Question : Locked Squads

[Gaz]

I was on your server recently and there was an issue with a locked Armour squad, I asked why there is a rule in place against locking armour squads but was pretty much met with "Don't ask me questions go to the forums" So I've come to ask the same question, why is there a rule against locking vehicle asset squads? is there a specific reason? Is it positive to gameplay?

From my perspective it has magnificently negative effects leaving armour squads open as it is not a functional squad, people joining it might as well be unassigned in most cases. It can give access to assets such as MAT which are essentially running around solo. As long as it is administrated properly is it a problem?

"To promote open teamwork and cooperation

No Locked Squads"

I Read the rules thread and located this, I do agree general squads should not be locked, infantry squads should remain accessible to all, but not Armour or personnel carriers all the time.


I look forward to being better informed on this specific rule, Thanks.

[Planetgong]

"To promote open teamwork and cooperation

No Locked Squads"

That's it. That counts for infantry and armoured. No problem to name your armoured squad "armoured 2 man- don't join" or something like that. You are also free to kick anyone else of your squad.

But the main rule is and will be : "No locked squads allowed on our servers"
This rule is here since day 1 of this clan and so far we did very well providing it.

When you go on other servers without this specific rule, you'll see 8 locked 3 men squads on each side and no teamplay. We have come to the conclusion to enforce this specific rule on our servers to provide an welcoming atmosphere for everyone.
And no, we can't do any exceptions, neither armoured, logi or any other "special squads"

[BearBison]

Planetgong has pretty much summed it up.

This rule has been proven over time, both in this clan and one previous to this where the CL's ran the European side of another clan.

Remember to see things from not only your point of view but from the admins whose job it is to keep the server running correctly and provide a good atmosphere for gaming.

If your admining and you have 4 locked squads on a side which all say armour, how do you decide which ones are just using it as an excuse to prevent good teamplay when there is only 1 armour asset or which squad had the armour first and should be left to play as that role? A bit of an over-exaggeration as to what I have seen thus far in Squad but seen plenty of it in previous games and it causes anamosity between admin and players and also players that can't join a squad becasue they are all locked.

[Wilhem]

people joining it might as well be unassigned in most cases.

Bare in mind that all unassigned players could be kicked when server is full and queue is long to join server. They are counted as AFK players. So there is not much unassigned players on our servers.
Also when I open squad and if there is someone "lone wolfing" in it i warn them that we are team playing and if they don't respond or come back to teamplay i kick them from squad.
As Planetgong did give you advice: Name squad properly and i am sure much less players will join. Warn ones who join and you don't wanna in if they don't get out kick them.

[Gaz]

I appreciate these are the rules and obvioustly stick to them. I don't personally tend to come into issue with it as I don't partake in armoured assets but thought it would be healthy and productive to bring a discussion here.

I've had the response "It has been a rule since day one of this clan" about 5 times at least when asking about this as it comes into conflict on the server at the time. I appreciate it has been a rule for so long but I also think that makes it even more prudent to reassess and possibly adapt older rules.

I can appreciate locked infantry squads is a definite negative but do not see so much of an issue with locked armour. "No we cannot do any execptions" Isn't quite as helpful in this conversational context but I appreciate it was covered by bear to be related to the administrative difficulties. I understand this could be daunting but I question if the games built in mechanics assist with this. The squads number as they are created generally speaking if there is one asset the earliest numbered squad is usually the correct one. I don't see how having squads unlocked avoids people duplicating either. I mean if I want to play with my friend in a tank and there's another squad claiming it then hell I could just make another and claim it should be mine, locked or not. I wonder if there is a technical solution ingame to this?

I'd argue not being able to lock squads causes a hell of a lot of animosity regularly between players and admins as is. I can tell you for sure that I infuriated an admin just today simply for asking why the rule exists. While he was arguing with another as to it's existence.

I understand you regularly purge unassigned players A. Because their lack of contribution to the overall gameplay. B. Because of their likely hood of being afk. My argument is with unlocked squads I could join a tank squad as a rifleman go AFK in base and avoid being purged because that squad leader dosent care about me. Alternatively I could just be wondering around by myself being practically useless. Infantry squads tend to police wondering squad members rather effectively as is.

I did write a whole reply once a bit better formated than this but I accidently pressed post reply on my phone instead of submit.. facepalm. I will say I understand your points but I just pose counter points as a healthy discussion with the intention of simply reviewing and understanding together.

I appreciate all the detailed responses I have received and hope I have at least opened you to rethinking or revisiting and understanding these rules again. Thanks guys.

[BearBison]

We revisit the rules frequently to check if still current and worth having, but discussions are always good. Although this is one that is unlikely to go as it makes life easier for admins, yes it does have it faults but the positives far outweigh the negatives.

Although you are correct with Squad numbers to a degree, that's only valid if one hasn't been disbanded as a new one uses first available number, so not an accurate way to confirm.

There is a fairly easy technical solution that could be put in place by the devs as has been proven by Post Scriptum where you have armoured squads that can only have 4 people in them and they are the only ones that can use armour, you can only have a set number of them. They also do it for logistics, which prevents a lot of issues.

[CaZ]

Hi Gaz - nice name btw : )

The only time it's frustrating is when squad leaders don't name their squad appropriately or when players don't read the squad name before joining it.

If a "2 man BTR" squad already has 2 players in it then it should be obvious for players not to join it or be frustrated for being kicked from it.

Only allowing Armored squads to be locked won't work due to the fact that when they lose their vehicle they sometimes turn into a temporary infantry unit until their vehicle respawns.

In conclusion - yes it's frustrating for players oblivious to the rule as it can be to admins having to mention the rule multiple times but in the end it does significantly encourage open teamwork and cooperation from my experience across many many other servers. And honestly, once someone understands it I rarely see any complication.

[Bl4ckP4nth3r]

Seeing I was the admin that referred you to our forum. Do you now also understand why I referred you here?

If we would have had this discussion within an active match how much time was left to play the game? Enjoy the game? Admin the game?

We still would be discussing as you are still convinced these rules should be adapted and I would still be there repeating myself...

Sorry for this short answer but the other people here covered it all.