Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Stom

  1. All of these rally suggestions have come up on the forums over the last few years and I still think a few of them are good.


    Back in the day we had a 9 spawn limit on the rally, which just meant an effective squad would keep an eye on it and then let the SL and a squad mate take the last spawns and create a new rally. So the rally was practically infinite unless someone ****ed up. So while it definitely needed a change from that.


    A timer is the most elegant solution. Giving a life timer of say three minutes, with a cooldown timer of six minutes would dramatically change the way rallies are used. You would need to be more coordinated about placement at the very least. The only worry is that an SL then goes back to being the rally bitch, and not doing much else.


    The ammo consumption is a great way of stopping the SL just becoming the rally nanny but you would still need the 1-2 additional players with the SL to place to stop lone wolf SLs from running around placing a rally, grabbing ammo from a FOB and repeating while the squad is off fighting.


    The sapper built separate item is a cool idea for the irregulars. Make it big so it's not easy to hide and have a long spawn timer like a wave every five minutes so it isn't pissing out troops and it would complement the irregular play style quite well.

  2. Mobile HMGs are something that I've wanted for ages. At the very least for INS/MIL should be able to somewhat covertly set up HMGs in buildings or on hills without the need of FOBs, it could really help sell their guerrilla ambush tactics.


    1 hour ago, flappie said:

    Having to literally remove a part of the map to make the trench fit, and having it plop back in in case of it being dug down or destroyed is unlikely to be implemented into the game

    I think he was suggesting that you can just build a mound of dirt:

    2 hours ago, Gobx said:

    ...(similar to sand bags but a dirt hill that you can always dig out for cover)...


    I feel that the rifleman's sandbags already fill that role and adds a bit of extra value to the rifleman class which would be lost if the SL could do it.

  3. On 10/28/2019 at 5:28 AM, EcchiRevenge said:

    For some reason BMP-1 has no stabilization(at least when used as Insurgents; even though a later variant added stabilizers: Ob'yekt 765Sp2 ); nor working rangefinder.

    So until those problems are addressed, BMP-2 is better.

    As far as I'm aware the non-stabilisation is accurate. I'm not expert but it seems like the majority of BMP-1s in the world lack stabilization.


    Especially since the BMP-1 is only used by irregular forces in Squad it makes sense that it would be an older model rather than an updated version. 


    The fact that the BMP-1 turret lacks anything fancy is also the reason it can be mounted on anything:

    Hopefully we get some of this in Squad at some point.

  4. 3 hours ago, warrior6 said:

    ... The only thing that is fun about insurgents and militia is their IEDs and rocket trucks which isn't emphasized or featured by the game as much. For example, there are no actual suicide bombers because of controversy and there isn't other more powerful unconventional weapons like chemical mortars or something equally as nasty and frowned upon by conventional forces. 


    Militia and insurgents need more " contraption / put together in some garage " type vehicles and suicide bombers. If we're not going to have suicide bombers because of controversy then they should at least have more of the above mentioned vehicles and they should be able to shoot out of them like the infamous "abu hajar" video where they have this home made armored vehicle and guys are sitting in the back firing RPGs. Designing Insurgents or militia can be really fun because you can get really creative since you don't have to worry as much about having official equipment and vehicles like conventional forces. There are accounts of insurgents using radio shack type home made drones. something like that instead of a helicopter for example which can drop simple grenades would be really fun. 

    You are speaking my language!


    I'm really hoping these sorts of things are being developed for irregulars to stop them from feeling like neutered conventional forces as they do currently. I remember seeing the devs say they have a lot of plans for more kinds of technicals but that was ages ago and we haven't seen anything new since the armoured variants were released.

  5. 13 hours ago, suds said:

    more start of round spawn points for small factions and more randomness. an unknown gun emplacement for example. a few  (limited and destroyable) ammo caches in villages. 



    This is the sort of thing that really should have be added for irregulars. I've always wanted there to be a significant separation between the play styles between conventional and non-conventional forces that is more than just differences in content.


    Playing with spawning and logistics mechanics for them is something that could really help to make them more effective asymmetrically.

  6. I think the logic was that if you're building a FOB on a hex then you mean to defend it and the system wants to 'reward' you for doing that by locking down the hex. If you want a hidden FOB then you make it outside of the territory hexes.


    I also don't really like it. You already get enough information when you see a territory being capped, if you've got a FOB there then you can spawn and defend the hex.

  7. The only thing that really surprises me is the player momentum feedback. I really like when the players character feels more physically represented in the world and the current implementation feels a bit too tight and just doesn't feel right to me.


    The other important ones to me are that people seem to be generally negative on the current Buddy Rally and that instadeath should come back, which is nice.


    I still find it funny that a lot of people who were previously furious at the devs for making decisions and not 'listening to the community' are now pissed that the devs are doing surveys instead of following their own vision. Can't please everyone.

