Jump to content

liamNL

Member
  • Content count

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About liamNL

  • Rank
    Platoon Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    The Netherlands

Recent Profile Visitors

829 profile views
  1. Turnout from Inside of Vehicle

    IMHO the ride ons were more commonplace in WW2 than in modern combat. Sure it would be nice to have but not really needed as much as in a ww2 game with limited amounts of transport.
  2. Shitty suggestion Nr. 462

    If it just becomes a fob you build then there is no harm in building a HAB. There is hardly ever a reason not build a HAB at an actual FOB.
  3. Fob disable mechanic is too OP

    Could you edit your post a bit? At the moment it just stands there like a wall blocking me from whatever is on the other side. Bit of nice formatting a white line here or there should solve it.
  4. ITT "people are already using discord, so let's make it so discord becomes almost mandatory" Seriously you don't fix people using discord by making it even worse to use in-game VOIP. For the moment people mostly use discord if they're playing with a friend. But if they add things like the enemy team hearing them what I expect to happen is that they will have discord and teamspeak servers linked to the game servers to avoid the other team hearing. And of course people shit talking each other in local chat because, it's people after all and they're anonymous so they don't care how they are perceived. Though the suggestion of adding a line said when reloading and throwing grenades and stuff might actually not be that bad. But it might need some mitigation for sneaky tactics like being able to silence yourself for a second to get the drop on enemies.
  5. 1. Giving one group of guys a significant advantage makes the game fun for them but makes it worse for the other team. And night layouts for the moment are broken by guys upping their Gamma. And variation isn't the problem it's that some guys get the cool toys to **** about with whilst the rest is stuck with normal gear. PR didn't have spec ops shite, the only spec ops in that game was if you got yourself organized with the assets available. Additionally the general gist of this game and PR is that we are playing frontline soldiers, not some spec ops behind the lines guys raiding supply lines (totally happens, instead of y'know sniping). Sure you can still do spec ops tactics but you shouldn't have better gear just because. 2. The argument was that some people won't get the chance to play with the cool toys, not that we should limit what gets added. You might want to play as spec ops special boys one round but it's always taken because their pcs got SSDs and you can't afford it. 3. This customisation is already in game so what is the problem then? 4. I squadlead enough to know you are wrong, and adding intentions to my words just makes you out to be a terrible person for projecting shit on others because they don't agree with you. The way you explained it in the initial post makes it seem like a normal AAS additive where some ****ers get high gear whilst the rest is ****ed. I have played simulation games and know what you mean with your latest post of scenarios and spec ops missions. But in my opinion those only work because they fight AI, whilst if you uptier one team with spec ops gear and the other is just normal infantry they just become targets for the other team to shoot instead of fight against. Additionally if spec ops squads were added to insurgency be that the whole team or just one or two squads. It would still suck balls to play the insurgents, just getting picked off by suppressed guys from 500 meters away and not being able to retaliate till they get close gets pretty freaking boring. Additionally just saying "your reasons for disliking your concept are bad" is in no way furthering any discussion whatsoever.
  6. check out this British vehicle

    It's actually a joint German and Dutch project. Though the UK and Australia are in the process of acquiring the vehicle. Though the UK and France were initially in the project they both left early to develop their own needs with France opting for the VBCI system instead.
  7. New faction S.L.A.

    Is it a good tingle or a bad tingle?
  8. New faction S.L.A.

    Well that is terribly specific. But I think a blanket faction such as the Middle Eastern Coalition from Battlefield 2 would work a lot better. As if you do one nation from the middle east they all want their own nation as a faction which means a lot more work for the devs. And if you truly want to see some geographically significant Lebanese people in the game then I suggest you assemble a team, and start outlining what the faction needs to be complete and then get on with it. If it gets up to a certain level of quality it might even be added to the game.
  9. Implementing AI in Squad and Why it's Necessary

    IMHO that just makes up a bit for a glaring flaw in your own team, if you need bots to defend your flags you don't have your priorities straight as a team. And you should send at least one full squad back to prevent the loss of the objective.
  10. Climb the radio towers

    Probably waiting on animations, or a ladder climbing system that doesn't just lock you with your arse hanging in the breeze gently coaxing the hostile to stick his long hard rifle up yo butt as you slide on down the ladder.
  11. Naming FOBS Stupid Idea Nr. 568

    While not a neccesary thing needed to enjoy the game, it does however add flavour and is relatively cheap on labour time and performance hogging. And it makes the world feel lived in instead of just being a blank canvas for us to shell to oblivion.
  12. While I do enjoy the notion of more factions and diverstiy in a battle I don't think having some guys play spec ops COD games is the answer. Hell there might even be griefers who teamkill spec ops squad members cause they didn't get in the squad and wanted to play with the cool OP guns. Though it would add more load times and more friendly fire as people with difficulty checking the map might not recognize the 20 different outfits your team has. On the topic of player customisation I have to say this: The military does not allow much customisation, a patch here or there sure but no different camo or weapon skins or what have you. Spec ops can customize weaponry depending on preference and choice but IMHO it doesnt have a proper place in Squad. So adding customisation while it might have some form of patches is mostly useless and makes people harder to differentiate from hostiles. Additionally locking better gear to squads just allows the more expensive PC players to take whatever they want and the rest is sitting with the scraps. Especially if the squadleader kicks everybody except his friends so he can play with them with their better gear. And on the topic of the game concepts: Though some would be fun and might even add variety in a dedicated PvE server kind of way, I don't think most of them work in a proper PvP enviroment. Especially spawning in hazards out of nowhere for one team to deal with whilst the other just trundles along just ties up resources for on the teams and makes the fighting more onesided. And to conclude: It seems you really want to get in to the spec ops power fantasy of having better gear and NVGs and shit whilst on special missions, but what I like in Squad and PR is that you're just some random grunt doing whatever your squad leader might think will help win the fight faster. Be this creating distractions for the enemy team or leading the frontal assault. And having these side objectives IMHO if they would be implemented should be player defined instead of just something the AI overlords say you should deal with. Like a commander marking a mortar emplacement and telling/asking a squad to take care of it. And the better gear for faster players or squad leaders and their friends just kicks the slower pc guys in the nuts because they can't afford more data or an SSD to boot faster and thus they rarely if ever get the chance to play with the cool toys in the box. Unless you set arbitrary limitations but those are shit.
  13. Implementing AI in Squad and Why it's Necessary

    Nice of you to link that shit, but could ya give me a timestamp of when he mentions AI? Or at least in what context. Like people have been clamoring for AI civies for ages to make insurgency interesting, or is it more have bot team to utterly curbstomp for your personal fetishes. Or go the Tannenberg aproach where the teams are full of bots and players take their places when they join the match.
  14. Solving the v12 Logistics Nightmare

    Long painfull drives however will be less to no problem at all with the advent of helicopter being able to zip around the battlefield dropping you supplies in quantity.
  15. Just a stupid thing to make orientation easier and make tons of dickjokes, allow the squadleader who places a fob to name it. It would allow people to make proper navigational remarks about fobs instead of just saying "Spawn in C4 fob" and just say "Spawn at FOB rogers left nipple" or "Spawn at Towers". It doesn't add anything so feel free to hate on it, just want to get it out of my idea before it becomes a tumour. So to sum it up: Pros: Better orientation No more "spawn grid fob" creativity injokes roleplaying for neets Cons: *** jokes galore doesnt add anything what are you talking about this is useless burn in hell.
×