Suppresssion dependent on SL and commander

[Kelmola]

Alright, time to make a suggestion that is most likely impossible and quite certainly has been suggested in the n+1 topics covering suppression (because search-fu will only get you so far).

The other day I was reminiscing of good times with Steel Panthers series, when I remembered that in those games, incoming fire caused suppression, eventually rendering the unit incapable of fighting even if it didn't causes damage/casualties. (Not that SP series would be the only wargame, computer or board, which has a similar mechanic.) Now, each unit had its own leader, who could try to "rally" the men and reduce suppreession. However, if he failed, then his superior would try to rally, provided that there was contact (radio or shouting distance), which tended to promote unit cohesion.

Remembering the importance of maintaining contact with the superiors and thinking of each soldier as a "unit", I came up with this wonderful idea for FH2. If you aren't in a squad or are too far away from your SL, you suffer the much beloved, dearly missed suppression from 2.0. If you're in a squad AND within a certain distance of your SL, you only suffer slightly more suppression effects than you do now. If you're in a squad AND within a certain distance of your SL AND there is a commander on the radio (no doubt giving encouraging instructions to your SL, such as "Das war ein Befehl! Der Angriff Steiners war ein Befehl!" ), you "only" get the current suppression effects.

Thoughts/comments?

INB4 "not possible due to engine limitations" and/or "we don't want to enforce teamwork".

[IrishReloaded]

mh sounds kinda weird that people closer to a squadleader dont suffer human effects ^^.

But your suggestion lead me to another one.

In WW2 only officer and NCO had maps. In FH2 everyone has a map.
What about that only squadmembers have access to minimap, map and spotted targets. As this would simulate that the squadleader shows the map to his squad.

As many people want a map, people will join squads more often which could lead to more teamplay.

[Lightning]

The FH philosophy has always been that players should be rewarded for working together, not punished for not working together. I doubt either suggestion will be taken up.

[IrishReloaded]

but when someone is award with something you need to "punish" the other one.
Cause the only thing you get atm is spawmpoint on SL and voip.

[Flippy Warbear]

I'd like this. It would promote even closer teamwork without making it all anal at the lonewolfs. They can still fight back, its just their view is messed up more than those who hug their SL's on regular basis.

[KittyThePwner]

Why do you have to go as 1 single blob? Many times when I play with my friends someone stays to defend another flag/attack or take some tank or plane. Why should you be punished because you take orders from the SL?

[Musti]

What about new players? Whenever they play the game. they wouldn't know where they are, where to go etc.
Oh and we would have lots of 1 man locked squads. Im sure of it.

[Kelmola]

Exactly when did the tanks and planes get the suppression shader? Exactly when was it a good idea for a SL to take a plane (other than observation plane and land it behind enemy lines to provide a spawnpoint)? Also, this suggestion would in no way prevent people in squads from lonewolfing. They just wouldn't get the benefits that the "blobbers" would.

The whole idea was this that in a warzone, when you hear the Sarge bark out the same commands as your drill instructor, you'll act reflexively, without thinking, and consequently don't think as much of your fear either. Also, being surrounded by your buddies, you'll feel much more secure. Now, there's no way of representing this directly in the game, hence the idea to use the suppression shader to represent this. Also, if the Sarge shouts that the Old Man promised divisional arty to unleash a barrage in two minutes, you should feel even more confident.

Re the "punishment" argument, using this logic, I could claim that people outside the squads are already being punished in FH2, because they cannot spawn on SL's and cannot hear the VOIP talk. Waaah! Not fair! Srsly, "rewarding" someone is essentially the same as "punishing" someone or at the very least, denying something from her or him.

As for the higher suppression, I've mostly seen the soldiers of 2nd Forum Regulars demand MOAR of it, but apparently the soldiers of 1337th Public Irregulars wouldn't like it or some such. This would be a nice compromise.

The map is part of the game IMO, and that was not what my suggestion was about. It was just that someone HIJOE'd the thread without making his own.

[ajappat]

Might work if not taken to extremes. "Safe area" with low supression around SL should be quite big. It should only penalize people that are in totally wrong places.

[Natty]

It should only penalize people that are in totally wrong places.

and what extravagant python-monitored alghorithm would define "wrong place"? What if you're a sniper, or a scout, or a simple heroic rifleman doing an epic flanking maneuver that will lead to a flag that has been defended for 30+min will finally fall?

