DUST Search - [Suggestion] Reduce Squad Size

DJINN Jecture wrote:

Regis Blackbird wrote:

As stated before, I am not against reducing squad size to 4.
I actually think it's a good idea, provided larger groups have somewhere to go with the Platoon (8) or Battleforce (16) options.

As far as I see it, we want to acheve the following goals:
- Make it easier for the matchmaker and team builder to work efficiently.
- Reduce the effects of Pub-stomps (large coordinated squads vs random blueberries)
- Still allow larger groups to enjoy the game without kicking half the team to squeeze into a squad of 4.

So, here is a modified proposal for Pubs which I think will cover the above points.
- Squads (4) gets matched against other squads (pref) and solo players.
- Platoons (8) gets matched against other Platoons (pref) and Squads (4), but no solo players.
- Battleforces (16) get matched against Battleforces (pref) and Platoons, but no Squads or solo players.

So, the larger group you form, the larger opposition (groups) you will face. I suspect new players usually play solo or in small squads before they find a good corp, so in the above scenario they will never meet opposition greater than squads of 4.
Vets with lots of friends can still enjoy grouping up together with the larger Platoon group size of 8. Big corps wanting to challenge other corps for a 16 vs 16 game can "easily" que-sync and get a private corp battle.

Since the team size of 16 can be evenly divided by all group sizes, I beleve the matchmaker will have an easier time grouping everybody together.

