Extremely hyped for companies! Hope pops don't get lower before then...

That was a bit of it- I was also referring to the current status where a lot of groups forgo in-game communication tools ...

But currently leaders are capped at being able to directly control large groups, at 48- and have to use Command Chat and orders and leader text to try to get some hard cohesion (unless someone is running large outfit ops- but people shouldn't have to be in an outfit to pull this off and it would help people like me(a dedicated non outfit leader of randoms currently)

I can understand the hype, coming from an background of large outfits working together during ops.

It's definitely a good feature and will help coordinate multi outfit ops. It's not directly something that will effect every server or outfit equally or even at all. But it's definitely a good tool for those that will actually use it.

Main example I can think of are Mattherson NC multi outfit ops as they are happening on a regular basis. I'm also sure the TR and VS on Mattherson will use this only to enhance already existing coordination that already took place in-game or via third party comm tools.

Curious where you are hearing those numbers-

Anyway, I suspect there will be times when just one major company is running on a faction aside from other platoons

Not to mention Companies are definitely going to end up consisting of randoms and the outfits that join in quite often

Never going to understand the people that enjoy the fights where 100+ people are trying to cram into a 20x20 room. Now if they'd just remove half the bases from the game and force these people out into the open it might be fun, but right now its terrible and i avoid large fights like the plague.

Perhaps they'll eventually tweak bases to scale up in size slightly(and also scale the distance between them by a lot)


- as for hundreds running around in a base- I think it's doable, but you have to have tons of pathways and long ways to various rooms- the bases we have would have to be expanded hard


So, maybe underground bases, but with far larger rooms and buildings all connected by tunnels underground, maybe a few aboveground-

and slightly scaled bigger...

as for 20x20 rooms- I guess for that you eventually make it so there's more things to do that are extremely useful ,rather than one objective where you are trying to throw your whole platoon in a SCU gen room and the enemy platoon is camping it

these days that sort of ....cohesion in a platoon isn't common-

And giving the order for everyone to cram in- I dont think i've seen this done


I personally think this is a bad thing but Large groups are ,highly reluctant to utilize the full strength of their platoon at one spot, and sometimes even at bases..

That's purely a base design problem and is caused by SOE designing large bases (like Tech Plants and Amp Stations) with a single capture point. The better designed bases like the Ascent with multiple capture points do a far better job at spreading the attackers / defenders out across multiple hexes.

All major facilities (tech plants, bio-labs, amp stations) should have (5) capture points, with at least 75-100m between them.

http://borderlinetactical.net/rsnc/world-population/?world_id=17
- Mattherson struggles to hit 1000 simultaneous logins most nights during late April - early May 2014
- Waterson has about the same size population
- Most peaks on the weekend are at around 1200-1500 server population

This means we wont be able to take it to the next level , batallions of...4 Companies which would be 768 people

right now- 2000 a map provided that's still a cap - but it's 666 a faction, and 192 is about a third of a faction- and 666 is a third of the total pop on a map or so

the thing is, i dont know if there's the will- to get to a point where we'd have...hm//768 *3 = 2304 = about a third of 7000 - so we'd need maps with 7000 players.... to run companies of that size and keep the ratios the same





As for now- this means on the weekends companies with 192 are decently doable- but any lower and this game is lost...
darn..

I know there's a huge concern about companies just supplementing the zerg, but answer me this. What's the difference between two platoons operating independently at a base, and two platoons who are part of the same company operating at said base? People are going to zerg regardless. Introducing companies is not going to change this.

But now let's consider the way this system will be properly used. For example, I am part of a large outfit on my server. One of the few active outfits, actually, and because of this we almost always have 5-6 squads up on a nightly basis. Even then, we are still forced to boot out most non-members (even though we run public platoons) because there just isn't enough room. And this isn't even counting when we have our air division up and running. Back in March, I kid you not, we had 2 and a half platoons running between our normal ground infantry, air assets, and our special ops and spectre (infil) units.

So why does anyone think that if people have access to companies, that it will mean we immediately drop 2 platoons worth of people on one base? If I wanted to do that now I could, company or not. Instead, we usually send 2-squads max to any small base, and try to push two lattice lines at once toward larger facilities, although our time is most often spend hopping between both faction's fronts, especially during alerts.

So what's wrong with allowing an OIC to command and view multiple platoons from the map screen. I know most leaders I've talked to would kill for this feature.

continent cap was around 600 when i started playing last year.

Half the game is defending against 48+ and wondering why there are a dozen aircraft, a dozen MBT's, and a swarm of infantry as the opponent has brought in multiple platoons while your faction drops to 1-12 if they're not just piled up in the spawn rooms.
With even percentages I wonder where my faction is after running into that size of opponent on two different fronts against one faction and not seeing a single 24-48 hex anywhere for my faction.

If anything this will REDUCE 'zerging'
because the large group of players will be controlled and commanded with someone who has greater situational awareness
and who can choose not send the entire Company to one base, because it's unnecessary
and, rather, send the platoons or even squads to different bases across an entire front.

This is because that commander knows exactly where all the players, squads and platoons (in the Company) are and who needs help and who doesn't.

