Forum Rules 07/06/2016Introduction The Squad Team reserves the right to edit, update, add and remove rules at any time. Applicable rules extend to the PM system. Your PMs are private, but the Squad Team may be informed about unacceptable PM content by the receiving party. Section I: Posting Rules §1 Show Respect This community can only work if we all respect each other. To that end, it is imperative that any time you engage with another user, either directly or indirectly, you show them respect with the content of your post. In particular refrain from flaming, insulting, abusing, taunting, racism, and other similar types of actions towards other forum users. §2 Attitude & Behavior Poor attitude and behavior are the most common ways a negative / unsafe environment is created and perpetuated. As such that kind of behavior will not be allowed on these forums. Please be mindful of this rule when posting personal positions and opinions regarding topics which could be considered contentious in nature. As a rule of thumb, keep your posts civil in nature, and refrain from making posts that are likely to incite arguments and create a negative environment. As a privately hosted web forum we reserve the right to maintain an environment that we are happy the majority of our players are comfortable with. §3 Swearing While we will not strictly moderate every little swear that occurs, please try to avoid excessive bad language. The moderation reserves the right to remove rants and unsuitable content at any time. §4 Illegal Topics
Prohibited topics include, but are not limited to: Piracy, drugs (including cannabis), pornography, religion, racism, sexism, homo/trans -phobic content, videos and images showing violent death or serious injury, ‘spam threads’, hacking & griefing (endorsement thereof) etc. Prohibition may be suspended for some threads if they are found to be suitable by the Moderation (such as scientific debate).
If there is doubt, the Moderation Team can decide whether a topic is considered illegal. §5 Attitude towards Squad and the Development Team
As per §1 and §2, keep in mind to be respectful and reasonable, not only towards all users of the forum, but also towards the Squad Team and towards any ideas and content and the game itself. Criticism is welcome, but if it is not constructive and/or if it is offensive, the Moderation may need to step in. Please refrain from posting if you are upset, angry or drunk, or you may be punished for things you wouldn’t have otherwise written, which is not in anyone's interest. §6 Language & Legibility
Please post only in English. Non-English content (including non-legible content) may be removed. If you see someone posting in another language because s/he apparently does not speak English, please report their post - if you can, you may reply in their language to explain their question, but please do translate their and your message so it can be reviewed by the Moderation. ‘Hiding’ insults in non-English posts will be punished harshly. Posts written largely in ‘leetspeak’ or full of spelling / grammatical errors may be treated like non-English content. This rule does not extend to PMs. §7 Forum structure & Search
Please ensure when posting a new thread, that the thread is located inside the correct forum section. Check all forum section titles to judge where your thread should belong. Threads created in the wrong forum section will be moved or deleted.
Before posting a new thread, please make use of the forum search to find older threads about the same topic. In doubt, it is recommended to rather post in an existing thread, unless that thread is years out of date. However, do not bump old threads without adding a new question / answer / insight that wasn’t in that thread before - use common sense. §8 Thread Titles
Please name your thread appropriately; the subject title should sum up / explain the content in the thread. If you fail to name your thread properly (such as ‘Hey!’ or ‘Check this out!’ or ‘Help!’), we will either rename or lock the topic. Repeated offense may lead to infractions. The practice of using CAPITALS only in your thread title is not allowed and will be edited or the thread will simply be deleted. Strange or abnormal Unicode characters should be excluded from thread titles for the sake of being distracting and unnecessary.
§9 Thread Capitalization
Please ensure that your post is not in all CAPITALS, as this is not allowed. Any threads posted in all caps will subsequently be removed from the forum. Repeated offenses may lead to infractions against your account. This practice is not approved or accepted here.
§10 Images in posts
When posting images, mind the following restrictions:
.gifs will be allowed and may be removed by Staff if deemed necessary.
Maximum size for images is 1280x1024.
Do not include more than ~1 large image per paragraph of text, unless in image collection / announcement threads. Link to further images.
Consider posting thumbnails. You may post a few more images per post if they are reasonably small, the details are for the Moderation to judge. §11 The use of BBCode
It is allowed to use the BBCode in your posts. Over usage is not allowed. You may use the Bold in a reasonable manner but not for the whole text body. You may use the size feature but in a limited reasonable manner. You may not use any of the additional fonts at all. Color may be used to high light a point but again, not for the whole text body. Moderators will be watching for misuse and will edit when required without giving notice. Continued disregard for this rule will result in Moderator action in the form of warnings. Section II: Forum Signatures §1 Signature Dimensions
To avoid clutter, please make sure your signature (if you choose to have one) does not exceed the following size limit: 350x150 pixels. Your signature may consist of images, user bars and text elements, as long as the total size does not exceed 550 x 200 pixels. A small tolerance will be given, but any signature larger than the limit may at any time be deleted without prior warning. If you are not sure whether your signature is acceptable, please PM a moderator. §2 Signature Content
All rules of section 1 fully apply to your signature. We will remove signatures or parts of signatures without notice if they violate the forum rules, and infractions may be given. §3 Animated Signatures
Please refrain from using animated .gifs as signatures, they distract and clutter the forum. Section III: Reporting & Moderation §1 Reporting Posts
There is a Post Report system in place. If you notice a post that violates forum rules, simply use the exclamation mark icon below the users avatar image to send a report to the Moderation. We will then review this post. Your report will not be made public and cannot be linked to your person by anyone outside of the Squad Team. You will not be punished for using the Report system even if the report was false, unless you repeatedly abuse the system to spam it.
