Squad Leader Archive

I thought I'd post this in the SL forum to feel it out and get some feedback before posting to the general SWG Discussion forum, as it would have a direct impact on the SL profession.

I'm not a squad leader (though I had initially thought of going for one, and may still try it a bit down the line if I tire of combat medic), but from reading the forums, it's my understanding that in order to get SL experience, the SL must be the leader of a group. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Currently, maximum group sizes are too large. Even at half the max, communication tends to be unorganized and strategy non-existent. For the most part, people that participate in large groups seem to be doing so simply to overwhelm their targets by shear numbers and in an effort to avoid even minimal chance of death.

Groups without a SL should be limited to four (maybe five) members. This should be increased to eight for groups led by a SL (close to the size of a standard imperial squad which, according to EU, is nine; Old Republic squads, also according to EU, were anywhere from 10 to 12 in size). For each level in Leadership (or perhaps just an individual's highest branch from the SL tree), the maximum group size should increase by one, up to a maximum total of 13 at Master Squad Leader. Squad Leaders should be able to join up to four squads together into one platoon, while maintaining their leadership role (and benfits) for their individual squad.

I think these changes would make make groups sizes more reasonable, while making the Squad Leader not only a more desirable, but needed, profession. This would also let multiple squad leaders that wish to participate with the same people to split a larger group into multiple smaller groups, allowing for more strategizing and cleaner communication, while still keeping the benefits of shared mission rewards.

Some may think that making four the max for a group without a SL to be too low. One possible way to circumvent this would be to set the limits as I mentioned above as standards, but to allow additional members with a penalty on xp rewards. I'd suggest that the penalty should equal the percentage that the group has exceeded standard size. For instance, a group of six without a SL should be penalized 50%; a group of 9 with a novice SL should be penalized 10%.

What do you think?

I am fine with the 20 player sized groups, and the fact that anyone can start one.

Although effective communication does take its toll when you have twenty players, I'd propose using a "team organization" function. Have multiple teams within a squad, each with a team leader. You could assign medics to be blue (or use letterdesignations such as "A")team, riflemen red team, etc; they would have their own "team" chat along with their names being color coded. Have a general "leader" chat, where only the squad and team leaders can communicate with eachother. Everyone could still participate in the group chat, of course; but would be recommended to keep their team-related discussions in their respective chat channel.

Having teams would make things much simpler for the larger groups, the Squad Leader could appoint veterans as team leaders and be assured they would carry out their duties well. This would also enable great tactical flexibility on the battlefield, and bring about some interesting strategies.

Overestimation is essential. If it's true that the group sizes are too big, and it causes problems, then naturally people will recognize this and form smaller groups. But in the cases that people do want larger groups, and can effectively maintain them, they will still be able to. Limiting group sizes will only allow for the former. The same type of thing has always bothered me with cheat codes in video games. Sometimes developers don't add cheat codes because they think it ruins the fun of the game, but they are tooignorant to realize that if it ruined the fun of the game for some people, they simply wouldn't use the cheat codes, and those who did like them could use them. Removing something because some people (even if a majority) don't like it is redundant. If they don't like it, they simply won't use it, so removing it is unnecessary and ruinsit for the people who DO like it.

I say, keep group sizes at 20, and make them even bigger with teams.

I agree with Orodias. Keep the groups the size they are and increase with teams. That would be some really nice PVP like that. If you get a group of people that listen you can easily lead 15+. I lead a group into the Night sister dungeon on Dathomir and it was a blast! They all listened and did what I said and we did a lot better than anyone expected.