Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About 40mmrain

  • Rank
    Platoon Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,916 profile views
  1. What's next?

    Worry that man portable ATGMs would be OP is healthy, but I think they could be very well balanced. Consider this food for thought. 1) Vehicles as they stand right now are kind of weak in an unrealistic way and could stand to be buffed. They're too easy to immobilize, they have no thermals, they dont have ballistic compensators, turret stabilization could be much better, and their HE rounds are way weaker than they should be. Having better AT for infantry would balance this. 2) Just like not every map had Tanks, not every map must have man portable ATGMs. Javelin or Metis-M on Talil would feel like a fair fight, the open terrain favours vehicles. But on a more closed map with lighter vehicles, perhaps not. 3) 100 player servers will make ATGMs more balanced. There will be more armour pieces active per side, and more infantry who are not equipped with AT, as long as the number of HAT kits isn't increased. Even if the ATGM HAT kit is very strong, it just wouldnt have enough volume to actually make armour feel underpowered. imo it would enrich the game with new tools, that are not only fun to use but can allow for more scenarios to be fair and balanced. For example. Imagine a map where one side gets a bunch of ATGM kits and only light armour, and the other side gets no ATGM kits, but a bunch of heavy armour. Could be cool.
  2. You can just transport infantry not in your own squad. There's really no point in having a helicopter inside an infantry squad. Its not like mechanized inf. where you want the inf and armour to stick together at all times. If you make your own helicopter squad, you can communicate with every infantry sl to supply and transport them all, except for just one. The ideal heli pilot locks his squad at 1, and sits in base waiting for infantry leaders to call.
  3. What's next?

    They're key features of current infantry and armour equipment and have been that way for decades. It would be pretty disppointing to see them omitted from the game imo. US forces have had man portable ATGMs since the M47.. 1975. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M47_Dragon
  4. What's next?

    Squad has some bits of content still to come, though not that much. Namely 100 player servers, attack helicopters and their accompanying counter-assets of anti-air kits, emplacements, and vehicles. There's also some key missing infantry features and tools, such as backup sights, man portable ATGMs, grenade machine guns, turret-ducking, and some miscellaneous things like shotguns and combat ladders. Vehicles could also use some more goodies like thermals, automatic zeroing, commander driver control override, turning out, and functional armour additions like slats, ERA, and APS would be really nice additions, most of these I think mandatory for the game to have a realistic and complete experience. Further, the factions in the game are not exactly complete. There's a handful of vehicles, such as the BMP-3, Chinook, Lynx, Griffon, and some variants of existing vehicles that should be added before the factions can reasonably considered complete. Its also worth mentioning that US and Canadian trucks are really outdated, and could stand to be replaced with the modern versions. Finally, and most importantly however, Squad is very much a game that feels, in every way, unfinished There are many, many aspects and features that are imbalanced, underdeveloped, conflicting, totally not used, were originally meant as placeholders, buggy, and/or underperforming. Some examples. Emplacements need an overhaul, for the most part they're far too costly, awkward, and slow relative to the pace of the game, some like the tripod HMG and SPG are frankly worthless, this could all be reworked to be much better. The insurgency gamemode needs an overhaul. The gamemodes in general need to be combined, pruned, and improved with a unifying and coherent idea in mind. Vehicle flipping and physics are placeholders. Suppression and infantry combat is not finalized. Spawn mechanics are practically placeholders, rallies change each update and are to change in tbe future. The turret stabilization feature is subject to all kinds of desync. Performance, low settings giving an advantage, LoD vs ranged combat. Blah blah blah blah. I could go on forever listing more, but that would take too long and be pointless, the devs know them, there's good reason squad is in Beta in name, because it is in reality too. So yeah, there's a lot in Squad's future if OWI wants to make it a truly great, and long lasting title that people will continue to play, modify, and populate for years and years to come, solidifying their name as a great studio that finishes what they start. Bugs need to be gone 100%, game design needs to consistently produce fun, interesting, complex, realistic and cooperative matches by rewarding behavior that produces this and punishing behavior that is against it, all the while providing players with sufficient feedback and resources to learn and practice this behavior. All features, modes, maps, and assets need to be relevant, balanced, and conducive to this described outcome. So yeah, this is an immense task, and we are still in the phase of development where classes of vehicles are being added. Fortunately Squad already does achieve the outcome of good games more often than not, it would be dead otherwise.. it just needs more.
  5. How Armored Combat Feels

    Trust me, this wouldn't make the driver irrelevant. A tank squad leader can be responsible for communication and coordination between the team, his squad, his own tank, and spotting/shooting with his remote MG. Driving on top of all of that renders him woefully overworked. IMO it's just too much of a burden to ask players to have a group of people to queue with, just so that they can get a decent experience in armour. Right now, playing any other role is fine if you play alone, armour not so much. I think this is a pretty good solution that is also realistic, I think pretty much all tanks have this capability (Commander overriding driving controls).
  6. How Armored Combat Feels

