BF4 In-game Balancing - Alpha Squad

[MERZiN8]

Good Afternoon,

I hope everyone's Monday is going alright. So I have been in CAG for almost a month. I love it. My only real concern is leaving people out, in game, in the party, whatever the case may be. We know MS and EA have limitations on party sizes that has always been a thing. But I feel like we need to come up with a better plan on how to do this. A better way to balance. I have been under the impression that we are a unit and we stick together. But what happens when we cannot? I feel like we need to work on this as a squad. Maybe I am alone here, and if thats the case so be it. I will keep my thoughts to myself. But its a concern.

I have had a few conversations with 8Ball, and he and I are on the same page, as we would like to see a tactical type team on XO BF4. A team where everyone has a role and follows it, where medics medic and supports support, and snipers spot and everyone is doing there thing, and we know where everyone is going and what they are doing. Every person in said squad has a role and follows it. So I guess my question is, can we do this? And how many other people are interested in it.

I have a habit of being very truthful, saying what I mean. I feel complete disclosure is the best policy. But the last thing I am trying to do is burn bridges, because well, some people don't like it. I am not trying to do that here I am mainly just expressing my concern and sharing an idea amongst colleagues.

[pisspawz]

We tried to set up a competition team for bf4 X1 but there was very little interest so we had to cancel the team..


Battlefield brigade
-CAG pisspawz
-American Battalion commander

[MoB Corleone352]

Pawz I think he is meaning more of a full discipline squad. Almost like Mil Sim...
I also have been working with 8 Ball on call outs and ETC. I really like the idea of doing something more like this.
I am also considering not doing 8 man parties anymore! I find myself spending to much time trying to get the people on right teams and scoreboard watching than actually playing.

It's awesome having/playing with so many CAG members in one game, but as I said I watch the scoreboard to get everyone aligned only to have the teams redone at the next game.
Merz I already told 8BALL I am down to do a more tactical squad, I just haven't been able to get up with 8 since we are on different schedules.

[Kujeaux]

Merzin, your post seems to be listing two things which are kind of separate topics, in my mind. Perhaps I'm just not getting the connection.

-------------------------------

Regarding leaving people out ...

I feel you should be more specific here. The Xbox Live Parties limitations, 8 speakers, and BF limitations, no team chat along with how BF will keep squadmates (in-game squads) together but anything outside of that could be switched to the other team on a new map, very much hinder us in keeping CAG together. And within the Xbox Live Parties, those who can't get in b/c of the limit always seem to be remembered and talked about. Everyone is being inclusive, from my standpoint.

Are you trying to suggest that we use game chat, that way we know we can always talk to in-game squadmates? Or that we should set up the parties along with in-game squads (when they are more than 8 ppl on)?

-------------------------------

Regarding team tactics ...

Until this becomes second nature, it's going to have to be a purposeful effort. Someone will need to set the squad or squads as we get enough people to fill squads (or you could plan a group ahead of time through the forums). And then those squads, with a decision maker, will set squad objective for the upcoming map.

The battlefield is large and one squad can't be everything ... these some examples of the scope of the objectives I would set (FYI, some of these are what I generally tend to do myself)
- Goldmud Railway ... Ground Unit, Anti-Ground-Vehicle Focused ... Attacking/Defending the A-B-C triangle
- Goldmud Railway ... Guerilla Unit, Anti-Air-And-Ground, Fast Transport, Focused on D-E-F-G
- Operation Locker ... Advanced Unit ... Goal is to penetrate the enemies deep objectives and force them to pull people from the front lines, Assault and very mindful of keeping one member alive, typically an outside attack
- Operation Locker ... Defense Unit ... Hold the line, wherever it is, disallowing the enemies advance, think LMGs and grenades
- Zavod 311 ... Ground unit, Anti-infantry ... middle two objectives are priority, if got those locked maybe one of the two near them

To take it further, when assigning the roles for one of these ....
say "Goldmud Railway ... Ground Unit, Anti-Ground-Vehicle Focused ... Attacking/Defending the A-B-C triangle"
the leader may say i need a recon above A-B, watch for parachutes from choppers and heavy ground from enemy spawn, two engineers running anti-ground vehicle, one support up the engis butts, and one assault up everyone's butt

And you have to keep in mind that just because you *want* to run a chopper squad or a tank squad doesn't mean you'll even be able to grab the chopper/tank before some random does, so you might want to have a secondary in mind.

For non-competitive day-to-day playing ... personally, and I think other BF leaders would agree, I don't really care who steps up and forms the squads and leads the squads, from a map-specific squad objective and squad roles standpoint. Heck, keep switching out each map as to who decides the squad objectives. I'd like to see you guys take the initiative. Everyone has a decent understanding of the game and I would find it interesting to see the different strategies that you guys come up with. For instance, if we are playing Rush, I don't understand that mode well enough to set objectives so we shouldn't simply always go by rank-in-CAG for in-game squad leading.

In the past, many people have been interested in having a more tactical approach in-game. But no one just does it ... it feels like everyone is waiting for someone else to do it. So what I'm saying is, just do it. Not everyone will want to play in that structured of a way, and we aren't going to force people to play that way, but when you are online and have 3 or 4 guys that want to do it ... get yourselves in the same squad and start setting objectives and roles.

[Kujeaux]

... I find myself spending to much time trying to get the people on right teams and scoreboard watching than actually playing...

Dude. It's not even scoreboard watching. You spend so much time trying to make 6+ man squads out of that battlelog trick that I think you miss half of every game.

[MoB Corleone352]

Dude. It's not even scoreboard watching. You spend so much time trying to make 6+ man squads out of that battlelog trick that I think you miss half of every game.

It's true and that's why I'm stopping lol. I do miss half the game due to trying to make this work. If we get 6,7,8 man squad then we will always be on the same team and I like that idea.

But on the other hand it's messing with my game performance and wasting my time.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[BlameItOnGod13]

i think Rush is the only game mode where having more than 5 in a squad is a benefit and that's ONLY if someone gets into the set of MCOMs FAST as they change and everyone spawn bombs on him otherwise it's still a waste of time.

[Kujeaux]

The benefit is really not being sent to the other team when the map changes and having to try to make your way back, only to get "Too close to last team switch" or "Teams would be too unbalanced" b/c we make ppl quit.

[MoB Corleone352]

If you have a 7 man squad then the 7 will remain together every game.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[Nesty]

Ya the root of the problem is that we kill servers when we have 8 people on the same team especially in a Rush or Dom game. That's why I have been suggesting conquest a few of the big player nights, because it's easier to stay on the same team.

Fact is most of the time we are gonna have to split up if we want to keep a server going. I don't mind as long as it's fairly even CAG members on each side. We could also server jump every game, another pretty easy possibility.

Personally I would suggest team leaders and picking teams then splitting into parties from there, I think that would be fun actually.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk