Project Reality Forums

think this idea is good. +1

maybe instead of being large letters like the commander has they could be squad specific coloured squares. Also people seem to be fixed on the usage of this when using patrols but think of how it could be used otherwise.

1.)Setting up perfect ambushes (becasue no matter what you say when on a public server it is difficult as hell to get 2 teams of three to line up either side of a road)

2.) patrols - obviously

3.) fireteam coordination. e.g charlie fireteam follow the marked route towards the town, delta follow me.

4.) squad coordination. e.g dismount on my first green mark at the entrance of the town then we will proceed through the middle while you pull out to my second mark in D4 kp 3 as it provides a hull-down overwatch position.

5.) It would also make everyones intentions clear. At the moment on some maps you see random squads in even more random places. AND THEY'RE FULL SQUADS! this really annoys me becasue thats 6 people not doing anything. Its not uncommon to hear "what the hell is squad x doing?!!"

Scot wrote:Type of fire is more from the officer, but yah, Group means how many, range(range) indication is 'Big mofoing tree 2 o'clock from axis of advance' or similar IIRC.

I do know.

And isn't group who fires?

Eg. LSW, or Section, or Charlie, or the guy with the slingshot? and Type of Fire is still done by a british squaddie, generally they just shout Rapid fire though, the SLs do the more complicate dones lol

well, reading some more of the posts=P i see another use posted before, whene you try and explain your plan of attack to peaple who have not played the map before. it would be easy to have sl placed markers to show the attack route aswell, such as start at main, all inf bail out of stryker at x marker, and then stryker moves to b marker to cover inf moving to t marker, but like 3 or 4 collers instead of letters=P its to hard to have youe squad plit and still keep them on target...

plus this could be great for setting up fall back positions or quick identification of enemy positions. I find it a pain to keep having to move a marker to tell people exact positions and loosing positions of other enemys.

"I want you and you to fire on Alpha while you and you fire on bravo and me and him move up to engage Charlie"

Or

"if we get assaulted and over run i want us to fall back to Bravo and you, you and you to fall back to delta"

Ccharge wrote:plus this could be great for setting up fall back positions or quick identification of enemy positions. I find it a pain to keep having to move a marker to tell people exact positions and loosing positions of other enemys.

This is a good example, currrently i, and my squad probably, find it annoying to use the markers again and again and to follow me.

"observe this." "but keeep moving towards this" "ok observe these guys in the open" "we've got to move south"

it can all happen so quickly.

Like the idea. Would be great to have it ingame.

i second this i love the idea just wish there was a walking motion like in arma

I think that we dont need to add anything for this to work ingame, its like a tactic. Just tell a squad, move around the flag, in this way. If your bored by defending, atleast the squad will have something to do.

I agree with rudd.

Dont implement this imo.

im sure this is a resuggest

Wicca wrote:I think that we dont need to add anything for this to work ingame, its like a tactic. Just tell a squad, move around the flag, in this way. If your bored by defending, atleast the squad will have something to do.

I agree with rudd.

Dont implement this imo.

Well that sounds good in theory, but in a public game non-specific orders such as this result in people wandering off and/or attacking, and you cant really have a go at them as the orders given were not very direct.

To Rudd and Wicca, this suggestion is not a massive change or the like, it is a simple feature that could be implemented, and if so does not have to be used, and will not effect you if you feel you don't need to use it.

and will not effect you if you feel you don't need to use it.

For the reasons I stated, I don't like the idea because I think its superfluous, and therefore either not worth the effort of the DEVs or low on the priority list. If it was put ingame, I wouldn't use it for the reasons I stated. Patrols are fine, but its not hard to just walk between a couple of points on the map over and over until you shoot something i.e. a patrol.

@ Rudd.

Take control of a squad on assault on mestia then tell them to patrol through the forest.

It will end up with a couple of guys walking around aimlessly as they arn't sure where they are going, and the rest unsure of what to do.

Then, with this, say "Patrol from points A to B, via C" and see your squad do clearance patrols in a very realistic way.

