I don't know. I can't afford to buy a bunch of games so I don't have BF3 and can't compare. But in all honesty I prefer a game like you are describing RO2 in comparison; a game that, instead of through map design forcing players into the same areas and calling the resulting semblance of commonality in engagement "teamwork", rather lays itself on the table and says "this is a team-oriented game, but I'm not going to force you to go anywhere. You have to choose to be a team player and the leadership has to choose to lead well."
I guess the idea that some people have is that somehow achievements and stats and progression offer the message that individual accomplishments are equally as important as team goals. I just don't see it that way and I think fewer people see it that way than is suggested. To me the primary motivation in RO2 is match wins, period. My measure of success is did my team win or at least make a good try of it and did I contribute to that, and I honestly believe that the lion's share of RO2 players see it that way, too, unless they are just playing on a bots rank-up server in between more "serious" matches. And, notably,
team-oriented play is by design what advances personal progression the fastest. Maybe there are features that could balance the notion of individual accomplishment, such as a reckoning at the end of rounds where if you are are below a threshold of team points your individual points do not get earned. Or less negatively, a team bonus divided amongst all the roles and weapons you used if you were on the winning side in a round and contributed above a certain threshold of team points. Something like that.
But regarding map design, RO2 is about the Battle of Stalingrad: a chaotic, unpredictable kind of urban battlefield where funneling teams into predicted routes is counter to the nature of the environment. There should be many routes and options for resourceful players/teams. It should be chaotic and unpredictable and there should be room for the famous "gangster tactics". There's also irony somewhere in that there are also a lot of people saying that RO2's maps are too restrictive and not open-ended enough (even with mantling mechanic!). Go figure.
The squad system as it is now it could just as well not be there. You pretty much never know with whom you are in a squad with and generally do not care about it either. And your entire squad spawns all over the map. Any form of squad cohesion like that is simply lost.
If you could make your own squad with some people that you like and could somehow always spawn roughly at the same side of the battle it could be a lot easier to coordinate play.
Your overhead maps shows in real time where your squad mates and squad leader are. The "join a squad view" (which I feel should be default, I'll grant) of role selection shows you which squad you are in as well as the scoreboard which is available any time during a round. Server settings allow nearby player names to show, which are color coded by squad and fire team as well as squad leader and team leader. Spawn selection generally offers you options that will put you in the vicinity of your squad, if you bother to check where they are, or if the squad leader is in a spawnable location or if your squad is actually using the VOIP communicating with each other about those types of things.
You can lead a horse to water...
Also, you can kind of create your own squad by using the "join a squad" role selection view in concert with your friends if you are talking on a 3rd party voip, but agree it would be nice to have some features to facilitate this process in the game, though I'm not sure what exactly could be done. Ideas? Game has friends feature; it would be nice if there was an option that automatically put you into the same squad as friends when possible.
But in general I think the main thing needed in squad tactics isn't so much the command structure, people will generally not listen anyway. But simply making it easy to communicate with people around you, like quickly saying watch out there is an enemy behind the corner. Or asking can you cover that window while I try to run to that door.
Small events like the above are what make me feel there can be real teamwork in a game. If there is no way to easily point out something and talk about it to the people you want to share it with you simply don't get teamwork you get clutter.
It is really really really hard to communicate those basic things in a video game without adding features that hardcore realism people will not whine about, and while positional audio could help in a real way and is a good idea, it'll still be more difficult than it should be. It's why people come up with names for areas, buildings, and locations for things in the game and should take the half second to familiarize themselves with cardinal directions in the maps (
btw, you don't need a compass, one quick glance at the overhead map will orient you). There is already a spotting mechanic people need to be more aware of. If you've identified the location of an enemy you can hit the spot key and your character will vocalize it and then for a short time the Tactical display will show the location of what you spotted. Nearby players who are paying attention could hear the vocalization, and it could be reinforced through the intelligent use of VOIP ("hey, sniper on east side 3rd floor window grain elevator!") regardless of proximity.
I really don't know. Like I said, I prefer voluntary rather than artificial simulation of team play. If you funnel all the players into the same area they can be truly playing like individuals and it will still
seem like a team effort because they're going to encounter the same opposition because of being in the same area. Whereas, if the comparison is valid, RO2 requires of people to not be lazy and individualistic and put a little effort into both the leadership and a conscious team effort. To actually choose to go by your squad leader's side. Because of this sometimes if feels less than perfect, because people are not perfect, but when a team is working together it is quite rewarding because it wasn't just a simulation through map design, it was brought about voluntarily by actually using the game's various team features including constructive use of VOIP.
At the end of the day, only some team effort wins matches in RO2, not a map-designed convergence of good shooters.
