Jump to content

Caliell

Member
  • Content count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Caliell

  • Rank
    Squad Leader
  1. New Map: Grozny

    Would be nice to have a developer give a comment on this suggestion. Grozny would be unique addition to the other urban maps. As I mentioned to make it truly unique experience the best option will be to create uneven teams as well with Rebels starting out with maybe one T-64 and perhaps one or two BTRs and numerous Technies, while RF forces starting out (to historical realism and fun) something like 4 T-72B3 tanks, 5 BTRs and only one or two Logi Ural truck(s). Obivously the fighting in urban terrain will be disadvantageous to the Armor, but that's what exactly happened.
  2. New Map: Grozny

    I think this map is long overdue, and it is unique in the fact that it is truly vertical king of the hill experience, and if true to its design, truly will be the best cqb experience of squad, with capture points being located around the center. Also preferably in AAS and assault mode Russian ground forces will start out with huge plethora of armor (since their main assault consisted of armor and mechanized infantry) while militia rebels will start out with plethora of technicals. This will create true to history experience, where rebels (in game setting up rogue HABs) seem to be popping from nowhere and everywhere, while Russian ground forces use armor and mechanized infantry in tight, urban combat.
  3. New Map: Grozny

    I believe this map is long overdue, specifically making it Militia vs Russian Ground Forces as the main fighting area. New Year's Eve assault on Grozny was the real Meat Grinder and Pyrrhic Victory for the Russian forces during the first Chechen War. The combat was in heavy/dense (even denser than Narva and Al Basrah) urban area and the map should be in the style of Russian (Chechen) weather with lots of mud and moderate amounts of snow with More Densely placed and partially destroyed Soviet Style buildings, with the center capture point the Chechen Parliament Building This will make for an interesting play, since this will be moderately dense urban map, with this high rise building serving as ideal CQB area of literal King of the Hill battle from bottom to the top, with several alternate routes through the building to get to it (capture point should be located in upper floors and the players on both teams will have to fight their way up, from multiple stairways located in the building or bring in buildable ladders to climb up through the holes in the ceilings. Notice the open area around this building, which will provide good play for the ground vehicles as fire support against defenders and due to the fight being in the city, it will also provide good cover against artillery and future helicopters in game for the balance sake.
  4. Body Armor

    Here are my two cents about "Reworking/Adding Body Armor into the game" from someone who used military (OTV of mid 2000s) and treated people with gun wounds. First all wearing body armor does not guarantee that you "wont be bleeding after being shot by the pistol" given that the body armor (highly likely ceramic) is destroyed, nor does it guarantee that you "wont be bleeding" if you got shot where those plates are not located at. Here is good rated +18 plus example. - Disclaimer not for fainthearted and by far (hopefully I wont get banned for this video, but it shows really good example that armor alone suddenly does not make you invincible, even though it also proves the point that this is how INS faction should be played). https://www.funker530.com/gopro-close-quarters-ambush-sc1/ This is video of Unarmored, Kurdish rebels (PKK) ambushing Turkish soldiers in full battle rattle with what definitely looks like equivalent of Level IV (at least level III) body armor. This in my opinion shows the point that In the way Squad developers got it (kind of) right. Body armor can either stop "Many Bullets" just like in real life, or it can fail after taking one shot (US Army's Mil Spec demands that all plates should be able to take at least 3 shots), but overall the video you linked above, the guy only got shot once and in controlled environment, than multiple times, where bullets can do some crazy things. In real life firefights (where squad is "Realistic) due to lead to air ratio (accurate superiority at the shortest period of time), the best body armor is "Not being shot at all." If you are being shot at your body armor, then things already gone horribly bad. That's the reality of combat and the body armor is designed to simply give you the fighting chance. It will eventually fail. And no: Metal plates are not actually better than ceramic plates either. They tend to bulge and spall (worse) in comparison to ceramic plates. That's why US military uses ceramic plates in comparison to Russian hybrids or full steel plates like AR500. I am not even talking about if the bullet entered a tad above the area covered by the plate at pectoral or abdominal area, then exited somewhere like armpit or even worse (I knew one soldier who died that way. - AK47 bullet entered above his SAPI plate, went through his shoulder, bounced off from the rear plate and hit aorta). This is my other point, to show how tricky it is to implement the body armor in the game. In real life, if someone who got shot into unarmored area, even with a pistol depending on his/her adrenaline level can either fight for a while, bleeding out at uncertain rate (realistically in Squad sometimes you don't even know you are bleeding to death), or drop due to the shock of pain. Thus developers kind of got it right. The current model of being killed in two to three shots (sometimes even 4 or 5) kind the best "Medium" between realism and arcade bullet sponging. Introducing body armor akin to ARMA 3 style is extremely difficult into this game. Perhaps the best solution would be to introduce before such thing, is realistic effects of the body armor and adrenaline level in the game. For example: if there a lot of gun fire and explosions going on around within certain range, then the player's adrenaline bar will be slowly filled up, eventually entering what is called "Reptilian Mode" where the player being shot (depending on damage) will not have debilitating effects. With adrenaline bars, also debilitating effects will have to be added into the game. For example being shot at the legs or lower torso will cause red screen (imitating grievous pain) and slow the player's movement akin to Counter - Strike. Surviving a shot to the head from a pistol or grenade, or long range small caliber bullet should cause slight concussion akin the one felt when the tank in Squad fires near you. Being shot in upper body should cause severe accuracy debilitation, especially if hit from the side. Overall to summarize: This is extremely complicated and I believe (as again repeating the mantra) Squad kind of got it right since in real life, body armor does not make you invincible especially if you got shot multiple times and no, one shot tests, even at point blank does not prove the point that the game suddenly should turn into "US and RF armies suddenly have more hit points."
  5. Realistic Tank aiming suggestions

