DUST Search - [Suggestion] Reduce Squad Size

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Suggestion] Reduce Squad Size

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
Lac Nokomis Palliative 35	Posted - 2015.01.14 09:48:00 - [121] - Quote Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote: I still think reducing pub squad size is a poor excuse for trying to fix perceived matchmaking problems. If you don't want new players to get stomped, fix the system. Lowering squad size will reduce the feeling of community, and will lead to frustration when a group of friends cannot seamlessly transition between game modes. We've had your dust for a bit to long. Sorry mate. Also: do you ever stop and ******* think that maybe the dev team DOESNT have unlimited resources? "Fixing the system" probably isn't possible at the moment. Maybe they don't have the manpower to (re)write that kind of program. And why would they waste time if this turns out to be a viable solution? Which, judging by your reaction, it will.
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4199	Posted - 2015.01.14 10:53:00 - [122] - Quote xAckie wrote: 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 Many of us don't like this game mode . Please let us untiick this option. With the way faction warfare is I doubt that this would be possible. Not to mention dividing up the pool of faction warfare players with the currently low population is that game mode would be bad. Domination is not really my favorite game mode, but if reducing squad sizes in pubs means that larger groups need another area to fight domination matches I think adding some into the Faction Warfare rotation would be a fair compromise. My only worry would be a group wanting a Dom match so they queue and then leave battle every time they don't get domination. The same might then happen for those that prefer skirmish. They will queue into a match, see that it is domination and then leave. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 706	Posted - 2015.01.14 11:42:00 - [123] - Quote Great now we have this notion stickied. I cant believe I have to argue why forcing us to play with less friends is bad for Dust. Blaming squad size for dust's current troubles is ludicrous. Hell the strongest point in dust is the squad size and the ability to organize with your friends., these strawman arguments are frankly nonsensical, and will for sure spell the death knell of this game. I happen to tank and fly, so no FW does give me or my friends frankly anything worth playing for, we could care less about Apex suits. * Better matchmaking: What is theevidence for this claim? How will smaller squads of my friends who average between 30 million SP prevent the types of new players who run Sniper starter fits in Ambush getting into our matches? * Better fights: Outright bullshit. Never in my time playing dust have i said, 'you know, if i only had two less friends then this match would run better." In fact its the opposite, smaller squads mean more reliance on people you don't know and can't communicate with, the smaller squad i run with the worse the matches become. Carrying 16 people with a 6 man squad > carrying 14 people witha 4 man squad * Fewer stomps / stompathons: Again, why is this related to squad size instead of crap matchmaking that pits new players against vets? How can you tell, player side, that stomps are directly related to squad size? sure you can say 'there was 6 FA on the other side but in a match like this 2 Unholy Legion (delboy, pyrex), 1 Nyan Tran (stefan), 1 Death by Disassociation (yours truly), 1 Amarr templar (the Judge) on the same squad and even then we had to sync to get 1 external beings (Ghaz ) 1commando Perkonne (Shely) 1 dust brasil (chopper) But to anyplayer who wasn't in our squad it looks the end screen makes it look like a bunch of random blueberries got together. And thats how it is for 99% of my matches,lots of of buddies run in all differnt corps and channels, and there is no way for anybody to tell exactly how many people were in one squad without cheking the team selection during the match. If you can't reliable know who was in a squad or not at the end of the match, how can you tie squad size in of itself to a stomp? * Shorter queue times Played enough matches solo to know that this simply isnt the case. In fact, i usually have shorter ques time the more people I squad up with, because we have 6 people at a time gearing up for a match and not waiting for one or two slots to be filled. * But you can PC: No i dont want to pay 30 million a clone pack to play once every 24 hours with more than 4 friends * But you can FW: No isk payout for FW, extremely long que times and perhaps not all of my firneds are of the same race or want the same things, or could care less about running skrimish for no pay. I am not willing and out right reject the notion of telling any two of my friends when I log in for matches to pissoff because solo players were complaining about teamwork. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 706	Posted - 2015.01.14 11:50:00 - [124] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. You are asking the wrong question. Your question should be: "why are proto squads matched up against new players" rather than of "how many proto stompers per squad is acceptable vs new players?" Which leads us to: "why is the MU matchmaking system not working?" Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
SirManBoy Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 795	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:03:00 - [125] - 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!) I think we can solve this whole issue by allowing battleforces to queue into pub matches provided that they can only launch against another battleforce. Teams could coordinate their queues accordingly in channels thus making the situation fairly efficient. This also allows large groupings of players to enjoy all of the match types afforded to everyone else without adding other match types to FW. It might also be worth considering an option in settings that allows players to check whether or not they would be willing to act as auxiliary members of a battleforce that they are themselves not a part of. There are some solo players who would find this appealing and it would also help battleforces fill the gaps when they don't have exactly 16 players.
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4199	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:29:00 - [126] - Quote Seems reasonable enough. Only issue I see is what UI may be needed to explain what could be a crazy wait time for a battleforce going against another one in public matches. Battleforce leader selects deploy to pubs prompt comes up: "Wait times for Battleforces are extremely long in public contracts. Proceed? x Confirm --- o Cancel" Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
voidfaction Nos Nothi 989	Posted - 2015.01.14 12:37:00 - [127] - Quote SirManBoy wrote: 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!) I think we can solve this whole issue by allowing battleforces to queue into pub matches provided that they can only launch against another battleforce. Teams could coordinate their queues accordingly in channels thus making the situation fairly efficient. This also allows large groupings of players to enjoy all of the match types afforded to everyone else without adding other match types to FW. It might also be worth considering an option in settings that allows players to check whether or not they would be willing to act as auxiliary members of a battleforce that they are themselves not a part of. There are some solo players who would find this appealing and it would also help battleforces fill the gaps when they don't have exactly 16 players. BIG YES I am all for a 2nd public area for large squads if we have the one for noobs and casual players. This would also give me a place i would not feel dirty running proto and possible getting more into squad play. I know being forced into only FW is not so good for corp or friends as they might support different factions and with bloodpact/loyalist it will split them up even more. If you can't kill them scan them. Meta 13 Proto Stomp G-I Scout
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2381	Posted - 2015.01.14 13:10:00 - [128] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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 Moreso than anything else in that post, this makes me happy. Thank you good sir for looking into something that I was once told was a stupid idea since "we're all simple mercs, not soldiers" I wish I could like that post a thousand times over. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
DJINN Jecture BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance 188	Posted - 2015.01.14 15:41:00 - [129] - Quote I would like to align with the Blood Raiders, but I believe this is off topic. EDIT: Down with all 4 of the Empires, Pirate til the end of time. How long til this hits PC?
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 1721	Posted - 2015.01.14 15:51:00 - [130] - Quote In Response to Tesfa Alem 1. * Better matchmaking: Blaming squad size for dust's current troubles is ludicrous ... What is the evidence for this claim? Squad size has everything to do with today's matchmaking failures. When Scotty fails to find competent opposition for a large squad of vets, we get a pubstomp. Today, pubstomps are as common as good fights. This is evidence of a problem. 2. How will smaller squads of my friends who average between 30 million SP prevent the types of new players who run Sniper starter fits in Ambush getting into our matches? Is it not reasonable to assume that newbros are less to blame for a given pubstomp than the pubstompers doing the stomping? If Team Building is working properly, newbros will find themselves onto either side of a match and effectively cancel each other out. 3. * Better fights: Outright bullshit. Never in my time playing dust have i said, 'you know, if i only had two less friends then this match would run better." In fact its the opposite, smaller squads mean more reliance on people you don't know and can't communicate with, the smaller squad i run with the worse the matches become. Not at all BS. When Scotty succeeds in pairing equally competent forces against one another, we get a good fight. When he fails to do so, we get a stomp. There a finite number of squads (and stompsquads) available to Scotty at the time of matchmaking. Increasing that number gives Scotty a larger pool to work with, which in turn increases the probability that he'll serve a good fight. Further, a decrease in squad size translates to a decrease in Max(Mu) potential, which again increases the probability of a good fight. 4. Carrying 16 people with a 6 man squad > carrying 14 people with a 4 man squad A single squad carrying its side to victory should be a difficult undertaking but is not cause for concern. A single squad all-but-guaranteeing its side a victory match-after-match represents a serious matchmaking problem. When Scotty does his job well, the odds of winning or losing a given match are near 50:50 and winning has more to do with "teamwork" than "squadwork". 