Should squad named assets have privilege over others?

[Waaah_Wah]

^^Exactly

[DarthDisco]

This is actually a very difficult question to answer. Primarily, I think, because the answer changes with each server you play on, and with each group of people you play with. Allow me to illustrate...

Assume that all of the following take place in public servers with no scrim or password nights.

Best Case Scenario
-You are playing on a server that has strict admins and rules and enforces a disciplined environment, including using named squads for assets. Also, many of the players in the server are veterans and/or members of respected PR community groups.
-In this case I believe having a named squad rule is highly beneficial. It keeps the team organized and lets everyone know what everyone else is doing. Other players will respect the fact that if you created the named squad first you are entitled to that asset first. Similarly, you will respect that if someone else asks for an invite because they want a shot, you will give them a fair chance when you die.


Worst Case Scenario
-You are playing on a server that rarely sees any admins online, and has no rules about baseraping, to say nothing of vehicles. Half the team is waiting at the airfield for the next jet to spawn. 3 people have been kicked for TKing during the wait.
-In this instance, if you created a named squad you would probably just have another person create another squad with a similar name and wind up in a shouting contest over who gets the asset. Meanwhile while you are both arguing, some newb in Bravo squad takes the asset and promptly crashes/gets killed. Clearly having a named asset squad is not helping you, or anyone else for that matter.


Average Scenario
-You are on a server that has regular admins present though not 24/7. The server supports no baserape rules and encourages a co-operative environment, but no one is necessarily holding a gun to your proverbial head to play nice.
-Assuming you make a squad a the beginning of the map and let the other players know your intentions, you basically have a 50/50 shot that someone else will try to take the asset regardless of your intentions.


So what does all this mean? More often than not, having a named squad will not make you more likely to get the asset you want, except when you are on a well administered server with mature players. That said, I think the question of whether named squads "should" have priority on assets is irrelevant. When the team and server are poor, having a named squad makes no difference. When the server is strict and the team is organized, named squads appear to happen naturally and prove to be extremely beneficial to team co-ordination.

Moral of the Story: When you're hot, you're hot. When you're not... well...

[PsychoSquirrel_NZ]

I support specific asset squads. What I do not support is the same people whoring them round after round (the same people that know the admin too... kinda like a dictatorship).

[The Crimson Major]

If you are good at your job and are dedicated to the role then yes, but don't be an ass about it.

[Bonsai]

Generally speaking - YES!

But too often i join a "specialized squad" and the guy that "runs" that squad has no potential. Which results in wasting assets because the squadleader takes the wrong decisions...
Can`t see a possibility to prevent this.

[BloodAce]

I say YES but there should be Admin on a server and also decent commander who keep an eye on squads.

[[DVB] Avalon.ca]

just remember folks. it dosn't matter how good at flying / tanking / driving the scooters, with this sort of system in place its a first come first serve on the asset. and the kid with the fastest cennection and pc will get to name his squad what ever he wants. so any good pilots out there that takes a minute longer to log has to settle for walking.

[Panzeh]

I don't like seperate asset squads because it's difficult to get them to cooperate with infantry that way and because they usually eat up more players than is really necessary for the assets.

On asset-heavy maps vehicle crews should join 'reduced' infantry squads rather than form one group.

[DannyIMK]

these just names. they don't have privilege over others. i don't care squad names cause that not mean that if they called "jets" the jets are only for them..

[Waaah_Wah]

Originally Posted by Panzeh

I don't like seperate asset squads because it's difficult to get them to cooperate with infantry that way and because they usually eat up more players than is really necessary for the assets.

On asset-heavy maps vehicle crews should join 'reduced' infantry squads rather than form one group.

I strongly disagree. Its much easier to coordinate a team as commander when you have inf, armor and air squads. Its must easier to talk to the Armor squad and say "can you guys move *somewhere*", instead of first having to figure out what squad has a tank and then telling their SL to order the tank to move somewhere. And when i do that they will only have 3 ppl left in the squad and wont be able to functure propperly.

As for the "they usually eat up more players than is really necessary for the assets", tanks have 3 positions for a reason, i suggest you start using all 3 of them