Sign in to follow this  
luftkorps

5-Man Teams

Recommended Posts

5 man teams in maps that the max player count is 7 (customs for example) is just ridiculous. Its a 5vs2. Where the hell people think its "fair"? You can solo all scavs, how a 5 man group would even be fun? Teamemrs never loose their gear,  because his budy would take it if he dies or because of the insurance system.

 

This is a major problem in this game for me. The maps doesnt support 5 man groups just because it isnt big enough for more players. For me, the max group it should be allowed is 3, MAX! The ideal would be 2, but 5 is just insane.

 

You could say: "Life is unfair", well, sorry buddy, but this is not IRL. Or you could say:  "Pick a team yourself": Well, then I suppose I should pick a hack too, right?! Teams the way its is now is broken, nad need a fix in order to make the game fun and enjoyable.

 

Take PUBG as exemple. It have a good MM system. 4 mans squads max, on a HUGE map with 100 players. You have 4% of the man power in the match, not 71% like here in EFT. 

 

*I did found some topics talking about but they were closed. So I made a new one, because the problem obiviouly still.

 



 

Edited by luftkorps
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this isn't PUBG, you are comparing apples and bananas and you are also forgetting that we will eventually have a sandbox and we don't know at this stage what the player count will be for this. We are only testing at this stage so i wouldn't worry too much about these things as yet.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Play Woods, a team of 5 and team of 4. With experience you will find that you can take out full teams. It isnt too difficult because usually, the bigger the group, the more complacent and unorganized they are.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game is designed to be a team based game.

A 5 man team doesn't make you invincible though, they are killable. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 man teams are good to for causing some confusion that normally results in some team kills as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Huskie said:

But this isn't PUBG, you are comparing apples and bananas and you are also forgetting that we will eventually have a sandbox and we don't know at this stage what the player count will be for this. We are only testing at this stage so i wouldn't worry too much about these things as yet.

^^

I assume the current team size and overall balance is taking into consideration a connected sandbox world.

On the other hand, I would think it wouldn't be too difficult to temporarily modify the group settings until more features are added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@luftkorps

The simplest explanation I can give you:

Military tactics: Are the science and art of organizing a military force, and the techniques for combining and using weapons and military units to engage and defeat an enemy in battle.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, swats73 said:

5 man teams are good to for causing some confusion that normally results in some team kills as well.

Only if the people you team up with suck or are untrained.

People who play solo or with just one more guy (2 men teams) can always decide not to engage in a firefight against 5 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If their communications is not good, you can kill them all. I like this style games. Not balanced, hardcore, and good pvp's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheSzerdi said:

I don't understand these types of posts. The game is not designed to be a solo player game. If you want to solo play then you need to accept that you'll be facing up to five man squads. Deal with it, join a squad, or gtfo.

 

7 hours ago, TheSzerdi said:

Raids are story line to be completed to unlock traders and get gear before unlocking free roam full map 64 player match.

Shoreline has 8 max players and woods has 9 max. You want to fight or loot? Make choice.

Want to make a better comparison, try Arma mods. Like Breaking Point or Exile or Epoch. All of which have completely unfair teams, full loot, desync, and stashes. Oh wait, PUBG also started as an Arma mod. As did DayZ. Not seeing any problem with Tarkov's development so far.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, krawecki said:

He compared Pubg to Tarkov. Nothing to see here.

I'm comparing two FPS video-games. It's wise to see whats works or what doesnt works on other games and learn from it while creating one. If you dont have anything to add dont waste our time with meaningless words.

 

7 hours ago, Sivrisnake said:

If their communications is not good, you can kill them all. I like this style games. Not balanced, hardcore, and good pvp's.

Yes, its true. Unlikely, but true. Also in theory a single soldier could win a IRL war too, but its also unlikely. I have myself alone killed 3 and died by the 4th once.

But Im talking about the balance. In a map with 7 people max, you in a team of 5, its very unballanced for you having to face only 2. Even if you raise the map limit to 10 ppl, I belive this game its not suppose to be like CS or R6 in 5v5 fights.