Way too many situational possibilities where this would go wrong, Battlefield is not about some streamlined lemmings game play where everyone does exactly as "they should". In PR they try to do that, killing you if you enter vehicles and forcing you to walk to an arbitrary magical box and pray at it to summon kits and other stuff, which obviously is making the players play as they want them to. In FH2, at least I want every player, teamplaying fanatic and rambo lonewolf alike, to play under the same terms.

Suppression should come from the weapon, and it's an interaction between the other player who shoots, and you. How will he know that you are squatting on an SL as is immune to his suppression? A bullet is a bullet, and if we change that concept, we might as well go all-in and kill you after 2min if you dont join a squad, make you eat more lead if you're in a squad, or any of the other nonsense fun-exterminating and anal rules that can be applied by simple python haxx and nazi server rules.

These are my personal opinions.

[LuckyOne]

It should only penalize people that are in totally wrong places.

and what extravagant python-monitored alghorithm would define "wrong place"? What if you're a sniper, or a scout, or a simple heroic rifleman doing an epic flanking maneuver that will lead to a flag that has been defended for 30+min will finally fall?

Make it check for kits? 

Or maybe if we make it the opposite... rewarding for example an MG man that stays in a certain radius of his SL with enhanced suppression effect...

[SiCaRiO]

It should only penalize people that are in totally wrong places.

and what extravagant python-monitored alghorithm would define "wrong place"? What if you're a sniper, or a scout, or a simple heroic rifleman doing an epic flanking maneuver that will lead to a flag that has been defended for 30+min will finally fall?

if you are a sniper you wouldnt get a supression effect because noone is supose to shot at you . if you are a heroic rifleman you would have kill everyone of those pesky enemys before they had a chanse to shot at you

[Warior135]

To be honest i like the idea for the fact the squad leader would be encouraged to stay with the squad instead of going off somewhere else 

[Natty]

You need a deeper understanding of player behaviour in this case... players do what is fun, nothing else. We wouldnt see any more squad play or hugging of eachother if we tuned the suppression... it's not that powerful of a tool. Project reality mod made it more fun to play if you hang with your buddies in the squad, that's the only reason they do that there. It's simply not as fun to play PR if you go around alone. Now many people are led to believe that players in PR stick in squads because it's more "realistic" or so, that is ofcourse nonsense, and only a metavalue applied afterwards. They made a good job of making the experience suck for anyone not in a squad, so that's the one and only reason they do that: it's more fun.

Having suppression and whatnots depending on closeness of SL would not have any great impact on the overall fun with playing FH2, simply because it would not be obvious for you if the person you shoot at is getting supressed or not, and the difference between the SL-closeness suppression you get, when getting shot at, and the suppression you get when lone-wolfing, wouldn't be measureable for you.
In PR, the difference between the fun being lonewolf and the fun bundling up with a squad and going around hand-in-hand, is very measurable and direct. That is the reason it works.

[Kubador]

It should only penalize people that are in totally wrong places.

and what extravagant python-monitored alghorithm would define "wrong place"? What if you're a sniper, or a scout, or a simple heroic rifleman doing an epic flanking maneuver that will lead to a flag that has been defended for 30+min will finally fall?

Way too many situational possibilities where this would go wrong, Battlefield is not about some streamlined lemmings game play where everyone does exactly as "they should". In PR they try to do that, killing you if you enter vehicles and forcing you to walk to an arbitrary magical box and pray at it to summon kits and other stuff, which obviously is making the players play as they want them to. In FH2, at least I want every player, teamplaying fanatic and rambo lonewolf alike, to play under the same terms.

Suppression should come from the weapon, and it's an interaction between the other player who shoots, and you. How will he know that you are squatting on an SL as is immune to his suppression? A bullet is a bullet, and if we change that concept, we might as well go all-in and kill you after 2min if you dont join a squad, make you eat more lead if you're in a squad, or any of the other nonsense fun-exterminating and anal rules that can be applied by simple python haxx and nazi server rules.

These are my personal opinions.

For once I agree with Natty (I also noticed he learned to add "my opinion" part ). Supression should be equal for everyone. I'm all for tweaking supression effect to the state when it allows for useful supressive fire - then you'll see teamwork.

Also teamwork should be the end result and synergy of features that are provided, instead of a requirement (not 'true' teamwork).