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 'roundtable'.
Found 3 results
Hey Squaddies! The text you’re about to read is a recap of a community roundtable held Offworld Industries to gather feedback. Roundtable events are based on the most recent Recap and we’d recommend reading that first. Please note that this text is not a planning document, but a recap of a conversation with the community. Best efforts have been made to retain tone and intent, but mistakes happen: please feel free to submit corrections. =) If you prefer to listen, you can hear the original audio recording. If your organization isn't involved in the roundtable and would like to be, please reach out to Nordic Socialist for more information. OWI Attendees included Axton, Assi (the Silent), StrangeZak, Fuzzhead, Gatzby, ChanceBrahh, and the host, Nordic. SquadWiki: It’s in need of some updating. If you can lend a hand, or know someone who would, it would be much appreciated. Usgu and Sweez are champions, but can’t do it alone. We all have knowledge that could be out there: It took 1300 hours for Nordic to figure out you could capture a neutral flag with one guy. While the groundwork for the mechanics is being laid, so should the groundwork for documentation. It would benefit from more meta knowledge of the game. Things like what to expect when you join a server, how different game modes are set up, or other meta basics. (Much of this should be in the game, too.) Reach out to Usgu if you’d like to assist! RIP members have made an announcement and have shown interest. (Thanks RIP!) One suggestion would be to have an organized wiki day with QA members and developers on hand to verify the data, answer questions, and assist in editing. Wikipedia style writing prompts may be another avenue. Adding some breadcrumbs to the wiki from the in-game message of the day might help as well. Squad could still use more tutorialization, especially video content. We’re looking into it, but due to the number of changes coming to UI and systems, it’ll make more sense to make that sort of content when it is done. In the meantime, the wiki is a good resource for that information. Server Experience It would be nice to have a section in the server browser/client for training servers. Effectively, having some sort of tagging system for server admins to self-identify server type might work. In addition to that, some sort of way to present rules and information when joining a server would help manage expectations and experience. Some suggested tags: “Regular, Competitive, Training.” “Training, Casual, Competitive” StrangeZak: We frequently debate server browser. No one can quite decide which way to go. We don’t want to split a whole community. Admin Tools They’re getting a little higher in priority, but still have to wait for other systems. We’ve heard your suggestions and want them too. (See previous roundtables.) Unreal Engine Versions We’re keeping an eye on the improvements in each engine update and we’re especially excited about the features being developed for Fortnite. We have everything we need to launch in the current release, but will continue to evaluate engine updates. They are a lot of work, especially making sure all previous code is compatible. RAAS Fog of war (i.e., Not being sure which flag will unlock next.) isn’t confirmed at the moment, but it is something we’d like to see. It may not make it into alpha 12, however. There will be randomized flags so you don’t play the same configuration every time. It’s being built with reducing overhead on building layers in mind, benefitting both our designers and modders. You should be able to select a specific layer with AdminChangeMap at least. Main bases will not be randomized in Alpha 12, but that’s something that could be possible in the future. It’s also possible to specify whether a flag will be randomized or not, as the randomizer is modular. One of the main difficulties with main bases are the vehicle spawns, but the future might have some solutions for that. As the designer still picks the flow, there will still be logic to the layer design. It should be similar to Destruction; it will pick a cluster or area of the map, and then pick a point within that cluster. Static/Normal AAS will continue to be developed where it makes sense to do so. We want the competitive community to have strong layers, but we will likely not create hundreds of static layers for maps in the future -- randomized AAS is to help address that. Hopefully, we can find some more competitive-friendly game modes too. =) Oni Shinobi believes the fog of war will be very important, as it will impact the ability to rush the next flag. truthRealm is into the