Re: Squad Leaders, or lack thereof...

**TheChapKid** · 09-26-2008, 09:13 PM

Its not so much the lack of SL's that seem to be a problem, its the SL's that decide to leave the game just because their team is not winning.

When I used to play almost everyday, I would generally like to be led by someone with some experience. But as soon as the game went in favor of the opposing team, it seemed that most SLs would just leave. Sometimes this would cause the "duck duck goose" scenario of where no one wants to lead but they need the squad to stay in the game. I would step up in this situation and try to maintain some order afterwards. My one main gripe about SL is that I desperately need people that use VOIP. I have led a few squads in the last version where almost no one had voip...... it just frustrates the crap out of me. While I do like good communication, I usually like to keep it things important. Unless we are doing something that is not as active as assualting a flag.

So yea, I haven't really given the SL role a chance since 0.8 came out, but now that I am beginning to feel comfortable with some of the new maps I am planning on being SL.
Its taken a while since I can't play as much, but expect me to be SL once in a while! (Please have VOIP or at least listen well!)

**Alpha_s9** · 09-26-2008, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by TheChapKid

Its not so much the lack of SL's that seem to be a problem, its the SL's that decide to leave the game just because their team is not winning.

This does happen... but a lot of times it's due to the kick for supporting members. I think a better way to say this would be that they quit "out of frustration at the game play". This doesn't neccesarily mean because they're losing, but normally that's a big factor in frustration. I'm guilty of bailing out of the SL position in midmap not because we're losing but because of the lack of fun in my gameplay. This can be due to uneven teams, uncooperative squad members, or even in some cases an effective squad with good coordination amongst themselves, but no support from the rest of the team.

Another thing I read earlier has made me think a little bit about my own choices at the squad page. I tend to not join a squad being led by someone I haven't seen before. There are a lot of reasons I do this, but there is probably only one somewhat valid excuse.

People who start a squad and then leave/rejoin once others are in.

I plan to make more of an effort to either SL, or join a squad with an SL I don't know. We'll see how long that lasts.

**creepin** · 09-26-2008, 10:43 PM

usually when SL's leave or disconnect and i'm SL i take that position and try to lead and reorganize the squad as good as possible. sometimes it works out very well, somtimes we just fall appart.

**FFLaguna** · 09-26-2008, 10:58 PM

Well, I grew some balls and squad leadered. First, I was just a transport pilot on Kashan who wasn't really a squad leader, but things were going sour on our team and our commander had just quit. But then, E-1st TMAN stepped up as commander, and I turned my burgeoning transport/idle squad into a real infantry squad that eventually ended up being the only squad to push into the enemy stronghold at MEC Outpost, right before the round ended. We drew blood at point blank range there, however!

Next round was Jabal, and I decided to be an infantry SL. We loaded up and headed straight to east beach (after a short bit of confusion), and set up a bunker. Our squad held east beach the entire round, at times receiving assistance from additional squads, but for the most part we were alone. We lost our rally twice and had to get flown back in from the carrier, but never ended up losing the East Beach flag (also thanks to other squads who held Dam).

Nearly all my thanks go to my squad members, two of which had to leave for personal issues, but the rest of the squad stuck with me for the entire round. The rest of the remaining thanks go straight to E-1st TMAN, who did a fantastic job of commanding an abandoned, scattered, and horribly losing team in Kashan, and then leading the same sorry team to a very close loss on Jabal!

Bottom Line:
SLing was a BLAST, an absolutely sublime experience. Here's a little idea of how our squad did that round. We only built something like a bunker and a half, and a few machine guns:

I'll definitely be squadleadering again in the future! It was so much fun. It's not as frustrating or work-intensive as I once expected. I had a great time with my squad.

**ReaperMAC** · 09-26-2008, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by FFLaguna

SLing was a BLAST, an absolutely sublime experience. Here's a little idea of how our squad did that round. We only built something like a bunker and a half, and a few machine guns:

I'll definitely be squadleadering again in the future! It was so much fun. It's not as frustrating or work-intensive as I once expected. I had a great time with my squad.

