Project Reality Forums

Ok, I was gona make a poll...But I don't know how so.. The question is if a squad is named for example "Tank" or "Armor" do you think they should have the right to that or those class of vechiles or not?

IMHO I think this is a great idea because this allows people like Comms and other SLs know what a squad is doing.
However I think its a terriable idea when people make a squad and say thats their vechile example: "Heli" squad locks after they have enough pilots... Then someone joins and realizes "Oh noes someones taken all the roflcopters, But wait if i make a squad called M-H6 Littlebird and they will be all mine"

But if the people who start the squad are complete...noobs and wreck every vechile they "Have the right to" then I don't really mind someone who's good with that vechile makeing a squad. To save the team.

Anyway question do you think making a desiginated squad is GOOD or BAD?



sorry if this is a re-post

ill basiclly repeat what u said..each has its strengths and weaknesses...it depends whos using teh vehicles

Making a dedicated squad is good. There's nothing that sucks more than an infantry squad with a guy who runs off to become a pilot. It sucks both for the squad's SL (he ends up being one person down), and for the commander, who ends up having a hard time contacting the pilot about putting his asset somewhere useful.

daranz wrote:Making a dedicated squad is good. There's nothing that sucks more than an infantry squad with a guy who runs off to become a pilot. It sucks both for the squad's SL (he ends up being one person down), and for the commander, who ends up having a hard time contacting the pilot about putting his asset somewhere useful.

And there is nothing that sucks more than a dedicated squad lead by a player with no clue what he is doing. Which regularily ends with destroying vital assets in under 90 seconds.

It`s a double-edged sword....

In the end it is as usefull as the players that are running it.

i think its ok so far if the sqd is not locked..

yeah.and it is a re-post
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... thers.html

Yes they should have rights to that vehicle. I would say having an apc squad with 4 infantery men is not all that bad, but the apc squad should attatch itself to an infantery squad taking heat anyway, rather than rolling out on its own and getting ambushed, unless there is good reason for it.

Same for tanks it is better to have 2 tanks in one squad than 3 on their own.

'[BF2 wrote:Bonsai;837997']In the end it is as usefull as the players that are running it.

This man knows, listen to him.

This has become a concrete rule on our server and we have ramped up enforcement since the end of September. It's a rule that has to be enforced pro-actively by our admins but it has yielded some really good results. Generic squads can take assets unless there is a named squad created to claim priority rights to said assets.

Common squads we are making/seeing include

AIRCAV - 1 helo + 5 infantry, fun.
MECH INF - Usually an APC + 4 infantry. This is THE point scoring machine if the squadleader can coordinate.
LIGHTMECH - Humvees + infantry
AIR TRANS - Usually multiple helicopters. Focused on Moving people and crates.
HELO - Mixed birds, best if the SL has an O-kit and isn't flying himself so he can type and coordinate.
TANK - self explanitory
ARMOR - Mixed heavy vehicles
TOW - Anti tank crews, usually toting some AT kits as well.
INF/Builders/AA/Defense/Grunts - self explanitory
APC - self explanitory
SNIPER/SPECOPS/RECON - the only INF squads we allow to be locked at 2 or 3. If they coordinate with commander and actually spend most time hiding they can actually be super valuable.

Some benefits I can think of:

1. The commander knows what each squads general M.O. is going to be. Helps him coordinate.
2. The players actually specialize more accordingly, less "goofball" kits get picked. People who grab sniper kits for say ARMOR squads usually get an earful from the squadleader.
3. Cuts down on carrier-deck asshattery, The COBRA still seems to be a matter of contention at this point anyway.
4. Rogue players stand out like a sore thumb to our admins. You see a TOW sqaud member with a pilot kit you already know trouble is brewing in that squad. Admins have an easier time appropriately using !w's and !k's
5. Squadleaders and members who don't know what they are doing also are more readily recognized.


I personally was skeptical when this was brought to the table on our private forums as a potential rule. Sounded like a pain in the a** to enforce. But in retrospect I can really see this has been a great success and our regular players have grabbed onto it pretty well.

