Bind Vehicles to Squads

[thetrav]

A common complaint I hear is about hummers being taken by new players and used as their own personal transport to a quick death on the other side of the map taking the asset out of use for everyone.

Another on is when your squad takes a hummer out on a mission, leave a gunner in it supporting and proceed on foot for the next 200-300m to keep the asset safe and someone sees it and decides it's theirs to charge around in.

I suggest a mechanism for encouraging players to use the assets a little more responsibly and in a team oriented manner.

1 - Restrict all vehicles to players that are in a squad of at least 3
2 - Restrict squads to having no more than one vehicle for every 3 players
3 - Do not allow anyone to take the drivers seat without authorization from their SL (a request response mechanism via the radio menu perhaps)
4 - Once a SL has given permission and the driver has entered the vehicle that vehicle should be locked to the squad until one of the end conditions is met.
End conditions:
- Squad Leader manually relinquishes control of the vehicle
- Squad leader leaves the squad / all authorized drivers leave the squad
- Vehicle is Destroyed
- Vehicle is unmanned for a period of time (an appropriate duration will need to be determined)

Attempting to drive a vehicle owned by another squad should be handled in a similar way to attempting to drive an APC without a crewman kit, a warning & disabling followed by punish / death.


That's my suggestion. I don't think it'll solve the problem outright, but I think it would go a long way towards encouraging people to use the vehicles in an appropriate TEAM oriented way.

I've never been in the military so any realism justification I try to give is going to be spotty, but I would be surprised if there isn't some sort of authorization process for taking control of military assets used by real soldiers.

Another follow on suggestion is that if there is a commander playing, he should be involved in the authorization process, and perhaps have the ability to directly assign vehicles and override whatever the squad leaders have worked out.

[nick20404]

For one I don't think this is possible, on another note this would crate many more problems than it would solve and would probably be very easily exploitable by grouped idiots.

If a server has a huge problem with people stealing others stuff complain to the admins and if the admins don't do anything don't play there anymore, most good servers have the rule that you must name your squad after an asset IE APCsquad/Tanksquad etc.

In theory it might be a good idea but its really not a good idea.

[thetrav]

For one I don't think this is possible

Can't comment on that, I'm a game developer but don't know anything about the bf2 engine. It doesn't strike me as something I'd expect to be impossible.

this would crate many more problems than it would solve

you've only listed one, what are some others?

and would probably be very easily exploitable by grouped idiots.

Please provide some more detail on a situation where a group of idiots could exploit this feature to cause more havok than they could in a game without this feature.

If a server has a huge problem with people stealing others stuff complain to the admins and if the admins don't do anything don't play there anymore

Already done, and the admins for my server (big shout out to the Australian BigD community) do a reasonable job of keeping the game flowing well.
The admins can only do so much however and I feel that the feature I've suggested will encourage players to think about what they're doing a little more, which is a better result for them, the admins and everyone else in the game.

In theory it might be a good idea but its really not a good idea.

Sorry to see you don't like it. I hope my response is able to change your mind

[Guacy_Doidão]

The vehicle bind must be a commander assent,

once it is givind, the squad leader main able to managent has you say.

and if commander like it to, the vehicle can be bind for the end of cenario. or util he decides you squad is not worthy of that.

about 3 or more man, it depends of the vehicle. for exemple. a tank may have the gunner, but in my opnion the gunner dont helps much. and apcs and hunve need basic the gunner and the driver.

at all it is a good ideia.

and the guys here must be constructive.

[McBumLuv]

While I see there could have been some use in this, and I don't think that it would be completely impossible (If anything it might be hard to implement, IE you might have to code workarounds), I don't think that it actually grasps the "problem".

Problems concerning assets is a much bigger problem with players competing over queues, TKing, stealing, or whatever. I very rarely see any problem with players not in squads, mainly only with server specific rules, and team competition.

Each case I've had has been unique, and we can't find a global solution that wouldn't bring enough problems with the loss of player/server freedoms to outweigh any advantages.

If, however, you can find a better way to solve some of these different problems, I'm all for it. Personally, I'd like to see higher restrictions on players who TK, such as the inability to enter any vehicle. But this would cause more problems to the real team players, who might accidentally hit a passenger hopping out of their vehicle, or an accidental friendly fire incident. Without finding a sure solution that causes no, or minimal problems that can be fixed otherwise, we must rely on good adminning.

Just as the laws of a country are there to try and regulate the society to everyone's benefits, every case is unique. Just as the judges of today do their best to observer each scenario without bias, in fairness and to everyone's happinness, so must admins decide on their own judgement on a case-by-case scenario.

[IAJTHOMAS]

The problem is essentially a player problem. Whatever system you have, players will do dumb things with it and cause annoyance. Althought this might treat some of the symptoms, the underlying disease will still be there and will manifest itself in another way.

[Tirak]

Resuggestion,

Please use the Search Function and the Already Suggested Suggestions List before posting suggestions.

[thetrav]

The problem is essentially a player problem.

Agreed, and also agreed that this will not completely resolve the problem, nor will anything other than good admin work.

The aim of this suggestion is to minimize the problem and take some of the work off the admins by strongly suggesting a better way of playing to players who wouldn't have thought so otherwise.

Do you believe that not allowing restricted kits to people who are not three people or larger is also a bad choice or ineffective at encouraging people to play the game in a more team oriented way?

about 3 or more man, it depends of the vehicle. for exemple. a tank may have the gunner, but in my opnion the gunner dont helps much. and apcs and hunve need basic the gunner and the driver.

The number 3 I suggested is an arbitrary number that I copied from the way restricted kits work. The purpose is not to ensure the vehicle has the optimum crew, so much as it is to ensure that the people in the vehicles are working with others.

On the same note though it's my personal opinion that a vehicle that isn't supporting infantry or supported by infantry is unlikely to reach is full potential, however that's not really relevant to the suggestion itself.

[thetrav]

Resuggestion,

Please use the Search Function and the Already Suggested Suggestions List before posting suggestions.

Can you please provide a link Tirak? I had a look for it but didn't see it, I apologize if I'm repeating

[Tirak]

Squad Cars /Personal Vehicles

From the *** Thread.

[thetrav]

Oh, my bad then, I saw that one but thought it was referring to a new vehicle type

[Gaven]

Personally, I don't like it.

There have been many times where I have lead convoys of vehicles and that sort of thing. It's tough to do a convoy with 2 vehicles. Also, I've seen people create 2 man squads and use vehicles very effectively.

Besides this, in a battle it would be very inconvenient to have to wait for the squad leader to approve for a member to drive the vehicle. Removes realism there.

Also, what happens if a squad gets wiped out but the other team opts not to destroy the vehicle. The closest squad in proximity wouldn't be able to rescue it?

I don't like this idea much. It would just be another way for people to have to deal with useless processes that wouldn't really enhance or prevent anything.

Tirak-You should ask to be a mod, I never actually see you post anything anymore, just the words "Re suggestion."

[thetrav]

what happens if a squad gets wiped out but the other team opts not to destroy the vehicle. The closest squad in proximity wouldn't be able to rescue it?

I originally intended to suggest that if the squad leader/registered drivers went down then that was one of the end conditions, failing that there'd be the timeout end condition and the ability for the SL to manually relinquish control.

Without the extra end condition then yes you're right it would make it more difficult for a nearby squad to rescue a vehicle, I submit that it would be minimal impact and zero impact with the extra end condition.