can have a radioman in-game but it needs to be something which can be picked up without detriment to the players enjoyability of the game, following a squad leader around 20m away all game and trying to stay alive because if you don't you completely bugger the squad up is not fun at all.

 

I am not asking you to make it easier either, something can be fun but hard to do, just not monotonous, also try to take out the essentialness from the role, make it partly essential for team success somehow and try thinking of more factors which affect the in-game environment of the squad and the people using the kit rather than what I would consider to be very difficult to control easily bypassed items.

 

Don't give in so easily, just because someone says I don't like how it looks, it doesn't mean it's wrong, it just means it needs more thought.

Thanks for info/input.  

 

Some roles, are, not fun......some can be rewarding.  Since this game is based off teamwork,  I think before release we may be able to provide enough "umph" in the direction of an RTO class to possibly implement(maybe a future patch or xpack).   Medics aren't fun(to me),  yet(it is first class I would chose) I am ALWAYS willing to take the role to help the SQUAD/Faction.  We need to look at Fun factor vs selfless service....  since this is a "teamwork/Communication" based game.

 

I have yet to play SQUAD, and I am new to these forums.  I should have done some more research(like the 3rd party voip software and what it does to a game..but like I said, SQUAD would be one of the first to shy away from software like TS/Mumble to enhance the experience/equality of gameplay), to better present a more "viable" RTO.  Give me time!  I really think with enough brains on this RTO/EWO suggestion, we could have the blueprint for a role more suitable for SQUAD mechanics , as opposed to a mil-sim.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@dale, after further scrutinizing your reply, and a quick foot note research/enlightenment period......an RTO role would hinder what SQUAD is trying to do....Keep 3rd party software out of the game.  I am behind it 110% after doing some homework.  

 

HOWEVER...An EWO/Forward Observer(FO) (still communication classes) would not negate the in-game voip SQUAD is trying to instill:

 

EWO kits (limited to 1-2 per faction further implementing your "triangulation" proposal @unfrail).  Have the ability to detect enemy radio comms[in-game voip through enemy inter(only)-squad comms] (via jamming/electronic warfare specialties/abilities)....by detect I dont mean SPOTREPS(show on minimap)....but more of directional kinda thing(by utilizing the compass on HUD) thus, forcing the EWO/FO role to communicate with the team and give his OWN SPOTREP..sorta like a Mortar Squad as far as judging distance/elevation).  Since there would only be 1 or 2 kits per faction, it would benefit the RTO/EWO/FO kit to stick with a sniper/recon/CO/SQLDR to be able to detect directions(spot) and semi distances, due to how strong or weak a "detected signal is"(say within X amount of metres depending on map scale).  It could be a "cooldown/limited use" ability.. (due to batteries needing recharched/ or having to visit a supply soldier or FOB to re-up the batteries).  That may be a little too much as far as recharging/re-supplying batteries, but at least this new proposal would NOT interfere with in-game voip.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if this type of kit was equipped with a mobile blue force tracking (BFT) computer? This would allow a squad leader to delegate to the RTO to set markers in real time regarding enemy personnel/assets/FOB locations. This is related to the commanders ability in PR to set map markers to inform squads of vital intel. If the squads RTO could set these markers on their fancy BFT computers (in compliance with SL's orders to set such markers), they would be able to more accurately communicate information between other Squads and the Commander.

 

Markers set by the RTO could be immediately visible within their squads tactical maps; and an RTO would be notified of markers made by other RTO's. To minimize a blanketing of markers across every players map, an RTO could select/deselect which markers (made by other squads) their SL wish to include for their maps, relevant to their own missions. Whichever markers the squads RTO has made and selected on their BFT, that would be the markers their squad will see in tac-map. Commanders should have the ability to select existing markers and create markers for all squads to have awareness of. 

 

This may give squads better situational awareness of the battlefield by allowing SL's to delegate the RTO to report intel visually to their squad/team/commander without distracting them (the SL) from managing the rest of their fire teams locally. This could also alleviate pressure on the commanders side by allowing them more assistance in receiving this type of information while they're tending to SL orders/request and other commander duties. 

 

Any markers that have become irrelevant could be deleted by the creating RTO and Commander...

 

...not sure how well this would actually work in-game, it could be a double edged blade if not done right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**caveat** to my previous post,  how bout this curve ball:

 

RTO/EWO/FO kit:   2 per faction.

 

CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE TEAM:  

1. Able to triangulate 1 FOB location per kit..closest to each kit, (if the two kits are within X-metres of eachother, wasted use of ability).  Whether or not it shows up on map or gets relayed to SQLDRs/COs is up to more input on this.  This ability has a 15 minute recharge/reload(open to feedback).  In order to initiate, one RTO/EWO/FO would have to "request triangulation/SPOTREP" and the second would have to respond (guessing through commo rose), take 15-45 seconds to triangulate.  