    What is you describing is basically the same way M1 Abrams ballistic computer works (or for that matter of fact any modern main battle tank ballistic computer besides older versions of Russian T 72 series) as well and I believe realistic tank aiming and shooting should be in Squad. Why? Because in the future Offworld industries already mentioned that they wanted to add Heavy Anti tank Weapons such as Javelin, Metis and others. When such lethal and portable weapons will be introduced, Squad in game tanks will be on equal footing or even at worse situations on the maps that involve urban and mountainous combat (Al Bastrah, Narva, Logar Valley) (already at disadvantage with Kornet and TOW). Why? Because infantry can literally sneak up and fire on the tanks at their opportunity, while tanks are limited in mobility and firepower potential in such terrains due to highly uneven terrain and high amount of cover and concealment for infantry to fight such tanks. What currently Squad have in game is "Manual Aim targeting" that is used when digital systems on board of the modern battle tank fail.
  6. Limited Alpha 12 Test Oct 10th

    First of all I never said that American military vehicles are invincible, but to your mentioned point: So historically only one F117 that is no longer in service shot down and all because of the pilot's error (pilot opened bomb bays too early and got lighted up by the radar. - This flaw is fixed on latest 5th generation Stealth fighters by having bay open up only upon firing the ordinance). How many Russian made aircraft had been shot down in comparison during that time? How many historically American 4th generation aircraft in comparison to Russian 4th generation aircraft? Shooting down one F117 only once historically ever, does not mean that is suddenly it is shitty plane. Every military technology become total shit in the wrong hands. This especially seems with incompetent armies like Syrian Arab Army that have to be complimented with Russian Mercenaries, South Vietnamese Army during Vietnam, or Saudi Arabian Army. As for my argument for Abrams, the tank is definitely really good. The funny thing, one American aircraft had been shot down and Serbs acted like they already won the war. Saudi Army should be part of Benny Hill comedy shit show. Saudi Arabia is extremely rich, but it is ran on incompetence and corruption, which is the result of Saudi losses. The perfect highlight of Saudi Arabian promotion system for their officer is. - Be in good graces of the Saudi Royalty or be rich enough to buy your own rank. The latest Saudi Version of Abrams (VERY IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT SAUDI VERSION "M1A2S" NOT AMERICAN VERSION AND THERE IS HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AMERICAN ABRAMS AND SAUDI ABRAMS) was literally left on the open to be shot up, with Saudis establishing no barriers and no fire support nor overlapping sector positions to cover it. They also apparently did not set up emergency channels for QRF, Air support (their air support helicopter arrived late and just circled around miles way from the actual combat while Houthis danced all over that overran COP) or artillery strikes. Saudi Abrams crew wore NO BODY ARMOR and they PLACED NO SECONDARY WEAPONS ON THAT ABRAMS (That Saudi M1A2Saudi did not have any machine guns on the top of the turret). All American tank crews wear body armor as the standard practice. - This is not how you use the tank, especially in "Combined Arms" doctrine, which Saudis do not seem to understand. Tanks are not meant to be invincible machines by themselves. They are meant to work with supportive elements to be at their full potential, such as infantry or air support, while providing the ground support for other element akin to Roman Legionaire Testudo or Ancient Greek Phalanx formation.
  7. Limited Alpha 12 Test Oct 10th

