Jump to content

Stom

Member
  • Content count

    789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Stom

  • Rank
    Company XO

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,209 profile views
  1. Body Armor

    I agree with the others about the current TTK being good, so I don't really want to see body armour. While it would be potentially interesting for Conventional vs Irregular layers they're only half the game. The issue when you introduce armour like you've suggested is that on conventional vs conventional layers it'll just mean players are more bullet spongy and move slower which is not something I really want to see.
  2. What does this game do better than PR?

    It's something that fundamentally affects the game design though. Vaulting and climbing are not necessary for an FPS and for most of Squads life didn't exist but the effort was put into designing and implementing the system and the result is that the way a player interacts with the environment is completely altered, which affects both system design and map design.
  3. You've got some useful stats there but the vitriol you've coupled with it is completely unnecessary and muddies your point. Optic kits having the majority of kills isn't really surprising or upsetting. Squad is an infantry focused game with vehicles to supplement, that's always been the goal, and optic kits are focused on accurate fire so they will get more kills. I do agree that if the ratio was reduced a bit and given more to vehicles it would be good but it's not ruining the game. A big part of the picture these stats are missing are objectives. Optics can help attack and defend objectives but non-magnified weapons are dominant on most objectives when clearing and holding. Vehicles also play a big part around objectives in destroying enemy transports and area denial which sets up a lot of the optic kills. Explosives are a bit limp at the moment, from memory due to a bug, which means grenades, HE rounds and mortar fire is less effective than intended. It is a little frustrating when landing a GL a few metres away from an enemy and having them unfazed, but it's also frustrating going to far the other direction where you just find yourself constantly being blown up by inaccurate explosive fire.
  4. The Wrench -- February 2019

    Lots of awesome stuff! It's a mod my man, you don't need to touch it.
  5. What does this game do better than PR?

    My favorite thing is the massive improvements to general player interaction. Moving through the environment with movement speeds and the vaulting systems is a pleasure. Gunplay is responsive and reliable. The radial menus work well (expect for the vehicle one glitching a bit). There are a few elements like suppression and vehicle handling which need to be further improved in Squad but I still prefer the direction they're heading away from PR.
  6. Insurgency Panzer IV

    At the moment Insurgents are also getting the T-62. If any WW2 tank were to be added to the game I would think a T-34 would suit better because it's actually still in service with some third world countries and was supplied everywhere at the beginning of the cold war.
  7. Redeploy From Main Base

    I think a lot of players don't really mind the idea of taking an empty logi back to main, what they don't want is to become the 'logi-guy' because once they get back there's not much to do but either kill themselves and wait one and half minutes or continue doing logi runs for the whole game.
  8. Redeploy From Main Base

    This suggestion has come up a few times and I'm absolutely for it. Whenever I'm in a squad that places a slightly risky FOB to assault an objective we end up either leaving the Logi somwhere out of the way, then if the assault goes badly we've lost it, or destroying it. Having one person return the logi and redeploy would be a perfect solution in my eyes.
  9. January 2019 Recap

    This is something that keeps coming up that doesn't make much sense to me. The game has the same game modes, kit system, squad system and even some of the same maps from PR. It is thematically and structurally the same, it has fulfilled the promise of being a spiritual successor. I personally don't care much for flyable aircraft and have been in favour of more realistically moving call-ins from the start but I can sympathise with people who were excited to fly. To my mind Squad has turned into about 80% of what was promised in the kickstarters and I'm satisfied with that because they've been transparent enough with their reasoning for letting some features go.
  10. January 2019 Recap

    They are still working on choppers but it's not a matter of just pouring more man power on it. It is a combined arms game and choppers are a single aspect, BMPs and T-62s are going to bring a lot of balancing and interesting elements to the known aspects of the game. Who knows what choppers will do.
  11. January 2019 Recap

    I am so excited to play with all that new armour, and ammo granularity is sorely needed. I think that might just be the end of a gun run.
  12. Squad is dead or not ?

    People often use "it's an alpha/beta" as a shield against criticism but I think a lot of this "wack-a-mole" of mechanics is just the reality of Early Access development rather than MilSim vs Arcade fighting one another. The challenge Squad faces is that it's a team based shooter that has to be balanced, but hasn't finalised any of it's key features and that's where this constant reshuffling comes from, not the genre. For me personally Squad plays better than it has in any version before, there are some who prefer some older mechanic versions like the V9 aiming controls and even those that preferred the game without vehicles. People will come and go, but to my mind Squad has maintained it's balance of arcade and milsim really well during development and is filling a void in the market quite well. Whether there is a massive playerbase waiting to find and fill that void or not is pretty irrelevant at the moment since there's plenty of sales to fuel development and always servers that are full. When the game stops making money or can't fill servers that's when it'll be time to worry, not at the moment.
  13. Everyone wants to see the HUMVEE return in some iteration but my guess is that it would need substantial remodelling to properly avoid any legal trouble and that's just not worthwhile when there's so many other vehicles that would have a greater affect on gameplay for those resources to be dedicated towards. I agree that the vehicle has enough differences in role to make it valuable to the game compared with the M-ATV but not to take priority over something like a BMP, Challenger or helicopter which would use the same artists.
  14. Interactive IEDs

    Didn't know that but it's exactly what I'm suggesting. In Squad it would have a greater tactical benefit than I image it has in Sandstorm since there's armoured vehicles.
  15. Interactive IEDs

    That's a large part of the reason I made this suggestion, both Rising Storm and Battlefield allow players to do it through mechanics but don't have specific weapons or kits to do it, which is what I am suggesting. Insurgency Sandstorm doesn't allow players to play as suicide bombers, those are only AI in the coop mode. I think all of these games don't have explicit player controlled suicide bombing to avoid the potential legal or publicity issues but the practical result is players can still do it as a tactic. IEDs can currently be destroyed by anyone with a shovel. I am just suggesting that the engineer kit, which is already in the test branch, has it's capability expanded to disarm IEDs. Coupled with this IEDs should no longer be destroyed by shovels so only Sappers/Engineers can disarm them adding value to those kits and increasing the threat of IEDs. Setting numbers would allow Sappers better control and versatility with how they use IEDs and if you find it too complicated and don't want to work with those mechanics it would work the same way it does now where all IEDs are bound to a single default number. From a reasonable standpoint as someone that plays the game I agree. But the players who are already in the community aren't the people that would cause a fuss. You and I see it as a game that represents real world tactics but there are many people in positions of power that just see games as romantic escapism so when they hear that a game set in the modern day let's you play as a suicide bomber against real world countries they think it's 'training terrorists' no matter the context. You might remember all the media fuss that resulted from someone making a mod that had an ISIS faction in Arma 3, which was always intended as an opfor faction. It's funny that just after I posted this the test branch updated with an Engineer class for each conventional faction that has explosives and a vehicle repair kit. So if IEDs were overhauled that class would get the ability to deal wit them.
×