Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kendo

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader
  1. Also some Map specific loading screens would be nice. Think BF2... it would really set the mood for the battle to come. Maybe even some trivia about the map, or even the game squad itself.
  2. The number of times I have ambushed an APC driving down a road with an RPG, only to see it roll to a gentle halt as the turret starts frantically swivelling about, searching for me, then kills me right before I have reloaded and drives off again is ridiculous. Its game breaking and immersion breaking. This system would change the meta in such situations to: Option A) Driver keeps going, knowing he has little chance of getting me in time before rocket no.2. In this situation, its fair enough: he couldn't defend himself so decided to flee, and I got a hit in on it which reduces its combat effectiveness. Effectively nerfed. Option B) Driver attempts to defend himself, takes an almost guaranteed 2nd rocket and is either toast or very close to death before he gets me. Better yet, the 2nd rocket would probably have come during the "blackout" phase, enabling me to simply lie still and slink away (reloading the RPG is extremely obvious and makes you easy to pick out of a bush). Again, effectively nerfed. This is an obvious improvement. This would also need to be implemented for entering/exiting vehicles. At the end of the day, its the same thing as switching seats, when you think about it. Not least because a "transition" timer only would mean that the meta for gunner->driver would just be "get out -> get in", and you are pretty much back to square one. When entering: character model disappears instantly (as now) to avoid you being shot during blackout sequence "unfairly" (although fairness is debatable as you made the call). However, you do not gain control again for roughly 1 or 2 seconds to simulate you taking up your position/fastening in/closing hatches etc. Blackout fades away as you regain control. This has the benefit of stopping someone instantly take over as driver (if the driver is killed in a techie for example) or gunner (in a Humvee for example, with a driver already in) and having no disruption to their effectiveness. When exiting: Same 1 or 2 seconds blackout delay (but your character model remains in the vehicle). Blackout goes away just as you appear outside the vehicle. Again for "fairness" reasons to stop players being easily picked off while in zombie mode, but this also has the added benefit of removing the vehicle combat cheese tactic of getting out just as your vehicle blows up. The driver can see the health status of his vehicle diminish to machinegun fire at an incredibly constant rate, allowing him (and the crew with good communication) perfect dismount timing to maximise damage exchanged before safely walking away from the burning wreck. This is BS, and undermines the a large part of destroying enemy vehicles if no crew is also lost. This also has the added benefit of helping to discourage "rapid dismounts". I think that a speed limit should be applied as stated here as well (not as a hard rule, but as damage/ragdoll if done at speed). The main benefit of the blackout and delay, however, is that it would also solve an extremely arcadey tactic of having 2 LATs (with rockets prepped before entering) being able to instantly dismount and take out an enemy APC at the very beginning of the armour duel. As this often happens with the APCs headbutting each other, a speed requirement for dismount would not be sufficient to discourage this tactic alone. Let alone the fact that any vehicle wanting to rapidly deploy troops would simply ram into a tree/wall/enemy armour (effectively stopping instantly) if there was only a speed restriction. That alone would not be enough, and would probably make things worse. We need the blackout and delay phase also. Fantastic idea and should be implemented asap. Fixes so many problems.
  3. One of the great things about Squad is the long, strategic matches that let you get settled into a battle and feel like you have a part to play. Too many games right now are quick, TDM style pointless cluster****s. Even in battlefield, if you stay at a particular objective for over 10 minutes, either the defending team win or the attacking team push through to the next area. However, one big problem that I have with squad stems from its more unique, slow and strategic approach. We have all been in the position of things going horribly wrong (maybe you lose that all-important FOB, or both Logi trucks got abushed and are now abandoned, or the enemy have vehicle superiority near your main base) and the game, at that stage, is completely unwinnable. This can sometimes happen within the first 10 minutes, and usually happens with even around 200 tickets to go. In most other games, that would be it, and the round would end. But in squad, it drags on, and on, and on, and on. To be clear, I don't need to win every round. So long as I can put up a good defence and have some input in the game, even if defeat is certain, its still a fun experience. I also know that ticket bleed helps end things faster, but sometimes the enemy do not wish to push all the way to your last flag. Sometimes its safer for them if they just sit and hold, slowly bleeding you down as you helplessly throw men at their superior defence just over the half way point. In this situation, you can often find yourself having to run from main (because vehicles are long lost behind enemy lines or because your MSRs are being camped by entrenched enemy armour). All in all, its a tedious affair and I find myself trying to loose as quickly as possible so that a fresh round can begin again, but this can take 30-40 minutes sometimes. At this stage, people start to drop like flies from one team, which only exacerbates the issue. SLs leave and the losing team (already with little hope) begins to turn into a circus. I would leave and find a new server myself, except I play with 4-6 friends most of the times and finding a good server and getting on the same team as each other is a tedious enough process already. To get involved in a round of squad is a big investment of time and effort that, when it goes smoothly, is extremely fun, win or lose... but when the game falls apart on you it saps a lot of our will to play. I don't know how you fix this without losing some of the strategic magic squad has, or still allowing for a comeback in those situations whereby it IS still possible to win. Moreover, even if there were a teamwide "vote to surrender" system, it would ruin the fun for the winning team who, just as they consolidate their positions, the round ends without them getting to exploit their hard work and organisation. I honestly don't know what you do to fix this...
  4. What kind of role do you see the MGs taking in squad? The closest comparison we can make to something already in game is the INS/Malitia RPK. This is the 7.62 variant of the RPK-74 (so roughly the same comparison to 5.56 and 7.62 NATO). *In game*, the RPK really only has an advantage up close with he greater stopping power, but it bleeds off very quickly, yielding to the 5.45 variant at longer ranges in terms of damage. *In real life*, however, the heavier bullet maintains decent stopping power out to further ranges, comparable to the lighter cartridge, and it is the *accuracy* (with bullet drop and velocity being much worse) that makes the heavier bullet more unwieldy for distant targets. Accuracy variations aren't really a big thing in squad yet... so I see why they have balanced things the way they have for now. Reference this video. The same balance "excuses" apply to the marksman kit. There is no getting around the fact that it is strange that they balance the heavier rounds to do less damage at range when fired from an automatic weapon, yet the inverse applies when fired from a marksman rifle, just because accuracy isn't a thing and they need a way of differentiating between cartridges. When the M240 and PKM get added, will we see them used for clearing buildings and CQB, with the LMGs reserved for longer range engagements because they do more damage? I certainly hope not... Weapon ballistics will always be a contentious topic, and I'm sure people will jump in with their experience/beliefs and disagree with the above. The less controversial point to make is that the bulkier design of the GPMGs should allow for more reliable operation when firing continuously. It is better suited to a support fire role and for area denial rather than short term suppression. However, because stoppages aren't (and will probably never be) a thing in squad, we don't have that to suggest a natural role for them either. So what good will they do in game?
  5. SPG techie should be equivalent to HAT

