Function of the Squad Locking System

[Jafar Ironclad]

As an experienced squad leader, whenever I run infantry squads with the extent of fulfilling a more specialized role (recon, logistics, demolitions), I regularly lock my squad at 4-6 people, and usually not because I only want to play with my friends. It's also not a matter of being unable to manage squads of eight; I've done squads of 16 in the early days of boosted player count testing.

Sometimes, as a squad leader, you need to make an assessment of how many boots you need to fulfill a function on the team. If you're just moving quietly along the flanks, spotting every enemy soul you see and marking them on the map, and using your squad's sniper to pick off high value targets, its a job whose utility maxes out at 4-5 people (Officer medic Sniper Spotter/Breacher, sometimes AT); for each extra infantryman in your squad, there's a line infantry squad at one fewer player, or an armored asset that is just short of its crew requirements. Being able to enforce your squad's role by locking it to a (reasonable!) player cap is an important capability; I'd much rather lead a highly-efficient 6 man unit than a somewhat efficient 8-man unit when the situation calls for it.

[Frontliner]

Psyrus;1979426']For those who are hell bent on locking, just remember to be equitable, with 50 players in 9 squads it should average 5.5 players per squad.

If you assume that there are generally about 2 full inf squads (hopefully more), that's 34 players in 7 squads, which is still 4.85 players per squad. So every time Trans or CAS or tanks or APCs or even selfish inf squads lock at under 4, you're putting more burden on every other squad leader, AND you're increasing the likelihood that people won't be able to join a squad because they'll all be full or locked.

If PR could implement no locking under 5 players [through python] I'd be a happy camper, but I know a large portion of the other players disagree with me so I'll just slink back to my utopian ideals and go commander when all the inf squads are full/locked and I can't create my own because there're JETS, HELI-CAS and TransHeli squads, all locked at 2 players [leaving the rest of the team needing to average over 7 players per squad]

You know, the game could do better without 100 players. Right now, the server I join the most is Merk because the 80 player limit reduces the CoD-esque flow of enemies down to a comfortable level. It also means that you can do with less than 5 players per squad on average, which does help with the limit of squads and players in them.

I should also point out that because everybody is just committing themselves to attacking(it's actually just straight up messy on 100 player servers), it's really hard to teach new players how to play their role properly before shit hits the fan. Not to mention most new players only spit out that they're new after like 20 minutes into the game and when asked. I would actually love to teach more players how to play the game but their baptism of fire comes so early, they are just overwhelmed and it doesn't matter whether your squad says 8 players, in reality it's 4 or 5. Then there's people without mics, people who don't report incoming enemies, players who go against everything you've ordered them to do(eg. having somebody cover the stairs only to find out he's done that for 30 seconds, then went on the roof and got shot there) etc., it's certain to break your patience at one point or another, and, as a result, I've grown tired of trying.

[saXoni]

You know, the game could do better without 100 players. Right now, the server I join the most is Merk because the 80 player limit reduces the CoD-esque flow of enemies down to a comfortable level. It also means that you can do with less than 5 players per squad on average, which does help with the limit of squads and players in them.

I should also point out that because everybody is just committing themselves to attacking(it's actually just straight up messy on 100 player servers), it's really hard to teach new players how to play their role properly before shit hits the fan. Not to mention most new players only spit out that they're new after like 20 minutes into the game and when asked. I would actually love to teach more players how to play the game but their baptism of fire comes so early, they are just overwhelmed and it doesn't matter whether your squad says 8 players, in reality it's 4 or 5. Then there's people without mics, people who don't report incoming enemies, players who go against everything you've ordered them to do(eg. having somebody cover the stairs only to find out he's done that for 30 seconds, then went on the roof and got shot there) etc., it's certain to break your patience at one point or another, and, as a result, I've grown tired of trying.

Very, very well written.

