Stom

Member
  • Content count

    547
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Stom

  • Rank
    Company XO
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

471 profile views
  1. The Russian's weapon equipment is pretty accurately portrayed. In reality they do have some red dots style scopes and grips but those are highly limited in the regular ground forces and we already have the ACOG style scope, most grunts just get the AK-74M without anything, as shown in Squad.
  2. From what I remember the devs haven't included the slat armour with this first release of the vehicle because it would be imbalanced for it to work properly, but I remember reading that they may add it later when more AT is added along with a proper localised damage system for vehicles.
  3. I can see the argument that Conquest doesn't currently fit the game because it's lacking assets like air and armour that could make the gamemode more interesting but asserting that it doesn't fit purely because it's featured in games like BF and COD isn't a strong argument. What conquest does, or at least tries to do, is create a dynamic frontline. Instead of having a set chain of points to be captured it's up to the players to decide what objectives are to be prioritised in any given situation. I think the current problem is that we don't have enough vehicle or infantry assets capable of support so it's pretty easy for squads to slip between enemy held points and back cap, but if you can imagine a GPMG fireteam, IFV, MBT or Helicopter keeping guard over a region to stop such maneuvers it would help reinforce a frontilne. Also, having 20 more players in a server could help conquest a lot. When we eventually get to 100 players having an extra squad to support in Conquest would be invaluable, whether they be infantry or vehicles. I'm not saying Conquest is ever going to be a perfect gamemode, but it has a lot of potential you shouldn't discount because of separate games the mode has been featured in.
  4. The Russians don't need a direct counterpart to the Stryker, they have their own doctrine that focuses on cheaper, lighter APCs like the BTR. Thinking about the vehicles in a 1:1 manner isn't really what the game has ever tried to achieve because asymmetry is a core concept whether it be between conventional or unconventional forces.
  5. Here's a quote from the V9 changelog: "No longer a front line vehicle by any means, the MTLB can be seen on the Russian side in Squad when missions involve non front-line scenarios, as well as functioning as an intermediate set of vehicles on light maps where BTR's are too high profile." The devs understand that the MTLB isn't the primary APC of the Russian army but at this point in the development of Squad it's what makes sense with the current system limitations. I see that your main problem is with the 30mm and 14.5mm variants but you've got to understand that being an Early Access game means the devs need to make it enjoyable at all stages of development or they lose funding, so they are using the assets they have to create variety by putting the BTR-80 and 82 turrets on MTLBs for some diversity of play. As ZiGreen pointed out the variants are in service in some capacity in reality so the devs aren't just making things up, they're just more common in game for gameplays sake. I don't think these variants will ever completely disappear from the game but when BMPs are introduced I think they are going to replace the vast majority of all MTLBs in the game so we will be seeing far less of the variants you have issue with.
  6. Those versions of the MTLB exist and are used. I've seen some footage of the 30mm MTLB used in Russian army drills for example. There are two reasons the devs added this archaic APC at this point in development. Firstly, they already had access to the model, from what I recall one of the devs made the MTLBM prior to the development of Squad. Secondly, at this point in the game a more advanced vehicle couldn't really be sustained for both balance and systems reasons. The MTLB is probably going to become a rarity for Russian forces when more vehicles are added, but I think Militia and Insurgents will continue to use them.
  7. But new guns are required for new factions and those add a lot of variety. I'm not saying a weapon artist can't make environmental props, but they're far more skilled at making weapons and should do so. If you think about the British faction coming there's a lot of weapons to be made for them. Also, there's weapons to be made for the future as well, like a PKM or MAG58, that currently don't fit into the game because the systems that support them aren't yet in place. I do agree that making alternative assault rifles at this point is a waste of time but setting weapons artists to making environmental assets would be a waste of money on OWI's part since there are so many weapons to be made for the expansion of current factions and introduction of new factions.
  8. That's not at all how it works. There are character artists, environmental artists and hardsurface (vehicles and/or guns) artists just to name a few who specialise in one field. While a character/hardsurface artist can make environmental props they're not going to anywhere near as skilled as a dedicated environmental artist so their time is better spent on what they're skilled at.
  9. I like hulling down as a viable tactic in game as it is in real life but agree that the repair stations need to be tweaked as to not make the vehicles unrealistically resistant to damage. That being said, I have had situations where BTRs were hulled down with two repair stations but we were able to destroy them with coordination, but that isn't a defense for the cheesy tactic.
  10. It's far too early to start discussing imbalance and ticket costs since we don't have the update yet. I like to speculate as much as the next guy, but we've got to wait and play the update before discussing how much ticket costs and timers should be increased.
  11. I see single man crewing of vehicles as inherently negative for the game. It goes against teamplay which is the core of the game. Also, casual players aren't the ones who single crew vehicles, it's the regulars who are experienced enough with the systems to do so without getting frustrated. I hope we see some penalty to single crewing when more powerful vehicles are added. Whether that be the PR screenlock system (which I think was a bit clunky) or something simple like the screen fading to black and playing the noises of you switching positions for a few seconds before you assume control the crew position.
  12. No, those are coming in V10.
  13. A long time ago SgtRoss responded to someone requesting scope adjusting. From memory he said that soldiers don't really change the zeroing of their weapons in the field so they weren't planning on adding it to the game, but that could of been in regard to swapping full scopes, I don't fully remember.
  14. It always looks odd when a group of players are running in a line with their weapons pointed at the back of the friendly in front of them, so it's good news that you guys are adding those 3p animations.
  15. They probably have some issues to fix since it was just testing. Also, even if there were no problems I don't think the cycle is that fast. There is probably plenty that needs to be done to get the test build to a working public version.