Locked into loadouts?

[BobTank63]

I was looking through the comments for this video and saw a comment from Highwire Games: "The Team Leader can assign a specific fire team role to each player in the lobby. But each role must be filled, for authenticity and to ensure a complete team. You really don't want to start a mission with no SAW gunner."

Is this actually the case? Because forcing 3 players to have their loadouts chosen by one other guy is a really weird way of doing this, especially with random matchmaking.

I understand and liked the idea of set load-outs, but not being able to choose which one I get is kind of ridiculous. I can see a lot of people getting very upset with this.

If this is the case, please change this as soon as possible.

[xxinfurnoxx]

I will wait till I play it to form any suggestions, but if it is the case that the host chooses the roles, then that is a bit weird imo.

[optimise]

Yeah, would be nice to have the ability to choose which loadout you go in with yourself, maybe put limits on the quantity of each one so you don’t get everyone running around with a machinegun or shotgun, but definitely let the player choose in some capacity.

- optimise

[AmperCamper]

maybe put limits on the quantity of each one so you don’t get everyone running around with a machinegun or shotgun, but definitely let the player choose in some capacity.

- optimise

Yes, these limitations already exist so that the fireteam is not only full but also balanced.

As for the main question, we are experimenting with ways in which the Fireteam Lead will always be the most experienced player in a lobby (and be less likely to drive missions to failure). With that being said, we appreciate the feedback on this and I'll be sure the guys take a look.

[BobTank63]

maybe put limits on the quantity of each one so you don’t get everyone running around with a machinegun or shotgun, but definitely let the player choose in some capacity.

- optimise

Yes, these limitations already exist so that the fireteam is not only full but also balanced.

As for the main question, we are experimenting with ways in which the Fireteam Lead will always be the most experienced player in a lobby (and be less likely to drive missions to failure). With that being said, we appreciate the feedback on this and I'll be sure the guys take a look.

I think fireteam roles being first come first serve would be better. I just want the ability to choose my loadout.

Having to depend on a random person choosing my loadout for me opens up a lot of options for the leader role being abused. I don’t mind if there are limited spots for a particular option. Perhaps a system like Squad where you choose your role from those that aren’t occupied?

[Kean_1]

Personally, more times than not, my experiences with "randoms" has been disappointing at best in online games so the matches I'll end up playing will be either alone or with 1-3 friends (up to the 4 max players allowed).

I actually like the idea of the host / leader being chosen depending on experience but hopefully other considerations should be made as well like friendly fire incidents, whether they have comms, missions success, etc. Maybe an approval / voting system where players can grade commanders helps determine eligibility? .....just spitballin' here.

I just know that unvetted randoms being put in charge of player groups probably won't work any better and likely worse.

[Dague]

Personally, more times than not, my experiences with "randoms" has been disappointing at best in online games so the matches I'll end up playing will be either alone or with 1-3 friends (up to the 4 max players allowed).

I actually like the idea of the host / leader being chosen depending on experience but hopefully other considerations should be made as well like friendly fire incidents, whether they have comms, missions success, etc. Maybe an approval / voting system where players can grade commanders helps determine eligibility? .....just spitballin' here.

I just know that unvetted randoms being put in charge of player groups probably won't work any better and likely worse.

I actually like this idea...Friendly FIre/Negligent Discharge incidents should be tracked in a way that contributes to a player's skill level in addition to microphone and success rates to help the lobby make informed decisions of who should be doing what. Great suggestion.

[oceansixteen]

maybe put limits on the quantity of each one so you don’t get everyone running around with a machinegun or shotgun, but definitely let the player choose in some capacity.

- optimise

Yes, these limitations already exist so that the fireteam is not only full but also balanced.

As for the main question, we are experimenting with ways in which the Fireteam Lead will always be the most experienced player in a lobby (and be less likely to drive missions to failure). With that being said, we appreciate the feedback on this and I'll be sure the guys take a look.

maybe some sort of win/loss ratio and who ever has the highest gets Fireteam Lead. or if you play with some friends and another friend keeps dying as the leader and you're always the last man left alive, that can attribute to something