Putting the Squad back in leader

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Vader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 21, 2006
367
30
0
Currently, the role of squad leader does not have very much to do with leading the team. The only incentives, or benefits if you will, of being a squad leader are as follows: Carrying smoke grenades, having access to some of the better weapons for the map, and having a 1.33 capping bonus. What I propose is that since there is a player maximum of 16 players on each side, that there be four positions delegated as "Squad Leader", with four squads per team, and a seperate mic channel for your squad, and a seperate mic channel for the squad leaders.

This opens up a multitude of possibilities. One is the designation of an entirely new position, "platoon leader", who would function the same as a squad leader, yet he would give the basic orders for the map. "Lt. X and Y, I want you guys to focus on Ammo Storage/Apartments", etc. Although not entirely necessary, it would make the game more team oriented with a set of executive officers.

The squads could even be differentiated if desired. Three Assault Squads and a support, Two Support Squads and Two Assault, etc. "Squad" is just a generic term. Perhaps they could be called Fireteam A-D, etc. Whatever is reflective of the time period.

A squad leader would not have to fill the "squad leading" position on the map, because there are certain limits. I.E., a rifleman/MG/assault trooper can also be squad leaders, remaining with their own class's weapon loadouts, but the squad leaders who have chosen that class are automatically delegated squad leaders. This might be a problem on a map such as Koitos1944, but the introduction of a lottery system for which squad leader gets to be the head honcho would solve that (currently squad leaders are unlimited in Koitos1944).

I believe this would help increase the order of things through each map, instead of giving 16 guys all seperate orders, one guy/or four squad leaders sets/set up a basic plan, relays that plan to the other squad leaders, who then relays that to their squads. This would leave open the squads choice on how they wish to take their objective, using their assets (weaponry and communication) on how to best tackle the problem.

Hmmm all of this is crap until we are able to play in 64 slot servers. The only thing that needs to changed to the squad leader, is to let him have access to any weapon he pleases on the map other than the mgs/sniper, and he should be able to pick between the smoke and HE-grenade.
 

Kurtz

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 14, 2006
401
0
0
If you let the squad leader take HE nades, then any idiot who just wants to get kills and doesn't care about capping points and winning will choose squad leader just to get a good primary weapon and a pistol. You know, just like it was before they introduced smoke grenades. :(
 

Felix Ostheim

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 9, 2005
1,051
191
0
Ohio, United States
It may not be a purist idea regarding realism but adding HUD indication for the squad feature ideas would be nice . Keep the squad members well informed on what is going on, what the current objective is, and who their squad members are. If a squad member is very far away from their squad leader/fellow members let him know that just like the other indications for ammo/vehicles etc. Tell them when the squad member has been killed, make it easier to know who each squad member is and what their name is. In reality if you have been trainnig with and fighting with a group of soldiers you are likely to know who is around you. I also really like the idea of the squad voice channel, as local is pretty ambiguous and rarely used so you hear 'GRENADE!' 'WATCH OUT!' on team channel and you're looking around worried that it may be you but it isn't. A more complex squad system that facilitates teamwork to a greater level to me may be worth sacrificing a minimalist HUD. It could even be made a server option for those who want to focus on maximum teamwork and those who want to allow more roaming freedom and spontaneous teamwork. Make information, communication, and covering one another directly integrated into the game. This could mean more tactical play and more new players jumping right into teamwork rather than lonewolfing.
 

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
36
when i was still playing COD2, we were talking all the time on vocal chat, one reason was that it was on a tactical realism server where everybody knows everybody, i still haven't found a good server on RO with a loyal population. anybody knows one?

but the maps were small in COD, so the information given thru the voice chat was handy for everyone, here in RO there is something unpersonal about voice-chat, if someone screams "grenade!" nobody knows from where it comes, the vocal chat should be like in RL, it should fade away in distance, so people can really conversate with each other without bothering those far away.

i have a mic, but i never use it, since when other players talk all the time it bothers me and makes me lose my concentration
 

Vader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 21, 2006
367
30
0
If you let the squad leader take HE nades, then any idiot who just wants to get kills and doesn't care about capping points and winning will choose squad leader just to get a good primary weapon and a pistol. You know, just like it was before they introduced smoke grenades. :(

That problem only exists in pubs, and yes it still happens even with the smoke grenades. If anyone half way knows the game and wants to win, they will know what to do. I don't see your fact a problem, if he makes enough kills his team is going to win anyways. I just don't like the fact that Germans get smoke grenades on maps they have to defend, while the Russians commanders get grenades on the defense on some maps like kauk.
 