  8. 20 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

    I agree. That particular MRAP can get you quickly and quietly behind enemy lines going cross country where you could get a rally down for the team and possibly engage a few infantry or poach a Logi or two though. However, the Bulldog doesn't have a single redeeming feature that you could utilize within the framework of the game to do anything of the sort. Not one. That's why they mostly sit at Main and cause a disparity in any map they're in. Especially that one layer Russia vs. Brits on Kohat.


    Like I said before their only current use is basically for noobs to create battlefield scenery with their scattered burning smoking husks strewn about the map.

    I agree that's the case with their current implementation but most of the biggest issues of the vehicle can be fixed and aren't inherent.

  9. The main problem with the Bulldog is that it has constantly been bugged to hell since it's addition to the game.


    First it's low hull mixed with the traction issues that have mostly been fixed meant it would get stuck on any loose props on the ground. Now it's acceleration is broken and it can't change gears properly.


    The performance problems it has now are all things that can be fixed. In reality the FV432 can go up to 70km/h (according to wiki), it's definitely not doing that at the moment. The armour, sound and maneuverability are also values that can and should be tweaked.


    The gunner exposure is the biggest problem with using the vehicle. That being said, I think it is important to keep some vehicle variants with limited efficiency, such as the two MRAP M2 variants.


    Like the MRAP it would be nice to have a Bulldog variant with a RCWS, and it seems like some Bulldogs used by British engineers do use them:


  10. 18 hours ago, <invalid> said:


    The guy wasn't even aiming at me. That's my argument.

    Players, including me, exploit the suppression system like this; when i get shot at in game, i just turn and automatic fire the direction i heard the gun shot, instantly ruining the enemy line of sight because it causes constant wobbly arms... it seriously makes no sense that your characters arms wobble.

    It's not how people react in real life, when people get shocked, they usually duck or move their head out of the way. Not wobble their arms.

    You think returning fire and stopping the other player from killing you is abuse but it isn't, what it does is extend what would have been an instant kill into a firefight which is what players like me want.


    This is the fundamental difference between players. Some want the game to be entirely decided by individual skill, he shot at you first so he should have killed you, and others want it to be decided by group skill, you suppressed him and moved to cover which opens this engagement up for more players to get involved.


    In reality you would duck from fear, but forcing the player to duck would feel like shit, so wobbling the character's aim is an effective way of getting the player to duck by choice because shooting back is a worse choice.

  11. A lot of the modders who are working on CAF have been hired by OWI because of their work on the project but it's not 1-1 for mod developers being OWI developers.


    I know the character artist and a couple of the weapons artists were hired but no idea about the rest of the team.

  12. There are a bunch of people who have bought Squad to play the Troopers mod.


    If you don't like it don't play it, but please don't demand people stop making the mods they want to make.


    The beauty of mods is that they can take something like Squad and turn it into something completely different.


    Are you working on any mods?

  13. 3 hours ago, TomReagan said:

    And that is why I am then for removing the C4 completely and replace it with a useful asset like a shaped charge to kill a tank. 

    You pointed pretty much out how the CE nerf is there to cover up mistakes made by the enemy team in FOB defence. There are already game mechanics implemented which made a FOB kill hard to achieve but these mechanics dont get used and therefore the nerf is balancing out sloppy decisions from the enemy. And actually you made another worrying point which is that a destroyable FOB is no interesting gameplay...which also implies that C4 is useless af. 


    You're thinking of C4 in the wrong context. It isn't meant to kill a tank or cancel out a FOB.


    C4 and the other faction equivalents are just meant for demolition of vehicle wrecks and fortifications as well as a force multiplier against FOBs and vehicles (in edge cases).


    This game is about working together and if you make C4 too capable it makes teamwork less necessary.

  14. My hope is that these changes are a temporary measure to get new blood into the game and comfortable before tweaking mechanics to be less forgiving again. The playerbase of the game has certainly increased with the recent updates which is fundamental for a game like this to be a viable commercial product since it doesn't have in-game transactions to sustain development.


    Fingers crossed for the coming updates to revisit those infamous changes.

  15. 2 hours ago, Barbarossa said:

    The point is, if you need a whole squad to get to the radio the placing of c4 is senseless.... they just dig it and thats it. c4 doesn't matter any more...


    its even rediculously weak against any vehicles....

    It speeds up the process significantly which justifies it. C4 is not some spec ops James Bond explosive that you slap on a moving tank, it's for demolition.

  16. 4 hours ago, TomReagan said:

    I don't get whats so easy to infiltrate the FOB. You say its easy, but by that standard what is not easy in the game? Killing a tank? Easy, you just need to hit the right spot repeatedly from a concealed place where you can reload and ammunition nearby...but thats the problem, these conditions were a task becomes easy are usually not met in the game. For a CE to become able to kill a radio single-handedly without notifying anyone the enemy has to neglect basic game mechanics like barriers and thoughtful placement of the radio...and he has to lose the ability to hear. If we talking about implementing nerfs to cover up simple mistakes we go a bumpy road towards mediocrity.