Do not ‘report’ posts by replying directly in public to them. In case of spambots, this prompts them to respond in turn, spamming the forum further. This also fuels flame wars and arguments. §2 Reporting Moderators
Moderators are subject to the same forum rules (and some additional rules / exceptions). If you think that a Moderator has treated you unfairly or is otherwise breaking forum rules, please PM the Lead Moderator or any Administrator. Do not accuse Moderators in public, the Squad Team will treat every complaint seriously and it is in our interest to discipline or remove Moderators who are known to break forum rules. §3 Respect Squad Team members and Moderators
Do not ignore or argue against Admin, Moderator or Dev instructions on the forum. If you have a complaint, as per §2, please inform the Team in private. You are expected to follow orders given by the Moderation, Administration and Development Team, and it is necessary for smooth running of the forum to respect their decisions. Being stubborn or ignoring warnings will lead to harsher punishments - however, we do not tolerate Moderator / Admin abuse of power / privileges, so do not hesitate to inform other Team members if you feel treated unfairly. §4 Bans and multiple accounts
If your account is temporarily or permanently banned, do NOT create another account. Bypassing a ban will result in further action, and a permanent ban of all of your accounts.
You are not allowed to have more than one account for any reason. If you share an internet connection with another user who has their own account, it might happen that this account is incorrectly identified as a secondary account - please get in touch with the Moderation or Administration to resolve such issues.
Search the Community: Showing results for tags 'apc'.
Found 8 results
Have some ideas for apc.... maybe devs already have thinked of it and is in the works. We have the BTR 90. But i feel its a bit OP compared to the other factions. So..... Can we get the bmp-2 for the Irregular Militia (witch is supose to be pro-ukrainian forces)? The good old M113 with 50.cal for americans Old toyota haice van 1980s model for Insurgents. Not apc but pc.
According to Wiki Russian Army has: 1500 BTR-80 and 1220 BTR-82A/AM. As you know, main difference is a 30mm cannon. Why we get BTR-80 which will be in the minority pretty soon? Because Russian Army add in service 1220 APCs in 3 years. I agree to reduce their number to 4 for the whole round.
Just interested to see what the community has in ideas, not saying it should be in but just spewing some ideas out. Such as odd Soviet era tanks. Or anything in general... Examples.... IDF MAR-290 Soviet Scud Soviet BTR... Again just brainstorming odd vehicals, plus as a history geek I learn something new when someone post something interesting. Please post with pictures
Vehicle Collsion The maps are obviously made with an eye for the fact vehicles will be featured down the road. I just worry that we wont get the right "feel" of driving a tank, if you forexample can't drive an Abrams through those low clay fences featured on most maps. Or break down a gate to a compound by driving a Humwee or APC into it. At they very least I think the developers should allow for tanks/vehicles of some caliber to drive through(-without destroying) a variation of obstacles, like the clay walls, small trees and so on. I just seems silly to be stuck behind a small tree in a main battle tank, like you would in battlefield games. I played forgotten hope 2 (bf2 mod) a lot, and they made tanks able to pass through fences and so on... of course it seems weird that a tank drives through and the infantry following has to go around, but tanks lose a bit of their purpose if they have to use roads, and cant offroad through a forest with small trees. Destruction I think it doesn't really suit the game how rocket launchers get stopped by a clay wall and if you're directly behind it won't be hurt by the explosion... So I was wondering, when vehicles... Tanks, helicopters with hellfiremissiles, IEDs and such are added. Will one then be able to just hide out in a compound while a main battle tank is shelling your clay hut without having to worry about it? About the destruction, i really do get how complex and time taking it is to implement.. however the cheap solution would be for explosions of some size to not be totally blocked by walls and such, so standing directly behind a wall getting hit my a tank gun, would give you something to think about. How do you think this will be in the final version of the game?
