Fluidity in squads 🦐

[birb]

in this acid goop post, it discusses the reworking of the squad system.

literally remove current squad system as it stands

It is clear now that the “””””””squad culture”””””” as it is presently known is a joke even deltas are cadehuggers now its unreal most actual plays are organised around metafriends now the recent echo incident is just a symptom of marines wanting to self organise (clearly a consequence of cm lore allowing socialists on the almayer they are already making a labor union its insane) make squads like battlefield squads where they can be spontaneously made

I think that’s a good idea, so lets put it in ideaguys instead…

original fireteam post in acid goop thread

literally remove current squad system as it stands - #4 by birb

---

So then, what and why “fluidity of squads”.

Fluidity of squads (as I see it) is giving more power to individual riflemen in deciding how to organize their squads.

The goal is to encourage teamwork.

My ideas

1. Fireteams are created by riflemen, and riflemen choose which fireteam they join.

   • Fireteams can be private, or public. Leaders are the first one to join the fireteam. FTLs automatically start with a public fireteam and randomly assigned members.
     • Advertising of a fireteam can take place in the main squad channel.
   • Fireteams can be advertised on squad channel - and those who do not follow the “rules” of the fireteam can be kicked/banned from the fireteam, in which they can decide to join a different fireteam.

2. Fireteams get radio channels

3. You can choose to change your squad without contacting command (ie: bravo to delta, delta to charlie, etc)

The idea (behind my ideas( the goal ))

The goal of squad fluidity is to encourage teamwork. Currently the game is at its most fun when you have metabuddies/battlebuddies to work alongside, and so this will incorporate and encourage battlebuddy teams ingame, so that you don’t need to create metagroups anymore, and more teamwork is utilized.

You will be able to find other individuals ingame, talk to them, rp with them, and create fireteams with them to fight alongside.

I believe when you are the one making the choice to join the fireteam, and when tools are given to actually manage your team, the game will be a lot more teamwork-oriented and thus fun.

Smaller radio channels helps aswell, in encouraging rapport and teamwork among fireteams.

---

Now then, as for discussion questions… what are your thoughts on this, what possible ideas about the idea should be changed, how would it fit in game/would it fit in game at all, critiques of the goal/methods, and other potential consequences?

As well as this, any alternative solutions perhaps?

[BasilHerb]

I don’t get how this will be much of an improvement on the pre existing squad system. If I’m just randomly transferred to a fireteam when I join, that’s identical to me being assigned to a random squad, just with less people. FTLs are even more mute than SLs, and the fragmentation of marine comms even further is an odd idea which I feel doesn’t really accomplish anything.

If I’m not forming metabuddies with people in my squad, why would I form metabuddies with people in my fireteam? I’m just randomly assigned and I’m probably just going to follow the SL and everyone else anyway.

In my opinion, you can’t really force people to be metabuddies, and relying on metabuddying as the main driving force behind marine “teamwork” is kind of just missing the point. The lack of marine coordination isn’t primarily due to the lack of metabuddies or OOC “friendship” with others, it’s an intentional feature of game design due to how awful marine communications are, as well as the inherent deathblob formation that’s meta. Small groups of marines operating on their own is less ideal than everyone clumped in a big blob due to inherent xenos excelling at divide and conquer tactics.

In the end, even if you smash everyone in random fireteams, the metabuddy cliques will still run around blowing things up by themselves and 90% of marines with still deathball. Nothing will change.

[atticus-rezzer]

I can send 10 squad messages saying “Move to this building right near you to attack” as an SO and the only response I’ll get is “Squad messages give me a headache.” And still not a single person walked the 20 tiles to where they were told.

I think people are just going to do what they decide to do, or what they’re supposed to and there’s little you can do about it.

[birb]

Overall it’s an experiment. Things will naturally be different from expectations, but I do think that working towards the goal of higher teamwork is a good plan.

@BasilHerb

If I’m just randomly transferred to a fireteam when I join, that’s identical to me being assigned to a random squad, just with less people.

I do think you’re right. Maybe the idea of randomly putting people in fireteams roundstart is a bad idea… I hate the idea of FTL as a role entirely though, that idea was kind of just thrown in because it feels weird having FTLs not having a fireteam by default…

I personally think it only goes so far as your investment though. Just like normal squad organization.

And I believe if the idea is you put more investment in to participate in the fireteam, you are more likely to go through with working together later. Giving the power to create teams by riflemen also means you do not need to rely on inconsistent SLs or FTLs, and thus the idea that it’s too much of a hassle is slightly less of a hassle.

Public fireteams will naturally be less organized since you get a random FTL. Joining a private fireteam will let you organize around a common goal, leader, and get private comms to encourage being around eachother and working together.

Those who do not engage with the fireteam can be kicked or banned from the fireteam, thus leaving only the ones who will benefit from the fireteam’s existence.

@BasilHerb

In my opinion, you can’t really force people to be metabuddies, and relying on metabuddying as the main driving force behind marine “teamwork” is kind of just missing the point.

@BasilHerb

The lack of marine coordination isn’t primarily due to the lack of metabuddies or OOC “friendship” with others, it’s an intentional feature of game design due to how awful marine communications are, as well as the inherent deathblob formation that’s meta. Small groups of marines operating on their own is less ideal than everyone clumped in a big blob due to inherent xenos excelling at divide and conquer tactics.

Not necessarily forcing people to be metabuddies - but encouraging people to be battlebuddies is a good step in the right direction I think. Standing by a brother-in-arms feels a lot more impactful imo then standing by 20 random people in a murderball.