    Its true that INS and Militia have mines, IEDs and HAT already. Mines in particular can be devastating when used right (I'm sure we've all been on the receiving end of it -- especially on the Al Basrah Bridges). However, I daresay this is only the primary tactic *because* of the lack of any serious mounted solution, at least in part. Why bother spending all the time and effort placing a mine down (and to play the lottery for a kill), when you can mount up and go seeking the enemy? Maybe for MLG style matches, this would open up too many options for irregular forces to take out vehicles, *maybe*, but for pub matches with lower levels of organisation a more powerful SPG is sorely needed. Even then, a more beefy SPG is still incredibly vulnerable and can easily be countered with the appropriate tactics, no matter the style of play. It seems they have balanced the SPG to be more effective then a normal RPG by simply flattening its ballistic trajectory -- I have no idea if this is realistic or not, but such a thing could be changed if the rocket was more powerful. The way it is now is also jarring from an immersion point of view.
  6. "Ammo FOBs" Promote Unhealthy Gameplay

    As far as 'ammobags' go, I've already voiced a concern that it seems rather arcadey. Feel free to rip into me if you disagree after reading this. Thing is, the idea seems to be quite popular, as well as the devs having hinted at it. So lets discuss. As implemented in battlefield, they initially seem dodgy because what if someone needs more frags, a different member needs more 5.56, another one still needs a rocket, etc. Does only one person get to 'use' this ammo bag? This means that you get the situation of "hey, can I have some more 5.56 mags mate?" ... " No, sorry, I already gave LAT another rocket". Like, what? That would be very jarring, at least for me. What if, instead of a 'Merry Poppins' bag of whatever goodies you need but that is single use, the ammobearer class had a well defined selection of kit? For example, he may carry, say, 4 extra mags of 5.56, 2 spare frags, 2 spare smokes, a spare LAT tube and a few belts of 5.56 (or 7.62 if/when get the GPMG). That is enough to keep a firefight going, or help keep the squad combat effective for another engagement, right? But then you realise that, given that the ammo bearer has these things, would he not get to use them too? Does that mean ammo bearer effectively as an LAT tube, 3 or so frags, like 12 mags of 5.56 etc etc etc. He's a one man army then. That's gotta be wrong too. We'll have to see how CoreInventory works, but this is why I think an 'ammo sharing' system is the way to go. Do some members of your squad desperately need replenished? Why not do what you would in real life -- gather around and sort out who needs what and divide it up. Every soldier should be able to donate a magazine, or a bandage, or a frag etc. Every soldier should be every other mans 'ammo bearer'. This has got to be the simplest way forward, no? No 'ammo ex nihilo', just scarcity and sharing to get the job done. No "don't worry if you run out of something guys, I have whatever you need, just go nuts", but a collective sense of 'OK, we, as a squad, have X resources to use, lets put it all to its best use". Besides, we all know that ammo replen is, for the most part, barely a problem on the scale that would justify ammobags. Being totally honest here, we have to admit that it's pretty much just for the LAT kits, right? I mean, bandages do run out, sure, and some people do goose all of their primary ammo, sure, but resupplying right now is 99% of the time just to give the scout another mine or the LAT another rocket to get that pesky armour. I'm prepared to be completely wrong on this one, but I think its worth questioning, at least, what good a Merry Poppins bag or a walking armoury will do, without assuming off the bat that it would be at all.
  7. "Ammo FOBs" Promote Unhealthy Gameplay

    Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking. Moreover, making supply points recoverable from a FOB opens up a whole heap of gameplay scenarios, as well as making it less of a pain if you want to move the FOB, or wish another FOB had your supplies. An ammo spawner class would be pretty grim, imo. There are so many more subtle and intricate ways of doing that. The thing that's really got me impressed with offworld is their ability to resist making a game that is a mile wide, but only an inch deep.
  8. "Ammo FOBs" Promote Unhealthy Gameplay

    @protocol... No need to cause a ruckus from nothing. I was simply stating my opinion... sorry if it came across as a personal attack on you. 1) Individual tool, yes. Maybe I don't understand what you're saying. It seems like you're suggesting that an individual tool cannot be used to support the rest of the squad? I don't see how you could possibly mean that though, so I must be going wrong somewhere. I mean, LAT, grenadier and marksman can, in the right situations, support the squad more than a medic can. They don't call them fire support roles for nothing. 2) Magazines for what, every type of ammo your military uses? Also, if you're going to go down the route of a spare rocket (or even whole disposable tube?) then you would also reasonably expect explosives in there too, right? I mean, rockets are still explosives... larger than IEDs too for that matter. 3) Purpose of the thread is not that FOB ammo crates are useless, it is in fact the opposite. They're OP and cause this very odd meta because they are used too much, and somewhat 'cheaply'. Making this meta a role in the squad is, I suppose, one way to 'fix' it... 4) Of course 5) I'm not saying the ammo bearer class isn't legit either... I must have been completely incomprehensible above, sorry. What I'm saying is that he hasn't got a Merry Poppins bag. RPK gunner carries a bucket load of mags already, and I'm suggesting he should be able to share them. Don't see who's helping or hindering here... I thought we were just having a discussion.
  9. "Ammo FOBs" Promote Unhealthy Gameplay

    AR gets a bipod. I'm pretty sure that's gonna be a complete game changer. I, for one, am more of a fan of "ammo sharing" rather than "ammo creating". I think you can leave magical ammobags full of ATmines and Rockets and every type of bullet under the sun for Battlefield games. Much better to have an ability for every solder to donate a mag to a fellow squaddie if they have run out, provided they use the same ammunition. Otherwise, you'll end up with FOB ammocrates being pretty much useless. The frequency with which people die and respawn already keeps a basic trickle of ammo coming back into the squad. Multiplying this effect when the "ammobearer" class respawns so that he can then ALSO resupply another solider, every time, and regardless of whether its a marksman or LAT or Scout, gets a bit "arcade" and "Ammo ex nihilo" again.
  10. "Ammo FOBs" Promote Unhealthy Gameplay