fog of war, and suggests that it might be a server or layer variable. Related to that, they wonder if there are any plans to standardize factions by layers. There will be some way of knowing which factions are playing, ideally in the server browser, but there will still be variations by map. Vehicle Damage The next iteration will have vehicle component damage, as illustrated in the recap with the exploding text fuel tanks. Along with mobility kills, there will be the ability to field repair, probably no more than 25% health. To fully repair, you will have to leave the field and return to a repair station. Hitting specific components will have some chance to cause a catastrophic failure, but it will not happen every time you hit that spot. E.g., ammo might explode occasionally, but aiming directly for the ammo container will not cause a kill every time. “Vehicles should be more survivable on the field, not necessarily more healthy.” - Fuzzhead Armor penetration (i.e., crew kills) may be possible in the future but are not currently being implemented. “It would be cool to shoot the back of a Stryker and kill everyone inside it, but it was difficult enough to get small arms working.” It would be cool, but don’t count on it soon, as it’s both design and programmatically complex -- we don’t want vehicles to be rendered useless immediately. Designers are investigating reactive armor blocks on tanks, based on the component damage tests. Another example might be slat armor for IFVs. Some vehicle suggestions include making infantry able to disable a vehicle, but not destroy a vehicle. Adding thermals may not have made sense in the past, but with HAT/TOW being lethal, it might balance the field especially if it could be disabled with component damage. We’re still looking into deflating tires or having them fall off, but we’re not yet sure if it’s possible with the physics engine. There will still be mobility kills, however. The team is currently focused on armored vehicles primarily though. Currently, vehicles are often too risky to use on an assault, based on their relative ticket value. Too risky to pile your troops into a Stryker. Sometimes assigning 2-3 people to a vehicle feels like a waste of resources. More counters against infantry with AT would be appreciated, as it feels like smoke is the only option now. Turret Stabilization It’s still a little rough right now, but it’s coming along. The input delay feels rough. Currently, it functions by holding your bearing while the vehicle moves. Lazing isn’t being developed at the moment, but it’s something we’d like to have. The baseline is that tanks need some sort of stabilization. We’re considering some sort of system for the gunner to adjust directly to a Commander’s target; some way for the commander and gunner can communicate (that isn’t VoIP), with the gunner still in command of their role. Modding 2.0 Linux server mod support! Whitelisting mods is something we’re considering, but it’s very difficult to run a mod at this point -- the system needs to mature some first. We’ve had some volunteers to QA/test community mods to this end, so stay tuned. Tanks/At We’ve shown the M1A2 (though it was mislabeled -- oops.) and the T72. We talked a bit about reactive armor above, but again, that’s not confirmed. We’d like to have as many assets as PR did; choices are great. Likely the driver will be a seat, the gunner will be a seat, and the commander will be a seat. You should be able to get away with a driver and a gunner, but running a full vehicle will be more efficient. It’s unlikely there will be four-person tanks. Don’t expect one man tanking to be a thing. There will be maps designed for tanks. (Not Sumari! Don’t worry!) Current maps will receive them too, but they’ll likely be balanced by similar vehicles on the other faction. (e.g., USA versus RUS) The ubiquity of the t72 means you’ll see more than just conventional forces using tanks. Future Regarding factions and other tools/vehicles/toys, post-launch content will be a thing; if you watched the recent SquadChat , Irontaxi lays it out a bit. We want to do as much as we can, for as long as we can, but we’re also very excited to see what the modding community comes up with. As we’ve shown with maps, we’re very open to adding community content to vanilla Squad. Belaya It’s a bit scope heaven right now; the mapping team has already made a lot of changes. It’s losing a lot of roads, gaining some foliage, ruined fortifications, and more space to capture in, hopefully giving people the cover they need to make the map more fun. Paired with the previous FOB changes, there should be a lot less meat grinder going on. There are also some layers that don’t