Again, nothing against teams. I find more enjoyable to play with friends, my point here is: The maps currently doesnt fit 5-man squads.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've complained about this since January when i started.

 

the response i typically get was "git gud" and well i've 4-5 times managed kill 5 man groups but that doesn't make it fair. 

the game seriously needs to nerf these kind of things in the future we've armbands with colors so people can see what team they're in. but that supports the wrecking squad idea. i would love a limit of 3 in every map as of now since on woods 5 man squads is very hard to even kill because of the fact it's so open area.

But as stated i've complained a bllion times since i started playing the logic of me killing 4 people and dying to the fifth is terrible annoying and just not actual fun.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said the game is gonna be fair?

Different situations. It's really nice. I love it when me and buddy play together and we encounter 5-man team. It's  so rare for us that it almost feels like present from bsg. 

Neutralizing 5 man team is way easier then tackling one 2-man team and one 3-man team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, luftkorps said:

I'm comparing two FPS video-games. It's wise to see whats works or what doesnt works on other games and learn from it while creating one. If you dont have anything to add dont waste our time with meaningless words.

 

Yes, its true. Unlikely, but true. Also in theory a single soldier could win a IRL war too, but its also unlikely. I have myself alone killed 3 and died by the 4th once.

But Im talking about the balance. In a map with 7 people max, you in a team of 5, its very unballanced for you having to face only 2. Even if you raise the map limit to 10 ppl, I belive this game its not suppose to be like CS or R6 in 5v5 fights.

Again, nothing against teams. I find more enjoyable to play with friends, my point here is: The maps currently doesnt fit 5-man squads.

Except that there is a massive, glaring hole in your argument - Escape From Tarkov. It's not a war, or TDM, or any other mode where you have to be the last man standing, or even still in the match. Your job is to escape. If engaging hostiles makes it easier for you to escape, go for it. If engaging that particular group would make life harder, don't be dumb, let them leave the area or work around them. 

Complaining that team sizes need to be nerfed because it's too hard to kill them all is literally asking the devs to buff your ability to play the game the wrong way.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, luftkorps said:


But Im talking about the balance. In a map with 7 people max, you in a team of 5, its very unballanced for you having to face only 2. Even if you raise the map limit to 10 ppl, I belive this game its not suppose to be like CS or R6 in 5v5 fights.
 

Why maps should be balanced? These are storyline maps not some casual fps maps.

Some maps are easier, some are harder, some are pain to play on. I like to kill 5-man teams and even if i only kill 4 - oh the satisfaction >.< 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2017 at 7:15 AM, Huskie said:

But this isn't PUBG, you are comparing apples and bananas [...]

11 hours ago, krawecki said:

He compared Pubg to Tarkov. Nothing to see here.

Whats with all those terrible arguments in this forum?

  1. You can compare apples and bananas. You can even compare apples with blocks of lead, as long as it is clear what you are comparing like weight, size, taste, etc. The entire point of a comparison is having 2 things that are different in at least one aspect.
  2. As of now PUBG and EfT are VERY similar. You may not like it because hurr durr EfT is supposed to be special, but it simply isn't. In both games you just join a deathmatch and try to kill as many people as possible while looting occasionally. So sorry to disappoint you, but the reason why PUBG is popular and EfT isn't, is not because EfT is so special, but because PUBG is fun to play while EfT isn't and has bugs and problem at every corner instead - that's it.
3 hours ago, Starlight said:

Except that there is a massive, glaring hole in your argument - Escape From Tarkov.

Last time I checked, in Call of Duty you are not some dude sitting in the office and calling other people. The name of the game is meaningless and doesn't limit the gameplay in any way. EfT is a multiplayer game, where you join raids, kill, loot and leave. You won't magically "complete" the game. There is no escaping. There are just raids on small instances. That's the game now and that's the game tomorrow. None of the other mentioned features will change anything about that. They even confirmed that it's the main gameplay.

4 hours ago, sYs said:

Who said the game is gonna be fair?

Nobody. But a lot of people said this game is going to be good and an unfair multiplayer game is not good, it's as simple as that. That's also why people complain about pay-to-win. They don't just say crap like "oh in war some people are richer than others so its realistic if the game is p2w", however I can imagine if EfT ever becomes p2w that people in this forum will exactly say poo like that.

