Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Han

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

231 profile views
  1. While I know this is the case in real life, like many things in squad, game play is valued over realism. If removing the serious infantry weapons from crewman make them less likely to abandon vehicles, then I think everyone should be for it.
  2. The way you say that makes it seem like you understand there are sometimes an infantry squad does and does not need a vehicle asset. But if they want one and do not intend on just ditching it when they are done with it (as usually happens), there will come a time that they no longer need it, so they have to take it somewhere it is not useful and potentially is a burden, likely to be destroyed at that point. This is why I believe a dedicated vehicle squad is better, because they can talk with other SL's to help them when they need it. Once the SL no longer needs them, they can easily communicate with another squad to go help them.
  3. The first part of what I wrote that you quoted was actually a point FOR vehicle squads. I mean communications for vehicles is that they cannot hear other SL's. It is easier for an APC/IFV to be their own driver gunner pair, with one being a SL, usually the driver. This allows them to communicate and work with all squads instead of just one. I agree, the APC/IFV current squads do not do a good job at making themselves available as transport. When I SL as a vehicle squad, I immediately ask other squads if they want transport to an objective. Once we get there, I work closely with them to engage the enemy armor, then infantry on the objective. Then they load back in and we move on to the next objective. The benefit of us being in our own squad is that we can communicate with all squads and hear the call outs for other enemy vehicles. I usually ask the other SL's to do this at the beginning of the round. The success of vehicle squads is pretty dependent on how communicative SL's are on the command channel. It is not easier to take out enemy armor with comms to the infantry and it is not best for vehicles to be where infantry should. Infantry should be inside the cap, fighting in buildings. APC/IFV's should be off the cap, shooting onto it taking advantage of their range. APC/IFV's are very unsafe in cap zones that are contested, as enemy AT can maneuver around them with lots of hard cover to easily overwhelm and destroy them. When vehicles are engaging other enemy vehicles, the most useful thing an infantry squad can do is have the SL mark the location of the enemy vehicle. Infantry AT can do it's job without communicating to APC/IFV and the SL is really the only one they need to talk to.
  4. Personally I think the crewman should be changed to only have a knife, sidearm, bandage and binos. I will break down my reasoning for each part of the kit and why I believe it should or should not be part of their kit: Knife - Everyone should have it, it's not really effective but allows someone to technically continue fighting without ammo, at a highly reduced effectiveness. Bandage - Every soldier should be able to stabilize them self until a medic arrives. Binos - This allows the crewman to exit the vehicle and spot enemy infantry/vehicle targets for the gunner. I would only use this if very far away from the targets and hopefully in the future the diver can simply open their hatch to peek their head out and use their binos without exiting the vehicle. Until then, this is a good substitute. Sidearm - Along the lines of the knife, every soldier should be able to defend themselves. A simple handgun allows them to do so, but not so effectively that they can really participate in an infantry squad as infantry. They could kill someone who pushes their location, but they would really want to switch kits if they cannot use their vehicle any longer. Rifle - Crewman do not need this. A rifle makes them too effective and similar to a rifleman kit. If they exit a vehicle, they are essentially just as combat effective as a rifleman, which can make them too likely to abandon a vehicle and continue on as a crewman. Their kits are basically identical, only missing the barbed wire and sandbags I have yet to see people use. A kit used by infantry should have an advantage over the crewman in infantry combat. Grenades - This is similar to the rifle, they just don't need it for their role as a vehicle driver/gunner. Shovel - Crewman should not be building things, they should be focused on their vehicle. VRS's should be created by the infantry squads at the fob. My reasoning for these changes is to lock crewman into a vehicle driver/gunner role, and make them not want to get out of the vehicle. If they do get out of their vehicle, they should be a severely reduced combat effectiveness and want to change kits ASAP. If crewman had less equipment, they would be more likely to "go down with the ship" or drop the vehicle off at main or a fob, so they could change kits. Abandoning vehicles at these places is totally OK in my mind as they are places they can be repaired and other people can spawn there and use them.
  5. I'd say the communication problems are less with crewman hearing too much from infantry and more of not hearing other SL's that could use them more or be relaying relevant information to them. SL's have to relay them all this info over squad comms on top of all the orders and communications that is already happening, which does get confusing and adds an unnecessary layer of confusion.
  6. Yes, their priority should be the support of infantry, as it is infantry that can take flag/destroy caches and win the game. However, to do this they mainly do three things for them (they are also organized by priority): 1. Eliminate enemy armor - They do this way better than infantry and allow the infantry to focus on enemy infantry, a battle they are well equipped for. 2. Transport infantry - If infantry cannot get to an objective, they cannot take it. Vehicles can allow infantry to move quickly and safely to objectives. 3. Eliminate enemy infantry - While they can do this better than infantry in some situations, friendly infantry should be able to do this on their own. Vehicles can do task 3 better when their in an combined infantry and vehicle squad, but this is their last priority. In matches where forces with APC/IFV's are mostly engaging enemy infantry (usually conventional vs. insurgents), combined vehicle squads can work well. However, if it is a large map where the other team has heavy vehicles, they are better off being separate squads that work closely together, because they will spend most of their time doing tasks 1 & 2.
