Jump to content

NO SUCH THING AS 4 MAN SQUAD!


Tortfeaser
 Share

Recommended Posts

What I perceive RSE has done is simulate a 4 man FIRE TEAM. So many folks are complaining about what looks like a "4 man squad" but there is no such animal. A true infantry squad is 9 men. This is a Squad leader, plus two Fire Teams made up of 4 men each - a team leader and three soldiers - a grenadier, a automatic weapon gunner and a rifeleman.

Sorry for the rant! But as is, controlling 3 men (plus yourself) is a very realistic representation of being a FIRE TEAM LEADER, not a squad leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My beef was that they've gone from controlling 6 men down to 4. If anything I would have liked it to go towards the 9 man squads as you have stated. I think many people would rather control more actors than less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, they should have gave us 9 heros like you just mentioned. That would give us an extra fire team to play with plus a squad leader that would be by himself. the quad leader could be the player/hero if you will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be a pain in the rear end here...there acctually is 4 men squads! :P Or atleast I know there once excisted a 4 man squad back in 1995/1996 when I did my service as a squadleader...guess how many privates that "belonged" to my squad???? 3

:sheep:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GR is moving along with the times, alot of 3rd person shooters now have 4 man fire teams.

And it's a black day when the GR franchise starts following other games in the pack like SOCOM and Conflict: Desert Storm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I perceive RSE has done is simulate a 4 man FIRE TEAM. So many folks are complaining about what looks like a "4 man squad" but there is no such animal. A true infantry squad is 9 men. This is a Squad leader, plus two Fire Teams made up of 4 men each - a team leader and three soldiers - a grenadier, a automatic weapon gunner and a rifeleman.

Sorry for the rant! But as is, controlling 3 men (plus yourself) is a very realistic representation of being a FIRE TEAM LEADER, not a squad leader.

You're playing semantics. I don't give two ######s about what they call it, it's still 4 people, and 4 people is LAME.

I thought 6 spread over 3 teams was bad, well, I was WRONG :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what they are trying to do away with is people using the other 5 people in the squad as extra lives. You die in a mission and then say, "well, I got 5 other team members to use." Also, if you are on a covert op and one of your team members die, you just can't call up your superior and say to them "Hey, so and so just got killed, can you send me another person so I can keep going?" You are essentially able to do this right now, because once the mission is over, you have more people at your disposal.

According to something I read on GR2, they changed it to a 4 man fire team so they could concentrate more on detailing the characters. Like one of the pictures shows a tatoo on someones are. They never did that on GR1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...i think it's more because of the "limitations" the x-box has. :rolleyes: ...polycount and stuff.

According to something I read on GR2, they changed it to a 4 man fire team so they could concentrate more on detailing the characters. Like one of the pictures shows a tatoo on someones are. They never did that on GR1.

i think that detailing characters is a good change for a start. but why reducing the mansize of the team?

i usually played that careful, that i had no or only few casualties....but even sf-operatives aren't supermen...so death is a part of their job.

btw: i'm really looking forward to the medics-function, as long as its done right....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, according to US military doctrine, a squad (9 men) is deemed combat ineffective once they lose one man. That's why in the hard mode in Full Spectrum Warrior, the mission ends if you lose a guy.

Now I bet we could all live with controlling 8 men instead of 9, but how about 3 instead of 4? Or two?

Basically you're pretty much SOL once you lose a man.

I forsee an unhealthy amount of quicksaves in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, according to US military doctrine, a squad (9 men) is deemed combat ineffective once they lose one man. That's why in the hard mode in Full Spectrum Warrior, the mission ends if you lose a guy.

Now I bet we could all live with controlling 8 men instead of 9, but how about 3 instead of 4? Or two?

Basically you're pretty much SOL once you lose a man.

I forsee an unhealthy amount of quicksaves in the future.

Sure that is what the book says... <_< I'll just roll over next time I loose a few lads... Christ. 1 trained man with a brain in his head is still effective. But more to the point, so long as there are two, so you can conduct Fire and Movement (one man covers the other moves) you are in pretty good shape.

Oh sorry... I forgot.... we are talking about a video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, according to US military doctrine, a squad (9 men) is deemed combat ineffective once they lose one man.  That's why in the hard mode in Full Spectrum Warrior, the mission ends if you lose a guy.

Now I bet we could all live with controlling 8 men instead of 9, but how about 3 instead of 4?  Or two?

Basically you're pretty much SOL once you lose a man.

I forsee an unhealthy amount of quicksaves in the future.

Sure that is what the book says... <_< I'll just roll over next time I loose a few lads... Christ. 1 trained man with a brain in his head is still effective. But more to the point, so long as there are two, so you can conduct Fire and Movement (one man covers the other moves) you are in pretty good shape.

Oh sorry... I forgot.... we are talking about a video game.

Hey, I'm just tellin ya what I heard :rocky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Four guys can be quite effective, although I will miss my team setup with six. Rifle-rifle/support, Rifle-demo/support, Rifle-Sniper. If one of my four men goes down, kick the enemies ass and move on. The whole complete realism thing is :bs: in a game that's supposed to be fun, not uber-realistic to the maxor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well,since GR is a game of special operations forces,i dont see the problem with a 4 man team.There are lots os SOF teams who use 4 man teams in the real world

Yeah, but as stated before 4 guys SF's or not cant take on 50 enemy. 4 men alone arent efficient enough for direct action, which GR is full of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1991, eight SAS operatives inflicted over 250 Iraqi casualties during a compromise behind enemy lines. A properly equipped SF team can do alot of damage, and obviously the extent of that damage will be dictated by the level of expertise of the enemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1991, eight SAS operatives inflicted over 250 Iraqi casualties during a compromise behind enemy lines. A properly equipped SF team can do alot of damage, and obviously the extent of that damage will be dictated by the level of expertise of the enemy.

But it wasn't their mission to do so - they likely found themselves in a bad position. I doubt the British or for that matter, the US govt would would ever send 8 guys behind enemy lines and said "fire at will". That is something more of a suicide mission - not unlike suicide bombers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the point is that a small group of SF soldiers could handle themselves against far superior enemy numbers. And in any case, it's still just a game. I personally always took a single team of three soldiers on missions in GR SP. Smaller numbers are easier to manage in games, and I'd imagine that's the reason for the small squad in GR2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...