Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lutz_Persn

  • Rank
    Squad Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Tromsø, Norway
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

956 profile views
  1. Alpha 9.6 Released

    So, the respawn-rearm "trick" is obviously still occurring at present moment. Which means that the current logistics (and spawn) features and mechanics haven't really solved the problem. Implying that the cause might lie elsewhere than in merely having or not having initially embedded resources in a single FOB placement. Perhaps if all special weaponry/equipment needed to be supplied and armed with every spawn (excluding the base rig, rifle, grenades, etc.), you'd get rid of that problem. But otherwise, if spawns costs resources, it might deter enough. In any case, there must be a slight degree of time consumption when rearming. The whole process needs to weigh enough so that you take it into account and consider it in your planning. Otherwise, what's the point of having logistics at all? If you can just produce industrial resources on the spot, independently of the entire machine, then will it not defeat the core principles of Squad? Namely, teamwork, strategy, and tactics, in the context of battle authenticity. And just to point out, these are things which are time consuming, either way. If people don't like that, then perhaps Squad is not the correct game for them?
  2. Alpha 9.6 Released

    I'm with you, man! A more dynamic and customizable HUD seems appropriate. And there really is no reason to not implement flexible HUD customization options, if there are enough resources to do so, of course.
  3. Alpha 9.6 Released

    Great update, OWI! I'm excited to see it in action! Yeah, I second this. It sort of makes the kit resupply/request cost slightly redundant as well, since you can simply take down and establish new FOBs willy-nilly. It hasn't really eliminated the equipment spamming, just made it a bit more inconvenient (which I assume was partly the reason for implementing it). To add, the FOB (and the RP) should also be a deployable that needs to be built. Those two are the only deployables which posits an entirely different placement rule from the rest. Why is that? I reckon simplicity and cooperation, but it could be argued that it rather complicates more. If you instead keep them part of the overall material placement rule (needs to be built), the logic would be more consistent and you wouldn't need an extra layer of rules to remember - except that only an SL can and is required to place it, and that it needs to be built. It would seem that it removes the artificial dependence of the in-proximity rule, and raises a more essential, physical, and vulnerable dependence (between SLs and SMs). And, well, it's actually simpler. But hey, I might be wrong!
  4. Announcement: Alpha 9 Features & Changelog

    And I'm not arguing for any of it to be implemented. Just pointing out various alternatives.
  5. Announcement: Alpha 9 Features & Changelog

    No, not really. If there's already a gunner in place, he'll keep his slot until he himself leaves (or is releaved by SL). Which means that the driver can exit the vehicle while there's a gunner in place. If the driver were to die while outside the vehicle, then the gunner can hop into driver's slot - but he can't jump back in to the gunner slot. If you want to make it more complex, you can surely make a function where the vehicle slots "recognizes" their respective occupants so that driver and gunner can exit vehicle simultaneously, but will be returned to their slots upon re-entering the vehicle. Or, you could have vehicle crew roles which unlock these positions by default. Gunner can gun and driver drive; Gunner can drive but driver can't gun. Certainly, these are not the only alternatives, of course.
  6. Announcement: Alpha 9 Features & Changelog

    If you wanna restrict vehicles being one-manned, you could open up slots in the vehicle serially. In the BTR, for example, you'd need someone in the driver slot before unlocking the gunner slot. Very much like how roles are being unlocked, currently. So, if there's nobody in slot 1, slot 2 remains locked and unusable.
  7. Rushing - The Game Changer

    A bit off-topic, but concerning the RPs... An alternative could be to give each RP the same amount of spawns as members in your squad, and each member get one use. After that, they'll have to wait for a new RP. Or, you could make the RP into a "ticket container" that has to be filled up at a FOB as the contained tickets are being used up.
  8. Rushing - The Game Changer

    I did enjoy the rush tactic for a bit but, it's gotten a bit silly at this point, seeing as the majority of fights carries out like that. Not saying it should be taken out or anything, just that it'd be great if it weren't the only way fights turn out. Besides, with the current logistical system, it's heavily encouraged due to infinite respawns and few limitations or penalties. Resource management needs to be more than just a means to an end, but, that's probably another topic. Nevertheless, randomization of control points or areas, coupled with a fog-of-war, where each CP is discovered either by adjacency or by visual confirmation, could go a long way to make fights more uncertain and ambiguous and, thus, demanding a higher situational awareness, more communication, and a wider space of strategical thinking rather than a memorization and refinement of one single pattern.
  9. August 2016 Monthly Recap

    By RoyAwesome on Reddit: "Can't answer timeframe questions. This is not something you make constant progress on and will eventually finish after a set timeframe. The issue is that when you load a new map, some of the terrain tiles fail to load the physical material, so that when objects want to do things based on the physical material (like wheel effects, footsteps, etc), your client crashes. This is why it doesn't crash right away when the map loads, but when the match starts, as that is when all the objects spawn in that need to query the physical material of the terrain they are on top of. Why it's happening? Not 100% sure. We thought it was a broken terrain material (since one of the material nodes broke in 4.12), but after fixing it the crash persists. Right now we are playing around with the dirt physmat and trying to force it to not crash when it comes up with an invalid physmat. If that works, we'll probably push the patch live and investigate the real cause."
  10. @Kalith, just found some time to check the game files with the UE4 viewer and it seems that it's not compatible with the 7.2 version of Squad, so I can't get to the map markers' files and view them nor export them into .TGA files. I suspect the easiest workaround then is to simply take screenshots containing all the markers. If you're still looking for those screenshots I can take them for you during the day?
  11. I can look around in the game files for you when I get the time, otherwise I'd be happy to assist you with screenshots.
  12. @Kalith, it is possible to extract the in-game map images from the asset files using a UE tool (can't remember on a whim what it's called). If I'm not mistaken, the same should be possible with the map-markers. TomNedry's thread on Hi-res maps should have a link to that tool. Of course, a workaround is to print screens of each marker while in-game and then edit and clean them with a photo program. Though I reckon that is quite time consuming.
  13. Great stuff, man! I'll be sure to use this going forward. As for icons, if you were able to implement the same map-markers available to squad leaders that would be really neat.
  14. High Quality Graphics Config/ Settings

    Tried out the settings, along with SweetFX, and the gfx seems to "pop" out more. It looks more smooth, although I might have taken approximately 3-5 hits on FPS - perhaps more on certain maps and certain locations - so I'm experimenting a bit to find a good compromise. But I wondered, what exactly does disabling 'texturestreaming' do? Does it mean that all textures are pre-loaded, instead of rendered on the fly? Because load times seem to have increased slightly, often resulting in connection time outs. I've gotten a strange stutter as well, but that might be me playing around with the anisotropy settings and the SMAA.
  15. Agreed/Disagreed button

    An alternative could be to have a "response" button with varying options of which you can choose one, instead of a mere "like" button. I might not like or agree with your opinion, claim, or idea for example, but if I had the option of showing that I, say, acknowledge, or appreciate, or am in consideration of it, then the atmosphere could be made more objective in a disinterested sense and perhaps suppress the toxicity. Imagine for a second if someone called me a douchebag and I respond with "Considering"; I'm asking myself if this is true and what's involved in it - what is a 'douchebag' and am I one, as a fact? Ouch! Or, if I found the insult to either be funny or actually true, I could "Acknowledge" or "Appreciate" it. Or, I could directly challenge the claim and reply or simply remain silent, in which case the insult begins to erode on it's own.