Squad vs Squad battleplay

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

Ok before I get started with my actual suggestion I would like to clear up a few things. I fully understand that we are trying to simplify things and I am unsure if this will help or hurt but I thought I should at least put the idea out there and I hope it will at least be considered. Also I am posting this as an attempt to fix squad imbalances.

After the battle today a thought crawled into my head. What if for battles we just had one REDD squad and one BLUE squad pair up and only play each other that night? For example: Let's say the Dreadrouges got matched up the 105th ODST's for a battle night. These 2 squad would only fight each other, depending on the map depends on who gets gametype choice. After each match the two squads can split up and discuss what could have been improved or what was done well. When they are ready and they get the green light from each field marshal then they can go at it again. This way God Squads would only play other God Squads, and same with weaker squads. Each week the squads could be matched up with a different squad on the same skill level. So lets say for the next week the 105th ODST's could face the Firesnakes, and then the Dreadrouges could take on a different BLUE squad.

If for some reason that 2 squads matched up one week have a massive score difference in all of their games then they wouldn't be matched up again the next week.

This is just a basic idea & I would like to see it expanded upon, if it isn't immediately shot down. Thoughts?

[VerbotenDonkey]

I like it, however, I could see a lot of complaints of it getting stale because you just play the same opponents over and over for two hours. I still think we should get a tier system going for Squads, but hey, sometimes you have to take one for the team and challenge yourself.

I could just see a lot of people complain about playing the same team over and over. Maybe Squad vs Squad per Map?

[iFurrious]

I don't think work because what if Blue has 7 squads on and Redd has 4 squads on. Who would those other squads in Redd play? Also it wold get pretty boring playing the same squad over and over again.

[ChillSquishster]

To be honest I do not like the idea. I agree it would get stale playing the same people for that amount of time. It is also hard to judge a group of people based on individual skill so the matchups could never always be even. And if its only one squad per night, both armies would most likely tend to want to play there better squads rather then the not as great squads.

[d3ad1te]

Also it wold get pretty boring playing the same squad over and over again.
I'm sure you wouldn't even notice.

But it would give you a chance a adapt to previous tactics.


don't think work because what if Blue has 7 squads on and Redd has 4 squads on.
Well tonight everyone got to play correct? Squads with the same skill level would just be rematched up.


both armies would most likely tend to want to play there better squads rather then the not as great squads.
This makes no sense. Since squads would be matched up EVENLY.

[Silko]

Not a big fan of it. It messes with the rotation and I don't know about you but I would get sick of playing against the same people over and over again

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

I have no problem playing the same people over and over again. I attended some Scrims with the Firesnakes this week and they would play the same other squad over and over on the same map and different gametypes. I didn't get bored fighting them. Each time we finished a match both sides would comment on what they did right and wrong, and tactics would change.

If however during a week one BLUE squad completely trashes a REDD squad then we wouldn't match them up again the next week.

If however one army has more available squads than the other the extra squads could rotate with one BLUE squad that may be more powered than the squad they were originally matched up with. Unless somebody has a better idea?

[d3ad1te]

We won't know the results until we try.

I don't see any harm in trying.

And of course blue soldiers would be opposed to this. REDD is getting slaughtered.

[silversleek]

I don't think work because what if Blue has 7 squads on and Redd has 4 squads on. Who would those other squads in Redd play? Also it wold get pretty boring playing the same squad over and over again.

this

[Anarchy]

When they are ready and they get the green light from each field marshal then they can go at it again. This way God Squads would only play other God Squads, and same with weaker squads.

So what you're saying is, firesnakes is tired of getting their ass kicked by 21st degree, so you want good ol' sparta to play them every night all night?

I know you didn't mean that, but you're essentially putting us in that position. You'd also be putting yourself in the position to be matched up with 251st almost every week.

My squad gets better to do just that: get better and see results, not be forced to play better squads. If our problem is people playing 21st and VbD too often, why would we make it so they play 21st and VbD all night...?


I'm truly sorry, but this idea is not going in the right direction. There's a reason we have a rotation going on who is forced to play against 21st, it's because no one wants to play them. So why would you make one squad play them 5+ times in a single night? Again, I'm sorry, but this truly looks to me like a way to throw 21st's force all on one red squad, which I know will be mine. There's a problem with these ideas that are glorified ways for squad leaders to keep their squad from playing 21st/VbD, and that's that SOMEONE has to play them one way or another. You're just throwing that demise on someone else.

[bazongaman502]

im on bothsides... it would keep the matches organized and moving smoothly (once everyone is ready, BAM! your in a game)... it would prevent those long waits for a squad to find extra players, since they are already there.

However, i like a good challenge... I dont like just going against even matched teams (sure gives me a fighting chance, but doesnt feel right)... i really want to work for that win, i like having the odds against me (on occasion). I dont want to play the same team over and over and over and over, etc etc...

But this is also marked as for 1 weekend, not the entire WAR... so if this were to work the HC of each Army should make a branch that goes from their top squad down to their lesser skilled squad. Then compare it to the other Armies and the FMs work on it together. If a squad wins, they go up against the next best squad, if they lose they take on the lesser skilled squads.... but i can already see how that can cause problems...