  7. I don't think it's their only purpose, but it is definitely their main priority once they get to an objective. They can do it way better than infantry and they cannot take objectives, so it is clear that it should be their main focus when there is another vehicle around. After a team has vehicle superiority on an objective, the vehicle squad can focus on taking out other enemy infantry in support of their teams infantry or transporting another squad somewhere.
  8. I think the main reason crewman is twofold, so that you don't end up with important kits driving/gunning vehicles and acting almost as a contract with those who take the kit that they will dedicate to the use of that vehicle. It reduces heavy vehicle assets from being left places abandoned and prevents your medic or AT from being the driver/gunner. On another note, I think they should remove the primary from crewman, so that they only have a pistol, knife and bandage. If you are taking this kit, you are going to either go down with the the vehicle, or drop it off somewhere to change kits (either main or a FOB), which is an OK place for it to be left. It will be near a spawn so that someone else can get it and use it if you no longer want it. Right now, they are our heaviest assets and will pretty much fill their role until MBT's are added. So we should pretty much treat them as such, except for they have the additional ability to transport troops. This can be done more effectively as a separate squad, as it allows the vehicle to transport many different infantry squads, instead of just the one they are attached to.
  9. I think the biggest problem with combined vehicle and infantry squads are that it's a lot for one SL to effectively manage both a heavy vehicle (APC/IFV) and 6 infantry. It's very convenient in the beginning when you need to leave base to get to an objective, that's when it saves everyone time instead of a full infantry squad waiting for a APC/IFV to come pick them up at main/a fob. Once you get to an objective though, it becomes a different story. The infantry will dismount and move onto the objective (which is always a structure or building of some kind that limits the movement of vehicles). This is when the SL gets out with the infantry and basically tells the two guys driving the APC/IFV to move off and support them at a distance. I know there may be cases where the SL is more involved with the whereabouts and orders of his vehicle, but most of the time the vehicle crew is on their own to a certain degree. The SL needs to worry more about supporting and guiding the infantry on to the point. This is the point where having an embedded vehicle crew becomes ineffective. The two crewman will communicate on local, worrying mainly about other vehicles and enemy infantry. They will inevitably have to listen to a lot of irrelevant infantry chatter on squad comms. They will not hear updates on the whereabouts of other enemy vehicles that other SL's will call out on the command channel, unless the SL relays it to them over comms. If another squad needs transport or is engaging another priority enemy vehicle, they will not know about it unless the SL relays it to them. Relaying the command channel over squad comms begins to fill it up with stuff that is only relevant to two guys in the squad. Also, this adds a delay to that info and a middleman that can potentially confuse things, especially when he's dealing with 6 other infantry needing orders, rally's and targets. Either way, one SL is usually spread too thin and either the infantry is held back because the SL spends too much time on ordering the vehicle and relaying info to them OR the vehicle gets underused by the squad and team itself, and cannot communicate with other squads. =================================================================================================================== This comes from my personal experience as both an SL and also as someone operating a vehicle in a combined infantry and heavy vehicle squad. I have had much more effective rounds as an infantry SL working with separate vehicle squads and as a vehicle squad separate, but working with, infantry. Combined infantry and vehicle squads can work, but it almost never works as effectively. As long as people are communicative on comms and mark targets on the map, it is far more effective for heavy vehicles to be in their own small squads. I personally think each IFV/APC should be a two man squad for them to be most effective. I would love to see mods where crewman have to be in their own squad, of no more than two people, a vehicle commander (Crewman SL) and another crewman. TL:DR: Vehicles are most effective and beneficial to the team if they are in a separate squad, but communicating to other SL's through marks and the command channel. The location, orders and priorities of vehicles are different from that of an infantry squad. P.S. Apologies if this seems very rant-y or too long. Just wanted to explain my reasoning/experiences well. I probably missed something or didn't properly explain something. I look forward to having constructive discussion with you all about this topic.
  10. Please do this. Anytime someone on here suggests something serious there's a lot of people who bitch saying that they're making everything too slow or making it un-fun. I think adding a small split like this in versions would allow players to try out both systems and find out what feels good to them. Maybe after awhile the dev's could look at what most people played and make that the default version. If they are both equally played than both modes could stay in.
  11. Disable ALL chat! PLEASE!