17 hours ago, Sivrisnake said:

I like this style games. Not balanced, hardcore, and good pvp's.

There is absolutely nothing "hardcore" about the game when playing in a team against a bunch of solos.

  1. You are a lot less likely to die, even if you play worse. All you have to do is open a stream of somebody playing in a squad and you will see that those guys play the game like a casual round of CoD. And they still survive most of the time, because solo players usually don't risk engaging on them.
  2. Even if you die, with insurance your buddy can take out your stuff and hide it so you get it back. So you kind of downplay the only thing that makes this game stand out compared to other games. With 5 people on factory you will practically never lose your gear. It makes the game everything else but "hardcore". Counter Strike between balanced teams is 10 times more hardcore than this.

 

More importantly, using additional voice tools counts as cheating according to following rule from the EULA:

Quote

Cheating: cheat, use, offer, advertise, make available and/or distribute or assist in the following:

cheats, i.e. methods influencing and/or facilitating the gameplay (including the code that makes use of vulnerabilities of the game) therefore giving you and/or any other user advantage over other players not using such methods

Since the game has no real ingame teams or a way of teaming up or teamchatting, tools like Discord or Teamspeak grant you a big advantage over players who don't use them, so they qualify as cheating according to the above rule.

I would be fine with it if teams would have to spend additional money on those ingame headsets to communicate or face the danger of shooting each other by having no way of communicating other than the upcoming gestures, but like this it is utterly stupid and not fun at all.

The easiest way to solve this once and for all would be just matching teams of equal size against each other, unless they wish (with a checkbox) to also match against potentially bigger teams. Then they can also spawn at the same spot without any problems. No big tinkering needed and doable in a few hours by a competent developer. But no we need to keep this bs, so people can play an easy game against mostly bots while still calling this game "hardcore", right? Disgusting.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Satah said:

Whats with all those terrible arguments in this forum?

  1. You can compare apples and bananas. You can even compare apples with blocks of lead, as long as it is clear what you are comparing like weight, size, taste, etc. The entire point of a comparison is having 2 things that are different in at least one aspect.
  2. As of now PUBG and EfT are VERY similar. You may not like it because hurr durr EfT is supposed to be special, but it simply isn't. In both games you just join a deathmatch and try to kill as many people as possible while looting occasionally. So sorry to disappoint you, but the reason why PUBG is popular and EfT isn't, is not because EfT is so special, but because PUBG is fun to play while EfT isn't and has bugs and problem at every corner instead - that's it.

 

PUBG and EFT are NOT very similar. EFT is a niche game and this is why there will never be as many people playing it as PUBG or CSGO. Both of those games are wicked arcadey and that is what the majority of the gaming community plays. Most want to work their 9-5 and do some casual gaming or get out of school and do the same. It's a much more forgiving learning curve too. EFT will never be the super popular game that is even top 10 on steam most played, sorry. 

 

Back to the subject though....I love tackling 5 man teams. I have been in a 2 man and wiped 4 or 5 of these 5 man death squads you are so afraid of. It's not difficult...while they are busy trying to figure out who is who and where each other are you may have already killed 2 of them because you know where your buddy is already etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Satah said:

Nobody. But a lot of people said this game is going to be good and an unfair multiplayer game is not good, it's as simple as that. That's also why people complain about pay-to-win. They don't just say crap like "oh in war some people are richer than others so its realistic if the game is p2w", however I can imagine if EfT ever becomes p2w that people in this forum will exactly say poo like that.

So basically - you are so anti-social that you can't seem to get a team together. It's easy. Adapt or die. 

I prefer to play in a team of 2 - that way i can wreck teams of 5. Priceless. As i stated before - tackling a 5 man team is way easier than tackling 2/3 man teams. People are trigger happy and engage without scouting mostly and then cry.. oh i killed two of them but there were one more who killed me herp derp this is unfair. 

+ sometimes we go as scavs as a team and 5 man team + another 2 man team is not a problem to handle if you pick your locations and tactics wisely. Good luck soloing scav players like me and my buddies.