include the train tunnel. Some feel that Kamdesh and Belaya feel really similar, from a design standpoint. They’re cosmetically beautiful, but lack some unique locations and points of interest. They can feel a bit repetitive. Some of that was due to the timeline (2-4 month) on which they were created, some of that was based on the philosophy; trying to make them as fun as possible within the constraints. We acknowledge that it does feel a little stagnant and gamey. Though there’s danger in asymmetric locations causing people to dislike the map entirely. The mapping team is split on increasing the size of the villages versus more open-ground fighting but are considering options to improve the experience. Adding more to the maps is entirely possible, especially as things like Yeho get revamped too. Kamdesh was conceived as similar to Operation First Light, but on the side of a mountain slope as well. Technical limitations with draw distance caused the design to change.
Hey Squaddies! The text you’re about to read is the minutes of a meeting hosted by Offworld Industries to gather community feedback. Roundtable topics are based on the most recent recap or patch; in this case, we focused on the changes in Alpha 11. You can review the audio of the event here: Please note that the text represents a dialogue between the community and developers, not a planning document. OWI Attendees included Axton, StrangeZak, Fuzzhead, Gatzby, Nordic, and Merlin. (Apologies if I missed anyone! Thank you for coming!) Note: Text in Italics represents responses from OWI members or general overview text sourced from OWI. Attempts to preserve the discussion as it happened between topics and questions have been made, but may be edited for readability. Pre-Event Armor system Longer, more intense. Maybe too long in some cases, especially if teams stalemate. Fuzzhead: Vehicle interiors are worth doing, it impacts all vehicles. Turning out is almost like adding another weapon/ability to vehicles. Virus: Tons of little bugs, very annoying. Royvas: More intense. StrangeZak: Internally, we're pretty happy with patch, best we've shipped in a while. But that’s not saying much as we haven’t patched very much lately. =) Wicks: People can still play fast; speed is now a tactical choice, not the default. People are more willing to move tactically, set up ambushes. Choice, not a sprint up the map. Fuzz: Could have spent another two weeks polishing, but we wanted to get this out. There were no major, major things, but a hotfix should come out to polish things. AAS/Bleed changes Virus.exe: My clan is not very happy. The game became more interesting in tactical ways, can make comebacks, especially after just entering server. However, on public games, it makes game boring - no incentive to attack flags. “Sit, superfob, and that’s it.” Currently lacking a strategic reward. Vehicle costs are comparable to the gain of a successful capture. If you lose BTR, all profit is lost. Vehicle cost should be lowered. Maybe standardize vehicle cost by vehicle class. Fuzz: AAS, based on conquest was intended to concentrate the fighting, but it’s ultimately flawed. It’s solid, it works, but it is limited. We’re actively working diligently on game mode to supplement AAS with more strategic depth and meta. We want a game mode that has more strategy, not as simple as things currently are. Fuzzhead has been thinking about Total War and they way they introduce non-binary win/loss conditions. A more nuanced approach would allow terrific victories, terrific defeats, draws, and less wins. Players want to be entertained and immersed with good game flow regardless of winning or losing. Territory Control is going to be where the strategy lies. Squad currently has three resources: spawns, construction, and ammunition. Hoping to introduce vehicle supply points, lifting the burden of balancing ticket amounts. Some of the team would like to see a system to request vehicles rather than having a map shit them out, but there has to be a reason not to choose the tank every time. Giving nuances for each vehicle and giving players more choice on that front. Tickets would be strictly for player spawns. “The more we **** with the tickets, the more we take it off the flags...the more an individual death means little to nothing.” Merlin: What are your thoughts on the solution of increasing ticket gain/loss on captures? Fuzzhead: The values that are set right now are initial values. That impacts the way players are going to think of value and spawning. Wicks: The weight of a heavy asset is its use, divorce tickets and vehicles. If you assign everything a ticket value, you run the risk of turning the game into a spreadsheet. Making the tickets tied to spawns only makes giving up a bigger risk. Steez: I agree with virus.exe. It’s stopped the need to suicidally rush at the middle of the flag if it’s not good for that faction. Games are running a little long. Ideal round time should be about an hour, or just under. Currently, games are running over an hour, which would be okay if the gameplay remained dynamic -- otherwise it just becomes a slog. Regardless of map size, with some leeway. More incentive to push is something salt. Feels strongly about. It’s generally hard to attack and not strongly incentivized, especially in public play where it’s much more difficult to play as an entire team. SWC is working on a mod to experiment with features such as increasing swing tickets incrementally and more tickets as you keep attacking. Fuzzhead: A big part of v12 UI is getting squads to work together more easily. Doc: Changes are great. Opens up more versatility out of the gate. Spawn mechanics could make life feel more valuable. I agree with lowering vehicle ticket values, but I’m not sure about eliminating them entirely. I think your incentive to attack is clear: being low on tickets forces attacking. TOWs are a good change; vehicle play is fun and versatile with the AAS bleed changes. You guys should look to PR a lot; it’s been around for years. V11 allows slower/more methodical play. 60-70 min games feels good, like an invasion, allows some sense of scale, moments of peace and violence, not just constant shooting, go go go. Slight adjustments to starting tickets (-40) could be good. Fuzzhead: We need to define layers for people who love long rounds versus layers for people who want to play for 30 minutes. Sometimes you’re in the mood for one, sometimes you’re in the mood for another. Vehicle and Armor Virus: Vehicles feel fantastic. Armor system feels great. Vehicles costs need to be lower. Standarding vehicles costs by vehicle class would be helpful. Some issues with people understanding where a vehicle can be hit for damage, as they were not consistent with Jensen’s Range. (“Can Bradley be damaged with x…”) TOWs “right what was needed to limit vehicle free-action on the map.” Scopes getting unzoomed constantly. Russian unlimited TOW bug. Soulzz: The Bradley is very loud. Pea$e: Vehicles are good. Will vehicle penetration happen? Will the Warrior take damage from the front? Nordic: Warrior front being very resilient is intention -- it’s got thick armor. Fuzz: The angle also matters, but it’s hard to illustrate in Jensen’s. Richochets. The sloped front armor of the Warrior is, by design, to increase survivability. The idea that vehicles aren’t just a box is new to the player base as well. Axton: People are going to learn what penetrates what, so the knowledge will trickle out to the community. We’d also like to update some of the old tutorials. Wicks: I like that people haven’t figured out the penetration values to the nth degree. Adds a little unknown into the simulation, not perfect every time. I like that it can’t be perfect every time. (truthrealm agrees) Aragorn: Love the changes. Make me think more. First and only problem, Bradley can shoot a very, very long distance. 3+k seems too strong, especially with optics and there isn’t a RUS counterpart. (TOW feedback seemed okay after Nordic explained.) TOW activation on Bradley seems fast, don’t need to be stationary. After a certain distance, you could introduce some delay/feedback into the controls. Nordic: TOW is 1500 m limit, after that it disappears. Playtest had 4km, was reduced. Fuzz: I would like to see the TOW carry over “some spiral” from PR which added a skillcap, something that varied by ATGMs. Shrinking the TOW range is still possible. Would like to get the Bradley to be stationary while firing TOW. Unlimited TOW exploit will be fixed and change prevalence on maps, of course. Merlin: It does raise the question if the Bradley should have that high powered of an optic in the TOW. Doc Hammer: I think TOWs are a good change for vehicles, since you can’t just run free now. Same with LATs. TOWs feel a little spammy, like on Kohat. Increasing the cost of the ammo they use would cause people to rely on logi more. Perhaps increasing the build cost would help limit spamming. Infantry has not necessarily seen the importance of taking out a TOW fob, so it could get better naturally. Axton/fuzz: Ammo bags for things like mortars and TOWs, rather than just relying on FOB, to create a supply chain could be possible, a la PR. Hopefully we can put that as a priority at some point, making ammo and logistics a little less abstract. Merlin: Fun fact: One of my first coding tasks on PR was doing ammo bag runs. Virus: Will vehicles get the ability to zero their weapons? Fuzzhead: We have an early prototype of a stabilized targeting system which only certain vehicles would have it. Not necessarily going to happen, but it would be great to have working sights. Nordic: Ranging is planned, but unknown status. Merlin: Nothing specific right now. Layers This was one of the largest changes to layers we’ve done. There were new layers introduced, something like 40+ layers were adjusted. Hang in there, we’re working as hard as we can. CCFN Tillomaticus: Thanks for changes to conquest. My biggest concerns from my clan reps: imbalance of factions, especially on Kamdesh (competitive viewpoint) isn’t great from a competitive viewpoint. It can be an extreme blow to morale, even if they know they’re switching next round. City fighting like Basra works well for INS. Brits or US going to be 2-3:1 kill ratio, which is a morale killer for the other team. 4 warriors isn’t that fun. Fuzz: More tickets just means dying more, not that you’re making the game more fun. One solution would be to not include INS on asymmetric layers. For invasion, especially a map like Kamdesh where there’s nowhere to hide, where they have no optics could limit them too much. But it is early. The idea behind some of the changes was to get people playing in parts of old maps they’ve never been in before. Axton: We already have plans to make Kamdesh less monotone and more INS friendly. The bug with beards showing through the fog will be fixed as well. (Edit: Fix has been merged.) Delta: 4 warriors is imbalanced. V3 layer. Finding problems like these on layers before going live would be nice. Fuzz: Maaaybe a bug. I should delete one warrior. Good feedback. There were a lot of layers, but it could use some more oversight. Did some changes before the warrior was working. Hotfix’ll fix. DocHammer: Biggest imbalance in layers is INS vs USA/GB factions. Not fun to play. INS need “special ability” like placing a FOB without supplies. (Hideouts.) Something to balance out optics. You can’t engage and you end up getting outshot constantly. “Militia with worse weapons.” Too much firing over long distance and unable to fire back effectively. More armor technicals? Basra runs great with GB versus INS, well designed. Keep changes small; don’t overcompensate. Fuzz: Looking at giving INS different tools. If it’s going to be asymmetric, there needs to be asymmetric tools. Hoping with Kohat (or similar) that we can dial the tickets in so there can be a planned retreat. As it is, you can be dying a lot, still winning, and it feels spammy. Wicks: Can’t have INS on maps that don’t make sense. INS wouldn’t pick fights in that terrain without some sort of change to the meta. e.g. Maybe some asymmetric spawning. Watching the RUS steamroller approach is tedious. Bombcars would allow INS to cover more open ground that isn’t normally accessible. VBIEDs are huge for instilling some doubt, offering more options, and they require the enemy to pay attention and use caution when moving into new areas. Fuzz: If the development cost as low, we can look at adding more civilian cars to help them stay mobile. That was the idea behind all the bikes. DocHammer: More layers that don’t make sense would be okay. I.e., INS/MIL, GB v. US. It is just a game. Axton: Did that a little with GB/USA on Kamdesh. Fun layer. I do believe we have a bigger selection of IEDs/tools for INS to use should help already planned. Fuzz: If that was well received, hell yeah. My point of view is to do more layers like that. Virus: Logar ins, RUS/INS. Kokan RUS/INS. POV: worked very well. Russians don’t feel OP, especially with optics, because RUS relies on vehicle, INS great against vehicle. Steez: Agree. Apart from imbalances, one really good thing is that all layers that were unbalanced because of timing at rollout are fixed. Better as a whole. Fuzz: Messing with bleed had that as a major consideration. Wicks: don’t mind massively stacked layers, conditions set for a struggle. Some hugely adverse maps. “Up against it a touch.” INS should be that way once in awhile. Invasion: haven’t played it enough. Maps with multiple flags, objective based. E.g. flags you take on an island control your assets. Take airfield, get helo spawns. Flags that are radar towers, which might spot anything in radius. Something to fight for even if you can’t take all the flags. Nordic: Invasion is cool, because even if you lose, you can still measure progress. Cache game mode by Virus.exe is a good example of incremental progress as a team. Weapon Changes DocHammer: Good changes. Step in the right direction. Issues: INS still feel really bad. Recoil on SL rifles prevents keeping eye on target. Can’t engage at long distance. Sway is still high for stamina cost required to run across map. Handling is fantastic. Like reduced sway. Recoil RNG side to side should be reduced. Wants players to be able to learn their weapon. Sometimes feels like fighting the game. Sway for brits seems increased. Nordic: I have told Ross the SL assault is so bad. He said both guns fire 7.62, reducing it more would make it a 5.56 rifle with more damage. Some stuff in the works for that. INS aren’t necessarily supposed to be the best shooters, though. We hear you, but there wasn’t a perfect solution for v11. Virus.exe: Not everyone is happy that regular rifle and medic get obzer on RUS. Many love ironsights instead. The choice would be nice. Wicks: Liking it. Not 100%. Happy medium; v9 was too easy. British FOV: SUSAT as a beautiful rendition of how shit it was, but I like it. It added flavor. Would like to see more differences in factions. Nordic: Removing SUSAT was a balance decision. Everyone had a scope. Balance is going to continue to change AK w/ scope still feels wonky. 545. Classic Russian one. Feels worse than v10, flies up, is floaty. Feels like the gun is coming apart. Feels like it doesn’t respond to mouse movements like any other game. Wicks: It feels loose. Feels rattly/lose. Maybe a frame pacing issue with recoil. Jerks and stutters, pulls up. Assi: Feels like you don’t have it shouldered properly. Nordic: US ACOG horizontal recoil reduced. Pea$e: Why was AT grenade removed? Nordic: because it wasn’t replicating. (It didn’t work.) Still needs work, works badly in different ways each patch. Motherdear may have fixed it, may be coming in 11.x Not gone, just broken af. Steez: I agree with AK finicky. Optic seems to compound it. AK optic does unused. Everything about way is better. Sideways recoil needs reduced more. It just doesn’t feel good and takes away from the tightness; not fun. Not tight. All movement/sway animations feel a little fast and exaggerated atm. Doesn’t have the weighted smoothness. Love the new linearity to the scale of the zoom sensitivity, but feels broken. Used British Acog, but then US was insane. DocHammer: Biggest thing is what is the reason for weapon sway. To extend firefights? Lower skillgap? Maybe look at spawn mechanics instead. Weapon play is on a good track. Truthrealm: One big difference between recoil and other parameters. Recoil is a cause and effect, player intuition plays into it. If I fire my weapon once, it’s understood that recoil is low. Side sway feels like fighting a game. “Why the hell can’t my character hold a gun and why can’t I do anything about it?” Misc [D-K] Delta | Alex-T: 3D UI: I want the damn Squad Leader Number out of my face. I don't need to be reminded who and where my SL is. At least make it optional. (boolean value and we are all happy.) The missing tag names are horrible on public but ppl get used to it and i like it acutally. BUT I want to see the name of my mates if I'm close to it. I can't even talk to them because I can't see their name Minimap Hover on vehicles and such is awesome, finally I can see who is in the vehicle. But it's missing for emplacements. Please add this as well [prog] Virus.exe Adding to 3D UI topic: may be add option to disable nametag text and leave role icon for players out of ur squad. Like, I want to be able to identify which squad mate i'm looking at 200m out when enemy sneaking up on him, but i have no use in blueberry nametag cluttering my screen in same situation, leave only role icon for em. ---- And we're done! Please feel free to let me know if there are any corrections needed. A huge thank you to everyone that attended, shared feedback, or otherwise listened along. You help make Squad great. =)
Hey Squaddies! The text you’re about to read is the minutes of a meeting hosted by Offworld Industries to gather community feedback. Roundtable events are based on the most recent Recap and we’d recommend reading that first. Please note that the text represents a dialogue between the community and developers, not a planning document. OWI Attendees included Axton, StrangeZak, Fuzzhead, and the host, Nordic. Note: OP refers to Original Poster, someone from the community. Text in Italics represents responses from OWI members, or general overview text sourced from us -- not the community. Attempts to preserve the discussion as it happened between topics and questions have been made. [Introductions, Rules, and Format. Contact Nordic for further information on participation.] Localized vehicle damage model. Part of the point is to increase gameplay depth, especially for APC/IFVs. Increasing their desire to work with infantry and the rest of the team. Also, they are large, very cool vehicles, so standing next to them during a fight is awesome. The values will continue to be tweaked, as this is just the first iteration of the model. Community wants: A visible model in firing range (Being worked on. Thanks Chuc! \o/) Yep, there are lots of AT options. Ammo capacities may change with balance, including the availability of ammo on vehicles. (Not likely to be in v11, but maybe v12.) One-shot kills are not desirable. (One-shot disabling may be a different story.) Ammo Changes to the way ammo is available in the field are coming, including stashing some on vehicles. Man-portable ammo. (Planned, but likely not for v11.) Resupplying in the field should probably enough for one person, but still in testing/design. (For example, 75 points would be one LAT, or 3 rifleman, etc.) Will there ever be ammo bearer role/kit? Maybe. Inventory customization potential post-1.0. (e.g. Opting for no grenades in favor of more ammunition.) Adding more kits is delicate, since other ones may become unused in your Squad. It does make for more specialized decisions though. It would definitely have to be fun to be implemented. Interlude It was agreed by all that it would be helpful to have a larger picture, a bigger sense of the high-level plan for Squad. It’s difficult to discuss some changes, as they are so linked to everything else. (e.g., ticket bleed.) Heck yeah it is! We're looking at a couple options to expose more planning and more feedback options, such as Trello. Vehicle gameplay We expect vehicle gameplay to shift across the next couple of patches, as more armor and anti-armor options are introduced. Additionally, the updated damage model is going to impact vehicle gameplay. Ideally, the shirt will go more toward a "thinking person's game," with increased emphasis on working with vehicles as a team. Make communication between vehicle and infantry more rewarding, and easier. Less dying/ self-sacrifice. Vehicles lose their purpose too easily, especially Logistics. Try to promote more thoughtful gameplay, more risk versus reward. TOWs will be a huge threat. Emphasize vehicles working together. Two vehicles together should be way more effective as a team than solo. Still too prone to flipping. Q: How do you feel about adding manual transmission? Automatic is bad for hilly maps. Mapping and design question. We have some of the steepest roads in the world in Squad, more so than actual roads in New Zealand. A US or Ural truck would go at walking speed, if it moved at all. Bumping up the torque would effectively make them mountain climbers up to 90 degrees. Zooooom! OP: Offroad mode (shift) doesn’t work very well right now. Noted. AAS Ticket Changes Changes to the AAS system are coming, starting in Alpha 11. It’s likely we will move towards "Static" AAS and Random AAS, as well as trying more experimental layers, but they will require testing and feedback. A lot of dynamics of the game will be changing in the next couple patches. Values may need to change, and we plan on working with the community to do so. Teams will now lose tickets when they lose a flag. Currently: +20 tickets for capturing a flag, -40 ticket for losing a flag. +20 for capturing a neutral flag. Ticket loss will be increased in v11. It will also be standardized. The values are standardized for simplicity; nobody wants to have to memorize a wiki for each flag. Squad has a transparency issue with tickets in general. Bleed is confusing, being somewhat of a background element. *Especially* for new players. The numbers are not set in stone. Some experiments with bleed time and values are being examined too. If feedback (yours and ours!) is poor, we will revert those changes. If you’d like to be involved in testing changes, reaching out to Fuzzhead might help. Bleed changes are small -- they’re not going to revolutionize AAS, but they might help you see different parts of the map and think about them differently. They aren’t expected to be a panacea. We’re still keeping an eye on the overrun changes made to FOBs. Community: Focus on tickets can turn into spreadsheet simulators, taking some of the magic out. All of these AT changes might impact AAS in unknown ways. Please be considerate of the balance between attackers and defenders, especially in terms of pacing. HUD elements for ticket changes would be nice, maybe on the map. But don’t overload the UI, please. (Fuzzhead: Squad may have too much HUD. It’s good, but there’s a lot there when you don’t need it.) Mercy Bleed OP: Does Mercy Bleed actually do anything for the community? Is it harmful? Where does the feedback come from? A: It seems to incentivize continuing attack, especially in the first five