The smaller squad sizes just kill the teamwork already established, I could see smaller squad sizes being ok only if people were having wait issues because there are no slots in a team to join due to everyone being in a squad of 6 all the time but this is far from true. In fact the vast majority of people I see in game are running without a squad and sometimes even without the foggiest idea about what makes a team or what an OB is until it slaps them all over the forehead.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 546	Posted - 2015.01.14 08:16:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Thanks everyone, I have requested technical evaluation of the following features: 1)Is it possible to seed Domination modes into the FW rotation 2)Is it possible and easy to give some ISK per FW match 3)Is it possible and easy to roll on your own team gear, instead of the enemies for loot (as Gallente I need Gallente Gear) in FW 4)Is it possible to easily (permanently) align with a faction (bloodpact/loyalist) so you get more LP for that Faction, but massively reduced LP/canGÇÖt fight for the other in FW 5)We are thinking about creating Platoons, which is either 2+ 4 man squads that are joined, or simply an 8, 12 and 16 man squad that can only deploy to FW and PC 6) Is it possible to have, instead of our single squad option, which is causing balance issues where 6 man proto squads farm new players. Create Squad (4) Create Platoon (8) Create Battleforce (16) And let the matchmaker check for conditions: If member in Platoon queues for Public Contracts get errormessage(Platoons and Battleforces cannot queue for Public Contracts!) Very nice I especially like point 4, 5 and 6. Been a Caldari loyalist all my merc life, so I would sign up for a "blood pact" in a heartbeat. If you don't mind, could you also please check the following:? - Is it possible (and easy?) for installations / objectives to have a default owner at start of match? - Is it possible (and easy?) for opposing teams to have different win objectives, rather than clone out / MCC destruction? These two points could open up some interesting game modes, and perhaps transform how we play FW and PC at its core. (Defenders actually defending something)
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 552	Posted - 2015.01.14 18:25:00 - [2] - Quote Dust User wrote: Reducing squad sizes feels like a step backwards. I'm not sure why anyone would want that. Duhh, he is investigating the introduction of two bigger "squads" at the cost of slightly reducing one. On top of that, all group sizes would fit evenly in a 16 player team, making it easier to match.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 556	Posted - 2015.01.15 11:58:00 - [3] - Quote What about the following? Reduce standard squad to 4 and introduce the 8 (Platoon) and 16 (Battleforce) options as per CCP Rattati's investigation. For Pub queue: - Standard squad (4) works as today (matched against other squads and solo players) and starts a 16 vs 16 game. - Platoons will be matched against other Platoons (only), and start a 8 vs 8 game. - Battleforce will be matched against other Battleforces (only), and start a 16 vs 16 game. No compensation is made if a Platoon or Battleforce contains less than 8 / 16 players, I.e if only 3 people are in a Platoon they will face 8 opponents if the other Platoon is full. This should be a conscious choice when you form a Platoon of Battleforce, and clearly labeled in the "create" option. Basic logic: If you create an army but only bring 3 people to a fight, you WILL be at a disadvantage. For FW queue: - Standard squad (4) works as today (matched against other squads and solo players) and starts a 16 vs 16 game. - Preference will always be given to match Battleforce against Battleforce, but if no match is made 2 Platoons is selected. - Platoons might get matched against Battleforces (as above) or 2 other Platoons. What this gives us is options. No group size will be excluded from any game mode, but there will be consequences if you are not full for Platoons and Battleforces. Organized players will have two more slots available (Platoon), and enjoy similar competition in a smaller battle (8 vs 8). Battleforces will alow "pseudo" corp battles via queue syncing. With the consequences clearly labeled, noobs and solo people will be warned to not form too large groups unless they enjoy being stomped into the ground.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 556	Posted - 2015.01.15 18:27:00 - [4] - Quote SirManBoy wrote: Regis Blackbird wrote: What about the following? For FW queue: - Standard squad (4) works as today (matched against other squads and solo players) and starts a 16 vs 16 game. - Preference will always be given to match Battleforce against Battleforce, but if no match is made 2 Platoons is selected. - Platoons might get matched against Battleforces (as above) or 2 other Platoons. You guys have me close to sold on 4-man squads in pubs provided that we find a solution that allows larger groups to enjoy the same match variety as everyone else, but if we're going down the road of making pubs more friendly to solo players, new players, etc., then I see no reason to go out of the way to protect people in FW. My initial draft was actually to match everything with everything in FW, as I also believe it should be more "gloves off". The reason I changed it was my concept of not compensating for partially filled Platoons and Battleforces as described in the pub matches. If mixed with solo/squads, this would lead to imbalanced matches and to give rise to a new form of griefing, when players deliberately rig matches by deploying in a "solo" Platoon ruining everybody else's experience. Of course, the simplest solution to this would be to leave the system as it is today, I.e any empty spaces in the total team (from partially filled Platoons/Battleforces/Squads) gets automatically filled with the best match available. However, this would also mean Platoons and Battleforces mechanics would work differently in Pubs and FW, but that might not be that big problem... I am good either way. But I do think the proposed pub mechanics of not mixing solo / 4-squads with Platoons and Battleforces is the best way to go.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 563	Posted - 2015.01.18 15:20:00 - [5] - Quote As stated before, I am not against reducing squad size to 4. I actually think it's a good idea, provided larger groups have somewhere to go with the Platoon (8) or Battleforce (16) options. As far as I see it, we want to acheve the following goals: - Make it easier for the matchmaker and team builder to work efficiently. - Reduce the effects of Pub-stomps (large coordinated squads vs random blueberries) - Still allow larger groups to enjoy the game without kicking half the team to squeeze into a squad of 4. So, here is a modified proposal for Pubs which I think will cover the above points. - Squads (4) gets matched against other squads (pref) and solo players. - Platoons (8) gets matched against other Platoons (pref) and Squads (4), but no solo players. - Battleforces (16) get matched against Battleforces (pref) and Platoons, but no Squads or solo players. So, the larger group you form, the larger opposition (groups) you will face. I suspect new players usually play solo or in small squads before they find a good corp, so in the above scenario they will never meet opposition greater than squads of 4. Vets with lots of friends can still enjoy grouping up together with the larger Platoon group size of 8. Big corps wanting to challenge other corps for a 16 vs 16 game can "easily" que-sync and get a private corp battle. Since the team size of 16 can be evenly divided by all group sizes, I beleve the matchmaker will have an easier time grouping everybody together.