If EA doesn’t want to “KICK” people

It's super sad that there is no kick option and no auto-demote when a squad leader doesn't set orders. DICE why do you keep dropping the ball on these things? We had a perfect system and you keep trying to reinvent the wheel. You have to stop this.

Allow us to kick players from the squad, allow leaders who don't set orders to get demoted. Stop trying to change the working formula. 

Just stop it DICE. STOP.

I can see by some of the responses in this thread where people have an irrational response to being "kicked". They are governed by their emotions and it "feels bad" to them. In my opinion, these individuals are taking it as a personal offense when they shouldn't. To be fair, they probably can't control it.

Being kicked form the squad doesn't matter. You are still in the game, and can continue to play exactly the way you played before. And you can even join another squad. This isn't a friend group. These are random people out of thousands playing. You will probably never encounter them in real life. They have no impact on you whatsoever.

I guess DICE is worried about the negative emotions. I think DICE should not cater to this. It isn't helping and only making this sensitivity worse.

If it were really about preventing 'negative emotions' then Dice is not considering the negative emotions evoked on our end -- the PTFO players that want to be able to play together. If we kick some other player that will be automatically be assigned to another squad, then these players might not even realize they have been kicked. So no negative emotions to prevent on their end.

But for 3 of us we all have to 'suffer' a lot of negative emotions when we have to first create a new squad, then all join this squad (I hope it's at least an easy process of just clicking the names in the EA app or the online player list and say 'join squad of friend' instead of having to hunt through many squads to find the one the others are in.

And then there is the negative emotion of the player we left alone in her squad. So, 4x negative emotions without kick vs basically none if we can relocate players out of our squad and into any other that has free space.

PS: now that I think about it -- and also from what is evident from the backlash Dice received now -- it seems to me that the decision to NOT include a kick feature as describe above is PRECISELY done with the aim of causing as many negative emotions from the player base towards Dice. The same can be said about the initial decisions to NOT have all chat or to NOT have a proper scoreboard. Honestly, it seems to be intentional to cause as many negative emotions on our end. I cannot come up with any other reasonable explanation that would make sense (to me -- I am open to read one, either by any of you or even by any CM).

DICE has become disillusioned with reality and the very term PTFO .

A squad gets together to PTFO,  and when you have a rogue element ruining that PTFO, a Squad Leader should have the right to remove that individual from the squad and bring in another player who will stick to the PTFO Core and work with his Squad.

this entirely asinine realm of fictitious definitions DICE continually creates just causes even more backlash.  Almost to the point I think its being done with intent.

@AOD_CapStar362Exactly. This does nothing to help with PTFO. All it will do is encourage more uncooperative players to not PTFO. This bad decision puts the burden on the players who are PTFO. Since it requires them (not the uncooperative player) to dissassemble an otherwise functional squad and hope to somehow reform another one.

Straatford writes "...but for Battlefield 2042 we feel it does not promote healthy PTFO beahvior if you just kick or ban folks from your squad ..."

Then I would really like him or anyone at DICE to explain why this feature was in all previous Battlefield titles, and why the overall squad play with random players, in prior titles, was better. What is it that DICE feels is special about BF2042 that causes the kick feature to hinder PTFO?

I do not buy this explanation. I belive this decision was made because someone at EA/DICE feels that new players getting kicked might hurt player retention. And they consider it worth the risk of not giving veteran players what they need vs. what they perceived as a threat to player numbers.

---

@AOD_CapStar362 wrote:

DICE has become disillusioned with reality and the very term PTFO .

A squad gets together to PTFO,  and when you have a rogue element ruining that PTFO, a Squad Leader should have the right to remove that individual from the squad and bring in another player who will stick to the PTFO Core and work with his Squad.

this entirely asinine realm of fictitious definitions DICE continually creates just causes even more backlash.  Almost to the point I think its being done with intent.

---

Hence my post above about how it feels like someone is actually sabotaging from within/above.

Between poorly thought and poorly justified decisions and highly questionable totalitarian behavior towards some content creators.

In any case. I hope that they will see reason like they saw with AllChat.

I want this game to succeed even if it does so late. It worked with BF4

Battlefield is a war game and a squad is a military  division with a leader. If a member is insubordinate it is the normal thing to dismiss them to restore order and discipline. Kicking is a necessary part of squad management even if I avoid doing it if I can.

It makes no sense that the squatter is the one who gets to stay while the more serious players have to migrate to a new squad

---

@flcrm wrote:

---

@ForumUser  написал (-а):
@NazT55

It is really hard to believe how little Dice themselves now understand what are the basic elements of such a core feature like squad management are.

---

Incompetent figures almost finished off the game. They have learned the topic of team building and can lead everything in the world. True, not for long. Until the next project they lead fails.

---

@flcrm You can be critical of developer/publisher actions and of the direction of the game without insulting the devs. Keep terms like incompetent out of the discussion. Pro-tip, the devs are human so delivery of feedback matters. If your feedback is 100% valid and justified and you deliver it in a nice sandwich of "you're incompetent what were you thinking you should be fired" the devs will likely ignore your feedback. If you deliver your feedback in a measured and neutral tone such as "I saw you made this decision, I disagree and here is a solid a alternative direction that accomplishes your goal of "X"" your feedback is much more likely to be listened to instead of instantly binned. Devs get the negative version of feedback from social media on a constant basis so any time they hear measured feedback it's more likely to be considered.

Just a reminder to the entire thread that attacks against EA Employees and Developers is against both the forum rules https://answers.ea.com/t5/help/faqpage#welcome-user  and the EA User agreement under https://www.ea.com/legal/user-agreement Section 6 Rules of Conduct so please avoid doing so.

---

@ragnarok013 wrote:

If your feedback is 100% valid and justified and you deliver it in a nice sandwich of "you're incompetent what were you thinking you should be fired" the devs will likely ignore your feedback. If you deliver your feedback in a measured and neutral tone such as "I saw you made this decision, I disagree and here is a solid a alternative direction that accomplishes your goal of "X"" your feedback is much more likely to be listened to instead of instantly binned.

---

Agreed to the first part, but strongly disagreed with the second. As has just been proven several times in the VERY recent past.

Regardless of HOW you deliver your feedback, your will be ignored. The difference is not that you will either be 'ignored' or 'listened to', but more likely 'ignored and banned for sustained harassment' vs just 'ignored'.

That is a very sad state of affairs.