Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MultiSquid

  1. I think the chance of something like this happening in Squad is extremely slim, the same way enemies won't ever be able to hear your local comms. Not only would shutting down squad-squad comms go directly against the whole spirit of the game, it would drive people away from using the ingame comms and cause them to rely on 3rd party voice apps. Also, I think the commander absolutely has to be a bonus, a force multiplier, not a necessity in each and every game.
  2. Welcome to Duty Commander

    Seeing as we have two simultaneous commander threads and it's obviously confusing to the newcommers, I'm going to go ahead and lock this one in favor of the other, which has been going on for much longer and seems more active. It also contains most of what has already been discussed here. You can check out the older commander thread here: Please at least skim the whole thing before posting, it helps us avoid going in endless circles and talking about the same thing over and over again. /locked
  3. August 2018 Recap

    It's literally in the post you yourself quoted. I'll make it more obvious so you can't miss it this time: Please read posts thoroughly next time, I've never ever said we should be able to 1-man tanks. I've been objecting to having 3-man tanks. There's a difference.
  4. August 2018 Recap

    Who are you arguing with here? I guess there's just a lot of things lost in translation between us.
  5. August 2018 Recap

    Feels like most of the naysayers never tried playing PR. You know, the so-called predecessor to Squad, the game that was comfortably nestled at the sweet spot between arcade shooters and milsim games. The game that over 10 years of developement fleshed out most of its gameplay mechanics near to perfection, but somehow everybody just wants Squad to reinvent the wheel and be "different" from it. I find it funny that you guys acknowledge Squad isn't a milsim game and with the same breath you push for it to become one. There's no sense in bringing up real-life vehicle drivers as @Bahrein did earlier, they obviously have a much more engaging job than just pushing WASD, it's not even comparable. Comparison for the PR uninitiated, to clear things up: Battlefield model - driver drives, controls the main gun and coax, second player controls his own MG - arcade, doesn't need any cooperation between the two players, stop assuming I want this, thank you. Project Reality model - driver drives and has his own periscope with zoom, thus he can actively look for targets, second player controls the turret with coax, third player controls another MG and isn't really needed - this is what a compromise between realism and arcade looks like, and for me an ideal way to go about it. Driver and gunner have to cooperate and both have stuff to do at all times. Realistic model - driver is bored in his little compartment, gunner is having fun, commander is scanning for targets, loader is... loading? - this is unsuitable for Squad, obviously There's another reason why I don't want 3-man crews for tanks and it's the same as why 3-man helicopter crews make no sense: every player that's occupied crewing vehicles means one less player fighting over the objectives in an infantry squad, and infantry squads should be the vast majority of each team. Seems like a non-issue, right? What is Squid talking about, he damn crazy! Well, between the commander, multiple armored vehicle squads, mortars, transport and CAS pilots, we'll see less and less infantry until we come to a stage where we'll have to start backtracking and removing vehicles from the map layers. I'll be sure to remember this conversation when I'll see people complaining that they're struggling to find crews for the vehicles because it's boring as hell to drive and look through three narrow slits for 40 minutes. It's literally the same issue we've been having with people not wanting to play medics or doing logistics runs. Why should we keep introducing/perpetuating issues because "muh realism" - which isn't even the aim of Squad - instead of solving them?
  6. New/additional scoreboard information

    Kill feed is a no-no for me. So is pandering to CoD crowd for that matter.
  7. New/additional scoreboard information

    Easily remedied by displaying total tickets gained/lost for the entire squad, not individual players. Also what victimization are we talking about here? I hope you don't mean that a guy who wastes excessive amounts of tickets and directly causes his team to lose should feel safe in knowledge that nobody can ever find out his 5 deaths cost the team upwards of a 100 tickets because he's wasting vehicles? Tickets are a much better way to evaluate player performance than k/d or score (don't even get me started on score in Squad). Honestly, the only reason I can think of for not wanting to see tickets gained/lost is some people might be afraid to find out how little they amount to each round. 900th post! 100 more and I get a set of steak knives!
  8. This whole thread and several others revolving around commander can be simply ended by renaming the commander to something else. A UAV operator, intelligence officer, long-range recon dude, whatever. When we remove the wrongly percieved "need" for the guy to actually give orders to or have power over anyone instead of simply advising on enemy movement, there isn't much else left to discuss. /solved
  9. Ticket count

    A marginal change at best. People are not clicking the "give up" button by mistake, and I'm pretty sure a vast majority of them know that giving up costs 1 ticket. They're doing it because they want to get back into action, and they know the game simply doesn't penalize them for dying too often. Making the process of giving up take 2 clicks instead of 1 won't stop anybody either. The way to end this is to take away the advantage of constantly giving up - the faster spawn times.
  10. August 2018 Recap

    Spoken like a guy who always gets to be a gunner Realism is pretty much just a flavour in Squad, you can't really wave it around as if it's an argument on its own. It's been mentioned many times over the years by the developers that Squad is supposed to somewhere between the milsim and arcade shooters. What does that say about Squad, considering even all of the games we consider military simulators are still very unrealistic? Squad is akin to a movie that says "Inspired by real-life events." at the beginning - most people don't make the mistake of taking those movies for factual accounts of real-life events either.
  11. August 2018 Recap

    It just seems practical to give the commander's abilities to the driver then, instead of doing the seat-swapping back and forth.
  12. August 2018 Recap

    I'm still wondering about having the tanks with 3 crewmen instead of 2. Will the driver have something to besides staring out of the narrow slits in front of him and twiddling his thumbs when the tank is stationary? Driving armored vehicles is already kinda boring, I imagine it will only feel worse when you'll have one more person in the vehicle that's actually doing something interesting while you as a driver are just waiting for a command to move.
  13. Co-op PR style?