[Tommygun]

Its frustrating joining a server to see only 1 open squad to join and its run by an 'inexperienced' player and the other players are also somewhat inexperienced. A quick look at the sqad list shows a number of locked 2,3 or 4 man sqds. I guess one can beg for an invite but its a drag and trying to get someone's attention is tricky (they cld of course be ignoring me on purpose )
I understand why people want locked sqds but at times it seems selfish. Why lock a mortar sqd? Let ppl join go off and give you intel. With small recon sqds, why lock, make another smaller sub sqd to act as bait or decoy, intel or just plain operate elsewhere. I know it can be tricky/frustrating as @#*$ when sqd members dont listen but try... You wont know till you try and explaining that you want to go softly and tread lightly in a small sqd I'm sure others will understand. I think the best solution is for sqd ldrs/admins to exercise their common sense and have admins enforce it (when around).
I do agree about kicking micless players or ones who do not listen if you want them to listen.

[_Fizzco_]

I'm really surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but once you begin to play with a certain set of people, you will never not play with those people.

An example, i will only play with say OD-S 3rdac and SN1, this is because i know all the people there, they have the same play style as me and i know if i walk round the corner and get shot in the face the next two guys are gonna run round and blow him away.

I've led plenty of pubbies, and some of them are good, they listen and they actually impress me alot.

Most of the time though, no mics, running off to get shot in the middle of nowhere, taking kits without asking and my pet peeve. Not keeping up with the rest of the squad.

Any hows, simply put. Once you play with a clan, you don't not play with a clan

[Brooklyn-Tech]

im sure that 90% of locked squads will gladly open if you tell them that you have a mic and you intend to teamwork.

i see no problem.

[Ranzpirat]

You know, the game could do better without 100 players.
[..]
I should also point out that because everybody is just committing themselves to attacking[...] Then there's people without mics, people who don't report incoming enemies, players who go against everything you've ordered them to do(eg. having somebody cover the stairs only to find out he's done that for 30 seconds, then went on the roof and got shot there) etc., it's certain to break your patience at one point or another, and, as a result, I've grown tired of trying.

I don't have the impression that those are a 100p based problem. Thats imho more a problem of overall playerspirit on some servers/certain times of the day.

While you are correct that on some occasions it feels just COD'esque, I think more than 64 players brings more tactic and fun to the big maps, either on INF or with assets.

I am not an experienced Squadleader nor a veteran PR-player, but when I step up to lead a squad I simply assign the new players a "godparent" from among the experienced players in addition to giving them advice myself. Non-mic/not temworking players shall be reported, warned and kicked.



Regarding the OP: Squad locking serves many different purposes. Admins should watch how its used, not the devs. If there are 9 squads and all locked, but 20 unassigned players: Admins didnt do their job. There are 8 unnasigned players and Squad 4 is not created yet: step up your game, sons and daughters.

Sometimes SL want to do certain tasks with do not require more than 5-6 people, why force them to do a 8 player squad? The asset related thoughts have already been pointed out in other posts.

+1 to what Brooklyn-Tech says. Worked/works for me with an 80% successrate.

[Brainlaag]

You know, the game could do better without 100 players. Right now, the server I join the most is Merk because the 80 player limit reduces the CoD-esque flow of enemies down to a comfortable level. It also means that you can do with less than 5 players per squad on average, which does help with the limit of squads and players in them.

I should also point out that because everybody is just committing themselves to attacking(it's actually just straight up messy on 100 player servers), it's really hard to teach new players how to play their role properly before shit hits the fan. Not to mention most new players only spit out that they're new after like 20 minutes into the game and when asked. I would actually love to teach more players how to play the game but their baptism of fire comes so early, they are just overwhelmed and it doesn't matter whether your squad says 8 players, in reality it's 4 or 5. Then there's people without mics, people who don't report incoming enemies, players who go against everything you've ordered them to do(eg. having somebody cover the stairs only to find out he's done that for 30 seconds, then went on the roof and got shot there) etc., it's certain to break your patience at one point or another, and, as a result, I've grown tired of trying.

Not a 100p issue but rather a poor choice of game mechanics and weak playerbase.

[matty1053]

I can't lock at 6p cause I get kicked by admin for saying locked inf squads are not allowed. Yet there is 0 unassigned players on the team.

[Psyrus]

I can't lock at 6p cause I get kicked by admin for saying locked inf squads are not allowed. Yet there is 0 unassigned players on the team.

