Jump to content

LaughingJack

Member
  • Content count

    1,370
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About LaughingJack

  • Rank
    Company Commander

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Melbourne.AU

Recent Profile Visitors

2,271 profile views
  1. Independence Day: Resurgence

    the original was bad enough
  2. FONT's the real enemy

    actually quite interesting Smee - good post. all hail Calibri !!
  3. Vehicle damage smoke cripples crew visibility

    agreed - ridiculous idea. and should be addressed where/when/if possible - because they will/can be a real thing for some peeps, however ... yeppers!
  4. Anti-material rifle

    hella yeah!!! (extra exclamation marks for good measure) - you just reminded me how much satisfaction was to be had by doing that. not sure why we'd need an AM role, tbh. there's so much available to use as AM already in the game, why have such a specific and limited role? ps: i don't agree with Crewman roles either, i think it's silly ... unrequired, when any peep can play Driver no matter what thier Role/Kit is without issue.
  5. What is Squad? Director's Cut

    excellent!
  6. The Wrench, March 2019

    so awesome to see an Aussie mod coming along - great work guys! i'm liking the lil'bird mod too. nice!
  7. Custom Heightmaps

    im liking the Topo stuff @Zylfrax791 i been thinking of using some photos i took in black&white, of clouds, as "dems"
  8. Body Armor

    i'm for body armour as long as .... going out on a limb here 'cause only one game i've ever played that had body armour (that was obvious/option in loadout) was JointOps and it worked very well due to it having weight, within an encumbrance system that included all weapons, ammo and items/accesssories. (IMO): The simplest way to introduce Body Armour into ANY game - tie it to encumbrance. give it weight, make it affect you as well as providing you a bullet-sponge. - you might be packing BA but you'll run a bit slower, so .... OC we'd need an encumbrance system first ... and loadout modification/selection.
  9. Helicopters and Jets

    if it's not already been mentioned before here; IMO, A10's would be far more suitable option with restricted enviroments such as in Squad, than higher speed turbojet based aircraft (A10 being turbofan). My reasoning: The A10 was designed for pretty much exactly the scenario(s) that (can) occur in Squad: 1. short-range stand-off (can call in very fast) - the ability to fly quite slowly, behind "nearby" terrain if need be, but also get going real quick when needed (well fast enough for Squad). 2. very nimble and highly manourverable - should be plenty happy within the confines of a Squad map. 3. armed for anti-tank and area-denial - either or both would be perfect for Squad; killing tanks (AT) and such - not dubbed the 'Tank Killer' for nothing - as well as giving troops wot-for on the ground (AD). My thoughts on combatting the A10: 1. they are relatively slow aircraft anyway due to being driven by turbofans instead of turbojets - i'll say it now; they'll be ordinance magnets as soon as they stick their heads out in the open (just like the choppers (which iv'e said before)) - landing rounds on them will be relatively easy, by pretty much anyone on the ground. 2. their low speed manuoverability - this will inevitably cause the pilot to expend more effort and concerntration on flying at low speed which will distract them from other stuff like projectiles coming their way. 3. exposed under-wing ordinance - surely the devs could take advantage of this as localised damage/destruction - some bomb/rocket gets damaged and pops under the wing (even if they don't do this IRL)) - takes out the wing/control-surface and the pilot has to bail or limp home. i get the impression from what iv'e read herein that peeps (generalisation oc) seem to think that the only jets we could ever consider/have in Squad must be high speed strike aircraft that need 10's of km's to work in because they have to rip along at just under the speed of sound. i would guess at the A10 could have a stall of about 100-150kph and top out at say 300kph, yes/no? seems reasonable considering it's RL abilities? a tubojet, in comparison would probably have a stall of at least 300kph (just a guess) - at the end of the day an A10 will look so much sweeter, and realistic, flying slowly than any high-speed strike/bomb aircraft - the f35's or woteva they were in BF3(?) were completely ridiculous and looked as such, so don't come back at me with "but vtol/stol!?", {caveat} vtol/stol - ok, use them, but make the pilots have to manually control thrust vectoring - auto-vectoring (and auto-hover, in helos) will make it way too arcadey - now, if you like that idea, we can then consider those big helo-plane things (soz, brain failure on name) with the enormous vectoring prop bits.
  10. The Wrench -- February 2019

    Aussie faction = w00t!!
  11. 1st time making a fun Russian montage enjoy!

    that music is nuts!
  12. Squad_JO [game play modification]

    Hey @Dimmie, thanks for the interest mate. Yeah, i'm still working on it; it's a labour of love ... also, learning how to UE4 along the way Lately, RL's been getting in the way as well.
  13. SDKv12: AAS not working

    1. not sure - interesting though. 2. yep. previously working map and AAS setup thanks mate, much appreciated. and i will drop that report as well. cheers!
  14. SDKv12: AAS not working

    @Gatzby: ahoy there mate, i'm still having issues with this, dunno what to do: So i tried to load Kohat, to see if AAS is broken for me in there as well, and this happened > As you can see i gave up even trying to load it to find out. i have replaced all the SQCaptureZones's and the SQAASLattice - still cannot find the SQAASCaptureZone(Component) to add to the Main bases. AAS is still not working for me and i don't know why. Given the other issues i appear to be having (in the other thread above), could someone please advise me weather i should reinstall the SDK from scratch, or if there is actually a way to Verify the install (given this is not an option in the launcher any more). cheers!
  15. SDKv12: Vehicle Spawner:

    HI all, I've been having "fun" with the Vehicle Spawner lately. My hope was to modify it to enable spawning more than one vehicle at a time and to add an Allowance to limit the total number of spawned vehicles, of the Spawner - and i think i'm close to making it work. Thanks to @wasti for putting me on to needing a "Tracked Vehicle" array, specifically - i think (HA! LOL!) i've set things up correctly but still have a few nagging doubts. Below are the EventGraph and SetCanSpawn, from inside the VehicleSpawner (i've left CheckCanSpawn alone atm), and things highlighted in the pics are things i have added. EVENT GRAPH > To count, Add / Remove Spawned or Destroyed Vehicles from the Make Array. The GATE because i needed to drive the REMOVE (to pass on OnVehicleDestroyed EXE). The ARRAY to hold a count of currently spawned Tracked Vehicles. REMOVE Tracked Vehicle, via OnVehicleDestroyed EXE. LAST INDEX = total number spawned. ADD Tracked Vehicle (from the SET), and driven by the (last spawned) ?IsValid EXE. (* just realised i have to re-route ADD's out EXE) SET Total Spawned Vehicles, driven by both ADD and REMOVE EXE's. SET CAN SPAWN > Thought this might be a good place to stitch-in - the only place i could think of to definitively break "Can Spawn". 1. Decides if the Allowance has been met or not by the Total Spawned Vehicles value being less than the Allowance value <true/false>. 2. Checks to see if any previously spawned vehicle(of class) is still sitting inside the Spawn Zone (ie; not taken yet) <true/false>. If Allowance = False, then the EXE will stop - if True will pass on. *just realised i need a link to the Set Can Spawn from Allowance=False, i think (or it won't fire?) If Spawn Zone = False, then it will Set Can Spawn to False *(what Allowance should also do) If both 1 & 2 are True then the Set Can Spawn will be driven and set to True, as per normally. I've looked at this now a number of times and can't find anything wrong with it (compiles fine ...) but i'm an amateur n00b at this stuff, at best. I'm too tired to test it tonight, so if anyone sees anything i've done drastically wrong or won't work (or possibly call up things from the vasty deep...), please let me know - still not sure how/if the array will work or not ... Cheers!
×