 

2. Able to detect(bearing/direction) enemy inter-squad comms if within X-metres.  If the RTO/EWO/FO is stationary, he will be able to detect distances by "hacking COMSEC"(ability name) after 10-20 seconds, any Enemies(ground only) within X-metres, will show up on HIS map alone, and he must send SPOTREPS  to SQLDR/CO via IN-GAME(not 3rd party) Frequencies.

 

 

Well, there is a better proposal.  Times/cooldown/distances need some work, but at least the defined "RTO" class/kit has a back bone now!  =D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with giving someone other than SL the ability to drop FOBs/deployables. It undermines the use of an SL.

 

I think having a spotter kit would fill the overall role nicely, give the player the ability to put marks on the map and the ability to laze for CAS. I believe anything more than that will essentially gimp the SL or the squad as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with giving someone other than SL the ability to drop FOBs/deployables. It undermines the use of an SL.

 

they dont/cant drop deployables......The "triangulation" ability would show 1 enemy FOB closest to either kit.   Either on the RTO map only or to SQLDRs,  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been thinking about this for a bit as well.

 

If a FOB and Respawning is representative of "a force's ability to call for reinforcements", then it follows that the "Call for Reinforcements" could be "intercepted" in a way that couldn't be circumvented by using 3rd part VoIP software.

In other-words, the RTO would obtain "radio signal-detection" only when an enemy player spawns, in essence, detecting the transmission that brought the reinforcement.

Getting the enemy FOB to show up like a bleep on your map is kind-of a hack however. Makes it too easy for the enemy. So give them some info, but not everything.

 

If you only give them detection when the enemy spawns, then they're going to have to spend some time staring at their signals eqpt. This takes them out of battle and is a cost/benefit call.

If they only detect direction, there could be a lot of ground to cover before conclusive locations are determined.

 

This gives them info, but not too much.

 

n6p7Qkk.png

 

If there are two of these to a team, then there could be an even greater reward for those RTOs that work together, where, if they pace a known distance and properly coordinate, they could effectively triangulate a more accurate position of an enemy FOB. This is a mechanic that rewards communication, skill, and the tactical application of technology. And it would come at a cost of time-spent tracking instead of fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been thinking about this for a bit as well.

 

If a FOB and Respawning is representative of "a force's ability to call for reinforcements", then it follows that the "Call for Reinforcements" could be "intercepted" in a way that couldn't be circumvented by using 3rd part VoIP software.

In other-words, the RTO would obtain "radio signal-detection" only when an enemy player spawns, in essence, detecting the transmission that brought the reinforcement.

Getting the enemy FOB to show up like a bleep on your map is kind-of a hack however. Makes it too easy for the enemy. So give them some info, but not everything.

 

If you only give them detection when the enemy spawns, then they're going to have to spend some time staring at their signals eqpt. This takes them out of battle and is a cost/benefit call.

If they only detect direction, there could be a lot of ground to cover before conclusive locations are determined.

 

This gives them info, but not too much.

 

n6p7Qkk.png

 

If there are two of these to a team, then there could be an even greater reward for those RTOs that work together, where, if they pace a known distance and properly coordinate, they could effectively triangulate a more accurate position of an enemy FOB. This is a mechanic that rewards communication, skill, and the tactical application of technology. And it would come at a cost of time-spent tracking instead of fighting.

This does all just strike me as inventing a role for the sake of it to be able to include an RTO role. However I think your FOB locating function could be nice to have. As the enemy can have more than one FOB triangulation of them could prove rather tricky and I think it would come down to a Squad just FOB hunting relying only on direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does all just strike me as inventing a role for the sake of it to be able to include an RTO role.

 

Not going to argue that. I like to look at it as creating pathways to victory. The more pathways, the less predictable, the more chance for creative strategy.

If a pair of RTOs have their trigonometry and comms down, they could in theory rapidly triangulate the location of FOB(s). This doesn't give them an inevitable victory, but it gives them information that they can use to their strategic advantage, and it rewards them for effective comms, teamwork, and skill.

 

Thats giving them a tool, and I'm of the opinion that one can never have too many tools. In games it also helps keep things challenging, non-monotonous, and ideally it rewards teamwork.

 

I see it, as has been suggested by OP, as a 2-kit per team limited use role, for selection if desired, otherwise its just an option.

 

 

 

However I think your FOB locating function could be nice to have. As the enemy can have more than one FOB triangulation of them could prove rather tricky and I think it would come down to a Squad just FOB hunting relying only on direction.

 

Was thinking RPs could add signal in there too, at a much weaker strength. Might help build the white-noise and make a specific FOB harder to pin down. Maybe not.

 

Add in the intermittent nature and the fact that attached to a moving squad things are going to be harder to track, and if the Squad is not moving, they're going to have to exercise some patience waiting for that intel to come in.

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

×