It is an internet video wargame and there is always going to be a factor of player chaos but this system has certainly helped us make it a more manageable controlled chaos. So I am speaking for =]H[= Hardcore Gamers. You have our yes vote.

IMO Yes to squads dedicated to the asset, nothing is more anoying than when u go on a server, u name the squad for that specific asset u got ur gunner(or just u ready for the jet) its just about to spawn and ten guys show up on the pad or taxi way when there in an armor or inf squad.

another thing i know where fuzzy is going with this as i saw his argument last night with some guy who waited the whole 20 mins for the mig

but fuzzy you took an AAV while waiting mayby he had an armour squad and wanted the AAV(armored vehicle)

but the thing is what does an air squad do when waiting for the jet surley take a chopper but what if there is a transport squad that would cause conflict between the two would it not?, also mayby the guys that take the jets are not very good at inf should they do it any way and plus if there away fighting at bunkers or docks and u have'nt died yet some one is sure to take the chopper or jet, but some guys that play respect that and land it and give it to the squad.

so yes to dedicated asset squad stick with assets the same should apply with inf squads i.e recon (sniper SF)

and the question what do the dedicated asset squads do while waiting the 10-20 mins?

"Air" squad is kinda vague, have not seen it. I think we would certainly enforce some more specifics if we saw someone make a squad called that.

As for standing around waiting for assets, what is the deal with that? Like it says in the PR loading screen tips, it doesn't make things spawn any faster. Go fight! You can do a lot in twenty minutes. Keep one eye on the clock, when you are about the 18 minute mark Suicide and return to main, make your squad and claim your asset.

.:iGi:.Hitman.2.5 wrote:and the question what do the dedicated asset squads do while waiting the 10-20 mins?

A good pasttime could be to build some Bunkers or Firebases (if you have 3 people free) so the fighting squads could concentrate on fighting. There is always a Truck availeble on Kashan or Quin-Ling. Ive seen lots of Pub-matches there that lacks of FOBs. 20 mins should be enough to build at least one.

I'm highly against it.
Commander don't see those squad names when his commanding, he see assets.

Those that take wehicles should stay with them so long that there will be no lines in base waiting for next one.

Imho if you get down in a attack chopper/plane you should not get in the second time. Let someone else have it.

I'm higly against the principle that fastest computer/fastest hands can name squad and then they just magically get the wehicle that basically interests about half of the team.

Vege wrote: I'm higly against the principle that fastest computer/fastest hands can name squad and then they just magically get the wehicle that basically interests about half of the team.

As opposed to whoever can run the fastest to the asset while pushing everyone else out of the way?

Commander can't see squad names, but he can see who is in the squad. And having a squad of 6 drivers in 3 tanks is way better for the commander than trying to coordinate a squad of one specop, one soloing driver, one sniper and a chopper crew.

daranz wrote:As opposed to whoever can run the fastest to the asset while pushing everyone else out of the way?

Commander can't see squad names, but he can see who is in the squad. And having a squad of 6 drivers in 3 tanks is way better for the commander than trying to coordinate a squad of one specop, one soloing driver, one sniper and a chopper crew.

If squadleader can't handle his squad, the name of the squad can't help.
Squads that don't put a describe name arent automatically bad.

Sure it's fine to name the squads so people who are willing can join, but giving them some kind of control over who gets the vehicles based on the name of the squad is stupid.

As goes for running for an asset, that's just fair.

Usually these kinds of "enforcements" are done in strict clan servers and are used for a reason to kick people out of server when they can't get into that special locked armor squad and still wanna take a tank for example.

Its dependent on server

some clans run a 1st come 1st served, some don't

personally, I put a name that describes the squad's intentions so people know what they are getting in to when they join

e.g. basrah = VCP def
kashan = Armour 1 (or 2 or whatever)
if I'm going infantry, Eng Voip will do

First come first served is best though imo, so if som1 just joined and thinks they are gonna get the A10 because he made the A10 squad, especially if he hasn't joined 'Air Squad' then he should be disappointed asap.

its good if people can accept it and be mature about it.