Nice job

**FFLaguna** · 09-26-2008, 11:33 PM

Does anybody know the exact "move marker deploy distance" for placing wire, sandbags, MGs, and AA? I am talking about where you place a move marker exactly where you want the asset to be deployed, and then you walk back until the move marker says you're "5m" or so from the point that you want to build the concertina wire at, for example.

Edit after Waldo's comment: Apologies, I placed in this topic since it is directly related to squad leadering.

**Waldo_II** · 09-26-2008, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by FFLaguna

Does anybody know the exact "move marker deploy distance" for placing wire, sandbags, MGs, and AA? I am talking about where you place a move marker exactly where you want the asset to be deployed, and then you walk back until the move marker says you're "5m" or so from the point that you want to build the concertina wire at, for example.

Completely unrelated to the subject, but five meters.

**w.WAREHOUSE** · 09-27-2008, 05:03 PM

One point I mentioned to some friends, playing squad leader tends to be cyclical in that after a good number of rounds, every SL wants/needs a break.

The other point I think contributing to the lack of SL's is the new importance of keeping the specialty kits (and vehicles) alive. A lot of the regular SL's are also some of the most veteran players, and they have realized with .8 more than ever, that if a good player does not use the HAT kit or LAT kit, some random suck players will likely request them all and lose them. While in the past, I would have said that a good squad leader can change the tide of a battle, easily adjusting to changing circumstances by telling a squad member to request a specific kit...now I feel that a good squad member with a specialty kit is equally as important in certain situations as the SL. Having been over-run by APC's and Humvees lately (due to squad members that have poor situational awareness), I have been playing less squad leader and more LAT kits, and feel I have contributed more to my team's wins than when I was SL. I can almost go so far as to say that I see the SL as a tactical figurehead now, with more pressure on the squad members and their kits to get things done than we have seen in previous releases.

**Alpha_s9** · 09-28-2008, 04:42 PM

Another point on team switching. Today the autobalance was turned off from the scrim, and on one map change there were 36 people on the USMC team. This was also the team with the most tagged TG players.

I'm not pointing fingers or complaining about the accidental autobalance issue or at TG tagged players specifically, but to me this was a very good indicator of how many people try to swap teams at the beginning of a map. In this instance the USMC team was also the winner of the previous round.

I know I'm not really offering a solution here, but I think this has a lot to do with the lack of qualified SLs... among a variety of other things people complain about. (Balance and teamstacking, etc.)

With autobalance on this helps keep the extreme from happening like it did in this scenario, but if you think about the people who switch to the "winning" team... the guys who's PCs load the fastest are probably all gonna be on the same team while the one's that load slower won't get the opportunity to switch. Not to say the slow loaders aren't good players, but statistically speaking....

Unfair technical advantage!

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 09-28-2008, 08:14 PM

An extreme would be like 50-10 which is what went on in the bf2 demo servers quite often. The one advantage is the lesser side has plenty of vehicles and its good practice to fight the odds

**BigGaayAl** · 09-28-2008, 10:57 PM

Maybe another way to portray this alledged problemis the folollowing statement which may or may not be true:

"many regulars and TG-ers like to play in an organised way, but not many people like to organise."

This sounds true to me by and large. As an example I think of air asset ehhh... lovers. It is no fun to fly a cobra on a poor team, as you won't get targets, you won't get lased, and you will get shot out of the sky pretty damned quickly by AA or other stuff that isn't spotted by teammates. Now If you are flying on the well organised team, all this will be taken care of (its called the dirty work) and you get loads of 1337 kills.

I am guilty of this myself too, as I don't always have the energy to organise, sometimes not even to organise a squad let alone a team. But there are some individuals that do this nearly every time. These players, often not even tag-wearers are the true backbone of TG. You know who you are, thank you!

One of the best rounds I've had in a long time was Muttrah city on MEC. NArdini and disp, switched ALL except maybe 3 TG to the US team to practice scrim tactics (inf+apc etc). I was quite apprehensive of starting the round like that and almost left. Still I was playing with my bro who doesn't play much, so we stuck around.
With the help of some regulars, we handed them a brutal defeat. It was VERY satisfying, and judging by the scrim results, very good practice for that us team also.