5. How can you tell, player side, that stomps are directly related to squad size? But to any player who wasn't in our squad it looks the end screen makes it look like a bunch of random blueberries got together. And thats how it is for 99% of my matches,lots of of buddies run in all differnt corps and channels, and there is no way for anybody to tell exactly how many people were in one squad without cheking the team selection during the match. If you can't reliable know who was in a squad or not at the end of the match, how can you tie squad size in of itself to a stomp? It isn't difficult to make a mental note of the players who've stomped a match; they tend to be at the top of the leaderboard. Further, the odds of encountering the same players again and again over the course of a couple hours are pretty high. Even a dimwitted player like me can spot a pattern if it's put-in-face a sufficient number of times. 6. * Shorter queue times: Played enough matches solo to know that this simply isnt the case. In fact, i usually have shorter ques time the more people I squad up with, because we have 6 people at a time gearing up for a match and not waiting for one or two slots to be filled. Optimization dictates that we place the biggest pegs first then fill in around them with progressively smaller pegs; this likely explains your observation. Making the biggest pegs smaller is more likely to accelerate process time than extend it.

Lac Nokomis Palliative 36	Posted - 2015.01.14 16:02:00 - [131] - Quote Everyone should note the "And easy"'s in that post. I mean this conversation is great but I keep going back in my mind to a few months ago when I was in the old Amarr123 (Or was it Amarr1? I forget teh numbaz) and we had to jumpstart FW every single froggin day. That still stands today. It can take awhile to get started after downtime. I think the BPO's fell short of a (presumptive on my part) goal of getting more players involved in FW. They come, they stomp, they go back to pubs. (Or take part in contracts to stomp for certain factions blah blah yawn yawn) What peaked my attention was just thinking about the shift that would happen if there was just a simple ISK reward added to FW. I feel like that could multiply the active games at any time by alot, and it wouldn't require any sort of complex systems(totally stupid oblivious comment) Then we could do more towards balance. So yeah... Isk + fulfilled loyalty store = more consistent FW participation THEN onto whatever matchmaking problems we have there? And Tesfa Alem, Nobody is blaming squad size for dust's "current problems". However, like with Darth, I feel like your reaction is solidifying that it might just be an awesome answer.
LAVALLOIS Nash 435	Posted - 2015.01.14 16:03:00 - [132] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: * Better fights: Outright bullshit. Never in my time playing dust have i said, 'you know, if i only had two less friends then this match would run better." In fact its the opposite, smaller squads mean more reliance on people you don't know and can't communicate with, the smaller squad i run with the worse the matches become. Carrying 16 people with a 6 man squad > carrying 14 people witha 4 man squad The reason it makes for better games is that more focused teams will be able to launch more in modes suffering from under participation, there will be games with more casual level squads, and since we are breaking things down. (2 6 man squads that might have been on one team before get broken down into 3 4man squads or 4 3man squads, which has a better chance of distributing them equally onto both teams. Right now, if the game places 2 good 6 man squads opposed from eachother, and one of them bails at the start of the match, its going to place randoms in the rest of the match, which seals the fate of the match. With blocks of 4, its easier to place. You might have a game where one team takes the lead over the other early, 4 randoms quit on the team getting beat, a good 4 man squad joins, turns the tide a little, and now we got a game again. Also, read his whole post before you comment. He is going to look at things like ISK payouts for FW, AND there is another thread about increased salvage in FW. Plus the potential upcoming simple trading which could add value to all that exclusive LP gear. In short, Faction Warfare is about to become highly profitable. SirManBoy wrote: I think we can solve this whole issue by allowing battleforces to queue into pub matches provided that they can only launch against another battleforce. Teams could coordinate their queues accordingly in channels thus making the situation fairly efficient. This also allows large groupings of players to enjoy all of the match types afforded to everyone else without adding other match types to FW. It might also be worth considering an option in settings that allows players to check whether or not they would be willing to act as auxiliary members of a battleforce that they are themselves not a part of. There are some solo players who would find this appealing and it would also help battleforces fill the gaps when they don't have exactly 16 players. I think thats a good idea. It might be a higher queue time though if its unorganized. Maybe they should refine the Squad Finder a little to cater to this. Add in the 3 level of descriptions. Would also be good for corp recruitment. You can have 2 half full battleforces called "recruiting", and then they just fill up with potential recruits, play a game, and if they didnt like it they try a different "recruiting" battleforce.
Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1457	Posted - 2015.01.14 16:42:00 - [133] - Quote Reducing squad sizes feels like a step backwards. I'm not sure why anyone would want that.
Balistyc Farshot The Exemplars RISE of LEGION 27	Posted - 2015.01.14 16:54:00 - [134] - Quote SirManBoy wrote: 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!) I think we can solve this whole issue by allowing battleforces to queue into pub matches provided that they can only launch against another battleforce. Teams could coordinate their queues accordingly in channels thus making the situation fairly efficient. This also allows large groupings of players to enjoy all of the match types afforded to everyone else without adding other match types to FW. It might also be worth considering an option in the settings that allows players to check whether or not they would be willing to act as auxiliary members of a battleforce that they are themselves not a part of. There are some solo players who would find this appealing and it would also help battleforces fill the gaps when they don't have exactly 16 players. I think this will bring bigger groups into battles which is a good thing! How often has a corp had to play the queue sync rodeo. Now we can put a whole team out there to join forces. Also we can practice a PC without a clone pack if we do this in pub fights or FW. I think this may ignite more channel syncs and if squad finder has the battleforce or platoon options available this will add another dimension to how we play. This also will allow us to communicate with the whole group if we role in with a larger group. No one voices in team chat or read team chat. Lack of coordination gets most of us killed. This is one step closer to having a team leader who can manage the whole battle. Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 905	Posted - 2015.01.14 17:11:00 - [135] - Quote I find a fix to matchmaking - only deploy 4-6 man squads when equal opposition has been found - acceptable. I would never again squad with randoms, but it would be acceptable. A system that allows team-deploy and also fixes pub matches by restricting squad sizes unless team-deploying sounds preferable though.
killertojo42 KnightKiller's inc. 90	Posted - 2015.01.14 17:33:00 - [136] - Quote Or we could just get 18 man teams, anyone thought of that? When walking on the battlefield i stand alone
killertojo42 KnightKiller's inc. 90	Posted - 2015.01.14 17:38:00 - [137] - Quote Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me When walking on the battlefield i stand alone
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 650	Posted - 2015.01.14 17:59:00 - [138] - Quote killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me FW is supposed to be an isk sink. You make money from salvage, and when it is introduced, FW specific missions. I'm not opposed to being able to make isk from FW, I just feel isk shouldn't be given out just to minimise losses.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 7857	Posted - 2015.01.14 18:23:00 - [139] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me FW is supposed to be an isk sink. You make money from salvage, and when it is introduced, FW specific missions. I'm not opposed to being able to make isk from FW, I just feel isk shouldn't be given out just to minimise losses. Save for the fact that the LP market isn't fully up to stock and not gaining ISK rewards to cover losses from gear that you have no other choice but to spend ISK on. Commando suits, certain weapons and modules, etc. I think it's pretty botch that I have to fight for the Caldari just to get some damage mods to fit on my Gallente Assault suit, which is all about high damage CQC action. Consider as well that even LP items still cost ISK and that ISK has to come from somewhere. The whole system was designed with the intention of a player market coming soon after, which never really happened. It was also to encourage players to play multiple game modes, even though a large portion of the community wants to do what -they- want and not what they're forced to do. Not being given ISK rewards while simultaneously requiring ISK cost on the items you use is a powerful ISK sink, sure, but who are we really trying to make broke? Why are we trying to make them broke? Who gets caught in the crossfire as an unintended target of wanting to go broke? Does it add complexity or depth? Does it add function or restriction? These are questions that have to be answered. I am... La línea roja artillero..! Tears collected from Redline sniping -:- 45
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 552	Posted - 2015.01.14 18:25:00 - [140] - 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.