Rather than the current situation of separate squads and platoons that have to just guess as to the assistance required at a base or the type of fight at a base. (or fight for comms to pass on basic information...)

There's another issue people aren't mentioning-
The ability to actually run more than one Platoon


I am probably Waterson's (VS) only non-outfit leader who goes out of his way to lead random groups for fun- everyone else is outfits and outfits.

I know the majority of leaders, and yet on Command- I am only able to get one or two other firendly leaders to respond during an alert- and the thing is, this is during times when there are like 10+ (you can go to the leader tab and it displays all the commanders on the server)

I don't understand why a lot of groups choose not to work with bigger forces- but at times our enemies will move Massive groups around during alerts- and numbers wise, we need our entire faction's forces just to hold off a enemy faction's forces on a continent
But Command is often a bit silent- which i dont understand, since We've worked hard and it's far better than the days after the jaeger /waterson merge- WAY better.

So, the most forces I can at best throw at a chokepoint when we're boxed in by 48+ on the two lattice links going out of our warpgate during a alert- Is maybe up to 2 platoons worth


I cannot 'intentionally' get , say 3 platoons worth of people to one spot to overpower a enemy force of 2 platoons or more, at all the locations the enemy has these massive super platoons''Companies will let me add platoons and randoms to my Company, until I can get 192 worth- and that will allow me to actually field the numbers required to smash through enemy forces when they outnumber you by extreme amounts and command isn't working for pulling multiple platoons to your assistance/outfits are mute for unknown reasons,

But could you do it not part of the outfit? As a dedicated random leader like me?

Or would it be subject to server pops??

Anyway,I agree with your post

God no. Sorry for going offtopic here, but jeez just hell no.

Ideally all bases should have exactly one hack and hold console, period. Capture points as a mechanic are allready so bland and stupid to begin with, and having four (or even five) of them makes the game feel even more like any run-of-the-mill conquest/domination shooter and the bases like a damn setpiece for a tdm map. A tdm map where you have to run around in the open for a minute to reach anything while the attackers usually have a better, quicker route.
Rework the bases into actual, large bases (they still look like cod setpieces without any structure, rhyme or reason for the most part) and have ONE capture point. Or even better, get rid of these unimaginative, stupid capture points alltogether and introduce CCs. Yeah, i know, i know, that would be way too original and creative and not "casual" enough...but that's my opinion.

...I'd cite MAG, but MAG had different objectives- such as getting past 4 bunkers on a large map to get to one point, or getting to a vehicle and driving it safely back- that involved extremely large numbers of players in multiple platoons or companies

What are CCs???

One hack and hold console? For 192 vs 192 people? ...I myself am trying to figure out how one would set that up- some sort of very elevated base with various rising paths?

??

I'm not sure what you're asking here. Could I have two platoons worth of pubbies drop on the same base? Yes, I could if I coordinated with another platoon leader over command comms or something similar.

Or are you asking whether a non-outfit player could lead a Company? I don't see why not. The system would not be any different than the current Platoon system, only at the next highest tier.

Now you've got me curious, though. If you enjoy leading so much, why -not- join an outfit? I don't know a single outfit out there that isn't always hurting for more leaders, as there are very few players with the experience and desire to lead in this game. And personally, I think members of an outfit would be far more willing to listen to your orders than the console crowd over in MAG ever were.

the former


perhaps- I dont think ive ever seen more than 2 to 2 and a half able to be put on a single spot using comms- but then again that might be due to Waterson's status.....

I was part of one early on before jaeger merged with waterson-
one of the things that irked me was a stigma where outfits considered non-outfit members worthless in a fight - and I remembered encountering a tiny bit of that in MAG- so that's why I didn't necessarily go out of my way to join an outfit when leading.
i've been thinking about joining one or two again just because - but my goal was to try to prove to the few Sovereignty commanders still on waterson who were like that - that a non-outfit group of people could be a extremely deadly force nontheless- So i've been trying hard to go for that

I've got a whole page of multiple Outfit invites.....and am bugged to join an Outfit- It's funny, as much running as i do with some outfits that will join public squads- one could almost consider me part of them-

It depends- MAG sorta didn't leave a large amount of free room as far as that went, such as when going for bunkers
But you could say the same thing about clans in MAG...to compare to outfits in PS2

Here's where I think people tend to just talk past eachother when it comes to Zergs .... which mirrors exactly what the effect of the Zerg is as well.

A Zerg is a snowball of Randoms, typically lower skill players, all pushing to the nearest Hex. The Zerg forms where it's facing the least Resistance and gaining the most territory or "momentum" the fastest. Its proximity to the Warpgate or any Facilities known for be "Cert Farms" magnifies this effect usually. Due to the "Least Resistance" qualifier, the other faction's zerg will then form on the OTHER END of their own terriitory and push out that direction instead. Thus the 2 Zergs will typically fail to meet eachother Head on.



Giving unit commanders a bigger platoon size, or altering the Lattice, does not change this dynamic. Only incentives, and the XP/resources formulae can change this by doing some of the things talked about here: