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), religion, politics, 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. §12 Complaints of Server/Admin Abuse Reports of server/admin abuse will not be posted publicly. All reports concerning this type of behavior should be place in the appropriate sub-forum. http://forums.joinsquad.com/forum/241-report-server-admin-abuse/ All posts made outside of this area will be be removed. Section II: 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 'armor'.
Found 10 results
Hello guys, Please note that I'm not an native English speaker and my countryman aren't really known for their English's skills, so be nice with the numerous grammatical mistakes that you will see. In my multiple game, i have noticed that most of the armour are reckless and often act alone. I believe this is due to armour being too tough : crewman roughly know how many AT hit their vehicle can endure and since the numbers is quite high, they think they are invulnerable. Sadly they never think neither about the mobility kills, or the possibility of falling inside a well organized ambush. In result they get smoked every time they face an organized squad. You may think that the community will grow up and people will learn to stop this ... but let's face it, it's been a while since Devs had implemented the mobility kill and so far most people still act like this. What I'm gonna propose it's to increase the damage done by LAT, HAT and maybe ATGM to reduce the toughness of armour vs infantry AND in the meantime reduce the number of AT in the field. Reducing the number of Anti-tank : Currently, this is your basic squad structure (9 man) : - 1 SL, - 2 medics, - 2 LAT, - 1 more support kit (often scopped AR for regular or marskman for irregular), - 1 HAT/MG/Engineer, - 2 rifleman, Please note that : - your squad is full, - you don't have crewman (so no mech squad), - you don't take several specialised kits (because that's not very friendly toward the other squads), My proposal is to reduce the numbers of LAT available per squad to only 1. That way, we will see more support kit like grenadier or dare I say marskman. I don't think reducing the number of HAT it's necessary, at least right now. They are powerful, but can't be everywhere. Increasing the damage of anti-tank : To compensate this reduction of threat in the filed, I proposed to increased they damage. For example, see below the number of LAT needed to destroy several amour : - BTR 80/82 : upper front/side 3 (but 2 make him slowly burning), lower front/side 2, back/top 1, - striker : front 3, side 2, back/top 1, - MRAP : front 2, side 2 (but 1 make burn), top /back 1, - BRDM : upper front/side 2 (but 1 does more dmg than on a MRAP), lower front/side/top/back 1, - IFV : thickest armour part 4 (but3 make burn), middle armour thick part 3, thin armour part 2, - MBT : no change, I personally find adapted, people lost them mainly versus other MBT or well placed ATGM. For the HAT versus APC/IFV, the idea will be globally that : - one hit on the weakest part (top/back) should result on a kill, - one hit on not so much armoured part (typically side) should result on making the vehicle slowly burn, - 2 hit on the thickest amour should result on a kill (or slowly burn for the best armoured). But Why ? vehicle will last as long or even longer with that To increase the crewman's fear, it's just psychological. Right now people think "they need 3-4 LAT hits to kill me, if I take 2 hits, I will RTB and save the vehicle", but they never think about the mobility kill or simultaneous AT hit. Now they will know they are weaker, and hopefully will work more with the infantry and avoid getting shot in the back or side. That way if the vehicle stay with it's infantry i will feel way safer because his fellow teammates will protecting his flanks, the ways it's suppose to be. Note that in my proposition vehicle are still very tough in "the front part", to avoid them getting "snipped" by skilled AT. They will get hit, but always be able to RTB. What's about vehicle vs vehicle damage ? Nothing, personally i find them overall quite well balanced (except bugging chopper that don't register correctly the damage but that's another problems). That's why I'm proposing to increase AT damage and not reducing the armour or the health of the tank, to avoid messed up something that work. Bonus point : supply consumption I have read somewhere on this forum, that if we put that much FOB close to the flag, it's because we need ammo for the AT. Since I have read this, I have realize how much accurate this is. AT need to much ammo for destroying an enemy vehicle that know how to play (meaning : that don't show his back and have his side covering by his infantry). Your rifleman can't bring him enough, so you need an ammo crate and you need it close, because if it's too far the amour will have to time to flee. It's also mean that you always need a FOB to attack a flag, so if you flank to take the risk to get annihilated by an amour because you lack ammo to destroyed it. I have several example of getting blocked by lone-wolf armour despite scoring mobility kill on him, simply because we were too far from a supply point and have to make the way back to it. Overall, I believe it will help infantry squad to flank more and incite vehicle to cooperate more with their infantry. Note that I'm not saying that : - cooperation between infantry and vehicle (or mech squads) don't exist, but admit it's rare, particularly on public server. I want to incite them to do it more often, - vehicle are too strong : no, an well organized squad will roll over any lone-wolfing vehicle and will struggle versus a good mech squads like it's suppose to. Once again, I want to incite people in public server to play better and cooperating more, I'm Lazy, please summarize I'm proposing to increase LAT and HAT damage deal to amour, but only one LAT will be available per squad. That's way, I hope crewman will fear more LAT and HAT, stay safer and cooperate with their infantry more.
Clayton.Q posted a topic in Feedback & SuggestionsI don't quite understand the idea behind making a tank only able to fire either a shell or the coax. Even if it's a matter of one person not being realistically able to do that much (I'm not a tanker so I have no clue how they operate) then it should at least fall to the point that you shouldn't have to load coax from your SABOT in order to use it. Is it a cooldown workaround? As for helicopters, I don't quite understand the idea behind putting a collective in the game if you're not going to work a way out for joysticks to be able to control that collective with better accuracy. As it stands now, the flight mechanics are very difficult, especially for new pilots. Is there a fix in the works for this in the future? Lastly, Thermal optics for crewed vehicles like Armor, APCs, even hopefully gunships when they come out. Yeah they're a little cheap, but it's sort of the idea. Thermals allow armor to be a threat from a greater range away. So it's up to the other team to find a way to find a way to flank them using defilade, distraction, anything they can to close the distance, or learn to shoot from a much greater distance which improves the skill level you'll find in servers. I love the game and I love the potential, and I know it's still in alpha, but these three things would make the fundamental mechanics so much more fun!
UNIT_normal posted a topic in Feedback & SuggestionsCurrently gunner in armored vehicle has ability to discharge smoke grenade. But in real life, commander has that ability. Just remove ability from gunner and add to commander. This will make commander more usable and force people to use armored vehicle as 3-man team. 3-man as a one armored vehicle is more authentic too.
Snaxxi posted a topic in Feedback & SuggestionsIn the title. It’s a bit confusing to me that the more modern vehicles in game do not have the driver periscope that Project reality did ( and even most older vehicles had a no-zoom 360 periscope that allowed the driver to act as a commander/drive better) This gives much more situational awareness to the crew and allows an experienced driver to call out targets for his gunner. Maybe that’s what the devs are going for; making it easier to sneak up on heavy armor. However it kinda just leads to new guys getting spanked and losing tickets much faster. Even if it had to be a third position for a commander, that would be fine. And potentially no thermal sights, that is understandable. however in the current state, the heavy armor feel a bit too blind, and make driving the “bitch job.” Not a lot of new players are going to want to use armor if they can’t gun, especially if you don’t have any expirience, the better players will just say “okay, you drive then.” At least with the Periscopes you’re could call targets and feel like you were in charge of survival, this was further made better by the third position machine gun on tanks. You could swap to that position and still lay down fire. tl:dr — to make heavy armor feel better and not have a “bitch job” (driving) add the 360 traverse periscope back to the driver for situational awareness/calling targets. please feel free to add stipulations to make it balanced. Aka no thermals, limited viewing angle (can’t look directly behind), can’t zoom far, ect.
nathanhindle posted a topic in Feedback & SuggestionsI don't about y'all but I had to share this, I believe it could be a good addition in the future for insurgent forces when MBTs and large caliber canons are implemented. Terrorist and insurgent factions lack most conventional weaponry such as a fleet of tanks or other armored vehicles. I feel that this could add game play and balance if need be for the future of Squad, when trying to match up less advanced insurgent and terrorist factions against big strong and well equipped factions which naturally have the advantage. Outside of actually giving terrorist and insurgents tanks, which would kind of contradict their natural capabilities seen in the world. This example shows that terrorist and insurgent factions resort to innovative means of leveling the battlefield when they are denied access to the same technology and infrastructure of their adversaries. It is not expected that militants, terrorists and insurgents who lack any industrial infastructure be able to posses and maintain something like a IFV, or MBT. As an alternative I present you with these photos. I hope this post inspires the developers and if they did not know about this technology existing think about it for themselves, and how it could tie into the combined forces aspect of Squad, keeping true to the factions real life nature and allowing these smaller less equipped factions to match heavily armed adversaries in the theater of conventional warfare in future 50x50 game modes on larger playing fields. Also in the wild there are most likely many more adaptations of weapon systems to pickup trucks and other common civilian vehicles across conflict regions today which may also have a place in Squad's future. Thank you for reading, have a great day. Source: http://www.americanmilitaryforum.com/forums/threads/3rd-world-modified-military-vehicles.1572/page-7
Devs, Loving V10! She has a few kinks, but will buff them out! With V10 out, and you all hard at work on buffing...I was just curious to find out in our next newsletter if we could get an update on Armor? I was very excited to see my M2 Bradley and Abrams being added! Any news would be welcomed! Thanks
I'm pretty hyped about the fact that tanks are going to be part of Squad. The level of detail showcased in the photogrammetry previews is tantalizing, and I trust that the final product will still be spectacular. I very much enjoy the level of realism in War Thunder's simulator mode, or something serious like Steel Beasts - that is to say, tank shells' effect on target depends entirely on the localized armor values and the components sitting in the line of fire, rather than a traditional HP pool. I'd love to see this type of realistic damage system implemented in Squad. It would provide so many new tactical opportunities besides "show up with tank, fire first". Use hull-down defilade as a defense against weaker AT rounds by covering your thinner hull armor Flank a tank as a HAT soldier knowing that the dual-warhead missile you carry will cut through the side/rear armor like butter and ignite the ammo Rely on top or bottom attacks as insurgent forces when an armored vehicle is impenetrable from the front/sides with the traditional warheads available Use autocannons to mobility-kill an enemy MBT or damage its optics, then rush the flank for the kill The system itself wouldn't have to be all that complex under the hood, either, in order to get a realistic feel. I've developed something like this myself, and all you really need are: Clean "collision model" for actual armor Components/tags/textures (whatever works best in Unreal Engine) designating armor thicknesses in RHAe for both kinetic and chemical attacks for each section of armor RHAe penetration values for each ammo type, along with kinetic or chemical flag Surface normal sampling on round impact, with pen/no-pen calculation on the spot based on calculated LOS thickness Collision zones on the locations of major systems or components inside the tank (they can even be primitives - no one's going to know the ammo rack is a couple of box colliders) A handful of vehicle status effects for component damage, e.g. ammo rack = fire/cookoff; optics = gunner zoom disabled; gun breech = longer reload; tracks = immobilized; etc. Ability for crew to repair damage over time Simple spalling model using generated "bullets" with a random spread from point where a penetrating shell enters the crew compartment Direct wounding/killing of crew members in line of fire when a shot penetrates These are just my ideas, though, and of course there may be something entirely different in mind for the way armor will work in Squad. Is there any word yet on how tank armor/ammo will be modeled?