    I would really like to hear what people think of this, especially if you can see why it would be rubbish. I totally agree. FOB placement should yield 0 ammo and 0 build points. Here is another video of just how ridiculous this can all get: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDPd2wA6fdo . Right now it makes little sense (where did it all come from?), it becomes the meta if exploited (see link) and promotes an arcadey way of playing. Fix?: IF one wanted to try the tactic shown in the video, there is one easy way of making it a) make sense, b) allow strategy but not exploits and c) allow for a more of a realistic or "roleplay-ish" way of doing things.. Moreover, this goes for FOB strategy in general. 1) Assume that all fobs are placed with 0 supplies of any kind when created. 2) The use of a logi vehicle then becomes necessary for that squad to create their ammo crates 3) NEW Feature required: allow logi vehicles to load back up the supplies that have been dumped at a FOB. (perhaps SL can hold Q when looking at the radio, like he does for F to unbuild... whatever) 4) A group of INS can take a logi-technical and drop a fob, place their mines and then take out the ammo crate and resupply, pack back up the FOB and move on. Benefits: 1) Logis would no longer be glorified delivery boys, but a crucial element of supplies mobility and allocation/reallocation of resources. 2) Logis will, on this tactic, atrophy resources until eventually a full resupply at main base is needed. 3) Destruction of the logi will render the squad unable to resupply and up a certain creek without a certain paddle. 4) Logis could be required to come and salvage a FOB under attack, quickly packing up what isn't bolted down and retreating. Tension, strategy etc... improved gameplay. "We almost have their FOB... digging now. WAIT they're trying to run -- Don't let that logi leave!" etc. 5) Added emergent gameplay elements, for example: Supply lines are being harassed at main and roads are heavily mined. You are losing logis. You have one near the front line by a fob that desperately needs ammo to defend itself. You have an unused FOB in the middle of the map, full of ammo and supplies that is no longer useful, but it is a useful safety net so you left it there for the HAB. Take the logi at the front and repurpose the supplies at the unused FOB. This has cost/benefit decision making, rather than just "get to main and have free supplies". It allows the enemy to follow your logi and find another FOB, if they are clever. Layers... Lots of layers. Possible drawback: - "what the hell I just put supplies here who stole all the supplies off my FOB?!?" This could be easily avoided though by requiring an SL to do it. Furthermore, this kind of 'problem' already exists with vehicle stealing, but somehow we all seem to get along just fine and cooperate.
  11. Warning before squad kick

    Fist thing is first, can we PLEASE move the button to "kick from squad" further away from the button to "promote to squad leader". Its actually quite funny when you think about it, but in the heat of battle when you're trying to get rid of the troll and you end up making him the squadleader.... well, no one is laughing then (except maybe the troll).
  12. Screen resolution problem

    Windows settings - Display - Scale and Layout - SET to 100% to fix scaling issues. I know you say its a resolution problem, but I thought mine was too before I tried this. You should at least be able to find the "apply " button again, hopefully. Note, I have had a similar problem on and off since getting into squad. Some days I have it, some days I don't. I like to leave my windows scaling on 125% as my screen is UDH and quite far away, but whenever squad gives me lemons I just change it to 100%, then can change it back later. The issue is not being able t press the "apply" button, as you say. Hope this works for you too.
  13. View on kids playing?

    Lots of people insta-kick if they hear a high pitched voice. This is more likely still when other "red flags" appear, like picking of marksman or if you start talking rubbish. If someone joined my squad and said "hey, I'm only a kid but I wont be annoying. What would you like me to do?", then he's already earned more confidence from me than most older squadmembers usually do. You'll be fighting peoples prejudices, but its easy to put them at ease if you are mature about it.
  14. British Faction: Optics and Ironsights

    So here's where we get a little hypothetical. As I understand it, the devs have already stated that they are tying to extend combat time -- reducing the "first shot accuracy" and so on. The work they are doing to draw out firefights and make weapons not 100% accurate is already underway. Combine this with the fact that we have already seen weapon zeroing (SO GOOD), then the "obvious benefit" to having a scope really becomes somewhat more debatable. ADS being quicker in Squad has also been commented on (particularly in reference to the new animations and when going prone so that ADS takes longer). Essentially, it is still very early days in terms of gameplay and balance mechanics and we will have a much better picture of things post v10. That being said, theres no reason why these systems could not be designed with faction differences like this in mind. You say that everyone having scopes would be OP? Well it can easily be made to not be OP. We'll have to see. All that aside, lets assume they use the SUSAT. That thing is big and right next to your face... probably takes up a large part of your FoV. Its also on an L85, which is the first Bullpup in the game -- if you are concerned about balance, just make reloads take 1.5x longer than the M4s and AKs. Boom, there's your realism and balance right there, working hand in hand for decent gameplay all round. Simply stating that "gameplay > realism" introduces a false dichotomy. These things aren't always competing principles guys... and, where they are in tension with each other, I will obviously admit that gameplay triumphs, as I said in Op, so we really don't need to keep repeating it.
  15. British Faction: Optics and Ironsights

    Exactly Frinz, its just one faction. It may help make them different than the Americans. Furthermore, consider the fact that factions like the Insurgents barely have any scopes at all. Iirc, I think it is only 1 (the marksman)? Of course gameplay before realism -- I pointed this out myself in the op. However these are not binary traits, being either fully realistic OR fully fun. Factions are already asymmetrical, and it enhances gameplay, no doubts about it. So why not?