    I don't know where you got your info at but I've personally saw Abrams survive driving over 500lb bomb buried in the road. For your information, during Operation Desert Storm AT minefields was the primary defense of Iraqi army against Abrams with hulled down T series tanks behind them. Abrams had no problems driving over those minefields, even without engineer plows. This is simply false statement that Abrams is poorly defended against mines. Also MRAPs main protection against IEDs is not primarily it's height but especially designed hull that diverts IED blast away from the main compartment, not to mention it is designed akin to Lego pieces to be easily replaced (if a wheel gets blown off for example, it can still drive on the other three) and the reality do you see those weird fat antennas on every American military vehicle? Ever wondered what do they do? Those are EW systems, that make IEDs activated by radio transmitter (by cellphone for example) or AT radio guided rockets have hard time destroying said vehicles. In real life insurgents even stopped using radio activated IEDs because of it and used either wire or close circuit trip pressure type of activation (not the weight but the tire pressure pushing the electric wires together to complete the circuit).
  8. Limited Alpha 12 Test Oct 10th

    Actually it is realistic that Abrams will survive 125mm shot to the rear. If that was such design flaw, Israelis for example would of never made Merkava tank with engine at the front. The problem with this thought is that false belief, especially spread by Russian vatnik propaganda that Abrams have exposed turbine engine at the rear. That is flawed thought. For one Abrams engine sits cradled behind angled plate with auxiliary power exhaust at the top of it that is seen. In Russia there been widely spread rumors that insurgents shot at that exhaust at Abrams rear and disabled American Abrams tanks left and right in Iraq. Only one rank had been disabled that way with RPG7 rocket and only because faulty fire suppression system failed to put out fire, which eventually spread and burned the tank. The worst most likely to happen if Abrams got shot to the rear of the hull is engine damage and if there is penetration of the engine compartment, is bringing Abrams to the mobility kill, with Abrams other systems still operational but either incapable of moving or temporarily moving before going into a halt. In such situations Abrams have hylon fire suppression system. Entire tank is designed to keep the most important part of it alive. - The crew unlike T series, where crew members are sitting on the pile of explosives. In fact rear hit from 125mm cannon is much more survivable, than the front, due to the Abrams crew being placed closer to the front and having armor between the engine and crew compartment as well. This is likely to happen to t72 as well, however how the ammo is stored in t72 series tank carousel system (Abrams uses separate compartment at the rear of the turret) and due to the fact is t72 rear is shorter, Jack in the Box effect is more likely to happen to t72b3 if Abrams shot t72B3 to the rear with its 120mm cannon. Also to mention the new 120mm APFDS rounds have greater velocity than 125mm cannon's APFDS of t72b3 and better penetration. While having bigger cannon can be better, but it also reduces round velocity. Generally to penetrate something you want to go faster and not be bigger, since velocity transfers more energy in joules and the size problem is offset by creating longer ammunition for the tank with more propellant.
  9. WTF with the cheating over?

    1) First of all you do realize in this game you can be killed through the walls? The damage is drastically lowered, but Squad at least tries to lean towards realistic ballistics a bit more and you can kill someone hiding behind obstacles, such as thin walls. Some of them are unrealistic though like RPG 7 and 25mm HE rounds, not being able to penetrate fences, but otherwise even small arms can do the damage through the walls in this game. 2) What do you expect when you throw smoke grenade and someone starts cheesing at you through the smoke? -That's pretty common tactic. I usually cheese the bushes, wooden and appartment buildings, through the smoke, especially when the medics throw those smoke grenades and run to pick up their downed teammates (just line up your rifle where the last you remembered their body and take sporadic shots. - Guaranteed to kill someone who is being revived). It takes about full magazine, but if you suspect someone hiding behind a corner of the window, you can usually take them down. 3) It would be nice to see the video if you caught someone cheating. I understand the complaints, but at times you also realize there are mechanics in the game that can look like cheating like your complaint "WTF GOT SHOT THROUGH THE WALL!" unless it was one of those thick brick walls that only 30mm cannon can go through , or you threw a smoke grenade and someone saw you running into it. - The last I checked smoke does not make good physical barriers against bullets. Cover and Concealment are two different things even though Cover can be Concealment.
  10. What would you like to see in Squad