Dr. Peter Venkman

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 21, 2006
871
68
0
California
Hmmm all of this is crap until we are able to play in 64 slot servers. The only thing that needs to changed to the squad leader, is to let him have access to any weapon he pleases on the map other than the mgs/sniper, and he should be able to pick between the smoke and HE-grenade.

If you have ever played Americas Army, I am suggesting a similar setup.
 

Obr.Lt.Scheisskopf

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 24, 2006
232
0
0
I haven't read all this but here's my two cents and is probably not gonna implemented.

Force player to follow a squad leader, like in BIA where you press a key and they follow you, or you can tell them to take cover, charge, supress, move to somewhere, and select certain teams. But my idea is to initally assign players to Squad Leaders, then to force them to follow their orders. The squad leader will give comands, for instance, if he wnats you to move behind that hedge, on his screen he will cycle through squad members, and hold another key to show the spot where you should move. If he wants to tell you something specific, he can tell you over VOIP. On the squad members screen it will show him where to go, in tis case behind the hedge, indicated by some symbol of some sort, like a circle or red shadow or whatever. If you're spectator, they'd be completely invisible. They should also be noticable, but not very out standing, like the ugly reticules in BIA. If you disobey orders you'll get warnings, but I still don't know how to punish the player. Maybe too much insubordiation will result in a kick or death (death I'll talk about later).

If you're being supressed you could shout "TAKE COVER" over the VOIP or press the key which would make you're character shout "TAKE COVER" with subtitles in the squad meber's screen, like wise to command the squad as a whole to supress or to follow the squad leader. The Squad leader would also need to have some sort of distinction because squads could sometimes mingle and squad member's might get lost, the squad leader's name could be bolded or bright silver, or have an icon next to it. Maybe the squad member's could have a special icon signifying their squad which would also be displayed on their own screen so they won't forget. To keep this from being too much like from BIA, we'd keep out the supression indocators.

There would be respawns, but you'd have to wait, like you can't respawn individually, but you'd have to wait for all required classes for a squad to be complete to die. That way, when you die, you'd be for instance an MGer, but another MGer dies
and you'd both would have to wait. You'd be unassigned to any squad. Once a squad has been eliminated, one MGer can join it, or if two or more squads are available they could choose. You'd choose you're class before you're squad, and to eliminate the faster-load-time-better-class problem, you'd wait until everyone joined. So not everyone is going to want to take MGer, and if you do, there's problably two or three slots open anyway.

Vehicle support is also a problem. If the platoon leader wanted the tank over there, he'd have to press the key, indicate the place, the commander would tell his driver to drove there. Furthermore, it's hindered by porr sight. Pretty slow. My solution is that the driver, Hull gunner, commander and loader is played by one person, if you pressed forward, for the sake of realism, you're character would shout forward, only you could hear and then a split second lag, then it would move forward. Not to mention animations to climb in and out of tanks, and a key to cycle view, I.E. press [F] and you'd be looking through hull gunner position and only be able to fire the hull mg, but still if you pressed forward, your commander would still shout "FORWARD" and the driver would still drive, all being done by you, since of course we can multi-task.

Supression should knock off you're aim and give you some sort of pyschological scare, and death should also be a scary experience. I like the idea about VOIP channels specific to certain things.


But, unfortunately, this would result in a totally new game.
 

K Rohm

FNG / Fresh Meat
Certainly all of these suggestions can be implemented, but I still say they are presently feasible. The biggest stumbling block is the commo issue, I think, but it is easily cured with a healthy dose of TeamSpeak (or Ventrilo) with TS/Vent Overlay.

The Platoon Leader (whoever that is) can implement, say, two Squad channels (A and B) and each player joins either squad and that squad's channel. The Squad Leaders bind a button to talk to the other Squad as well as to the Platoon Leader. Viola! each squad can then talk among itself without getting mixed up in mass 'GRENADE!' warnings. Plus, when needed, the Sqaud Leader can coordinate with the other Squad Leader and the Platoon Leader can direct everyone when needed.

As for the actual mechanics of infantry squad composition and interaction, the 'Leaders' are already free to form squads based on the task at hand; perhaps a maneuver squad (with SMG's and whatnot) and a support squad (heavy on MG's) based on whatever is available on that particular map.

Tankers are already halfway there; it's just the issue of having everybody in the crew up on voice comms that is our biggest problem.

And as for tactical employment, it's already there if the Leaders use it; all that is lacking is the Command and Control function, which is now taken care of by giving each sub-unit a dedicated comm channel. All that remains is for the troops to be briefed and led onto the field of battle by competent leaders.