tau_neutrino

I don't like the idea. Disrupts team/squad chemistry.

__________________



TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

UnDeaD77

Doesn't bother me, really has no effect. You switch sides..voila. Get back in the squad you were in. Maybe its a matter of being lazy.

__________________

Foxoq

Please no. When you have a good squad and get something going, it really sucks to have to pick it all up again every hour. I don't mind playing a whole side one night, I can just play the other side the night after. It's too disrupting for something so trivial.

Grunt 70

Good point on dynamics of repeating maps twice...Al Basra twice in a row tires me out just thinking of it. However the idea appeals to me for many of the smaller, shorter maps like Helmand Province. Probably can't mix and match though, huh? You 2142 folks seem to have done quite well switching sides every map. It really doesn't take much too much effort to create a new squad on the other side. As long as the whole squad knows what to do at the end... I love to find a good squad and stick with it but I guess in the long run I'd say I'm neutral on this subject.

A poll might be nice but I'm not sure it'd even be a subject up for debate on the admin side.

__________________
|TG-1st|Grunt

The Vanguard"]http://www.tacticalgamer.com/wiki/index.php/1st_Joint_Tactical_Operation_Command"]The Vanguard

Riki_Rude_BTYC

I like the idea of switching to the other side on the next map.

I don't get how you guys say it breaks up squads? SL from the previous squad makes and locks a squad then invites all member, how difficult is that? If fuzz and I can keep the same squads for 4 hours switching every map, I think anyone else can handle it.

Although it does break up squads if one guy wants to stay US so I see that point, but then I think that's his loss since he's abandoning the other dudes.

I also think more people get bored with one side then people who are dedicated to one side... that made sense right?

__________________

WhiskeySix

I think there's some confusion here - I don't want to see the same map twice in a row - It's not about balancing or team-switching or anything like that... I just want to play the other factions!

And maybe I'm missing something, but why would squads get broken up - just reform the squads and join your old squad? (Lock and invite if you must) I'm not sure I understand why squad chemistry would be destroyed??

__________________




Reflexes are for mistakes only. Reaction implies surprise. Be surprised less.

BigGaayAl

+To form a form a squad again after a whole-team-switch, you only have to lock it and invite everyone again.

+Speciality squads probably would function better.

-The rounds at TG are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long to play the same map twice. So if tg wants to do this I think it's best with one round per map.


If the server swithes to escort/vip mode, shorter games and 2 rounds per map with team-switch is definitely the way to go.

__________________

If a cluttered desk is the sign of a cluttered mind, what is the significance of a clean desk?
Laurence J. Peter (1919 - 1988)

thebleakaffinity

As said before, you can switch at the beginning of each round, no matter what the team numbers are. So people who want to switch already can, and people who don't want to are also happy. Everybody wins!

Riki_Rude_BTYC

Yeah but there is a big chance the a certain amount of peopel will either get deaths added on or just get team switched right back.

__________________

Beatnik

I like the idea for PR. At least half of the maps are very tough Assault maps, and getting stuck on the US all night pretty much sucks. I'd rather have to re-create a squad every round than continue through 3-5 hours of frustration in a night. I know I can switch myself if I get bored with the side, but its usually not cool to switch a whole squad at once, unless their was a beatdown the round prior.

Another benefit of this is we can play Assault maps back to back more often. Usually, when there's a defensive slaughter, I or other admins will queue up a standard balanced map. This happens...a LOT with PR. With teamswitching between rounds you can just let the rotation play out without altering it to keep the Allied side from tearing their hair out.

That's my perspective. I say give it a shot, see if there are any IFF/Squad bugs and see what the TG regulars think about it. I'm thinking the relief of changing assault/defense will outweigh the inconvenience of re-creating your squad. And we could always tack on another 30 seconds to the Start Timer.

__________________

secret.squirrul

Personally, I hate playing on the OpFor side because of the weapons and the fact that they are...well...the OpFors. Screw China. USMC all the way, baby.

It doesn't make a lot of difference to me what you guys choose to do with the team-switching, I'll still probably whore the M16 all night. =p

Ghost Dog

Is there really no way to carry over the squads to the other team? That would solve all our problems.

I don't really mind playing on the same side an entire eve. Changing teams all the time confuses me with the costumes and makes me TK too much . On the other hand, short maps would be fun to play on both sides, but I agree that most maps last too long to play twice.

Good squads will reform though, as said above... SL just create a new squad, then lock + invite. Squads with bad chemistry will break up, so better ones can be formed.

tHa_KhAn

I personally hate side switching. #1 is the bugs issue. #2 is confusion. In PR people have a hard enough time recognizing teammates. Can you imagine the TK's after you've spent 40 minutes shooting MEC and now your surrounded by MEC at the start of the next round? It happens to me when I get team switched. Also the squad issue. It can be done, but more often than not the same squad never gets reformed. Instead of taking the next round as getting yoru squad back together usually use that time to pre plan the mission. That gets lost.

Now I just enjoy playing so maybe that is why it is not a big deal, but why team switch for gameplay reasons? I understand some maps are unbalanced or appear unbalanced, but most of the time people are equating a really high K/D ratio as the definition of unbalanced. There's the one map where the British have to take 3 flags that are uphill against the chinese. I've won as British more than Chinese, yet as soon as the map comes up people compalin about inbalance.

Outside of unbalanced maps, what gameplay issue finds it necessary to switch sides? The weapons are balanced so I don't see a big issue. The West wins as much as the East. I really don't see the point if we're not playing the maps twice(which would be horrid in PR). If you want to be on the other team, then just switch at the end of the round. Enough people leave at the end of the round that new squads always open up. I have yet to have a good experience on a side switching server that couldn't have been had with less effort on a non switching server. To me the only difference between the two is your SL needs to be fast loader to get his squad up and running and everyone needs to pay attention to what side they are on. Why force that? If you have a slow loading SL there can be no room for your squad. I have seen this happen before. That stinks and ruins the whole chemistry of the squad.

__________________

Tempus

Read this..

http://realitymod.com/forum/t17081-b...g-problem.html

__________________



-- Suits are what you wear when doing things you shouldn’t want to do anyway.

FROM THE TACTICAL GAMER PRIMER.
3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.

KevlarBR

Amen, Whiskey!

Good thread.