• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Peerun

  • Rank
    Company XO

Recent Profile Visitors

347 profile views
  1. Even if none of the other things you mentioned are going to make it into the game - and they probably won't lbh - this little detail is very interesting and I think is something that could be worked with in Squad.
  2. Implying that there were no good games ever made before 60 fps became a thing.
  3. Then it's just a bottleneck. If it isn't the graphics, it has to be the number of calculations performed by the CPU, which I think doesn't change much(if at all) whatever the settings are. Also, the Recommended Specs list an i7, and I've never heard of min. specs being a guarantee for smooth 60 fps. Especially on a kickstarted early access game. Take it or leave it.
  4. No that's called an elemnt of suprise.
  5. Well the point is that, if you are on a winning streak, you shouldn't leave that second objective empty. It's not about chasing each other around. It's about having to mount a good defence, if you want to steamroll your way through the map. I don't see how you can achieve anything remotely similiar with conquest mode. It's not situational. And it is about territorial integrity - meaning that if you want to expand your territory rapidly, you should make sure that the enemies aren't behind your lines, disrupting the integrity I like your idea, though I think it might get a bit too slow. It would need a good balance between mapsize:playercount in any case.
  6. That just sounds like chaos and an endless tug of war to me, tbh.
  7. No it's not! You get to dodge rockets and run over unsuspecting enemies.
  8. Yeah, I would say you're doing this wrong. What you want is to set up on a flank, when your squad is attacking another squad and supress them from the side. That way you get a 3 effects. You supress the enemy. You don't attract attention to your squad. You expose the enemies to fire from 2 sides, which makes it harder for them to find proper cover. That said, as long as your SL hasn't said to hold fire, just shoot whenever you want - you bought the game, you can press LMB whenever you want, unless you're shooting at friendlies
  9. Sorry, I have no idea what you mean here. ^
  10. You mean drinking while playing?
  11. Why not have artillery as an asset in the main base, that you can use "manually"? Then you have to actually communicate with whoever is giving the coordinates to aim the thing. Stand it next to a repair station and give it 24 rounds that it can fire in 3 minutes, then has to reload/cooldown for 6-20 minutes or so. You could even have it towed by a humvee, in case the map is designed in such a way that the location of the main base prevents it from firing at certain areas. Question is, would you have it implemented in such a way that one person can operate it or do you require half a squad?
  12. I think that V9 and the animation overhaul will help with hit detection immensely. Not directly mind you, it has nothing to do with netcode, BUT at the moment there are many animations or to be more precise states of the player characters between animations, which lack a lot(or in some cases any) frames. What I mean is that you'll see a player suddenly jerk and change his rotation and position in an instant, while for example sprinting forward and suddenly pressing A or D in addition to W. Same goes for a lot of other animations and getting into/out of them and inbetween them, where there is just a visible lack of what I would call procedurality, of which a great improvement can be seen for instance on one of the teaser .gifs about the new animation system - specifically the one about the character turning his upper body. Hopefully the same progress will be made on changing stances as I believe that affects hitboxes quite a bit. A bit unrelated, it'd be intersting to see a difference between going to prone from standing up versus from a crouch and vice versa...
  13. Well I think I've got the solution and it's really simple. The basic philosophy is to fight fire with fire. So let me explain. You have 3 flags. Let's call them flag A, B and C. You have 2 teams. Team o and team +. o - A - B - C - + Match starts all flags are neutral, like always. (black) o - A - B - C - + After a little while, both teams cap their respective first flags, C and A. .o - A - B - C - + Blue "+" team has the upper hand and takes the middle flag, B. Now at this point, in the current game blue team would have an attack marker on A and a defense marker on B, right? BUT... What if the blue team had an attack marker on A and a defense marker on both B and C. So what happens, if the red team captures C, before B? Well they can't, but they can Neutralise it. o - A - B - C - + This in turn turns the A flag neutral and uncappable for the blue team. o - A - B - C - + A so-called double-neutral or stalemate. Now the only way for the blue team to capture the A flag is to get back the C flag, and not let the red team capture the B flag in the mean time. If they fail... o - A - B - C - + Now the cards are shifted. Provided that the red team can secure the A flag, before the blue team caps the B flag, this is what happens. o - A - B - C - + Red team gets both A and B flags. Blue team gets a second chance to secure the C flag now. Let's say they do. o - A - B - C - + And let's add another flag... o - A - B - C - D - + The D flag is underlined, because it's completely immune to any actions of the red team. Why? The reason why the blue team has only one defensive flags and the red team two, is because the red team is on the offensive. They took two flags, A and B, in a row. If the red team lost the B flag now, both teams would have only one defensive flag. And this is pretty much the whole point. If you keep taking flags, uninterrupted - such as when you rush the last flag and cap objectives as you hold the other team on their first - the team losing these flags gets a bonus opportunity: a second flag to attack. This obviously relies on one thing in particular - to work. The very first flag of either team must be pre-capped; like on Kohat, for example. This ensures, that even, if the enemy is able to deny your second flag long enough to cap all the others - once he seizes even the flag that he's been denying you - there is still the first flag to initiate the above illustrated system of double defensive. Therefore the conditions of one team(let's say your team) having two defensive flags would need to be as follows: You've capped atleast 2 flags in a row AND one of these flags directly connects to a flag held by the enemy. In conclusion, this mechanic wouldn't nerf rush&deny to hell, but still give the rushed team some bonus in initiative with the rushers having to split forces or risk losing 2 flags at once. Of course, if the rushed team does capitalize on this as much as they can and do take 2 flags at once, they now become the ones with 2 flags to defend - so it goes both ways, if you try to "abuse" it. tl;dr 404