Yesterday I was playing some Project Reality, and I was in the APC squad in the Yamalia map. For those who don't know, that map is composed by medium grass fields separating "islands" of taller land with semi dense tree forests on them. It is a really enjoyable map, but playing as a Heavy Vehicle driver I discovered something that I had never imagined could be so annoying and detrimental to armored gameplay: the indestructible trees. While driving in between the trees, there were some times that I tried to just run over some trees, just not to go around them and lose valuable time (very valuable in fact: my other squad mates' LAVs were engaging enemy BTRs and needed my help). I wasn't trying to run over a baobab or anything of the sort, just a tiny little tree. However, the LAV just ridiculously bumped into it (even taking damage!), and I had to back off and maneuver around anyway. So the second or third time that happened to me I decided to come here and ask you to PLEASE try to implement some way for Medium and Heavy vehicles to just run over trees, as they would in real life, just like in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKnB5XabdxI (it's some old soviet armored tracked vehicle just not giving a fuck about some medium-girth tall trees) or in this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wimFnubzrQ (an Abrams saying fuck you to a pretty big tree). I'm angry at trees right now, I know you can tell, but still, I think that if this could be done it would make armor much more versatile and the overall game more immersive. Maybe I got so insistent on this tree crushing because I had played this CoD1 mission (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILI5zzKsHw0) on the same day the Yamalia Tree Conspiracy happened to me, but if a 2003 game could do it, then it just doesn't seem that hard to do in 2015 now. I'm no videogame programmer though, so that's why I came here, to hear why I'm wrong and this isn't convenient to be added to squad. Thanks for your attention.
I could not find a thread for tankers, so hope you don't mind making one here. Squad development looks great.. and going so fast atm! Being a big tank nut I would like to suggest to please add proper tanks and apc's. So what is in my opinion proper tank implementation. There are only three titles that did it right, so use them as an example! (Steel Beasts Pro, RO2, T34 vs Tiger) I'm a Steel Beasts Pro player and that should basically be the aim for proper tank implementation. no need to make it a sim like DCS -make it possible to control a tank solo AND multicrewable. (if that is even a word) and for those screaming that you should not be able to solo a tank.. It's not like the tanks in battlefield.. where you are basically a sniper on tracks driving around the battle field. Soloing a tank gives you a disadvantage as you have to move from one position to the other.. so a multi head crew is always more effective. (if they communicate at all) I suggest looking at how they implemented the controls in RO2.. because that is basicly how I would implement a tank. Have at least the turret interiour, as this is the place you will spend most if your time (the office) , popping your head in and out of the cupola .. when turned out able to use bino's (but vulnarable to snipers etc). And when turned in and looking through periscope you have very limited view. Don't do instant switching from seat to seat.. just do it like in RO2.. there's a delay (or animation when moving from commander to gunner seat) so you are not able to just use a tank as a sniper and spam the battlefield. The problem when you force people to use multiple people in a tank is that you always have to get people online you play with. Believe me.. controlling a tank with people who do not communicate is a nightmare. And a tank is a large vulnerable object with all those infantry with rpg's. I rather see 2 tanks with interior and 2 apc's then 20 without. I think it would be epic to finally have a great tactical framework like squad that is the first one ever to have proper tanks like Steel Beasts and/or RO2. Both are great.. but steelbeast is mainly about vehicles, and in RO2 the maps aren't that great for tankers. I know implementing tanks this way is a shitload of work.. but please.. get someone on the team that knows the few good tank games and makes it his mission to get it right in squad. Yes, I see bumps ahead.. how on earth can you get interiors for the newer models for example. And if you need help I know my way around with 3D modeling.. just let me know
What is Immersive Driving? Immersive driving is probably the polar opposite of all FPS land based vehicle control. I'm not sure how to implement it fully but some examples have been suggested in other threads. The idea is to enhance the experience of driving vehicles and make it much more interesting and also slightly more challenging Immersive Driving Might Include: Manual gear changing only (perhaps unrealistic but used to enhance driving and hence gaming experience)The ability to turn on and off engines Vehicle brakeHandbrake/parking break/mountain brake (to stop or resist the annoying sliding down terrain to a certain degree)Balancing Terrain with Vehicle Speed and ManoeuvrabilityPerhaps a 'GPS direction system' for some maps (not neccessarily all, not sure if possible)Exterior Mirrors or Camera views (JACKAL can be mounted with FLIR, I'm not talking about 3p view)Vehicle Dynamic Damage, Disability, Decal & Destruction System (Vehicles that are disabled/unusable AND not exploded/onfire/'wreck' status)Dynamic Dashboards (speed gauge ect)Lock vehicle/Restrict Vehicle to squad/personnel(with automatic unlock time of 10 or 15 minutes - so team can still use vehicle if vehicle is abandoned or squad disconnects)More terrain features specific to vehicles (traps/ditches, road craters ...model could be 'blast crater', impassable terrain/roadblock, enforced usage of deployable bridges (in a minority of maps or to cross a certain area of the map, limited terrain deformation limited for network physics and bandwidth, player made terrain traps...limited with conditions, more chances of crashing vehicles with careless driving)Vehicle Driver VOIP Channel (friendly team only)Vehicle sensors for parking/proximity'Shot Detection' Sensor for vehicles that have it IRL (system gives audio cue to compass bearing, device exists IRL...not sure if it is used much or deployed. Probably used to feed intel to machine gunnners or disembarked troops)Passenger Injuries from SOME crashesObviously some of these ideas have been suggested and I've tried to link them (where possible). However, I did add some original ideas into the mix and my suggestion is the actual concept of driving needing to be improved upon from PR. I'm not endorsing or saying all of the suggested implementation ideas are good. They're just ideas to hopefully inspire ideas or possibilities.