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 563	Posted - 2015.01.18 16:09:00 - [6] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Regis Blackbird wrote: As stated before, I am not against reducing squad size to 4. I actually think it's a good idea, provided larger groups have somewhere to go with the Platoon (8) or Battleforce (16) options. As far as I see it, we want to acheve the following goals: - Make it easier for the matchmaker and team builder to work efficiently. - Reduce the effects of Pub-stomps (large coordinated squads vs random blueberries) - Still allow larger groups to enjoy the game without kicking half the team to squeeze into a squad of 4. So, here is a modified proposal for Pubs which I think will cover the above points. - Squads (4) gets matched against other squads (pref) and solo players. - Platoons (8) gets matched against other Platoons (pref) and Squads (4), but no solo players. - Battleforces (16) get matched against Battleforces (pref) and Platoons, but no Squads or solo players. So, the larger group you form, the larger opposition (groups) you will face. I suspect new players usually play solo or in small squads before they find a good corp, so in the above scenario they will never meet opposition greater than squads of 4. Vets with lots of friends can still enjoy grouping up together with the larger Platoon group size of 8. Big corps wanting to challenge other corps for a 16 vs 16 game can "easily" que-sync and get a private corp battle. Since the team size of 16 can be evenly divided by all group sizes, I beleve the matchmaker will have an easier time grouping everybody together. The smaller squad sizes just kill the teamwork already established, I could see smaller squad sizes being ok only if people were having wait issues because there are no slots in a team to join due to everyone being in a squad of 6 all the time but this is far from true. In fact the vast majority of people I see in game are running without a squad and sometimes even without the foggiest idea about what makes a team or what an OB is until it slaps them all over the forehead. Then use the Platoon option? Regardless which group sizes the game provides there will always be groups of players which are either too big or too small. Right now we only have one option with a squad of 6, which does not even fit evenly into a team of 16. With the above proposal you will have three options to select from depending on which fits your group of friends the best.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 563	Posted - 2015.01.18 16:15:00 - [7] - Quote deezy dabest wrote: My thought on this are simple. If you think this will actually help the game then go for it. If this is just yet another band aid fix in an attempt to stomp whining about matchmaking the STOP IT AND FIX match making. Personally I think squads of 4 in pubs are a terrible idea. What we actually need is match size increased to 18 on both sides so that 3 squads of 6 can fit into a match. I feel like this would have a surprisingly positive affect because it would allow 6 of the proto squads attempting to stomp to be crammed into a match of their own instead of a new match being made for 2 of them and filling it up with randoms that get dumped on. I could go for increasing team size to 18, but as stated by CCP Rattati it will have a cost of performance. Regardless how you do it, I think it's importaint that the available squad sizes can fit evenly into the team. But, I would prefer to have more options of squad sizes.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 564	Posted - 2015.01.18 18:22:00 - [8] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Tell you what, how about instead of getting 5 of your friends together to run squads only pick up 3 or 4 others to run with, see if it makes a difference. I am honestly not sure what your point is? Are you implying it's less fun? More difficult? No difference? What if you could invite 7 other friends instead of 5?
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 566	Posted - 2015.01.19 10:42:00 - [9] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Regis Blackbird wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Tell you what, how about instead of getting 5 of your friends together to run squads only pick up 3 or 4 others to run with, see if it makes a difference. I am honestly not sure what your point is? Are you implying it's less fun? More difficult? No difference? What if you could invite 7 other friends instead of 5? Then I would...I am an advocate for larger team sizes, bigger battles more gore, more ragdoll, a market that functions exactly the same as the Eve market, true Open World gameplay, PVE missions involving shooting things not people, Opening the stations so we can walk around and murder each other in our quarters, Merc transports through New Eden and having CCP complete their ideas in a manner that works better rather than creating more problems every time something gets fixed. But this is a lot to be interested in, how about more fun with more peeps. Then Sir, we are in total agreement (One can dream, right?) +1 As you can see from my previous posts, I agree to a reduction of squad size to 4 IF Platoons (8) and Battleforces (16) have access to all modes (Pubs & FW). This is doable by arranging how each group size is matched against eachother, as per my previous proposal. Question is how difficult it would be to implement, if even possible. Is it the golden bullet which will end pub stomps overnight? Absolutley not. Will it give more options to players to play the game on their terms? Yes Will it give small squads and solo players a break from large organized squads? Yes Will it help the matchmaker to balance the matches? I honestly think so.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 567	Posted - 2015.01.19 13:22:00 - [10] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: If 6 man squads are too OP for pubs, how will 8 man squads be balanced for FW? Should they be balanced in FW? If we have four options: Solo, Squad, Platoon and Battleforce, and the likelihood of winning is greater the larger group you have, what do you think people who want to be successful in FW will do? Band together and form larger groups. As it should be IMHO. (At least then we don't have to endure the 6 + 6 + 4 Q-sync mess. I would just find the appropriate Platoon or Battleforce and go) Tesfa Alem wrote: If 6 man squads are too OP for pubs, how is encouraging two Q-synced squads of 8 to compensate going to balanced for pubs? By making sure a Platoon can never face Solo and small Squads, just other Platoons or Battleforces.