Squads 4 U

[ZQuickSilverZ]

I am curious what people most value in a squad. I believe this post will help online squads better tailor themselves to public want. Is there anything you desire that current squads do not offer? What tendencies do squads have that annoy you? If you are not in a squad, why?

 

I am especially interested to hear from people that have never been in a squad what they think would be important, as they have no preconceptions of what a squad "should" be.

Edited December 4, 2011 by ZQuickSilverZ

[Grimes]

Granted I'm in a squad, but the best thing that squads offer, in my opinion, is simply "shenanigans"

[Heli Shed]

I am curious what people most value in a squad.

 

Hmmm, try camararderie, the thrill of flying with others who are as good, if not better than you, in the cockpit, the compliance with a set of SOP's and unifying knowledge and systems of work that you all comply with.

 

I believe this post will help online squads better tailor themselves to public want.

 

Er..............no it won't. The Sqn directory is the place for this and a good portion of squads do exactly that there.

Edited December 4, 2011 by 159th_Viper
Rule 1.2

[Frostie]

I should imagine a lot of squad members and founders have been part in some way of several other previous squads and have a good collective guide on the general understanding of what people want.

The concept of squads being highly drilled sergeant major nonsense is false, obviously some squads have rules which encourage more serious minded pilots but what makes all squads work is understanding the needs of its members and above all else having fun with others.

[Snoopy]

I should imagine a lot of squad members and founders have been part in some way of several other previous squads and have a good collective guide on the general understanding of what people want.

The concept of squads being highly drilled sergeant major nonsense is false, obviously some squads have rules which encourage more serious minded pilots but what makes all squads work is understanding the needs of its members and above all else having fun with others.

 

Couldn't have said it better...

[yureg]

Is there anything you desire that current squads do not offer?

 

i want realism. Never found a squad who playes dead is dead, meaning everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned. This is not a joke or something, i'm seriously.

I want to see how changes its approach to missionpreparation, "style" of flying, increase of nervousness when entering a cockpit, etc. etc.

Edited December 4, 2011 by yureg

[derelor]

i want realism. Never found a squad who playes dead is dead, meaning everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned. This is not a joke or something, i'm seriously.

Banned permanently? And what if another squad member crashes into you or you crash because of lag?

[PoleCat]

i want realism. Never found a squad who playes dead is dead, meaning everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned. This is not a joke or something, i'm seriously.

I want to see how changes its approach to missionpreparation, "style" of flying, etc. etc.

 

Many of the squadrons have events where dead is dead and you only get one life. It is very immersive and practical for an event. It is not however practical when running a public dedicated server daily. So in essence what you seek is already out there and available but only for specific events (As it should be).

I am curious what people most value in a squad. I believe this post will help online squads better tailor themselves to public want. Is there anything you desire that current squads do not offer? What tendencies do squads have that annoy you? If you are not in a squad, why?

 

I am especially interested to hear from people that have never been in a squad what they think would be important, as they have no preconceptions of what a squad "should" be.

 

Good reasons for joining a squad outside of all that Tyger has posted is that through a squadron lifelong friendships are often forged. Flying with people from all around the world also expands your view of the world around you. Great community, really nice people. :)

 

Out

Edited December 4, 2011 by PoleCat

[yureg]

Banned permanently?

 

No more try-and-error-flying in training, during missions and events.

[159th_Viper]

.......everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned.........No more try-and-error-flying in training, during missions and events.

 

Taking your argument to it's logical conclusion and assuming that you have crashed at least once in DCS/LockOn, then you should not be here - you're dead and your copies of the SIM should have found a new home via E-Bay a looooong time ago.

 

Or is there a 'time-limit' on your 'death' where, upon expiry of said period, you are resurrected?

 

Back on topic, a Squad is akin to a Gentleman's Club where friendships are forged between like-minded individuals who entertain and enjoy our Hobby in a manner particular to the individual Squad as dictated by it's members as a collective. Above all - it's about the Fun!