    Currently I think the easies things that can be fixed is the ability to set or stabilized all weapons Rising Storm/Red Orchestra 2 style onto obstacles (getting tired of shooting sandbags) or at least adjust ADS level at the Full Sandbag Wall Window level. This is kind of retarded that you can build sandbag wall with an opening, that is not sized correctly for aiming down the sights through it, or the players are incapable of placing their weapons on the sandbags just like current bipod weapons work. Perhaps also adjust graphics level to Post Scriptum style, where there are shadows everywhere. The current graphics are getting abused. At lowest graphics Multicam of US Army and Brittish Army are the worst (Russian Army even worse). On high graphics Multicam is the best though as in real life.
  11. CAS, Jets & Helicopters

    That depends how creative squad developers are. I believe such things can be countered with: 1) New LAT/AA kit with MANPADS either with Stinger or Igla or Strela to counter BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT or SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH of SU-25. 2) Provide mobile spawn points that can be easily concealed (already made the post about it in suggestions, giving Insurgents mobile spawn point that looks like Bongo Truck or Bongo Bus and Militia to get Kamaz truck). 3) Providing vehicles like Pantsir 1 or Shilka for Russian Ground Forces and Avenger or Linebacker, or M113 with Vulcan cannon on the top of it for US Army.
  12. M4 burst mode

    I don't like it. Neither liked it in real life, with real m4, nor in game and Squad got it spot on that Burst Fire of M4 having that surprising kick to it due to how fast it fires. In full auto M4A1 can go through entire 30 magazine in less than 4 seconds. US Army did the right thing switching and upgrading to M4A1 variant (although now Russian army got better body armor and it looks like newer rifle is needed).
  13. Commander in every APC / IFV

    In the way, we might of won because the developers introducing M1A2 into the game as 4 man crew (Loader optional as 240 gunner) after my suggestion and I was surprised that they took the notice of it.
  14. Commander in every APC / IFV

    I already mentioned my person argument about this. - First of all it is pointless to make vehicle "arcadey(ish)" due to the fact that "useless mirror fogger" is quite rare with the average crew in the vast majority of matches running 2 man crew. However "FORCING" such "Arcade" mechanics on the players (such as me) who wish for realistic crew is also unreasonable and pointless. - Why? Because the tank with the full crew is much more effective than with 2 and with introduction of the crewman class, this is rare to see dedicated armored vehicles' crewman squad as is. The result? - Such fears of "more useless non infantry players" is completely unfound because this scenario is highly unlikely due to the vast majority of players, naturally grabbing infantry classes anyway. Why am I for Commander's seats? The reason for this, is simply adds more freedom of choice to the game of what you wish to do. The best games tend to be the ones with the more freedom of approach, which translates into "more room for having fun." There should be absolutely no reason for not having such options (such as commander) if they are already naturally do not cause any problems as you mention. In my 300 hours of Squad gameplay I had never seen the situation you described, where "everyone ran wildly for armored vehicles as useless crewmen, leaving good portion of the team without viable infantrymen." - At most I saw about 10 matches, where one or two locked squads of 3 people ran dedicated vehicle crew, which are not very common. The rest of the matches, surprisingly involved one man or two man crews. - However dumbing down vehicles to "Arcade Mode" will take out the effort vs reward part of the game, rewarding solo players with such vehicles, when they should require effort to operate. Therefore the freedom to 2 man and 4 man as the option on the side should always be there. If Squad will introduce 100 player severs as well (which seems to be the plan), this problem will be non existent anyway and fully crewed vehicles shouldn't cause any problems even with such scenario that very unlikely to happen and already with current (semi) "realistic" crew numbers, at least I and I would think majority of players can agree rarely if ever happened. "If it is not broke, don't fix it"
  15. I am not talking about playing as infantry, but as gunner, inside the vehicle. You completely misunderstood what I am talking about. This is not about infantry. This is about Gunner's position, specifically in the gunner's basket like MRAP or Humvee (no longer in the game) and the future Loader's position of M1A2. The post was about gunner's position and not infantry. In Battlefield 2, player could duck inside the vehicles, such as Humvee turret basket with the press of the key.
×