Jump to content

Dockside Bars

Member
  • Content count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dockside Bars

  1. An Idea for being sneaky

    A few videos shouldn’t be indicative of the overall success of a tactic. Solo operations in Squad is an overwhelmingly lopsided affair, which is why the game is played with the intent of working with a squad of players. Just because the attacker is well concealed, doesn’t mean they aren’t now compromised. That player could’ve easily alerted their SL who alerted other squads to the fact there is a player attacking a location or moving around to disrupt operations. And just like stealth is gone. Squad doesn’t need commando style kits. If you really want to run around and try to disrupt operations with demolitions, use an Engineer kit. Adding a brand new kit for the sake of encouraging more soloing and lone wolfing is pointless. This game already has a big enough issue with people straying from objectives or wandering around areas with little of no importance and depriving the team of much needed defenders or attackers.
  2. An Idea for being sneaky

    A single guy wandering around on the map looking for stuff to sabotage isn’t going to go very well. You’re going to be grossly outnumbered and ill-equipped to fight anything short of a single guy, and any attempt at stealth is going to be nullified by the fact information can still be passed when downed, which will mean anyone with a pulse will converge on you once you are spotted or kill someone. Working with riflemen also nullifies the use of a suppressed weapon, since anyone else that fires with you will give your position away. At present, there’s just too many gameplay mechanics that hamper attempts at stealth, the biggest being anyone can open their map and see when and where someone was killed, or the fact people can still communicate with their squad when downed. So unless you manage to slip through enemy lines undetected, the moment you’re seen or you kill someone, you’re compromised.
  3. An Idea for being sneaky

    There’s zero reason for a kit like that to ever be added. The proposed gap that it’s filling doesn’t exist, there’s zero reason to promote even more people running off on their own on ineffective and suicidal ventures anymore than the game rampantly already suffers from.
  4. Helicopters guns ideas vs what we have

    I think you’re missing my point here. Just because 60s or Mi-8s can accommodate a plethora of crew served weapons and fixed forward firing weaponry, doesn’t mean they should be added just for the sake of allowing them to conduct CAS. Transport is the primary role of those helicopters. Not CAS. Why they only have door guns in Squad. You should not feel encouraged to conduct CAS attacks when all you have are door guns. You should only utilize them for self defense to suppress pop up threats and egress the area rapidly. Not loiter around trying to kill the enemy. You aren’t going to win that engagement. Adding a 50 cal to the 60 isn’t suddenly going to make it anymore capable of destroying threats, because the overwhelming majority of threats will not be affected by that. Crew served weapons are suppressive weapons.
  5. Helicopters guns ideas vs what we have

    You’re right, they have that capability, but a conventional transport Black Hawk like the one depicted in Squad, doesn’t. Just M240s for self defense. Which is why they are modeled the way they are. Yes, I’m well aware the Pave Hawks in the Air Force runs 50s in their gunner windows, just like we in the Navy run 50s in our cabins. We can also mount 20mm M197s on the pylon, as well as Hellfires and UGRs. But those are two entirely different branches. Not the Army. Squad is all about conventional military conflict, which is why the helicopters depicted reflect the standard load outs and equipment they’d utilize in real life. Transport helicopters, as in meant to transport and not act as dedicated CAS platforms, are what we have. And they shouldn’t be utilized to strafe or do attacks when they are severely mismatched in that role.
  6. Helicopters guns ideas vs what we have

    Transport helicopters are not meant to be attack platforms, which is why the crew served weapons that are mounted are only used for self defense and suppressing fire. There’s a reason why attack helicopters exist. In my opinion, if you’re using it as a makeshift gunship, you’re doing it wrong. You’re needlessly risking the helicopter, and with only crew served weapons you’re going to be ineffective against anything armored or hunkered down. Meanwhile you’re a very prominent target that anyone can see and shoot at. With the eventual addition of MANPADs, you’ll have another axis of threat that can bring your flight to an abrupt, and flaming end. Transport helicopters should just get in, drop their guys or unload their ammo, and get out of dodge. Not to mention, Army Black Hawks don’t fly with 50 cals, they use 240s as depicted in Squad. The Mi-8 has a Kord modeled which is a 12.7mm (50 cal).
  7. CAF Patch and Alpha 16 Status

    Army 60s fly with 240s, with the exception of the 160th who use the mini gun. As they stated in the post, helicopters will feature a forward looking infrared (FLIR) system that the crew can utilize to spot threats and perform reconnaissance with. If I had to guess in terms of gameplay, the co-pilot will be the one to operate that system. Although I doubt they’d implement the feature, having the co-pilot be able to take control of the aircraft if the pilot was to be incapacitated or killed would be nice to prevent the aircraft from just hurtling into the ground if the pilot is killed without anyone being able to stop it.
  8. Pen Flares

    Parachute flares fired from grenade launchers would be a neat addition if they added night layers. However with the plethora of smokes and marking mechanisms that already exist in game, it’s hard to justify additional equipment that wouldn’t be utilized much, especially something that burns out as quickly as a pencil flare. Not to mention they’re typically only worn on survival vests of pilots and aircrewmen, and are very limited in their daytime application.
  9. British tank?