[dooom]

i concur with much of what has been said in here. For myself, squads are first and foremost about having a collection of fellas who like flight sims and are always willing to play a round of coop with ya regardless of the title. Keep it about the games and only about the games... Unfortunately, Squads rapidly loose their appeal when they confuse real life with that of the virtual and interpersonal drama begins to invade. I like things to be loose and really about having fun in the pit with others. Lol - i have enough drama in my real life that i don't want to bear witness to an Oprah episode replay on my forums.

 

A evening shooting the breeze or flying with a squad mate should feel like I just spent a couple hours tipping beers on a bar stool.... We both like the "bar" and "brand of beer" we are drinking and share some interesting conversations at the same time.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Just comparing Tyger's answer with Dooom's shows two very different approaches. That is why I think this post has value. Honestly though, I was hoping to maybe find out what things might "tip the scales" and get people more involved with squads and therefore online play. A lot of people play DCS titles and have NEVER been online yet are active in the forums. That shows that they want to be a part of the DCS community yet, something is keeping them offline. Maybe we can find a way to entice those people to take the plunge. I think Tyger's 74th Virtual Flight Squadron Flight College (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=74188) is a good start for instance. That shows evolution. War Hawks has also done some evolutionary training aids. Let's have more of that.

Edited December 4, 2011 by ZQuickSilverZ

[dooom]

i would propose its the military role play that disincents many from participating online. Either they have the wrong impression from online vids taht you have to know military brevity code or they are intimidated by the squadron beauracracies. To many, gaming is a leisure activity that leaves no room for real-life dramatics. So they elect to participate in the shared passion via the forums but wing with the AI to maintain their sanity.

 

Furthermore, terms such as "Candidates", "College" or "recruit" can certainly be offputting to many and give a perception of adding a "workload" to what they deem a leisure activity. I'd like to see how big the Casual gamers group I have seen on the forums could get if they could really market what they are about.

 

 

To entice them online is to encourage them to dialogue what they want. I actually think DCS would benefit greatly from a recruitment forum which allowed for deeper threads to "sell" a squad to prospective members. Simply putting a post up in a squad directory doesnt do enough IMO.

Edited December 8, 2011 by dooom

[GGTharos]

I doubt that. Most squadrons take things fairly easy.

 

There are a few that have demands, the one I'm in among them, and I'm fine with that - if you can't hack it, stay out. I don't need a wingman who I need to fly by remote control while he jams up the coms for everyone else too. Not to be harsh, it's just the preferred way to play for me - some of us take this pretty competitively. Not that I wouldn't fly with people, or tell them they suck, or that I wouldn't help them - but where I put /most/ of my flight sim time is with people who are competent or trainable and training, and have the right attitude.

 

Most people won't be a fit for the squad I'm in, and they'll call us elitists. That's fine - but it isn't fair to try suggest that we should just dilute what we have either because oh, the poor casual players. I/we have nothing against casual players - thanks to them, there are sims on the market. They're just not the people who we'd really want as wingmen though, and they wouldn't like flying with us either (it's not fun always feeling like you're behind the power curve so to speak).

 

i would propose its the military role play that disincents many from participating online. Either they have the wrong impression from online vids taht you have to know military brevity code or they are intimidated by the squadron beauracracies. To many, gaming is a leisure activity that leaves no room for real-life dramatics. So they elect to participate in the shared passion via the forums but wing with the AI to maintain their sanity.

 

Oh please. A bunch of people are going to invest time and resources into someone new, and they're offput by having to turn in a track or two? (Usually that's about all it takes). Maybe they shouldn't join any squadrons then.

 

Regarding the military role, if things are unfriendly while 'out of the office', then it's just being done wrong. There's really no room for ranks etc when you're not doing teamwork in your chosen aircraft. While in the office though, hierarchy can be majorly handly.

