[poll] locked squads

[=VG= Ingo]

i am making this suggestion to remove the locked squads rule from the pr COOP server because there have been many times when i want to lock my squad but i just can't. i mean when there are 2 trans huey or only 1 apache you don't need more people in the squad just to be useless, that will make them join a infantry squad and do something usefull.

[-WCC-sparky]

i have these same moments yet at the same time i feel that people would lock squads when its not needed. im gunna have to say no even though at times i hate the rule.

[=VG= BLuDKLoT]

That will just make them start another of the same squad then we have 2, or even 3! Or people create 7 one man squads and then all the rest of us are screwed, don't think so.

Sorry.

[G.Kirkland]

i have to say no, i know what your talking about ingo, there are times, and some good reasons to lock a squad, but i do believe no locked squads are better. plus you could just always kick them from the squad if you dont want them

[=VG= CCCode]

No. I know what you mean Ingo, but not having this rule will ruin teamwork for most new guys and some of the regular players aswell.

[Robotfungus]

i agree the locked squads rule needs to be there, however could we consider something like No locked squads before 4 squad members. This would allow squad control and make sure there is always spare squads available.

[=VG= Jarema]

Exceptions made to any rule will just complicate trying to reinforce it.
It must be all or nothing otherwise it gives reason for people to argue and just causes confusion and delay.

[PITN]

Keep the locked squad rule.

Use your best judgement when enforcing this rule. Give them time to adjust their suqad and clear the lock.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

I have an understanding of both sides of this argument.
With regards to locked squads as a whole, I fully see why admins have this rule. It promotes team play, assists in removing the "7 one man squads" quagmire, and ensures mixed teamplay with all visitors.

The point of being able to lock a squad would help keep too many players from joining a clearly limited squad, such as a recon/sniper team, or an attack heli team. The problem being, though a SL can kick a person from a squad, they can join back instantly it seems. If the squad is an airborne one, this can be quite cumbersome to deal with in a way which is not disruptive.

Any rule or new rule can be hard to enforce, but clear communication regarding it is where you have the power.

My opinion or suggestion would be something like changing the Green Rule from "no locked squads" to reflect the variant you want, such as "Only Fully Occupied Asset Squads May Be Locked" or perhaps, "Only Fully Manned Heavy Assets Squads May Lock"
But these would negate the "sniper/recon" gripe.

The ability to lock a squad for the first minute while SL requests certain members is another side of this argument I hear in game, but haven't seen posted here.
This would allow an experienced SL to add a few regulars before allowing random public from rounding it out. This achieves a good mix of trained and trainees to better promote the body of knowledge in PR.

I could envision two Green Rules for locked squads mixing the benefits of both sides of the argument. One allowing a Cobra Commander (lol) to lock his squad when filled, and one allowing squad locks for a short time after it's formation. Clarity in TEXT will alleviate the difficulty enforcing them.


Art of War Ch. 9 V. 43-45
43. Therefore soldiers must be treated in the first instance with humanity, but kept under control by means of iron discipline. This is a certain road to victory.
44. If in training soldiers commands are habitually enforced, the army will be well disciplined; if not, its discipline will be bad.
45. If a general shows confidence in his men but always insists on his orders being obeyed, the gain will be mutual.

[WCCBadploy]

On a well managed server like VG's the locked squad rule is a true test of good team play management.

It is very easy to either tell folks to leave or utilse them in different roles. It is important from time to time for there to be back up pilot for rescue missions of downed pilots and vehIcle crews.

Security, medical and supply personnel can be members of these Specialist squads, adding additional direct action capabilities to their combat package.

How many times has an APC been hit because there is no security team watching for AT units or traps??

Also it is antisocial and not in keeping with the spirit of how PR is to be played. New and inexperienced players need option to improve their team work and enjoy the community spirit. It may even get some of them to use TS3.

[WCCBadploy]

...Or consider Being members of the VG family...

[Pvt. Pirate]

well, i understand its usefull for the special roles like trans huey and CAS teams but it would lead to one or two man teams locking their squad...
i have also experianced missions where some rambo guys got into my squad and didnt stick with the team, maybe didnt even react on my orders at all. at those times i wished i could lock my squad, but i know that most people would abuse this power.

[=VG= BLuDKLoT]

[WCC LAN_WROTE ...
Badploy]
On a well managed server like VG's the locked squad rule is a true test of good team play management.

It is very easy to either tell folks to leave or utilse them in different roles. It is important from time to time for there to be back up pilot for rescue missions of downed pilots and vehIcle crews.

Security, medical and supply personnel can be members of these Specialist squads, adding additional direct action capabilities to their combat package.

How many times has an APC been hit because there is no security team watching for AT units or traps??

Also it is antisocial and not in keeping with the spirit of how PR is to be played. New and inexperienced players need option to improve their team work and enjoy the community spirit. It may even get some of them to use TS3.

I put some great Presentations that I either collected or created in the Member DL Section. they go into this further. But there should be an Assault, Security and Support Element modeled into PR with the proper equipment for these Elements to do their job.
So instead of joining Squads, you should be joining into Elements. Then once in your Element (13 men), you should join into a Fire Team (4 men) The Squad Leader should be an independent Role, but he should be able to bounce thru or join into any Fire Team, or communicate with any of the squads/members/elements so he can control the fire and movement of his force. They're all in the same "Squad" but now they would be broke up into smaller more manageable teams that could actually perform duties like you're referring to BP.
I too think this would make the game play so much better. For anyone wanting to get more insight into how this all works check out the PowerPoint's. It will give you a different perspective on your game play and how much better things could be if game designers had more "attention to detail" in mind. You could really make this something big if you were working with battalions of Infantry Marines and all of their supporting units.
This sounds like a good Arma2 OA Mod Hmmmm?

s/f

[WCCBadploy]

An interesting concept... I would love to try some these ideas and a few others on a well managed Multiplayer PR server where the Commander can confidently CONTROL the army and its resources.

I think in order to get the PR devs and mod teams from other games to see new ideas, a visible shake up of the existing game play needs to be addressed. It needs to be taken to another level, Just like VG has done for COOP.

I remember early in 0.7, a lot of combined team work was done on servers like 10th Community and UKWR. It also had the direct support of some of the admins who would deal swiftly with smaktards who disrupted the campaign strategy. It was glorious to see the whole army swoop in and over run the enemy positions long before they got their kits sorted.

Ahhh... One can dream... But This may be a topic for another thread all on its own...