Jump to content

Caliell

Member
  • Content count

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Caliell

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader
  1. 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).
  2. 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.
  3. 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"
  4. 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.
  5. Commander in every APC / IFV

    Indeed it is and I am Russian by the way. Ironically Russian who served in US military (lulz).
  6. Actually it was that, except in Battlefield 2 as I remember it was Z key (same for prone) to hold down to dive inside the tank. In either case, Squad should of already had that feature since from what I heard the engine is borrowed of Battlefield 2 and PR.
  7. Commander in every APC / IFV

    The reason why I mentioned that, you have to look for what BTR series and Stryker series are designed for. BTR (Bronetrasporter in Russian) translates literally to "APC carrier" with the base Stryker IFV model seem to be the same. - However the deviation in those "analogs" comes down to that BTR was meant to be amphibious and swift. Yes, it is true any vehicle can be the death trap, but Stryker's Double V hull and slat armor, specifically designed to tackle IED problems is "definitely less of the death trap."
  8. 1. You literally pointed out the problem I wrote about. Just to mention on the side, I spent 3 years with .50 cal in the army and even today I could take it apart with the blind fold and even set headspace and timing. Machine gunner that does not remember if he/she chambered is either Alzheimer's patient or never received the training on the heavy machine gun (highly doubtful, since in my unit even cooks had to qualify on .50 cal gunnery). I get the point of chambering when first getting into gunners position, but it is simply asinine needlessly pulling charging handle every time you get off and get back into it. Yes, it is annoying during firefights, especially with the turret seem to be always facing some other way on its own once you leave it. 2. "Somali Style" describes blind fire type of shooting, highly prevalent with insurgents and Arab armies, where they would stuck automatic weapons over the cover without the aim and hold that trigger till black. However, it also applies to heavy machine guns, where you should be able to duck into the turret well, will holding the trigger down. In real life, those gunner baskets in the Squad though are also usually reinforced by extra panels with steel plates, with bullet proof glass on three sides. 3. My gripe isn't with "straight through penetration deviation", (even though there is no substantial deviation, especially with NATO .308 since those doors are so flimsy, you could bend some of them with the good kick. I am not even talking about shitty unarmored technical doors) but the fact that the damage through such doors at times is laughable. Are you telling me that 25mm High explosive cannon, cannot penetrate flimsy fence walls, or RPG 7 cannot penetrate and kill someone behind aluminum fence or flat board wall? Or for the fact that you have to cheese unarmored vehicle compartment before getting any visible results (excluding passengers sitting in the open cargo compartment), or AP 25mm and 30 mm are not one shot kills through walls? The ultimate icing in the cake, have you tried to shoot someone through the glass window in the game, only for it to act as bulletproof invisible wall? Try that with any parked Lada/Ghiguli in game or for that fact any glass window in the building. The ballistics deviation part is agreeable on and I had killed players in Al Basrah by cheesing apparent walls on the lips of the windows, but it seems that the damage was miniscule. It seemed like it took me 30 round magazine. Furthermore AT rockets don't seem to have penetration mechanics at all. - Anyone hiding behind picket fence, hugging it and being shot with any explosives seems to be immune. Damage for 25mm and 30mm AP seems to be lowered as well, at least by more than half and HE rounds don't even seem to be able to penetrate anything. If such large round was shot through the wall with someone hiding inside, the spall and debris on the other side would of created literal shotgun with pieces of the house towards unfortunate victim, not to mention list of other problems.
  9. Commander in every APC / IFV

    real life BTR is kind of death trap. Because of it Russian soldiers, in fact used to right on the top of them, which I find to be surprisingly not an option in the game (probably because of the balance issues of making troop transports useless, but they could be easily turned into extra logistics trucks).
  10. One of the dilemmas I noticed that "Insurgency esque" fix is technically in the game but it does not work, at least when in idle ADS position. Have you noticed, when crouching and ADS, your character does what it should be doing akin to Insurgency character? It postures up into the hunter's position. Bent forward, bent knees, weapon aimed. For some reason when no longer movie, your character in squad, even in ADS mode gets lower, which should be separate animation. Why simply not capitalize on that and implement the same posture up when the character goes into ADS mode to the level of sandbag windows?
  11. Commander in every APC / IFV

    Depending which platform. M1126 basic IFV platform for Stryker Brigade have 2 man crew.
  12. At least they could give the temporary fix I mentioned above in the Edit "Insurgency Esque" type of aiming down the sights and crouching. As in when you are crouching behind the cover the size of the sandbags or wooden crates, your character hunches behind the cover. When aiming down the sights, your character in Insurgency "Postures Up" above the cover, without even resting or propping the weapon. While this is not a real fix and the problem with the sandbag wall windows will still remain, that will provide some better solution. Also I find it strange that Rising storm/Red Orchestra 2 with similar (could argue even worse) graphics does not have the problem you mentioned above. Also another option Rising Storm Esque. - Near props such as sandbags and crates the icon in the hud appear showing that the weapon Is rested onto the prop.
  13. As I said if I could and was part of the team I would of made it the priority since it does affect gameplay and can be addressed with relatively simple tweak. OR at least provide Insurgency esque fix. - When the character is not ADSing, they are posturing down i.e. hunching when in crouch. When in ADS mode, they raise their weapon above the obstacles such as sandbags or crates by posturing up. However that still will not address the awkward usage of the sandbag walls with the windows in them.
  14. If I was the lead designer or had any connection to the development team, I would of already added propping mechanic into the game since it is very easy to add with current bipod mechanics. All it needs to be is substantially lower rate of rise and recoil reduction bonus in comparison to bipods, for the simple reason that it would allow for the weapons to be propped over the cover.
  15. August 2018 Recap

    I don't think there is need at all for changing the vehicles from being realistic. Currently they can be one manned if someone loves to do that or they can be as real counterparts ran as full on crew (4 for abrams/3 for T72B3). "If it is not broken, don't fix it" just leaving it the way it is fine, because it gives the freedom of choice in the game. - This is what makes the games unique and amazing, is providing more leeway. At the moment both those who wish for 2 man crews and for realistic crews win. There is absolutely no point for destroying Win/Win situation for the pointless argument "Well WE NEED MORE INFANTRY" when there is already more infantry and most of the vehicles are naturally ran on average by two crew members, with full crew being the option, who wishes for it to be. Forcing arcade mechanics on those who don't wish for them, will only turn people away, while those who wish for 2 man crew can already, happily do that by choice.
×