 

Furthermore, terms such as "Candidates", "College" or "recruit" can certainly be offputting to many and give a perception of adding a "workload" to what they deem a leisure activity. I'd like to see how big the Casual gamers group I have seen on the forums could get if they could really market what they are about.

But they tell you what they want, or at least what they worry about. Some say they're worried that they won't be able to put in enough time when they join a squad. Various squads have various participation requirements, some strict, some not so much. Is 4 hours a month too much to ask for, for example?

 

Others worry that they're 'not good enough for MP'. While this tends to be painfully true against human opponents in air to air, you're not going to get better against them by playing against the AI unless you either practice by flying in MP or, preferrably, get some really good training. The latter is rare.

 

Regarding yet another forum for here - why? Squadrons have their own forums, and I don't think the moderator group really cares to police squadron business here. If people want to discuss with persons of a particular squadron more, they can use PMs or go to that squadron's forums and see if they like things.

 

To entice them online is to encourage them to dialogue what they want. I actually think DCS would benefit greatly from a recruitment forum which allowed for deeper threads to "sell" a squad to prospective members. Simply putting a post up in a squad directory doesnt do enough IMO.

Edited December 8, 2011 by GGTharos

[dooom]

slow down GGtharos.. :) I am certainly not suggesting that any squad water down their SOP for the poor casual gamers. I, in fact, enjoy a modicum of reality injected into my online play as well... as such you can find me online and as a member of various squads.

 

What I am responding to; however, is the original posters inquiry as to what might be keeping the silent majority away from online cooperative play. The reasons I offered are sound reasons heard not only by myself with those in this community but in many competing air sim forum communities/games that i frequent.

 

Indeed, I would suggest you and I are cut from a closer MP cloth than you think - but regarding the online "naive" we likely have offered complimentary reasons as to why they do not participate. e.g. time, non-commitment, poor teamwork, intimidation from squad SOP and perhaps a misunderstanding of what it is all about.

 

As to the suggestion for another forum - i merely opined it was a possibility given the vast success I have born witness to within titles like WWIIOL where squads can recruit by thread rather than by a single posting in a directory. However, as an exclusively online title - perhaps greater attention is paid by the developers to the squad support making the comparison moot.

 

At the end of the day, there are many reasons a casual gamer chooses not to click "CONNECT"; I had understood the spirit of the thread was meant to explore these reasons for the benefit of building the DCS online community. Surely no squad need justify their particular SOP to anyone, but it would be wonderful for us all if we could better understand why so many customers choose to forego participation online.

 

Cheers!

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

Indeed, just offering a perspective from the other side :)

[Sov13t]

LMAO :megalol:

[dooom]

by way of introducing a little further levity... i ran across this video a while back and got reminded of it tonight...

 

Perhaps this is what they want to avoid the most!:megalol: (warning language)

 

that said, I was reminded I played too much online the other day when i said "Copy that" to a client on the phone.:doh:

[Scooternutz]

i want realism. Never found a squad who playes dead is dead, meaning everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned. This is not a joke or something, i'm seriously.

I want to see how changes its approach to missionpreparation, "style" of flying, increase of nervousness when entering a cockpit, etc. etc.

 

 

Enjoy your squad of one until you die and have to ban yourself! :thumbup:

[Eddie]

i want realism. Never found a squad who playes dead is dead, meaning everyone who "dies" a virtual death in a mission or training should be kicked/banned. This is not a joke or something, i'm seriously.

I want to see how changes its approach to missionpreparation, "style" of flying, increase of nervousness when entering a cockpit, etc. etc.

 

There are plenty of squads out there who fly 'dead is dead' in a given mission. But the idea of people being kicked out/banned from a squad because they died in the sim is a bit daft don't you think.

 

Any squad that did that would be the shortest lived organisation in flight sim history.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

I think dooom and I are on the same page. He got my intent perfectly.

Edited December 11, 2011 by ZQuickSilverZ