Jump to content

Karl Martell

Member
  • Content count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Karl Martell

  • Rank
    Grunt
  1. More branches of service

    In my opinion there is no need to have every role in the game at any time. Fights can be focused on armor with many tanks or more on infantristic close combat and with that the amount of specialized roles can also vary. Noone says that e.g. combat engineers cant fight (neither in real life nor in game), they have the same weapons as the infantry and often fight side by side with them - also depending on the nation that deploys them. For a game like Squad it would be more than ok to give them more combat-capabilities as in most armies, e.g. compare them with the "Sturmpioniere" the Wehrmacht used. But a certain grade of specialization can require the whole team much more to communicate and coordinate and brings a more realistic feeling to a battle. I think you wouldnt even have to sacrifice a huge amount of simplicity. Besides that, when PR is so perfect, then why should anyone want to make a copy of it? Technological possibilities have changed, player interests, too, so why not change a few things without destroying the basic idea of PR/Sqad? This whole idea is more a thing to think about that one i want to have in the game as soon as possible, but nonetheless i think some specializations like reconaissance and demolition/mining/base building would be very cool and relatively easy to implement.
  2. More branches of service

    I really didn't want this thread to discuss the "grade of realism" of Squad, but personally i dont think that arma is a better milsim than squad, because it tries too hard and gets slow and overcomplicated, whereas squad brings a very realistic feeling of shooting, combat and tactical needs. I have not played Project Reality, i just have heard about it and i know this game wants to be its spiritual successor. That on the other hand does not necessarily mean that it will be exactly the same in every aspect. I know there are other threads, but for the MilEng branch for example the newest one i have found was older than a year, and a lot seems to have changed since then. So i wrote this one here and added some other ideas that i have come to as a soldier and a fan of Squad, which i became in the last days and weeks. I think the game has the exact grade of realism (and map size) to make combat engineering a very useful and fun component in combined arms combat, for combat bridges as well as for demolition, blocking, base building and mining. Drone usage is common among every modern army as far as i know, and i know it for sure for the German army: The german recon troops use at least 3 different kinds of recon drones as well as different radar technologies and scouting.
  3. Factions You Would Like To Play As Or Against

    I also really like the idea of aCi. Personally i would be really glad to have all major european forces in the game: Germany, France, Italy, UK, swiss would be very interesting, too, maybe Poland. I really cant see a problem with different uniforms: How do you think it works in real life, e.g. in the maneuver Saber Strike in Eastern Europe at the moment? Since the developers wont be able to implement every nation a thing like the really existing Eurocorps would be cool (http://www.eurocorps.org/). And i also cant see any problem with "racism", this is just bullshit. I would prefer to play the Bundeswehr, since i am German, but i would have fun, too when i would have to play the french army (yes, really ) or austria. Banter over different nations is pretty normal and has nothing to do with racism at all.
  4. More branches of service

    After playing squad since quite some hours now i have come to some thoughts: Until now you only can play dedicated infantry soldiers. But imagine how much variety there would be if we had some other classes. My experience so far is, that you never really know where there are enemies and how many. The real military has specialists for that, who have several drones, special vehicles and techniques: Recon troops. I dont think that would be too costly to develop and implement. Another great thing would be Combat engineers (as discussed in some older threads): There is a huge variety of tasks fulfilled by military engineers. Expecially for Squad there could be possibilities to lay and clear mines, to build specialized defences, to breach doors, walls etc. and to build bridges. A fight for a river can be a very complex and demanding task, which needs the collaboration of many different troops, beginning with reconnaissance, over fire support, infantry protection and of course engineer work. For a real military operation there would be of course a lot more different branches of service, like signals, artillery or logistics. As far as i know they want to implement the latter in the next update, but i think that should just be the beginning to have a real MilSim. Imagine a huge battle with 6 squads per team, of which there is one recon squad and one combat engineer squad, for example, scouting the battlefield with drones and laying mines and tank traps on strategically important positions, giving the players much more complex tasks than "take this village". What do you think?
  5. Looking for a Team? POST HERE

    Name: Karl Martell Steam Profile: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198010448718/ Primary Language(s): German and English Age (optional): 24 Timezone or Region: CET/MEZ Nature of Interest: MilSim, would love to not run around wildly shooting like in call of duty, but to play as a team with adult people, who know fair play and how to use military tactics. A German clan would be great, a European one would be good, too. Gaming Background: Playing since nearly 12 years, i love good simulations of all kind, i play or have played Insurgency, Arma II, but also many RTS-games Additional Skills: Have learnt what is important in combat when i was in the military, hope this can compensate my small experience with MilSim-games a bit Status: Signed
×