Conclusion: I do switch teams at times, to play with friends. But I never ever switch to be on the winning side. I feel justified in wanting to play with friends, but the other reason for switching is very frownable imo and no TG should do that.

I think that IHS-squadleaders should try to be very conscious of spreading their love over both teams. I think doing this swiftly will alleviate the problems raised in this thread a lot. I know it happens, but I think it should happen sooner at times, so that the level of play on the server will be higher, and more fun for all.

**TMan** · 09-29-2008, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by A.WICKENS

I SL a lot, often during the 'Euro time' whenever that is. I enjoy the role but sometimes I like to have a couple of games off. I don't always SL late at night as I have usually got a lot of games under my belt as SL by then and dealt with all the resulting problems/joys that brings. Also at 1 or 2 in the morning, my time, my other half doesn't appreciate me bellowing "no snipers, no spec ops, how many times do I have to tell you" at the top of my voice.

Same here. I am almost always SL for a public squad due to the time of day. It is very rewarding and you get to meet some pretty darned good players.

Delta*RandyShugart* · 09-29-2008, 01:32 PM

As many of you know I have taken a back seat to SLing as of late, and since I have stepped down from being a member of an IHS the one thing I have found out during this time period is that i am not expected to be a SL as opposed to when i was in an IHS i was routinely asked why i was not leading a squad, when I would join a squad with TG regs bearing TG tags, or TG tag wearers in general.

When people would ask me this I would say "Just because you are in a IHS doesn't automatically mean you have to be an SL." I think that too many people automatically feel that members of IHS have to be SL's and that is something that has to change. I also think that sometimes too many people just sport the TG tag for reasons to get assets, etc, and that has changed but maybe there should be a public forum where if someone wants to put the TG tag on their in game name they read and publicly post a Read and Understood with their in game name so that are held to the highest form of maturity and understanding the SOPs in general.

I also hope to see more non-regular sl's who participate in the forums and who play on the server step up to the plate, on any type of map.

Imagine if in fact the server went up to more than 64 people, there wouldn't be enough SL's to lead all the squads..........funny, but its true.

**Katanama** · 09-29-2008, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

As many of you know I have taken a back seat to SLing as of late, and since I have stepped down from being a member of an IHS the one thing I have found out during this time period is that i am not expected to be a SL as opposed to when i was in an IHS i was routinely asked why i was not leading a squad, when I would join a squad with TG regs bearing TG tags, or TG tag wearers in general.

Or people have just accepted that you are not SL'ing at the moment. I for example get the question most of the time if I decide to do something other then leading an infantry squad.

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

When people would ask me this I would say "Just because you are in a IHS doesn't automatically mean you have to be an SL." I think that too many people automatically feel that members of IHS have to be SL's and that is something that has to change. I also think that sometimes too many people just sport the TG tag for reasons to get assets, etc, and that has changed but maybe there should be a public forum where if someone wants to put the TG tag on their in game name they read and publicly post a Read and Understood with their in game name so that are held to the highest form of maturity and understanding the SOPs in general.

Yeah a thread where you had to put your name if you wanted to wear the tag would be nice. I would say you are not really a part of the community if the admins never heard of you. Which I have experienced in one coincidence where a tagged player had done something I didn't think was befitting of someone wearing the tag and I contacted an admin about it. He never heard of the guy

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

Imagine if in fact the server went up to more than 64 people, there wouldn't be enough SL's to lead all the squads..........funny, but its true.

Not if they want to stay on the server

but it would be quite fun.

I had a good experience playing with elemanoel last night where warlab convinced him to lead a squad. Turned out good and you should do it more often. cough*hint*cough

**Warlab** · 09-29-2008, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by Katanama

I had a good experience playing with elemanoel last night where warlab convinced him to lead a squad. Turned out good and you should do it more often. cough*hint*cough

El you stepped up and did a great job !

Thread Tools

Display