Im gonna go ahead and say this for a MOD whos been deleting useless posts[but hadn't told you all to stop]. Please dont simply reply with a "Agree +1" as its useless. From here on, if we see one, its getting warn points.

Add something to the convo, k?

Thats what i've been thinking too, Im absolutely for it if its possible.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:

For the reasons I stated, I don't like the idea because I think its superfluous, and therefore either not worth the effort of the DEVs or low on the priority list. If it was put ingame, I wouldn't use it for the reasons I stated. Patrols are fine, but its not hard to just walk between a couple of points on the map over and over until you shoot something i.e. a patrol.

Its not like you have to use it... plus i think it would benifit the community in a way so that people new to PR can get fimiliar with the terrian and fimiliar with squad tatics rather then just learning to walk to one point and wait for the next order. Also what effort i doubt designing some markers and implementing them would be that hard.

Have you ever had a squad were the people in it are asking over and over on what to do next? plus if u have ever played in a tatical squad it would be great for using fire teams.

Just cuz he said patrol routes doesnt mean it must be used for that.

I like the idea, and if it's feasible for just the squad to see, then go for it.

@ Rudd, while the intentions of the OP's post are based on a tactic that the majority of people doesn't use, the suggestion isn't going to be limited in use to making partol routes. As an SL, I find myself sometimes in need of placing multiple markers as I either split my squad up for suppressive fire, or because I want to lay way points for SM rendez-vous-ing from a different area than me. I'm sure you've found it at times when you need to place your markers in quick succession with each other to explain the path you're taking to your squad, or for organizing flanking assaults. This would obviously be useful for that, since once you move your marker, people wouldn't be able to see the last one anymore.

However, if this were implemented, I'd have 5 different letter options within their own category, which can each be "spotted" directly onto the map. Think of it like how it used to be possible to place markers on the map of enemy locations back in 0.75. However, you can only have one of each letter on the map at a time, so that you can move them each around.

Would be useful in this way both for creating wwaypoints for a path, or for positions you want your squad to be aware of (Fire team A go after the spot marked "A" on the map, FSG hold at "B", regroup at "C", etc...)

Those are my thoughts at least, however I'm not sure if a map with markers that only your squad can see is possible, but it wouldn't be a bad thing for the entire team to see if we have to resort to that. Only problem might be clutter on the map, or marker spamming which can be taken care of by the swift hand of a good admin

oh its quite within the limits of the bf2 engine i belive. Though the way i see it being implemented is thru the squad orders system and what not. What i fear is that if i go commander theres all these A's, B's, C's, etc all over the map so i can't see, but i imagine they can work through that.

I have ordered Patrols alot of times, defending. Its not really hard for a guy to press W then press caps lock as i tell him to walk somewhere else and check that out, just make someone a Fireteam leader and make them lead the patrol or not. It doesnt really have anything to say, this is just a tactic.

If you want to make things realistic, why dont we just print the maps, and then tell your squadmembers to do the same, and tell them to write certain stuff at grids... Like battleship

Seriously, if a player as a squadleader cant keep his men following orders and fear they will just wander off, that squadleader really needs to train his leading skills, aswell as his oral skill. No offence, i just think this idea is as rudd said, superficial.

You cant just blame it on the squad leaders. when we have people who have voip eng squads and everyone has mics people still dont listen. Join a public server without mumble and ask three people to sweep the area around your cap point and it will be three spread out people wandering around.

Its not as if the idea is forcing you to use it, in a match it may be that no squad leader uses it. but it just acts as an aid to those who want to carry out precise movements on a public server where people may generally not understand exactly what he wants.

It would also make squads intentions more clear, "why the hell is squad 7 all the way over there?"

Agree +1

Srry OkitaMakoto i had to say it

Now as for this idea... I could see it working but the only problem i see is how would this be implemented? Can this be set so that ONLY the one squad can see it? How much time would it take to implement into game? Is it worth it? Is this what the DEVs see the Mod heading?

But i must say its a good idea and i would love to see this implemented if done right...