If there are no unassigned people on the team, why do you want to lock it?

[IWI-GALIL.556FA]

If there are no unassigned people on the team, why do you want to lock it?

Lol, hmmmm. Good question

[Piipu]

I need to lock my squad to keep all the shitters out. I play with at least three friends so there is never need for more people. I've only seen one or two actually competent people join my squad who would communicate with us instead of trying to steal a HAT or LAT kit and proceeding to do fuck-all with it all round.

If a server forces me to keep my squad open I tell any random idiots to fuck off and kick them manually if they don't co-operate. They weren't listening to SL orders so it's all according to the rules too.

[Murphy]

There are plenty of reasons to lock a squad in a full server with everyone assigned. Off the top of my head I see randoms joining an asset squad, not saying jack shit and taking the asset only to lose it and either take another one to lose it or just leave the squad before anyone even realized what happened. Then there are the guys who will join your squad, assume a role (IE: AR, or Medic) and then completely ignore anything the rest of the squad is saying and go on their merry way to lonewolf a few kills and die. Let's not forget that people do leave and join midround so those trolls who snag kits and leave are always a possibility.

[CR8Z]

I almost never lock my squad. On rare occasions, I will lock my squad if there are only so many seats in a vehicle, such as Humvees, trans helos, etc., but I will usually unlock it once we reach our destination and I can throw down a rally. I will also lock for disconnects and friends joining.

If there are more personnel in your squad than is necessary, communicate with the other SLs to see if they could use an extra man. Then reassign the guy. Most people are amenable to this, especially if you are using teamwork to foster more teamwork.

Personally, I don't like locked squads because I think they hinder the team even while they help the squad. That said, far be it from me to tell someone how to spend their free time playing a video game. Let the admins decide if locked squads are causing the server to empty or if they are helping to fill it up.

[Bringerof_D]

locking of squads should stay, there are legitimate purposes to locking them. It comes down to application though. locked INF squads for a clan with only 4 or 5 people in it on a pub server is simply deuchey behavior. On the other hand if there's a group of people with a language barrier in a locked squad thats appropriate. for example the JP guys on the CIA server lately.

Mortar sqds do not require 8 players.

mortar squads should have at least 6 players in my opinion. It's nice to have forward spotters providing shot correction and live info on the target. You can also just talk to other squad leaders, but it's hard to find forward infantry squads who'll take the time to provide you with the needed information. but that's neither here nor there.

[HunterMed]

I am against locking squads.

It is becoming a plague on servers nowadays. Clans are becoming more and more elitist while at the same time losing quality.
A Tag infront of your name does not make you better than anyone.

While Clan locked (or generally locked squads) F*** around doing mostly "spec ops" or "ambushes" the pub squads defend and do the important work just so clans can feel like they contribute.

With mumble I see absolutely no reason to lock a squad. If a SM does not teamplay get rid of him and voila.
The only reason to lock is for language, and to be honest almost everybody can speak english enough to understand: Go there, dont shoot, shoot. And that is all you need.

It is becoming pretty pathetic in my opinion.

yesterday. It was the same on the other team by the way. funny enough that CAS (!) squad didnt lock

[Jevski]

But hunter what would you do, if that player you just kicked kept coming back? You could spend the whole game kicking him over and over, and risking it, letting the player steal a valuable kit. or if you didnt the player that does want to teamwork cant join you sqd.

[HunterMed]

But hunter what would you do, if that player you just kicked kept coming back? You could spend the whole game kicking him over and over, and risking it, letting the player steal a valuable kit. or if you didnt the player that does want to teamwork cant join you sqd.

I've never seen anyone coming back more than twice actually. I would keep kicking him or report him to admins.
When there are no locked squads I have no fear that a teamworking player wont find a home to be honest (in your example when I fail to kick the player fast enough)

[Murphy]

We had one guy join the squad to talk shit to the SL, he continued to join and reported the locked squad. Admins told him to unlock and the griefer got to play his games with kick/rejoin/talk shit/kick/rejoin. It does happen, there are people out there with nothing better to do then cause needless drama on the internet, just look at how popular Reddit is.