    Why do you need to communicate with the enemy team? I think the OP is just talking about All chat, not team or squad chat. Team chat is very useful, squad chat should be left in for those poor souls without mics. You should not be able to disable voice as a regular player. Maybe admins could mute someone's local if they're playing music, but then they can't cooperate and you might as well just kick them.
  12. battle royale mod for squad ? :)

    Please god no. This is not the game for that. While I'd like to see a battle royale with Squad's current shooting and movement mechanics (V10 feels so good), making a mod like this would give people the total wrong idea and bring the wrong crowd to squad. We already have enough CS players, don't need to bring the PUBG players too. P.S. Not saying I don't want people who have played PUBG to come play, they might play other games like Arma or EFT too. But the people who come from mainly CS and PUBG backgrounds do not have a good sense of teamwork or cohesion, and usually auto lock the marksman kit.
  13. Will we see jets in the future?

    Yes. As Squad grows, more and more modders come into it and so it's only a matter of time before some lunatic takes it upon himself to make them from scratch.
  14. Will Squad introduce airstrikes?

    Well if they're trying to be realistic, that's kind how it is. Most Insurgents don't have any way to retaliate against them. That new AA gun would be really hard to use effectively against a jet (also nobody would want to sit on it waiting for the strike to come). If its only something the US could use x amount per game, with a long cool down(~10-15 minutes), do you still think it would be unfair? I personally have had lots of games on Al Basrah where the Ins fob up gas station and mosque, and I think the US having some ability to punish them for digging it would be good. Also I think this is a good substitute until we get fixed wings, which is a loooong way out.
  15. Will we see jets in the future?

    Depends on where you look and who you ask. Recently it's been "not for a long time" though, but the image below is from the kick starter: Even though this is on the kick-starter page, so they technically promised it, lots of people flat up say no. I think that's a bad mindset to have. I'd say more like "in due time...." I think you can count on two things certainly: 1. If OWI doesn't do it, people will mod it in 2. Regardless of how they enter the game, it won't be for a looooong time (especially at the current rate things are taking) Basically if you're itching to fly fixed wing in Squad anytime soon, you're out of luck. Hopefully it won't be like that for rotary wing! (sorry heli biased lol)