    The important difference here is that nobody ever promised we'd get bots in Squad as far as I know, nor was Squad ever advertised as LAN-friendly. There's nothing preventing you from playing with your friends online, I don't see a problem here unless you just don't want to play with other people on your team, but that kinda goes against the whole concept of the game. I wouldn't underestimate the modders either, I'm sure they can come up with something, I just don't see the point of having bots in Squad.
  14. Weapon Variation

    But... but... I like SKS.
  15. Ticket count

    People not knowing when they'll bleed out is not the reason why many of them rather give up than wait for a medic, and a lot of players simply don't give a damn about tickets. Persistent ammo might help some, but I don't think it's going to be enough, not by a long shot. Unless either the spawn times are significantly increased or the give up button is locked for a certain time period after getting into the wounded state, I'm afraid we're never going to get rid of the instant giver-uppers.
  16. Price

    Yes, but for a hacker there's a marked difference between buying multiple copies of a 5€ game and a 60€ game. If you were a developer and accepted the fact that there always are and will be hackers, would you have them pay less or more for your game?
  17. Sun & Compass

    Don't you think it would be more practical just to move the sun?
  18. Price

    I think you'll find that Squad even at its current state offers years of fun (frustration (...gameplay)), and the developement isn't even close to an end. You get your money's worth several times over, compared to most other FPS games which tend to last maybe until the first DLC drops. Also let's not forget lowering the price usually also leads to increased number of hackers, nobody wants that, right?
  19. Farm 51 - World War 3

    I was convinced I've been watching a BF4 montage until the very end
  20. Sun & Compass

    Check with your local sun at about lunchtime today I think you'd need to be close to the equator in order to see sun rise and set to your east and west respectively.
  21. The pitfall that is community feedback

    Why are you so sure this was a minority pushing for the rush meta to end? You don't mean to tell me the majority of players actually enjoyed the rushing?
  22. The pitfall that is community feedback

    I've seen tons of bad ideas over the time I've spent here and I'm pleased to report none of them actually made it into the game. I'd say the dev team is looking pretty solid as far as their integrity is concerned. Judging by the amount of "I don't like this and that" threads we get every time new features are announced, I'd say they actually push against a wall quite often. People on the internet are entitled to their likes and dislikes, doesn't mean it has any effect on the developement.
  23. Squad vs Insurgency

    No idea, /moved.
  24. BE the CHANGE that you WANT to see in SQUAD

    No. You're in a thread that's literally about with how useless the players can be in Squad and how that needs to change, and you're talking about giving one player the ability to ruin the round for the rest of his team. The same thing came up when we were talking about commanders, we simply cannot give one person too much power, not in public games anyway. Ironically, this would work just fine in organized clan matches and servers with series of strict rules and active admins - both of which you seem to dislike as I recall. What exactly do the stats tell anybody about anybody? How would you quantify the amount of knowledge a player has about maps and gameplay mechanics? How would you determine a stat for a great teamplayer? A guy who communicates well? All of these skills play a large role in Squad and their presence or absence can easily make or break rounds. Instead of promoting them, stats diminish their importance in favor of drooling over one's k/d and win ratio because let's face it - those would be looked at the most often. A player with great k/d might just be a mortar hog who doesn't die often, a great vehicle gunner or a lonewolf who likes to camp irrelevant places on the map, not really helping his team other than with a few tickets gained. But would you rely on him to cover your back in close combat and storm a flag? A player with 90% win ratio might well be the most useless guy in the game, but he's friends with 'pros' and gets carried all the time, or maybe he just likes switching to the winning team before the round ends. Would you feel better having him on your team? A guy who lost a horrendous amount of FOBs he placed might have placed them well, but his teams were clueless and couldn't capitalize on the opportunity he provided. Would you leave his squad in favor of joining the 90% guy, because the latter tends to win more often? What I'm trying to illustrate here is that a lot of things in Squad do not depend on any one player, but on groups of players working together and there's often nothing one guy can do to win if the team just isn't working. Stats are thus extremely misleading, especially in a game like Squad where the teams are large and personal achievements of any individual player often don't matter. I'm okay with stats in CS - if you're one person in a 5-man team, you have to pull your weight, but one player in a 40-man team doesn't nearly have the impact to justify judging him on his stats.
  25. Regarding suppression and optic machineguns.

    Then perhaps you didn't read his posts thoroughly. Right in the OP he's claiming that the MGs are dominating the game and calling for a nerf.