    This is because in PR there was no commander-driver distinction. They were compressed into one slot in the vehicle. I personally think that this was for the better. In Squad is that if you want to have control of a vehicle you can NOT do it from the driver's seat, otherwise your situational awareness will simply be far too poor to do any kind of meaningful decision making. This does reflect real vehicles, of course the man in control of the vehicle should be in the commander's seat, which is not the driver's. But.. the problem with this is that a commander, no matter how good he is, is limited severely by both how good and how compliant his driver is. Driving is a complex skill, you need to receive the orders of the commander and translate them into real maneuver that accomplishes his goal. This is not the task for a robot, it requires you to have a sort of critical relationship with his orders, as you will need to fill in blanks, and make your own decisions on the fly that might be required to keep the vehicle alive. If you're the driver, and commander says "move forward into cover behind that building" you need to do as he says, but the actual angle, and exact positioning you choose is yours. The commander may also be busy with other tasks, when there is imminent danger, and as the driver you need to have a sense to recognize this and move the vehicle away from it. I could go on, but the point is that being a good driver requires a lot. But again the driver cannot be the leader in Squad, because he has very poor situational awareness. The commander MUST be in control, he has the vision, and the freedom of cognitive capacity to make long-term strategic decisions, and can coordinate long-range engagements. Where the crux of the problem is, is that no matter how good the commander is, he will ALWAYS be sabotaged by a crappy driver. No matter how good his strategy is, and how good his commands are, if the driver cannot quickly and intelligently translate them into effective movement and positioning of the vehicle, the operation is doomed. Worse, if the driver is simply bad, and makes unilateral decisions. The opposite side of the coin is true as well, no matter how good a driver is, if he has a bad commander, he simply won't have the situational awareness required being fed to him to make good decisions. I believe the solution to this is to allow our Commander to be able to override the driver's controls at will, just as he can designate the turret to where he pleases. This would mean that a low-skill driver would still be valuable as someone who can take the role during non-critical times, and when necessary the commander can take it up. I think this is a better solution than simply combining the two roles, because if the commander has to do all the commander work (including the remote MG) as well as driving, all the time, he would be overworked, and the vehicle would be incredibly inefficient. Trust me, I 2-man tanks and IFVs from time to time, and it feels like we're playing with a serious handicap. In PR, these two roles could be compressed with less problems, because there was no remote MG, and armour was considerably simplified (damage model, ballistics, turret speed, and vehicle handling were all easier in that game). Also where the hell are thermals in Squad? And actually effective HE shells? Should be in the game now that AT is actually strong..
  7. SQUAD could be amazing, but it lacks care

    I really don't think Squad is a casual game masquerading as a hardcore game. It's simply caught in the middle of these two ideals, and has failed to find a balance. There are aspects of Squad that are "hardcore." Playing vehicles is insanely punishing, and requires considerable coordination to not simply get rocked by anti-tank and enemy armour constantly. Successfully attacking and defending objectives is not just a matter of standing on, or walking towards a point, but rather an active attempt at encirclement or breaking from encirclement. Thoughtful consideration of FOB volume and location affects the outcome of the game. Actual coordination between and within squads is rewarded, at least somewhat. It is simply not the case that you can join the game, spawn in, and have a good time. Even as a regular infantryman, the amount of information that you're give about where the enemy is is weak, it's common for new players to have absolutely no clue where they're getting shot from, and how to prevent it. All of these things point to the fact that Squad is hardcore, at least in some sense. Hardcoreness is a SCALE, not a binary condition. I think a lot of players do quit, because it is actually too punishing for them, not that they have figured the game out and realized its facile. However, I do agree that the developers should have more courage in punishing the players. PR's medic system meant that being by yourself made you essentially useless as an infantryman. You had ONE bandage and that wasn't even guaranteed to stop the bleeding if you were hurt enough. This mechanic's removal in Squad means that players can run off by themselves, get shot, and really, even though they're penalized a bit, get on just fine. I believe there are deeper issues to the way in which a match in Squad unfolds, and they are mostly related to the gamemodes available, and the spawn systems, both of which need some kind of overhaul from a top-down perspective (IE we have a general philosophy of what we want and completely create anew from it, rather than just keep tweaking and preening and picking at it until it gets better).
  8. Beta 17 Notes from Game Design

    Love this kind of insight into the game's philosophy and policies. There is some future stuff that gets me really excited about the future depth of the game.
  9. What was your most bad ass moment in Squad?

    Playing as an armour crewmen and being surrounded by a mass of friendly infantry that are assaulting, providing immense mutual support feels so damn right. You can provide huge amounts of suppression for them to advance, while they completely suppress AT users from hitting you on a flank. I feel like a literal hero when I pull my tank in front of a couple of downed friendlies, and act as a shield of steel, smoke, and lead while a medic works to revive them all.
  10. Insurgency

    It's been utterly neglected. Sad thing is people loved it in PR. If OWI could just copy.paste pr's insurgency ruleset that would be super cool. Theres a million reasons why PR's insurgency was so fun and they basically all got thrown out in Squad haha.
  11. congratulations on observing that you've hit the enemy in the arm before! The post I responded to explicitly said "3 to the chest." That's wrong. if youre 3 hitting people with 5.56, youre hitting the limbs.
  12. V12 no ammo

    OP is presented with a problem; no ammo. He has the power to solve this problem by resupplying an FOB, or just acquiring any vehicle in the game really. Instead he decides that someone else should solve this problem for him. Thus demonstrates the pathology of narcissism.
  13. 3 Man TOW

    It would be nice if all of the deployable weapons were un-tied to FOBs to be honest. If there were an inventory system for players and vehicles, we could just load the weapon into vehicles that had the appropriate capacity to hold them and take them anywhere. There's no reason why an SPG, or mortar tubes need to have a radio. Especially light CSWs like the .50 or light mortars could even been disassembled and transported on foot, with parts spread between multiple riflemen. Imagine if you just rapidly deploy a .50 cal without the need for three guys to huddle together to place a radio thats not with 400m of another one, have a big loud truck dump supplies, then have SL and SL only place it. Imagine if you could then move/rotate/cant the thing as the situation calls for it too.
  14. Well I noticed that A LOT of the layers in 11.1 were updated, and many of the conventional vs. irregular were tweaked/or removed, and the miltia leader got a scope thanks devs
  15. https://www.reddit.com/r/joinsquad/comments/7xeh9g/squad_game_mechanics_post/ 5.56 does 62 damage. It's a two hit kill in the chest up to about 375m .50 cal does 152 damage, it always kills to the chest