Heyho Squadies! I really like the infantry game-play. While it is easy to learn it is pretty hard to master. It feels intuitiv but at the same time it has a realistic feeling without being overly complex. This is, as I hope, will follow into the vehicle gameplay. In this topic I would like to discuss my ideas/ hopes especially for tanks, without knowing how they played out in PR. I draw my experience out of SteelBeasts Pro PE, which is a full fleched tank simulator. Despite being a simulator, it did a lot of things correct and simple. Crew-System While I would like to see a 3-men crew-system, meaning driver, gunner and commander being playable, I would understand when it would only be a two-men-system: Gunner + Commander. In the two-men-system the commander would be the guy who controls the movement of the tank and this solution seems to be the best IMO. Commander: He "drives" the tank, can look outside the hatch, controls maybe a remote-weapon-station (if available) and gets his own optics. When he uses the optics-mode, he can bring the gun on his sight with a simple left-click on his mouse. With a right-click he can bring his vision on the current sight of the gunner. This would implement a hunter-killer-ability of modern tanks and enhances inner-tank-teamplay. Of course in this case to fire the RWS would need to be on another key, but this shouldn't be a big deal. With a press on the "prone"-key, he would get the smoke-screen up. Gunner: He shoots the gun over his optics, without the ability to look out on his own. There should be two optics available to him: The "normal" main-optics with thermal-imaging and different zoom-level and a optical-solution with a fixed zoom, no Laser-Range-Finder or Dynamic-Lead as a kind of emergency-optic. Should the tank be only be crewed by a single person, an instant switch between both position should be possible, while driving should also be possible from the gunners-position in such an instance. How to fire the gun As you have seen, I haven't written much about the gunner in the part above. Shooting a tank-gun should be more complex, than shooting a rifle. I imagine it the following way, without getting too complex: 1. The player identifies a moving target over his optics 2. With the "Lean"-keys he zoomes onto the target and brings the optic on target. (e.g. with the left-lean-key you change the zoom, with the right-lean-key you turn on/off / change the Thermal-Imager) 3. Middle-Mouse-Click: Lasering the target, when "hit" then he gets a correct echo (he gets a solid red range number into his optics), when he misses (or the laser is blocked) he gets a wrong echo (blinking red number with the measured distance). 4. Right-Mouse-Hold: Because he needs to follow the target with his optics, this way the dynamic lead is "programmed" into the FCS. 5. Left-Mouse-Click: He fires the gun... when he got everything right, he hits the target... if not, he misses. What he needs to learn is to program in the dynamic-lead correctly (when he follows the target too fast during the "hold" period, he shoots in front of it, if he follows it too slow, he shoots behind it). When he got a wrong laser-echo, he needs to either lase again or shoot with a wrong echo by adjusting the distance manually (aiming above the target). Lasering isn't constantly possible. If you would laser too fast (around lasering every second), the laser might overheat and will need a short cool-down period. After the gun is fired, the crew hears some loading sounds and then a generic voice of the loader with something along the lines "Sabot in", "Sabot loaded", "HEAT in", "HEAT loaded", I don't now the correct terms of our English friends, they might help you out here. When such a system is implemented, using a tank-gun gets far more interesting and realistic. It would even be possible to put in the different mechanics of the nations, when wished, but I think the above system would be fine as a generalization. Is the enemy dead? This is an important point for me: Everybody knows that an enemy tank is destroyed, when his ammunition cookes off (while we are at it: can we have this please) or he draws the head (his turret flies away)... but when you hit an enemy tank with an APFSDS-round, the only thing you see might be a flash, dust and a standing enemy tank... you don't know if the crew inside is completely dead, if they are only wounded, if the gunner might be even alive and shoot back... you need to wait and see... or sent a 2nd round downrange until you are sure. Thus the damage-mechanic is important: Optics, Crew, Ammunition, Tracks, Engine, Turret-Rotation, Stabilizer, LRF, ... should be destroyable if possible and cause different problems to a crew of a tank... while at the same time you could still work with a invisible "health-bar" that renders the tank completely destroyed. When a tank is destroyed it should just stay there without doing anything most of the time and only with a small chance of a cook-off or explosion (which is of course higher, when the ammunition compartment was hit). Armor and Ammunition It seems the developer are on a good way here from what I found in the forums... but please, can we have working ERA? sincerly, Thonar
So I haven't heard anything about armor pen, modules, ect. I am of course talking about damage models, taken in far greater detail then lets say, arma, war thunder, ect. as the pictures below. My thoughts would be having module damage, there should be no such thing as "hit-points" rather overall damage that would cause the vehicle to be a banded or destroyed. It can be done reletively easily as knocking out modules would add for realism(as PR was famous for vehicle combat). Or like russian tanks are famous for; putting ammunition around the turret so most penetrations cause internal explosion. ::::rant starts here:::: So I heard squad thought about implementing the armata platform. One question, If the T-90 has seen little to no action why would you even add the armata which the specs will be classified for a long time. The T-90 would make sense or any other T-72 implemtation. If you are gonna go that crazy you should add the fucking polish super tank the PL-PAC01. I don't mean to go off on the russo fanboys, but if we are sticking to whats realistic why add a tank that has maybe 10 produced, with specs you are just guessing on. ::::END ARMATA RANT HERE:::: I will edit as I find more documentation.