    If it were difficult to do then CE's sneaking in and destroying a FOB alone would be a rare occurrence, but it isn't. Whenever I see experienced players as CEs they are FOB hunting alone, and they're usually successful in getting a couple of FOBs.


    I really enjoy the vehicle-infantry dynamic at the moment. I've had so many experiences where myself and a couple LATs/HATs from other squads have had to quickly coordinate in local to take out a vehicle, it's been great. However, arguing that a lot of layers have too many vehicles is certainly valid but I don't think the difficulty in taking out an individual vehicle is the problem. If vehicles where made more susceptible to infantry AT then they would need to be buffed to be more dangerous with something like thermal imaging.


    The difference between the CEs FOB destroying capabilities and the infantry ATs vehicle destroying capabilities is that one doesn't require teamwork and the other really does. Sure, if someone is guarding the FOB constantly or it's been entombed in fortifications then that's harder for a lone CE to do, but neither of those defenses is interesting gameplay for the defenders whereas defending a FOB from a full squad is.

  17. 1 hour ago, ZXD_Lee said:

    This is one of the worse updates/downgrades so for unfortunately!!! 


    Graphics have been downgraded for performance or more like less graphics 


    i would totally forget about potato pcs they hold back game development and progression trying to cater for pcs less powerful than consoles!! 


    V14 optimisation was good just some micro stutters on some servers but ok 


    squad/OWI should be saying the minimum requirements are much higher than than on the store page! Have the recommended requirements as minimum at least 


    I know squad needs to go out to the widest possible audience to make money and so on but it’s making the game worse!! 


    We need more foliage more cover more view distance! Just downloading graphics to make it run better for potato pcs isn’t a way forward at all, if people want to play a big boys game they need to have a big boys pc not a fisher price pc 




    That's an extreme overreaction.


    The visuals are definitely changed, and I personally don't like the new colour palette on Fool's Road, but they haven't reduced the amount of foliage, just made it act a bit more realistically.


    Rather than grass being in distinct chunks it's more spread.

  18. 3 hours ago, Good-Try Greg said:



    New official Coop game mode Hardcore Checkpoint

    • Movement speed is significantly reduced. Enemies are harder. Friendly teammate indicators only show when a teammate is nearby. Objective indicators are hidden in the HUD.
    • If you die, you will respawn with a Mosin bolt-action rifle and Makarov pistol. You must resupply at a Supply Crate to get your Loadout.
    • There are only two Supply Crates. One will spawn on a random objective, the other will always spawn on the final objective. You can only resupply once on a Supply Crate. Small Ammo Boxes will give some ammunition for the weapons you are carrying.


    It's simple, and it's quick, dirty, and experimental. And because it was successful, now they're expanding it, adding it to PVP modes, etc. Isn't it weirder that's in a released game and not an alpha?


    Sandstorm has a complete foundation so they can spend the developer resources on things like this but Squad needs those resources to continue building the foundation.

  19. I honestly really like both the SKS and FAL in the recent updates.


    However, I do agree the Medic should get an AK option since the current options are a little bit harder to use and as a role that is basically mandatory it should have a more versatile option.

  20. Agreed. I was happy when they introduced the WASD controls for turrets because it meant there could be hard limits on movement speed without making using them annoying. Unfortunately it's only on certain turrets.


    When I spoke to one of the QA guys in discord this is apparently a design decision to only include the WASD movement with turrets that are mechnaically assisted in real life. Seems strange to me given we're controlling the turrets with a mouse and keyboard anyway but maybe that's why DPI is still able to affect turret movement.

  21. 4 hours ago, Pluto is a planet said:

    RPG-29 is also used by Russían forces so it wont even be a stretch to give it to them.

    I'm not an expert by any stretch but from what I've read from, mostly from actual Russian soldiers on here a while ago, but it's not really used by Russia.


    Besides that it's something that should be left for the irregulars long term to give them a better sense of identity rather than being second rate Russian forces.


    4 hours ago, suds said:

    ammo cache drops for irregular would make them very strong. eg a vic can drop a small ammo crate and drive away for use elsewhere.

    Features like that would be great. I'd love to see a fundamental difference in the way conventional and irregular forces operate in terms of the spawn and logistics systems.

  22. Agreed with all your points. It seems especially odd that the BMP-1 wasn't given to Russia when they're still using the MTLB in game, which is even older than the BMP-1 and lacks the ATGM.


    I've seen people suggest that the Russians should get either the Metis or RPG-28 as their long term HAT but the RPG-29 would be a better placeholder. The updated SVDM would definitely bring them up to par with the other conventionals and differentiate them from the irregulars.


    My only worry when I see stuff like this is what will Militia/Inurgents get? The BMP-1 is a nice addition but it does seem like the only reason it hasn't been given to Russia is for a false sense of parity between the irregular and conventional factions.


    The content arms race between the conventional factions is great for those match-ups but it does make the irregular factions feel like third class citizens who lack a sense of identity. A bit off topic here but I want to see more love for them, for instance, we've had the ZU-23 for a while now and it still lacks a scope rendering it pretty useless overall.