    It's in the works.
  10. Why I dont want Helicopters

    *Obligatory helicopters (and fixed wing aircraft even though the backed out on them being player controlled) were always going to be incorporated into Squad since back in the Kickstarter days post*
  11. Can we have this beauty in-game, pwe-ease?

    Well considering the fact the Russian military is the only country that fields this weapon, it wouldn’t make a lot of sense for an irregular milita faction to be running around with a weapon that’s primarily used by Russian SOF units. As to Russian faction getting it, if they ever added some sort of reconnaissance or spotter kit, a weapon like that could at least be realistic since they have a limited fielding in the Russian military outside of specialized units. But with the DEVs focusing on conventional military equipment, I don’t imagine we’d ever see this weapon added. Not to say someone couldn’t add a mod with it however.
  12. Armor Penalty

    Rarely do I see people lingering around in main once they lose assets. They usually have enough situational awareness to contribute in other aspects while their asset respawns. Is that always going to occur? Of course not. But if the server has admins that are worth a damn, they'll probably remind them to go out of main and do something productive. Arbitrary penalty systems are only going to hurt this game in the long run. With the eventual addition of more varied armored vehicles and helicopters, the balance of power on the battlefield is going to be smoothed out. Competent teams are going to be the deciding factor in a match, and not a single asset.
  13. Armor Penalty

    -1 This whole idea is just mind numbingly bad. The game shouldn't impose any additional penalty on losing vehicles, not when the ticket value and respawn times are as costly as they are, not even mentioning the fact the asset in question is no longer in play to render assistance to the team. If admins want to regulate armor squads that are showing to be incompetent in their effectiveness, that's one thing. But automatically locking you out of a role for the entirety of the match for a single death and leaving the asset to now be manned by an entirely new crew (whose skill set could be even worse than the previous crew) is just asking for hilariously awful outcomes. What happens exactly when you run out of people who want to crew the vehicle since now everyone else will be infantry and those that want to crew can't because they're locked out? Do those tanks and APCs just sit in main in timeout while the team in question just gets steam rolled?
  14. Add a startup procedure for Helicopters

    Why stop at just an engine start proecedure? Why not have prestart checks, system checks, rotor or no rotor brake start checks, postengagement checks, mission and weapons system check list too? Why not have to break out a PCL and do a full pre-flight of the helicopter? Hop up on the HYDs bay and poke around with all the primary servos and hydraulic pumps, and then clamber over to the engine bay and check all the sensors and PDIs to make sure none of them popped. This game isn’t a simulator, a complicated startup procedure is incredibly frivolous. Project Reality handled it perfectly fine, take 30 seconds or so for the engines to fully spin up and the rotors to hit their full rpm before you can actually take off and begin flying. There’s really no reason to make it any more convoluted.
  15. Why I dont want Helicopters

    The DEVs wouldn't add attack helicopters to this game without some sort of MANPAD counter at the very least.They'll add an Anti Aircraft kit, in addition to deployable AA emplacements in the beginning, with mobile anticraft vehicles coming further down the line if I had to make a guess.
  16. Why I dont want Helicopters

    How exactly does adding helicopters create more 2-4 man squads? Considering the fact at max you'll probably have two helicopters or so per team (depending on the map and factions) , you're looking at maybe 2-4 guys per team acting as pilots/crewmen. With the inevitable addition of 100 player servers, that leaves 46 to 48 people per team to act as infantry or armor if applicable. Attack helicopters would be countered by MANPADs and self propelled anti aircraft weapons that would be added, which would make their employment far more cautious as opposed to just hovering in place and raining death down below. Although people seem to dislike alluding to Project Reality here, it's a very good case of how combined arms can be properly implemented and balanced. Maps often had a variety of fixed wing and rotary wing assets working in conjunction with different armored and infantry units, yet everyone could kill each other pretty effectively and no one asset was better than anything else. Logistics and transportation right now is already a pain in this game. Having a dedicated transportation helicopter that can ferry supplies and personnel around, especially when larger maps are introduced, is going to be absolutely crucial. Not to mention it'll add a whole new layer of strategy to this game, allowing teams to quick mobilize forces to attack and defend in ways previously unavailable. Obviously this all hinges upon helicopters being balanced properly, but I don't see why their addition would do anything but be a positive thing for this game. Not to mention people are quick to forget the developers always had the intention of making this a combined arms kind of game. Granted they did recant on their addition of player controlled fixed wing aircraft, but they are still being added in some respect as a commander asset so I suppose it's better than nothing.
  17. Well there’s already deployable 81 mm mortars and the Insurgent faction has access to a rocket technical that can acts as an MRL. Other than that I don’t believe they’ve stated intentions on adding howitzers or long range artillery pieces. On the note of deployable mortars perhaps the addition of an alternate heavier mortar (like a 120 mm )that could be deployed instead of the 81 mm that would feature a longer range but have less ammo capacity and require more supplies to rearm it to add some variety. Personally I wouldn’t mind seeing mobile mortar carriers along the lines of the M1129 added.
  18. Team Calibration Indicator

