Does anyone else wish Squads were bigger than 4 people? Especially considering the size of teams in this game, finding any friends who couldn't fit into your squad will be a nightmare. I never had a problem with the 5-man squads; I thought it was a perfect number. Just wondering if anyone else agrees. It's not a game-ruining thing but I wish it would be the 5 we're used to from other games. (merged topics, cleaned the main post (les couleur) and changed tittle to reflect the topic) - Atic

@FreddyBenssonI liked how it was in Battlefield 2:1 - Medic2 - Support3 - Sniper4 - Engineer5 - Assault6 - Man with RPGor all were doctors) and were treated :D for point or unlock gun or))))) medal. Ohhhh Gold Medal)))) Special Gun for Veteran Medic)

128 isn't divisible by 5, but it is divisible by 4, which make 32 squads of 4, if it was 5 then some players won't have a full squad, the next divisible number is 8, which is a way too large squad

Battlefield REALLY need better squads size , in 128 players match squads of 4 is way to low and does not allow for good and organized group to make a difference . We NEED at least 8 players squads and Lobby so we can have more friends and have better chance to do any difference into a match ..A solution if Dice want to keep squads respawn manageable with 4 they could do 2 fireteam of 4 insde a squad of 8 and 2 squads of 8 to make a platoon of 16 and 4 platoons per team ... Fireteam have the BF respawn capability inside their own fireteam yet they are part of a squad of 8 that can create lobby and join games toghueter Also Team Leaders need tools to communicate similar to planetside 2 command chanels where squads leaders can speak to each others and organise better , this structure is deeply lacking in previous BF games and problem will be exacerbate with the increased players count things are to randoms and there is no real team work happening unless you play private servers with the control over the team composition etc.. So We NEED 8 players Squads and lobby to invite 7 friends or team mates willing to play We need command chanels for squads leaders and maybe even a platoons structure of 16 players per plattoon so 4 platoon per team of 64 Also We need an option to kick out undesirable peoples from 2 seat vehicules like tanks a SIMILAR Platoon structure is needed for BF 2042 128 players modes

This is the one thing I haven't really seen anyone talk about. I have a lot of friends getting this game. After a year or so of playing BRs and constantly telling friends "we're full", I was hoping with battlefield that wouldn't be the case again. They doubled the player cap but made the squad size less than BFV. Doesn't make any sense. Squad size should be 6-10 people.

i wish they add 6 or 8 player for squad

Bigger Squads - Conversations | EA Forums

153 Replies

AristarhUcolov2
4 years ago
@FreddyBensson
I liked how it was in Battlefield 2:
1 - Medic
2 - Support
3 - Sniper
4 - Engineer
5 - Assault
6 - Man with RPG
or all were doctors) and were treated :D for point or unlock gun or))))) medal. Ohhhh Gold Medal)))) Special Gun for Veteran Medic)
mathematics654
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
128 isn't divisible by 5, but it is divisible by 4, which make 32 squads of 4, if it was 5 then some players won't have a full squad, the next divisible number is 8, which is a way too large squad
Forkbeard84
4 years ago
OP, I agree with you. A five man squad would be much better than 4. You can usually see your squad mates easier on the map. And an extra medic or support is always nice to have on your team. And more spawn points possible with more squad members. All leading to a more helpful team. I vote for 5 man squads.
Forkbeard84
4 years ago
@mathematics654Haha, very good and living up to your name. Good point but I dont think its that critical for a completely perfect division of equal squads. As soon as one player locks a squad, the division problem changes randomly anyways. So let there possibly be one squad that is a little undermanned.

With squads of 5 players per squad, and assuming no one locks a squad, your actual chances of being in the 3 man left over squad are about 2 percent. Or one chance in 50. Worth the risk to have 5 men per squad.
EXILE157
New Adventurer
4 years ago
Yeah EA/DICE keeps going backward on that from a ( 6 man squad to 5 and now 4 ) it makes no sense, especially if you so call have 128 players in a massive map.
I mean I have family and friends that play together mostly family consist of 7, so now we have to break the platoon apart in order to play together and that's if we can play together on a server since we can't make a 6 man party from the start to go in at the same time and will it divide us due to lack of players as we're being thrown in blindly into servers.
Trokey66
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@mathematics654 wrote:
128 isn't divisible by 5, but it is divisible by 4, which make 32 squads of 4, if it was 5 then some players won't have a full squad, the next divisible number is 8, which is a way too large squad
Whilst yes this is sound in principle, as we saw in BFV, as soon as there is one undermanned locked squad, that principle goes out the window.
5 man squads is my preferred squad size.
Noodlesocks
4 years ago
As far as playing with more than 3 friends, I would hope with so many players in a server they would make it easier to identify friends. Even within a squad I've often found it difficult to differentiate my friend from the randoms. It would be nice if friends had their own nametag colour whether they were in your squad or not.
Volvangor
4 years ago
I definitely agree, I can understand where dice is coming from, with divisibility and it may also be due to vehicle seat numbers, but I feel 5 was the perfect number in BF4.

Gotta consider it from a pre-game and post-game perspective too, instead of joining a game with only three friends you could join with 4, which is a really big issue, especially considering the sheer number of other players in the game. Having those comrades with you as you join changes the experience by a large amount.

Another way to put it is that the size of the squad is essentially a "soft-cap" on the number of friends you can play with, which can be quite a pain if you have community game nights or a clan or just a large number of friends you play with.

Now it's absurd to expect immediate changes, and i would very much like to see what the gameplay feels like in 2042 with the new squad size, but I expect it to be similar the same as playing with a squad of 4 in BF4, a little empty. (It's good to keep in mind that if the max squad size is 5 while you have 4, it does mean that chances are you will be entering firefights at a one-player disadvantage, at least with infantry. However, in BF4 I've rarely seen a squad with 4 players not immediately fill to 5, as people seem to want to squad-up as much as possible.)

Conversely, I think that any more than 6 players in a squad causes the "open-mic" effect where comms basically just becomes a mashed up mess of too many words by too many people, and squads of less than 4 are just lonely and quiet if the other players aren't both good friends.

TL,DR:
I hold my reservations till I experience some gameplay, but...
Less than 4 is too few, more than 6 is too many, therefore 5 is just right, so why change it dice?
Bluehydrax
4 years ago
Would rather them making it custom. So squad leader could pick a size of 3 - 8 for the team. Then if you are 6 people playing you could play six together.. or if it's the 3 of you. 3 player squad.

Would also help to reinforce a squad to a larger size if needed to hold an objective,
Such Ui was in the older battlefield. can't see why it couldn't be used now?
CyberDyme
4 years ago
@mathematics654 wrote:
128 isn't divisible by 5, but it is divisible by 4, which make 32 squads of 4, if it was 5 then some players won't have a full squad, the next divisible number is 8, which is a way too large squad
Come on @mathematics654 ,
Just put the max player count then to 120, and we could perfectly fine then have our 5-soldiers squads as we want ! ;o)
And its not really any solid excuse anyway for EA not to allow us more members in the squad.
Just think of BF4, where we had 5-man squads also, but 32 players in total on the team side. So yeah 2 players not in a full 5-man squad. And so what?
Many squads weren't even filling up anyway, as some deliberately broke away or sat up their own private squads with a few friends.