It’s not a cause-and-effect where “no battlebuddies means deathball”, yes, but it’s a proposed solution to this problem of lack of options to organize teamwork amongst people in this game. While it has the chance to change the game significantly (if massively successful), it will also have that same potential to introduce another layer of the game to many people who do not do this sort of thing imo.

I believe giving choice and easy squad fluidity to riflemen is a good solution to things such as permanent fob sieges - deathball every round - static, unmoving fronts - and simply finding buddies to fight with.

After all, its better to do this in game, since that means teamwork reaches more people.

Organizing squads on a small scale working up to a large scale lets people get acquainted with eachother over time, and form more rapport/team spirit imo. You will never recognize the 1/20 people in your squad on highpop, but you will recognize the 1/5 people in your squad on lowpop.

effectiveness-wise… this would be an experiment. I do not agree that it will reduce effectiveness of marines though, divide and conquer mainly works because marines are so disorganized. Perhaps it will make it more difficult for command though.

@BasilHerb

In the end, even if you smash everyone in random fireteams, the metabuddy cliques will still run around blowing things up by themselves and 90% of marines with still deathball. Nothing will change.

Metabuddy groups are an ordinary way to enjoy the game.
Playing alongside people you know is a lot more fun then playing with random people you do not trust.

But I believe a good first step to creating people you can trust (ingame) is organizing them in small teams where they have to work together.

@atticus-rezzer

I can send 10 squad messages saying “Move to this building right near you to attack” as an SO and the only response I’ll get is “Squad messages give me a headache.” And still not a single person walked the 20 tiles to where they were told.

I think people are just going to do what they decide to do, or what they’re supposed to and there’s little you can do about it.

Command as a whole is fucked anyway. Intentional game design or whatever. More sane division of labor is a step in the right direction gamefeel-wise regardless I think.

People who don’t want to follow command can keep doing what they want to do either way, but this is more focused on making the game more enjoyable as an individual, not making command more effective. You put the effort in, you’ll get the teamwork out with less hassle.

Since following an SL is inconsistently fun, being an active part of your fireteam will be a bit more consistently fun since you made the choice of where you go and what you sign up for.

[Ciitrusbeetle]

I think most other concerns have been addressed but one I have personally is that by allowing people to freely create and mold their own fireteams, it’ll start to become exclusionary.
People can start holding meta grudges and just start refusing to let people join without IC reason, or alternatively you’ll have a bunch of groups that only let certain people in; kind of like lunch kid tables.

Overall I’m worried that this might just end up dividing squads further, and also potentially make the game less friendly towards newer players.

[Steelpoint]

The problem with this idea is, as noted by others, it will likely just devolve into favouritism, meta-picks and exclusionary behaviour.

If this is a discussion on Marine coordination, you’ll never see high level coordination among public players unless you literally force people to be teathered to their squad leaders, or you add extremely easy to notice on-screen markers that CIC can use to direct marine squads. Both of these are concepts that have been seen as anematha to the code base insofar as I am aware.

[FrostN]

@birb

Fireteams can be private, or public. Leaders are the first one to join the fireteam. FTLs automatically start with a public fireteam and randomly assigned members.

we see this post, in its natural habitat, making the already existing problem into a worse one

this will de-evolve into fireteams of meta-omega-gamer friends and command will have literally ZERO authority over these fireteams as they will do whatever the fuck they want

[Danil154322]

@atticus-rezzer

I think people are just going to do what they decide to do, or what they’re supposed to and there’s little you can do about it.

As an ungadunga main, I gotta say in all honesty - yes, we are. The only messages I want from SO are: “FLANK [location]!” and “Supply drop incoming!” Not to mention how annoying squad messages are with their popup on the half of your screen and really loud sound effect. If you’re not some renowned SO main like Aalto or Mortland - you know where you can shove those announcements

Same goes for squad leaders and fireteam leaders, really: unless you already have a good rep, earned through endless grind - nobody will follow you, your orders, your plans and etc

@birb

I believe when you are the one making the choice to join the fireteam, and when tools are given to actually manage your team, the game will be a lot more teamwork-oriented and thus fun.

This ain’t changing anything. Again, I won’t follow bronze SL with 100 in-game hours into the grim unknown. And I will not follow some noname bald FTL anywhere even if you forcibly shove me in his fireteam

This idea could help if, for an example, you’re a good SL main that missed his roll, and we got some baldie on SL position - then you could create your own fireteam with other competent marines, or even usurp the power over the whole squad. But SL role is unpopular enough for this to not be an issue

[atticus-rezzer]

unless you already have a good rep, earned through endless grind - nobody will follow you, your orders

I have no idea how to change the psychology of players for this in general.

[Danil154322]

It’s how it always has been between humans, you can’t change it, really

If you want people to respect, trust and obey you - you need to prove that you’re worth something. Whether you gonna bother with that is another question…

[Oranje]

bad idea it will only encourage meta gaming and most possibly gonna make commands job even harder

[Lmwevil]

incredibly bad idea, cliques will form over this mechanic and become hyper toxic

[c4xmaniac]

If you want to find your buddy in game it’s really easy. You ask over the radio where he is (or just ask in your VC) and then go to him. Alternatively, you could just pre-arrange what you’re going to do.

You don’t need Squad’s squad system for this. This isn’t going to incentivize teamwork, this would be the death knell of what’s left of the squad culture aka soul.

[Flatulent]

@Lmwevil

cliques will form over this mechanic and become hyper toxic

buddy are you in a market for second hand bridges