    You seem to be forgetting that Squad's player-base and community is tiny. Trying to place arbitrary rank or time restrictions on things like being able to lead a squad would do nothing more than drive a wedge into the player-base and discourage new players from ever attempting anything new. You seem to be placing all the blame strictly on the new players who try squad leading, but if they are the only ones who are stepping up out of the dozens of other people on the team who potentially have more experience, whose fault is it really then? With such a small community, if more veteran players choose not to squad lead, you're leaving those roles to be filled by anyone, whether they are decent or not. The only way people are going to get better at leading squads, is by actually getting experience in doing so. The accessibility of Squad is in my opinion one of its greatest strengths. You can join a random server, jump into a random squad, grab a regular kit, and odds are pretty good you're going to have a unique experience that is rarely found outside of organized gaming communities or events.
  19. When they putting in aircraft

    I highly doubt the Insurgent faction will ever get any type of helicopter asset, let alone something as highly sophisticated as a Havoc. Not to mention the Havoc would be better suited for the Russian forces anyway. Militia getting helicopters seems highly unlikely too, but you can bet the conventional factions (US, RU, GB, etc) will inevitably get some form of transport and attack helicopters at some point later in the year.
  20. Question about Air Defence vehicles

    I'd imagine the largest and more deadly anti air systems they'll implement will be self propelled anti aircraft vehicles like the Tunguska, Gepard, Avenger, Shilka, etc, anything more sophisticated than that will be overkill for what Squad is going for. Would also be nice to see unconventional forces like the insurgents and militia groups be able to deploy static anti aircraft guns like a ZPU-4 or ZU-23 in addition to their handheld Iglas or Strelas that they'll most likely get.
  21. Microphone Talking with Attitude

    I'm looking forward to the future too, but that doesn't change the fact the community can still be incredibly toxic, whether it's to new players or just the general attitude of those in-game or on the forums. Telling someone to see themselves out just because an opinion doesn't agree with theirs is also kinda what I'm getting at.
  22. Microphone Talking with Attitude

    Squad's community is toxic. /thread
  23. The only time I think Project Reality had a transport helicopter that pretty much required a co-pilot for tasks not covered by the pilot himself, was the British Merlin back when the rear ramp was controlled by the co-pilot and the troops would spawn inside the helicopter, forcing them to jump out the side doors or run out the rear ramp. Obviously that led to a lot of team-killing when people would get stuck inside the helicopter and not be able to jump out in time before the helicopter lifted off, which is why it was changed and the ramp feature was removed. Assuming they increase the transport capacity of the vehicles when they are introduced, allowing for a few extra crewmen to man specific points on the helicopter could be interesting and make their roles more engaging if it was done properly. Even still with only 50 players on each team, having two helicopters with four players each equating to almost a full infantry squad for just flying transport would be terribly wasteful in my opinion. A single crewmen besides the pilot is more than enough to act as a door gunner, co-pilot, etc for whatever need arises. Unless they make it more functional, there's really no reason a helicopter can't do the job it needs to do with only a pilot flying.
  24. Door Gunner Kits

    It's really unnecessary given the scope of Squad to have anything other than helicopter pilots for the crew of rotary aircraft considering the amount of players being on a server at any given time anyway. If you only have 50 players per team, having potentially three extra crew members aboard a helicopter just to man door-guns or act as a co-pilot is pretty frivolous, and would only take away players from other squads that could use the manpower. It would also be a pretty boring position to man, since the door gunners would only likely have short bursts of contact with the enemy, surrounded by long periods of flying around without seeing any action, especially on routine supply runs deep within friendly territory. It's just not necessary for what Squad is trying to achieve to have a dedicated kit for crew chiefs/door gunners aboard helicopters. The infantry squad that would be riding aboard the helicopter can fulfill the roles temporarily just fine until they arrive at their destination and disembark. And if you absolutely needed to have a dedicated crew member riding aboard the helo with you, it would be far more effective to bring a medic aboard who will be able to heal other players in-flight while still acting as a door gunner.
  25. Anti-Tank Launcher Optics.

    Korea? The LAW wasn't in service until Vietnam, not to mention that it's still used (albeit not as much) today since it's lighter and more portable than any other launcher the US military has in its arsenal. I've heard that among SOF and other units, it was far more popular to carry two LAWs on their back as opposed to the weight of one AT-4 (that is until they started introducing the Gustav. With that in mind I hope they keep the LAW as an alternate variant of the Light Anti Tank kit with the AT-4 as the primary like how Project Reality did it. Would make for a good trade off.
×