Edited by sYs
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, luftkorps said:

I'm comparing two FPS video-games. It's wise to see whats works or what doesnt works on other games and learn from it while creating one. If you dont have anything to add dont waste our time with meaningless words.

Different games for different player bases. Try to compare quake 3 arena or quake champions to eft :D or doom. Some would say the best FPS is CS:GO as it's the most played one but somehow i have a feeling that 90% of EFT community dislike it. 

FPS is wide genre with crap load of sub genres. 

Edited by sYs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP ?

Nobody said it´s fair, but it´s a mighy fine challenge .

If you don´t like challenges then chances are high that you might get disappointed further .

 

Stay safe,

sneak well .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't play in 5-man teams because, frankly, it takes too much effort in order to communicate with that many people.

You have to divide your attention between tracking your 4 team mates and scanning for threats.

OP shoul try to play in a 5-man. He'd be amazed how stressful is it to having constantly check if someone you're seeing is a friend or foe.

I personally wiped 4-man squads on customs simply because they recognized me as one of their own. It's pretty hard to tell who is who when there are 5 identical looking PMCs around.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Satah @luftkorps You simply cannot make any meaningful comparison between PUBG and EFT. Both games are FPS and include a looting mechanic. That is all. PUBG lacks any sort of progression and makes no attempt to model realistic firearm mechanics or human physical characteristics. The closest comparison to EFT that I can think of is Arma 3's Breaking Point mod.

Breaking Point includes looting, teams, stashes, factions, karma, realistic firearms mechanics and ballistics, food, hydration, more realistic wound mechanics, character levels and perks, and other similarities to EFT. Neither Breaking Point or EFT is in any way fair. Realism by its very nature precludes the concept of fairness. Everyone is presented equal opportunity and that is all the fairness that can be expected. If you want everything to be fair in a game then it must be heavily regulated and mechanically much more arcade style.

Equal opportunity does not and should not guarantee equal outcome. It is up to the individual to take advantage of the opportunity presented and even then a positive result is not guaranteed. If you so desperately require a participation trophy, get back in your safe space, and play something less realistic.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LegendaryDragon said:

I've complained about this since January when i started.

 

the response i typically get was "git gud" and well i've 4-5 times managed kill 5 man groups but that doesn't make it fair. 

the game seriously needs to nerf these kind of things in the future we've armbands with colors so people can see what team they're in. but that supports the wrecking squad idea. i would love a limit of 3 in every map as of now since on woods 5 man squads is very hard to even kill because of the fact it's so open area.

But as stated i've complained a bllion times since i started playing the logic of me killing 4 people and dying to the fifth is terrible annoying and just not actual fun.

 

On 9/6/2017 at 6:44 PM, luftkorps said:

5 man teams in maps that the max player count is 7 (customs for example) is just ridiculous. Its a 5vs2. Where the hell people think its "fair"? You can solo all scavs, how a 5 man group would even be fun? Teamemrs never loose their gear,  because his budy would take it if he dies or because of the insurance system.

 

This is a major problem in this game for me. The maps doesnt support 5 man groups just because it isnt big enough for more players. For me, the max group it should be allowed is 3, MAX! The ideal would be 2, but 5 is just insane.

 

You could say: "Life is unfair", well, sorry buddy, but this is not IRL. Or you could say:  "Pick a team yourself": Well, then I suppose I should pick a hack too, right?! Teams the way its is now is broken, nad need a fix in order to make the game fun and enjoyable.

 

Take PUBG as exemple. It have a good MM system. 4 mans squads max, on a HUGE map with 100 players. You have 4% of the man power in the match, not 71% like here in EFT. 

 

*I did found some topics talking about but they were closed. So I made a new one, because the problem obiviouly still.

 



 

Have you guys ever used a suppressor on your guns?  I would rate myself as a normally skilled player in EFT and I have done so many squad wipes with suppressed weapons that I cant even count them. Most of the time you can down 3 players out of the 5 before they even know whats going on. If you have decent game sense you can easily take down a full squad. Have you ever used the F1 grenade in EFT? The F1 can literally wipe an entire squad, just throw one in your gamma/beta as insurance. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this