But id like to hear more about this before i can put my final judgement down

[Anarchy]

But this is also marked as for 1 weekend, not the entire battlenight... so if this were to work the HC of each Army should make a branch that goes from their top squad down to their lesser skilled squad. Then compare it to the other Armies and the FMs work on it together. If a squad wins, they go up against the next best squad, if they lose they take on the lesser skilled squads.... but i can already see how that can cause problems...

But id like to hear more about this before i can put my final judgement down

Exactly. And the placements would look something like this:
Sparta - VbD/21st
Firesnakes - 251st ODST
Dreadrouges - 105th ODST
Fox legion - 2nd Assault


You know as well as I do that would be a bloodbath. But a lot of squads would get their kick from not having to play 21st, while mine struggles to find a single win.

[bazongaman502]

Exactly. And the placements would look something like this:
Sparta - VbD/21st
Firesnakes - 251st ODST
Dreadrouges - 105th ODST
Fox legion - 2nd Assault


You know as well as I do that would be a bloodbath. But a lot of squads would get their kick from not having to play 21st, while mine struggles to find a single win.

and thats the thing im afraid about, but again im not gonna shoot this idea down, cuz there are a few ways this can work and be benificail to both sides...

and thank you for listing 251st as 3rd best lol

[Anarchy]

and thats the thing im afraid about, but again im not gonna shoot this idea down, cuz there are a few ways this can work and be benificail to both sides...

and thank you for listing 251st as 3rd best lol

The only way to make this work would be to fix the inequality between the two sides. Red would need one or two more "above average" squads to equal things out. And IF that happened, then there would not even be a need for this system, because the problem of imbalance would be fixed.

[Blackhawk570]

The only way to make this work would be to fix the inequality between the two sides. Red would need one or two more "above average" squads to equal things out. And IF that happened, then there would not even be a need for this system, because the problem of imbalance would be fixed.

Another problem is that we don't have many active players on Blue right now to give. When you guys switched over they basically got two "above average" squads because how active your squad is. Firesnakes are good IMO and are above average it is just that when it went to Anchor 9 last night 21st stay together and split up at the same time balancing other squads and creating a chance for their weaker squads to win.

[Spartanbh]

This squad vs. squad stuff is the kind of problem that is plaguing this war sim. It makes it seem like a gamebattles community rather than an actual army setup. People have more loyalty to their squads than their army. I do not approve of this idea.

[Blackhawk570]

It makes it seem like a gamebattles community rather than an actual army setup. People have more loyalty to their squads than their army.

How so? The community is trying to speak out so we can create a good gaming environment for all players in both sides of the Army. You cannot have much fun when squads get dominated every night.

[Anarchy]

How so? The community is trying to speak out so we can create a good gaming environment for all players in both sides of the Army. You cannot have much fun when squads get dominated every night.


There's a problem with these ideas that are glorified ways for squad leaders to keep their squad from playing 21st/VbD, and that's that SOMEONE has to play them one way or another. You're just throwing that demise on someone else.

.

[Blackhawk570]

It isn't up to us to decide whether who we should play. That is up to the Field Marshal. You can always suggest ideas, but pretty much all we could do is to try to even out the skills in both armies.

[Anarchy]

...but pretty much all we could do is to try to even out the skills in both armies.

Exactly. That's the only way to fix the problem. This thread's idea does nothing to fix that.

[Blackhawk570]

Exactly. That's the only way to fix the problem. This thread's idea does nothing to fix that.

Oh I am against what UNLUCKY posted lol I was talking about what you and bazonga were saying

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

Alright I would like to thank those of you who have supported this idea, but if Spartan doesn't like it I doubt it will ever be implemented. And there are others who seem to not like it either.

[Anarchy]

Alright I would like to thank those of you who have supported this idea, but if Spartan doesn't like it I doubt it will ever be implemented. And there are others who seem to not like it either.

No offense, but why would we ever like playing 21st constantly?

[Blackhawk570]

Alright I would like to thank those of you who have supported this idea, but if Spartan doesn't like it I doubt it will ever be implemented. And there are others who seem to not like it either.
This idea is more tournament style where you play a team a certain amount of times and you comeback after each game deciding what you should do better and continue to play each other the whole night. This wouldn't work if an obviously better squad gets matched up with a weak squad because then that squad would dominate the other squad every time hurting their morale and basically quitting after the first or second match and not even try the rest of the games. To fix this then you need to have certain squads fight each other EVERY night of EVERY week which is boring and tasteless.

[UNLUCKY NUM13ER]

You wouldn't have to fight them every battle night anarchy, I thought I had made that clear.

[RaZ Vader]

This squad vs. squad stuff is the kind of problem that is plaguing this war sim. It makes it seem like a gamebattles community rather than an actual army setup. People have more loyalty to their squads than their army. I do not approve of this idea.

QFT.

As long as I am Founder of this place, this idea will never happen. Nice idea, it really is. But take it to a clan-battles group. This thread will now be closed, and will not be considered by the WC