Jump to content

Stom

Member
  • Content count

    672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Stom

  • Rank
    Company XO

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

828 profile views
  1. Battlefield V

    It seems like an odd transition from BF1 tonally. Even though BF1 was certainly an unrealistic representation of WW1 it still tried to portray the war as brutal and somber, at least in singleplayer. This seems lighthearted, adventurous and cartoony which is a complete 180 from the previous game. I've seen a lot of people complaining about women being in the game but that's silly. If the game was male only it would still have the same wacky tone.
  2. I'm not arguing that the TT33 must stay for Militia. I just don't think it's a big deal that they have it and see it as a plausible weapon in the hands of this fictional faction. They are definitely more organised than the Insurgents but I don't think they're to the level where they would have standardised pistols. To me it seems like they've had a few shipments of makarovs, but not enough to equip everybody, so a few of them have old TT33s from their grandpa or wherever.
  3. Militia is more inspired by the recent Ukraine conflict groups rather than the Yugoslav wars. During the early days of the Ukraine conflict there were some rebels using old WW2 weapons like Mosins and PPSHs so in that way it makes sense. The way I see the Militia in Squad is that the soldiers are mostly self armed, bringing their own equipment like the Gorka suits and leather gloves. So it makes sense to me that they'd be using an old WW2 pistol as a side arm since it's a personal piece and sort of outside of the regular logistics chain.
  4. Vehicles Constantly Getting Stuck

    That's not quite how it works. Now, my knowledge of this is mostly based from an artists perspective but here it goes. You've got geometry which is the wireframe you're talking about, that is the visual mesh that has the material applied. The collision mesh is a simplified invisible version of the geometry used to interact with other collision meshes. The reason it's simplified is because complex meshes cause issues especially with concave shapes. This causes the issue you've recorded because the log is an irregular shape so even though it visually seems like they're not touching, the collision boxes are. So while this aspect of the game does need improving it's not as simple as 'framing' the objects better.
  5. That's true but the M17 was added to the US because they were adopted in reality. The Militia and Insurgents are fictional factions so they can have whatever pistols they want as long as they make sense, which the TT33 does. All I want is the painted soviet star grip to be replaced with a non-painted version because it feels a bit out of place.
  6. I like this idea a lot. There have been some good suggestions around RPs and making them a limited equipment item like smoke grenades that only get refilled when you respawn/rearm at a FOB or main. If RPs went down this route the hideout idea would work as an additional item irregulars get in addition to RPs that have the same sort of rearming restrictions.
  7. 3 Man TOW

    I agree that emplacements and FOBs should be decoupled. Given most vehicles carry some ammunition now it would cool to see an overhaul of how emplacements work so you can move them in vehicles then use the ammo of those vehicles to load them. This would mean that FOB based emplacements would still be valuable since they take FOB resources which is a much higher capacity than any vehicle but you could also use emplacements more dynamically with vehicles. This principle could also be applied to ammo boxes and fortifications which I think would be pretty interesting. Making a change like this would take a fair amount of effort to pull off properly but I think it would make emplacements a far more interesting aspect of the game and would emphasize the ability of irregulars to employ hit and run tactics given they've got lighter vehicles and less resource expensive emplacements.
  8. I don't see any reason not to do this but it would and should be a very low priority given how little side arms are used in game.
  9. I personally don't think it should be a point based system to change equipment like Insurgency has, or dealing with attachments at all. What I'd like is an option for your primary weapon and a certain piece of equipment like choosing between the RPG-7 and RPG-26 on Russia. Weapons shouldn't be customised in the traditional game sense where you choose which attachments you want, there should be set weapons like we have now with the multiple US rifleman kits; M4 with aimpoint, M4 with ironsights and foregrip and limited M4 with ACOG. At the most basic level this would functionally work the same as the current kit system but would be a lot cleaner. However, a change like this would make it easier to add weapons and equipment variations to the game without visual clutter or kit bloat.
  10. Light Mortars For INS Faction

    I think a similar thing would be achieved by giving Insurgents a class that has an RPG with only Frag rockets. I've experimented with this idea in a mod I'm making. My version has it as a non-firesupport role that is limited to a maximum of three for a team.
  11. I've got two issues with the extent of exposure for emplacement weapons at the moment. Firstly, you're still a human being so I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to move around slightly to protect yourself or get better situational awareness, which would be a nice benefit to exposed weapons over RCWS. Secondly, it's extremely easy to shoot an emplacement or open topped vehicle gunner from long range, sometimes even if you can't really see them, since their head is always in the same spot.
  12. Personally, I think the next faction should be China

    China has a huge amount of PC players, just look at games like Dota. That amount is only increasing so to make a move that could get Squad banned would be a bad idea.
  13. Insurgency and Invasion do work for irregulars because they're fundamentally asymmetrical but I don't want to see irregulars only ever played as defenders. Other ways of representing the terrain advantage are with both spawn locations and spawn mechanics. We see some of this already with Insurgent and Militia HABs costing less than their conventional counterparts and a couple of layers giving Insurgents multiple spawn protected bases. Adding additional spread out spawn locations to layers with conventionals vs irregulars is the simplest way to encourage a different playstyle. In terms of tweaking mechanics I think if irregulars were able to place several somehow weaker HABs at a FOB rather than one it could also emphasize their guerrilla gameplay. Couple that with more unique kits like Mike suggests and I think the broader player base would be much more willing to play Militia or Insurgents.
  14. The disadvantage of the reflex sight is it's obstruction to the view and can't be zeroed. When you're at a range that bullet drop matters with an iron sight it's easy enough to slightly lower your aim from the target, observe the impact then readjust your aim or zero and fire again. The Russian machine gun I was referring to is their GPMG, the PKP, which was added this update. It has a larger capacity than the MAG 58/M240, has a scope and fires a similar 7.62 round. I don't doubt more people would take the role if they had scopes but my point was that it wouldn't necessarily mean the kits value is being realised. Right now if a player grabs LAT it's because they understand its importance or have been told to by the SL which will eventually teach them its importance. If all kits had fancy scopes new players would have a harder time understanding the purpose and value of each.
  15. Balance in game design doesn't mean things are fair and even. Balance is basically meeting player expectations. I want changes that further differentiate Conventional forces from Irregular forces because that would make the game more interesting. For example, having more spawn points on the map for the irregular teams emphasises both their mobility and the thematic element of them having the home ground advantage. It also increases the need for Conventional forces to act as if they're fighting a guerrilla force since they could appear anywhere. This change doesn't necessarily give irregulars a better chance of victory since their assets and kits are the same but it means they will inevitably play more like irregulars should even in pub matches.
×