Why we need squads and squad chat.

[Taramafor]

It's simple really. Stick together. Form plans. Move as a team. Hopefully coordinating with other squads in the game. Would certainty add more of the strategy gameplay. And for the love of god, make the chat show longer. Can barley read half of what people type.

[Noodlesocks]

Could do that without squads but I agree, VOIP would be really useful.

[R315r4z0r]

The problem with squad chat is that it pulls you away from your team and instead into a private group. That hurts the gameplay since you aren't going to be interacting with your team as much but rather just a small portion of them.

You can do the exact same things you're suggesting about squad chat just in normal team chat and it doesn't disclude people who aren't in your squad.

I mean, I can support having the option to form squads in general, but I don't think there should be a squad specific chat.

[lauri455]

Squad feature would be great, especially for big servers. VoIP is in my opinion a necessity for any team-orientated game.

[Taramafor]

The problem with team chat is that you would all be talking over each other and you also get a lot of negativity from idiots that troll around. And squad chat would encourage team play. If you don't want to be in a squad, don't be in one. I'm not saying make it mandatory. But if it was good in battlefield (at least 1 and 2), why wouldn't it be good here? Not everyone knows people off the game and can set up teamspeak and the like. This is the only way I can think off to encourage people to work together IN GAME and making it obvious. Basically, team players and people that want to tag along would be in squads and those that want to lone wolf can.

[R315r4z0r]

I just don't like how a group of people can communicate on their own and form plans on their own without letting the rest of the team in on it.

What I think they should do is to make a squad system, but for teamchat, your name would have [squadName] in front of it. That way you can talk with each other and communicate but the rest of the team could also join in.

It would also make organizing rushes easier when you can refer to specific squads rather than a group of units.

[Taramafor]

I just don't like how a group of people can communicate on their own and form plans on their own without letting the rest of the team in on it.

You're talking about an entire side acting as one. That's not the result I'm expecting (let's face it, not EVERYONE will work as a team).

What I'm talking about is smaller squads acting as a single unit. Basically, getting people to move up in teams for more effective attacks instead of going one by one and getting popped.

[SFJake]

I'm not sure how squads have been handled in other games, I really just avoid most FPS these days.

Ideally, I always thought of some sort of system where people can easily join in in other people's ideas. For example, a separate interface, maybe an overhead map, with a squad-selection on the right. Someone could try and make a squad and say to the team "APC rush", people could easily join the squad and form a team as is. What I mean is just a way for squads to be formed around an objective. Squads could easily be temporary as well.

There's lot of possibilities in terms of game features that can naturally enhance the teamwork of a team.

[Taramafor]

I just don't like how a group of people can communicate on their own and form plans on their own without letting the rest of the team in on it.

You're talking about an entire side acting as one. That's not the result I'm expecting (let's face it, not EVERYONE will work as a team).

What I'm talking about is smaller squads acting as a single unit. Basically, getting people to move up in teams for more effective attacks instead of going one by one and getting popped.

Edit: Misread. Ah well, case in point, I'd rather have smaller squads acting independently then whole teams funneling one by one and getting popped. Also, can you honestly say that the teams are communicating and working together efficiently (or at least as efficiently as we would be doing with squads?). I'd be more inclined to communicate in a squad where I think my voice has some merit then just a whole team expecting to be brushed off (which is usually the case in large teams. A large force is too much to micromanage) But regardless, it would be up to squad leaders to communicate to either squads or teams and if I think something I say will benefit the team, I'll say it to the team and not a squad. Such as mining the tunnels.

With smaller squads you can have people on foot moving in a large group and another squad could move up and cover each other in vehicles (you can't watch EVERYONE'S back, but you can watch your squads and a squad can then in turn know where to focus their attention to help cover people outside the squad). And of course there would be APCs and transports choppers.

Edit 2: oops. Accidental double post.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Guest

[R315r4z0r]

I'm not sure how squads have been handled in other games, I really just avoid most FPS these days.

Ideally, I always thought of some sort of system where people can easily join in in other people's ideas. For example, a separate interface, maybe an overhead map, with a squad-selection on the right. Someone could try and make a squad and say to the team "APC rush", people could easily join the squad and form a team as is. What I mean is just a way for squads to be formed around an objective. Squads could easily be temporary as well.

There's lot of possibilities in terms of game features that can naturally enhance the teamwork of a team.

Actually, I think that is a really good idea. In fact, if it is done like this then I'd have no concerns about a squad chat.

IMO, the way it would work would be:

1. Someone suggests a plan such as "Gunner rush in tunnels" and puts it up on this overview map.

2. Players who are interested go to the overview map and click to join the group (or squad).

3. Once in the squad, you can communicate specifically with them or your team at your discretion.

4. You'd only be allowed in one squad at a time and you'd be allowed to leave it at anytime. Also dying at all would automatically remove you from the squad. (This makes squads objective based and not team-based, which is what I think makes this such a good idea.)

5. The overview map would have a player count as to how many people are participating and there wouldn't be a set limit (other than the amount of players on your team).

[Christopher]

i want to be able to spawn inside allied apcs and chinooks. would be cool to deploy those on the battlefield and spawn from them in enemy base. =)

[Taramafor]

4. You'd only be allowed in one squad at a time and you'd be allowed to leave it at anytime. Also dying at all would automatically remove you from the squad. (This makes squads objective based and not team-based, which is what I think makes this such a good idea.)

That would also help with knowing how many people are still alive at the objective I suppose. And nothing would stop you from joining the squad again. However, I think there should always be a team leader that can "anchor" the squad. It would be a bit annoying to always be making a squad every time it's wiped out if you have a strategy that's working.

i want to be able to spawn inside allied apcs and chinooks. would be cool to deploy those on the battlefield and spawn from them in enemy base. =)

I been thinking about that one myself. I was thinking if it would work in this game and being objective by telling myself "don't do it because other games have. Only if it would help make the game more fun."

After thinking about it, I think it would be a neat idea IF you set it to squads. Otherwise, guess what, one APC that happens to be in the base means whole enemy team zerg.

APC's could perhaps do with a few more passengers either way though. But that's another topic all together.

[ZTDELTA]

No to every single post here. this is renegade not battlefield clone.

we coordinated team plays just fine in original renegade.

[Afevis]

Command & Conquer > Divided & Conquered

[R315r4z0r]

No to every single post here. this is renegade not battlefield clone.

we coordinated team plays just fine in original renegade.

Half of the posts here think squads are a bad idea. The other half likes the idea. So... you're disagreeing with them all. What's your suggestion then? Remove teamchat?

[cirex]

For the moment being, I prefer Teamspeak rather tank squads for VoIP. If the devs. have to focus on stuff, I prefer a smooth game, VoIP is more as an addition feature that could be added once the game reaches a stable 1.0 non-beta.

Additional, squads doing teamplay is called squadplay not teamplay.

[Taramafor]

For the moment being, I prefer Teamspeak rather tank squads for VoIP. If the devs. have to focus on stuff, I prefer a smooth game, VoIP is more as an addition feature that could be added once the game reaches a stable 1.0 non-beta.

Additional, squads doing teamplay is called squadplay not teamplay.

Oh, I'm not expecting anything like this 'till all the other stuff is sorted out. But what you have to remember is that not everyone knows people off the game. With squads, people would be working together in game without having to know each other and better yet get to know each other.