Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Qaiex

  • Rank
    Squad Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

628 profile views
  1. Yeah, I think you should still need supplies to build sandbags, just they shouldn't cost any of the supplies to build. You could have something like a certain amount of sandbags per FOB or per supply crate. Point is I don't think players should feel like they don't want to put up sandbags because they'd rather spend the points on mortars or whatever. You should always put up sandbags.
  2. Please no cost for sandbags though. A bag of sand shouldn't be considered any sort of loss. I think sandbags should cost nothing to put up, and cost nothing when destroyed. That's probably the best way to actually incentivise players to shore up the defenses. It would also give squads the ability to really dig into a position.
  3. Teams within a Squad question.

    Whenever I SL I always designate the fireteams at the start of the match, and then I expect everyone to remember which fireteam they belong to. I don't think that's asking too much. I think fireteams of 3 soldiers each are adequate, with SL being part of one fireteam, usually the one with the SAW because the SL fireteam is better used for suppressing rather than maneuvering, so there's no loss in situational awareness.
  4. Dedicated Squads

    I'm not defining anything, I'm just telling you what the devs have told us. You see the quotes you can read them for yourself and tell me if that wording is somehow ambiguous, because to me it seems crystal clear what this game is intending to be.
  5. Dedicated Squads

    I'm just telling you how it is, man. This game isn't Red Orchestra or Call of Duty. You need to be prepared for these things to change, because they will. The game was from the very start intended to be played a certain way, and every change they make, every new thing they add is designed to work towards that goal.
  6. FOB Mechanics Too Harsh

    I understand your concern, and share it. But a commander doesn't necessarily have to act like they did in PR. That system was based entirely off of BF2, which was very limiting in scope. You could just as well have something like a platoon commander, who is out in the field alongside his soldiers. It'd be more like the squad leader of the squad leaders. Less Lieutenant Colonel, more First Lieutenant.
  7. Dedicated Squads

    You're missing the point. Even if 2-man squads were effective right now, which I disagree with, then that's a gameplay balance problem that will eventually be addressed. You're assuming that just because something is a certain way right now, that's how it's intended to be. Not the case. The game is still in development. Being able to lock squads has other uses. For instance when helicopters are introduced, if there are only two helicopters available on a particular map, you only need 2 people in the heli squad, or 6 if you want gunners. Locking it at that point is useful because it is for all intents and purposes a full squad at that point. Or, if someone crashes or takes a while joining, you can lock the squad so no one jumps in and takes the last spot. It was not intended as a way for people to antisocially lock themselves away from their team so that they can just ignore everyone and go do their own thing. For the record I did go look at your steam screenshots, and I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of screenshots where you or your buddy had any capture points at all. That does not fit my idea of good teamwork. I don't know if you've played Project Reality or not, but you should go take a look at some videos on youtube if you haven't, because that's the kind of gameplay you should expect from Squad. It's a different game, and this is not a remake, but the core gameplay loop is basically going to be identical. Because that's what everyone wanted, PR but built from the ground up to be precisely that, rather than tacked onto the BF2 engine with all of its limitations. Here are just some of the things the Squad devs have said that support this: "Squad will be a tactical military game built from the ground up as a cooperative shooter, where high levels of teamwork and communication are supported, encouraged, and integral to gameplay." "Squad success relies heavily on teamwork and communication; featuring built in VoIP, with “Local” chat for players with a certain proximity, “Squad” chat that is focused on player within your squad, and “Command Net” chat, that is open to only squad leaders. The players dictate how the scenarios unfold with base-building and interactive environments, intuitive squad command and management tools and large-scale warfare where strategy and leadership are just as important as a quick trigger finger." Some tips from the AAS wiki, demonstrating how the devs intend for the game to be played: Don't play as individual, as your score won't affect the match Squad Leaders must coordinate with other SLs to cover the active points Communicate with other members to establish good FOBs And for comparisons to Project Reality: "... PR was originally started and evolved around the idea of making the BF2 experience more realistic, the central focus of Squad will be on establishing and encouraging the culture of teamwork that made PR the game it was."
  8. Dedicated Squads

    You forgot the first part of that mission statement: "Squad is an online, team-based military experience where high levels of teamwork and communication are crucial to success." Nothing in that, even the part you quoted, is contradicted by anything I said. You can have organic and emergent gameplay dictated by the players (note: players, plural) within a strict command hierarchy. It worked just fine for Project Reality. If we compare it to chess again then you can think of it like this: In Squad you're not the player, you're one of the pieces on the board. One of many, all working together to achieve a common goal. Your role is pre-determined, and you need to fulfill it to the best of your ability in order to win. Because the strength of an army is in its cohesion, it's a machine greater than the sum of its parts. Every part of it can do more, and be more, when it can depend on the other parts to support it. And in order to have that, you need teamwork, and lone-wolfing it is not teamwork. It is the opposite of teamwork. Just look at the name of the game. It's called Squad for a reason.
  9. Dedicated Squads

    Easily solved by having a starting screen when you join the server, where you can list the rules. Games have been doing that for a long time. And this game is a bit more complex than chess. It's far more flexible and adaptable. You can't just have one strictly enforced ruleset without limiting the game in a lot of ways. It's better to have admins on the servers who can deal with these things on a case by case basis. So if they see a bunch of 2 man squads they can go "Hey, all of you merge into one big squad." but if there's a 2 man logistics squad or something, and no one else is doing that work, they can just let that be. If there were hardcoded rules it'd either have to be no 2 man squads, or infinite 2 man squads, there's no middle ground. This is a game, sure, but it's more of a serious game than most, and it's a game where your personal freedom to do whatever it is you want isn't the main focus. In this game you're a grunt, you don't get to decide to just run off into the wilderness with a buddy and some guns. You're supposed to follow orders and do your job. And when someone doesn't, it's the job of the admins to rein them in and make them fall in line. This game only works if everyone is playing SQUAD, not Spec Ops: The Lone Wolf Simulator. There are already thousands of those games, this one is for those of us who want more than that.
  10. I personally have a very powerful computer, though. You can get around that by using culling and stuff. There was some game I read about that had a similar issue but with hair variation, or was it hair physics? Whichever it was they solved the problem somehow. I forget the details, so I guess it's not a very informative anecdote, but it was something with the bones in the model. I think they baked everything into one model and then just disabled whatever wasn't in use. Or the opposite of that...
  11. Dedicated Squads

    Servers are privately run, so anyone who owns it can make whatever rules they want. And they can kick or ban anyone at any time for breaking those rules.
  12. Now you're speaking my language. I don't see why we couldn't have some customization. Couple of different shades, oakley pilots or nomex gloves, ballistic goggles or nothing on your helmet, shemagh, there's stuff you can do without having it be unreasonable.
  13. FOB Mechanics Too Harsh

    In PR transport helicopters could drop supplies, so I wonder if they're going to do the same here. Would make it a more reasonable task to build and supply shit like this:
  14. FOB Mechanics Too Harsh

    Well there's more than one logi truck, isn't there? Surely a logistics squad should, at the very least, have as many members as there are trucks.
  15. Dedicated Squads

    Isn't this something server admins should be dealing with?