Project Reality Forums

[R-COM]BloodBane611 wrote:
This is completely wrong. A commander's job is not to micromanage his team, especially now that SLs can do everything except operate the UAV and send area attacks down range. A commander who is sitting at main is keeping 1 body off the field that could be used more effectively to help the team win. If you're an SL on a server, get on mumble, in the SL channel, and talk to the squadleader of whomever is driving the APC. A commander is not a telephone operator or a secretary, they're playing PR for fun. The reason so few people played commander in past versions is because he was tied down to a boring job in a game that's all about fun.

2 examples of how having a mobile commander helps:

First is from the PRT: Our commander was never in his command post (for multiple battles), he simply expected his SLs to get things done (admittedly with much more planning than goes on in any pub game). Much of the time he wasn't even in the commander position, he was leading a squad instead, often a specialized squad with a HAT or other special weapon, or placing FOBs in strategically useful places. We never won a battle by less than 200 tickets (out of 450), and the total time we played for the last 4 battles in the campaign was less than 4 hours. Now, there were a lot of reasons other than him being outside the command box all the time, but having an extra body on the field, especially one who is putting up spawn points or destroying key enemy vehicles, was a huge advantage.

Second is from playing on the T&T server today on Qwai: I went comm, primarily because all squads were full. Immediately, one SL in particular starts telling me I need to be telling everyone what to do, need to communicate more, etc. At that moment the team had very good momentum, were moving towards the second to last flag, had well placed FOBs, everything you might want from a good team. I saw no reason to interfere with that, so I didn't. During the course of the game I soloed 2 enemy FOBs, delivered supplies to that same complaining SL, and set up one of our FOBs in a strategic location (which turned out to be a waste, but could have been useful). If I had sat in the ACV all game we would have lost, but as it was we barely scraped out a victory.


Too many people are stuck in the mindset that the commander is in fact in charge. If the SLs aren't already on the ball, no commander is going to get them there. However, if those SLs are working together, a good commander who knows where to put down FOBs, or is willing to fight next to his squads, can give them the advantage they need to win over a similarly good team, whose commander is busy sitting in the box.

As a caveat, there are maps where the commander really does need to be in the box most of the time. All the insurgency maps really need the comm to keep the team focused on staying together, staying alive, and he needs to be constantly using the UAV to find the enemy caches. But in conventional warfare, that kind of recon is fairly useless, because the UAV is slow, has a limited field of view, and keeps the commander from doing more useful things, like setting up spawn points.

ANDROMEDA wrote:While the closed section of proposals for PR I can make a few observations on team play. Two aspects that contribute heavily to the game - a new rallipoints system and squadlimitation. What I see today on the battlefield? Value of squadliders is reduced. Rearrange squads for the new attack is very, very difficult. As a result, some members of the squads are permanently lost from the rest of squad. All the innovations in these systems, personally I really like, but for gameplay it would be good to make small changes.

1. Rallipoint System. It is necessary to remove the limit of 60 seconds in the existence rallipoint, but increase the radius of its destruction in the appearance of 1 enemy to 200-300 meters. This saves us from rallipoints, standing not far from the point of capture, and make possible more efficient rearrangement squads. In this case rallipoints acts as a one-time camp for the squads, which is very easy to find and destroy, if it is too close to the enemy.

2.Squadlimitation. I believe that fire-team consisting of 3 persons is a very effective fighting unit, so it would be better to reduce the limitation of the number of people in the squads from 4 to 3, but 3 people can make available, only 1 limited kit, and for 4 people and more - all limited kits.

These small changes would be good complement all the new features of 0.9.

Heskey wrote: A non-smacktard new player

The best I can think of is granting server-registered commanders minor admin controls, such as the ability to !resign non co-operative squad leaders, rather than kick; as even when monitored this can be open to abuse.

dtacs wrote:A rare bunch, they are.


Squad leaders don't have to follow the commanders orders, often bad commanders give an absolutely idiotic and impractical order without proper judgment of the situation.

Why is there no inster-squad teamwork

badmojo420 wrote:I started to write a reply, but then realized I shouldn't even be replying to your obvious suggestions that are off-topic in this thread, and this isn't even the Suggestions section.

Please don't turn this into a place for suggestions. Or it will get locked. Discussion about inter-squad teamwork only.

dtacs wrote:Squad leaders don't have to follow the commanders orders, often bad commanders give an absolutely idiotic and impractical order without proper judgment of the situation.

Example: On Asad Khal I was given the order to move straight up and through south objective (as IDF) while there was 2 squadsworth of HAMAS spread out through the flag, stopping the teams movement. After telling him twitter off I'm not doing that until we secure a firebase here for a respawn, he tells me 'well I'm the commander, you should do it'. Would it be wise for him to resign me as such? I for one think it would be stupid as they have no primary way of determining the situation, secondary word of mouth from an SL in the thick can only go so far.

ludwag wrote:Because people don't use mumble. On Realityteamwork (The only server that forces use of mumble), there is inter-squad teamwork on every round. On squadleaders radio. It works very good. The team that uses most sl radio, is the team that wins.

badmojo420 wrote:In my opinion, when a commander steps up and wants to lead a team like that, obey his orders and let him fail or win. Not going to let a team fail due to the incompetence of a single person. The ball is in his court. I know that being in the action, it feels like you know more than him. Because we do, and regardless of UAV support the fact remains that he was issuing orders without gathering intelligence first. I know this because he was using V chat and not B chat to speak to squads individually. But he has the advantage of communications with every squad. Which are only useful when he uses them properly. You never know, he might have had a great plan for distracting the enemies while your squad moved in. He didn't, and most of the time dropkick commanders are the bane of the team.

I believe that a squad leaders job is to ensure his squad works together to the best of their ability, and ensuring their safety. But, the squads mission is decided by the commander. If it is, then he better start issuing me orders from the start of the round and not 1/3 of the way through. If he orders you into the shit, he doesn't expect you to run into enemy fire & die like lemmings. Obviously not, but I made an informed decision not to due it, and as the round progressed it was the smarter choice. He expects you to do your job and lead your squad in an assault on an enemy position, however you can get it done. Worrying about a spawn point is the last thing a squad leader should be doing. No. The spawn point and backup point, aka Plan B, is one of the most important points a squad leader must pay attention to. If your squad wipes, spawning at main is the last thing you want to be doing unless you are going mechanized or transforming to an asset-based squad. Unless maybe the squad is named "Logistics" or "FOB DEF" but since he ordered you to assault a flag with lots of enemies on it, I'm guessing you were running a common infantry squad? Clearly.
.

badmojo420 wrote:Without having to force it on people, through tough administration by the people running the server.

dtacs wrote:most people that play this game are idiots.

BlackFallout wrote:Right now the servers are inundated with noobs I played in an APC squad and the driver of my APC just decides to start driving all over the place. This was on silent eagle and we were in a BTR..... and then promptly got killed. I asked him what he was doing and he said looking for stuff to kill......

badmojo420 wrote:And you're helping them when you go above and beyond your duties as a squad leader to ensure the entire teams progress. Idiot commanders and players thrive on the efforts of people like you. You're enabling them to have fun and win, while being a complete idiot.