Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. PR people seem less inclined to work for a common compromise to appeal to a broader audience (myself included). I'm getting the feeling that they want to remain in their own segregated community pushing everyone else away. The general consensus is that current state of Squad does not represent that of what PR is in regards to features, mechanics, etc...Examples of this can be seen all over the forums... I'm not the type to stop playing just because they change things. I can adapt. I just wish other would too for the sake of good enough compromise that will appeal to everyone that is all.
  2. I like it though. Especially, like you said, in regards to HAB placement. First thing that comes to mind is trying to place a HAB in a building on Basrah for example and ensuring exists of HAB are all usable. If this is implemented and the HAB is half way built only using half of the construction points then only half of those construction points would be lost if the HAB needs to be repositioned. So yeah I like it why not
  3. hmmm, is there a possibility of exploit with this?
  4. @Gnalvl I'm under the impression you must be comparing Regular mode & HC mode to that of past games like BF or RO2 or whatever else have you. Don't. Squad devs are capable of providing an equally challenging Regular mode to what squad is right now (V10) by not changing anything. So to put it in even simpler terms -> The regular mode would be what Squad is right now right now....right now....go into the game and that's your "regular mode"....V10....get it? HC mode on the other hand would cater to those who wants disabled RP's, even slower pace, removal of HUD, tweaks to respawning mechanics....etc...
  5. That's fine, everyone has their own opinion and I respect that. I still think adding a HC mode would not split the community. There seems to be this "veteran" status given to PR players and rightfully so but just looking at some of the threads opened on the forums it looks like some PR players currently on squad are doing just that (splitting the community):
  6. 1. We are all earning from the game's success. It seems logical that the devs are paid money to work full time on the on-going development of the game. If there's no more support due to lack of funds then we all lose. No one will be paid to listen to our cries. 2. Just because you're from a part of the world with a smaller community (you didn't specify) doesn't seem fair to completely disregard the majority of players, by a large margin, who are from north america and UK/Europe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here... 3. I'm not going to respond to that. lol smh... 4. Who said anything about "toning down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals"? You misread what I wrote. By adding a hardcore mode, as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore, you're giving options to players as opposed to taking options away. Would it bother you that much seeing regular mode servers listed on the browser next to your favorite hardcore ones? Just don't play on regular mode server lol it's that simple... As a noted FYI: I will happily play on regular mode with "casuals". At least I won't have to listen to a know-it-all (not you @Vegetal I'm referring to a type of squad player we often see) tacticool top dog super competitive 2000 hours in game 5-star general screaming at me and other SL's because we're trying to play the game TO HAVE FUN and win our way instead of his.....Let those people play in hardcore server away from me and the casuals. I have little time to play nowadays and being able to hop into a game or two shouldn't be a chore and I shouldn't sacrifice my time playing this game for the sake of others who only want to be professional E-sport competitive hardcore mode...... We should all be able to enjoy squad.....you have your side of the court and I'll be on mine....
  7. Well because generally speaking, for a good product or service to work you want to make it in such way that it is inclusive and appeals to a broader audience. At it's current form (V10) it is more tactical-centric than other games but not quite as difficult of a learning curve as ARMA III. It is sitting right in between exactly how the devs want it. By adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore you're opening the door for a larger demographic that could pick up the game ($$$) to play in what is now regular mode V10 and could shape their mind to try out the hardcore mode that everyone here is apparently a fan of without even knowing what it entails, just theories and suggestions. Once players are properly introduced and acclimated in regular mode they may choose to step it up in the hardcore mode where all the tacticool pew pew top dogs will be mostly playing on. Regular mode + Hardcore mode: More people coming in (+$$$). Only Hardcore mode: Less people coming in (-$$$). I highly doubt players will purposefully not play hardcore if it's optional and not mandatory....anyone that throws a tantrum at the devs for adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game hardcore is honestly childish. I'm sorry...
  8. Overall immersion

    Gore body parts? There will be NO! gore added into this game but when modding becomes available fill free to get creative, join the discussion --> 'Here' I also believe destruction was discussed already and you're right it all ties into engine limitations.
  9. A hardcore mode will be interesting indeed. It will also give the devs some feedback as to which implementation is better suited for regular mode VS hardcore. Additionally it will create a contrast between players who just want to have fun and not necessarily role play to a T (regular mode) vs those who might want to step it up a notch and play the game to it's full tactical and competitive potential (hardcore). This suggestion might also help alleviate some of the stress new players are subjugated to by the more experienced players sometimes...
  10. Will Squad introduce airstrikes?

    Well balancing is very important in my opinion. But like I said, the developers can choose which vehicles are available to which faction on any given map. On a map layer that has 2 Conventional force fighting each other are both going to get aircraft and MBT. On a map layer that has 1 Conventional force fighting an Unconventional force, neither will get aircraft or MBT.
  11. Will Squad introduce airstrikes?

    By regular you mean Conventional forces right? Such as U.S. Army, RUSSIAN Army and soon the British Forces? The devs can also choose which vehicles are available on which map/layer. So on Al Basrah (U.S. VS INS) there won't be any aircraft or MBT available to the U.S. but on Fool's Road (U.S. VS RUSSIAN) they can for both Conventional forces.
  12. Total War | Chicago

    I had to watch it in full screen to get what you were trying to post...lol oh well @♠DEG♠ I'm fast like that

    I am 100% down for RHIB or even better amphibious beach landings from aircraft carriers....YAAASSS
  14. Please Fix the visibility.

  15. Please Fix the visibility.

    Dude you're giving off major vibes of dissatisfaction, to say the least, in regards to spotting. I agree with @Guan_Yu007 that it needs to be improved but only slightly. Having to rely on your squad to move together and work together is much more rewarding then a possible situation that can arise from a major buff, such as what you're suggesting here, where we'll see more lone wolves because they'll then be able to spot and engage without the help and support from their team mates. The more emphasis on squad movements to accomplish goals the better off the results. Stay close to your squad, communicate and engage targets that others have spotted and have fun. Also, suppression is a thing.