m621 zma 249	Posted - 2015.01.14 18:44:00 - [141] - Quote With regards to Ambush/OMS, reducing squad size to 4 will do little to kerb the protostomping, when 1 team is almost consistently full of newberries/blueberries/just plain bad. Remove squads from Ambush.
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 650	Posted - 2015.01.14 18:58:00 - [142] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me FW is supposed to be an isk sink. You make money from salvage, and when it is introduced, FW specific missions. I'm not opposed to being able to make isk from FW, I just feel isk shouldn't be given out just to minimise losses. Save for the fact that the LP market isn't fully up to stock and not gaining ISK rewards to cover losses from gear that you have no other choice but to spend ISK on. Commando suits, certain weapons and modules, etc. I think it's pretty botch that I have to fight for the Caldari just to get some damage mods to fit on my Gallente Assault suit, which is all about high damage CQC action. Consider as well that even LP items still cost ISK and that ISK has to come from somewhere. The whole system was designed with the intention of a player market coming soon after, which never really happened. It was also to encourage players to play multiple game modes, even though a large portion of the community wants to do what -they- want and not what they're forced to do. Not being given ISK rewards while simultaneously requiring ISK cost on the items you use is a powerful ISK sink, sure, but who are we really trying to make broke? Why are we trying to make them broke? Who gets caught in the crossfire as an unintended target of wanting to go broke? Does it add complexity or depth? Does it add function or restriction? These are questions that have to be answered. I agree, but I don't think giving isk away in FW is the answer. A player market would allow for FW to be a way to generate isk, whimodss something I would really like. Isk costs for mods are low on the lp store, one pub match would get you enough isk to buy about 20 proto suits if you have the lp. If FW missions were introduced it would help to alleviate the problem.
Atiim Titans of Phoenix 15054	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:06:00 - [143] - Quote I'm going to go with no on this one. To begin, changing the squad sizes from 6 to 4 will do very little (if anything) to reduce stomping in Public Contracts. Four players (assuming competence) are very capable of stomping PUBs to the same difficulty (or lack thereof) as a squad of 6 players can. --- Then we also have the fact that one of the few strengths this game has over other FPSs is the ability to converse and enjoy the company of others. Being forced to play a PC or FW match just to play with your friends (without being forced to exclude some) will cause many to leave, as the social appeal is gone. While one could say "that group should just play FW or PC", that is a flawed statement for a host of reasons: 1. Not all friends fight for the same faction, which means that the group will either be forced to exclude friends to play FW, group member(s) may be forced to betray their faction, or the group as a whole will not participate in FW. 2. Most squads play about 10 matches before disbanding, so if you don't already have clones (which only PC groups have), you will need to purchase clone packs (50mil ISK each). So if you want to play with your friends for the length of an average play session, you'll need to spend 500mil ISK. Couple that with the logistics of forming teams, and the fact that all of these battles have to be scheduled 24hrs in advance and playing PC is an impossible solution to not being able to play with your friends unless your in a PC group (which the majority of players in support of this idea aren't in). -- Moving on, in a balanced game, all roles are needed equally which means that each squad needs to have 1 of each-role to be proficient. With the current squad sizes, that's possible as we have 5 Infantry Roles (with one slot being open for a Vehicle Pilot). When all roles are needed equally, how does the inability for a squad to use all roles make sense? You could just rely on another squad, but that's impossible in PUBs because the players there are usually terrible and can't be relied on for anything, and in PC (or FW) you can select the team composition and give them orders, making them actually reliable. And while yes, many players have access to more than 1 role, the new players (the people that this change is designed to help) won't, which makes them unable to win a match as they won't be able to utilize all the roles needed to do so. There are much better ways to solve this problem, and I personally believe that my solution is better. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Starfire Revo Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 317	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:07:00 - [144] - Quote Agree with what SirManBoy suggested about allowing larger size groups queue against each other in separate contracts. Full team vs full team is a blast and would benefit from existing in public contracts. CCP Rattati wrote: 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) Going to nitpick and ask these be changed to match existing group names based on numbers. Create Fireteam (4) Create Squad (8) Create Platoon (16) I make videos of EVE and Dust http://www.youtube.com/mrgimbleb I write about EVE and Dust http://mrgimbleb.blogspot.com
Nirwanda Vaughns 1201	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:35:00 - [145] - Quote we coped with 4 members befroe. we'd cope again. personally in PCs i preffer to run 4man sqauds, makes you more versatile Never argue with an idiot. they bring you down to their level and beat you through experience proud C-II bpo owner
RedPencil Random Gunz RISE of LEGION 156	Posted - 2015.01.14 19:46:00 - [146] - 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 Domination in FW is a bad idea. It doesn't really require strategy because everyone just storm into one point. The stronger team always guarantee win on this mode. Unlike skirmish, you can flip the table if you out smart enemy team. Beware Paper cut M[;..;]M
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2384	Posted - 2015.01.14 21:57:00 - [147] - Quote killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me Get two more friends and sync two "fireteams"? Also, you seem to have serious entitlement issues. If you'd rather put down the game instead of grabbing two more friends and syncing, I'm not sure the game wouldn't be better off without you? Sorry, just calling it like I see it. Amarr/Minmatar vehicles are OP (especially Minmatar speed tanks) ^The reason why CCP is afraid to release them
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 1736	Posted - 2015.01.14 22:06:00 - [148] - Quote Atiim wrote: changing the squad sizes from 6 to 4 will do very little (if anything) to reduce stomping in Public Contracts. Four players (assuming competence) are very capable of stomping PUBs to the same difficulty (or lack thereof) as a squad of 6 players can. Two teams are in warbarge awaiting deployment into battle. 1) If Team A has 16 more veterans than Team B, what are the odds that Team B will be stomped? 2) If Team A has 8 more veterans than Team B, what are the odds that Team B will be stomped? 3) If Team A has 1 more veteran than Team B, what are the odds that Team B will be stomped? 4) As the difference in veteran count between Team A and Team B decreases, do the odds of a stomp increase, decrease or hold constant? Bonus) If Team A is guaranteed X ultimate slayer beasts and Tean B is guaranteed none, does the probability of Team A stomping Team B increase or decrease as X nears zero? (assumes X is positive number between 16 and 1).
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4204	Posted - 2015.01.14 23:20:00 - [149] - Quote Echo 1991 wrote: killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me FW is supposed to be an isk sink. You make money from salvage, and when it is introduced, FW specific missions. I'm not opposed to being able to make isk from FW, I just feel isk shouldn't be given out just to minimise losses. FW being an ISK sink was a load of crap which is exactly why CCP is looking into adding ISK to FW. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Echo 1991 Titans of Phoenix VP Gaming Alliance 650	Posted - 2015.01.14 23:47:00 - [150] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Echo 1991 wrote: killertojo42 wrote: Oh and by the way i run a FW squad and we need to do pubs often to keep doing FW, my isk wallet isn't set to unlimited, I'm not screwing friend 5 and 6 on our isk grinds so this would be a deal breaker on the game for me FW is supposed to be an isk sink. You make money from salvage, and when it is introduced, FW specific missions. I'm not opposed to being able to make isk from FW, I just feel isk shouldn't be given out just to minimise losses. FW being an ISK sink was a load of crap which is exactly why CCP is looking into adding ISK to FW. Then public matched become completely pointless. The only ways isk should be made in FW is through salvage, missions and selling LP items (selling obviously won't work atm and missions could me introduced).



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.