minutes. OP: Players may not be incentivized to attack over defend when bleed is active, especially with super FOBs. A: While it may not change the mentality of the average player that isn’t reading the forums, etc, this would be a change that’s going to impact player behavior. It’s a choice on map basis: part of it to get large, unused portions of the map involved. People mentioned they were never fighting in many areas of maps. OP: “We do see on general servers, a lack of motivation, or a give up mentality, when the center point is captured.” User example: It seems slightly punishing, forcing players to take all of the flags instead of setting up a solid defense with more than half the map. Different user counter-example: One of the best ways to play AAS right now, especially if you capture Papanov, is to turtle and not fire another shot for the round. You don’t attack them because you don’t have to. That sucks; it’s boring. Q: “Why should I leave the first flag super fob?” The enemy has +20 tickets for every neutral flag, they know where you’re at, and you should expect mortars and armor very soon. Someone will always want to push. We can think up a hundred scenarios, but we won’t know for sure until we test it. Admin Tools We’re aware of the frustration server administrators have with the tools and hope to improve upon them in the future. We run into them too, especially during playtest. However, they are not the top priority right now but will receive some attention. Better admin UI being looked at, for example, you may be able to ban someone from a radial menu or the scoreboard. Replay functionality is currently buggy. It can be used, but take care when skipping forward; turrets will disappear, soldiers do some weird stuff. Improvements are being made Community would love: MOTD (maybe on the loading screen, or during the queue, or a specific tab) Maybe similar to Counter-Strike HTML options -- something that allows it to be recalled when necessary. Warning messages directly to a player, before kicks/bans Visible admin indicators (optional) Improved chat logging Idle/AFK kick RCON Team management tools: move players to squads, etc. Force join squad timer. (There are problems here with locked or full squads, players that don’t want to squad lead, etc.) Access for modders and modding, please Many functions could already be made as a mod. Zak is willing to assist people working on them, but be aware that it requires a custom server. Mod support is still under continuing development too. Q: Will there be more licensing/guideline enforcement? That’s a director-level decision, but we expect some changes. Stay tuned. Patches/Optimization In the wake of getting to v10, we’re definitely aware we need to work a little harder on our patch scheduling and transparency. Currently, there are several programmers dedicated to optimization. They’re using the tests as opportunities to collect performance profiles, hunt fixes, and eke out more FPS. Further, we’re developing tests to focus explicitly on optimization. Community: Faster patches with less fixes is a-okay. (“Patch bugs asap! We don’t mind!”) Large patch size is still a concern, especially with small fixes. (i.e., you have to download another 30 gigs.) Latency feels increased. Can’t tell if it’s server issues or other. Some community members confirm some server performance boosts in 10.2. Fuzzhead: One thing can hold performance back. You may not notice the changes until we find that one thing that’s causing problems, even if other items have been optimized. I think we’re getting close. Gameplay Some of the upcoming changes include prone to stand speed adjustments, addressing gun wobble, examining sway (Yep, the m4 needed love.), recoil patterns, as well as changes to ADS timing. We’re also aware of the slight desync between first and third person views and will be tightening that up. Hopefully, this will increase responsiveness in hitting your target, especially when your target is peeking around corners. Q: Prone to stand is changing. Does stand to prone change? A: Maybe. It’s something we’re considering based on real world behavior, even among the developers. Most people WILL throw themselves down real fast… even in paintball.) The desynch between 1st and 3rd person: 3rd person view is sped up a little over it. Side effect: latency has you showing up a little sooner, but the speed compensates. If you’ve never noticed it, you should notice it even less now. It’s often a trade-off between looking a little silly and playing how people expect it. Leaning movement: Try walking while you lean. It’s hard. Especially with a weapon. Your feet don't move the same way. But we understand it’s a game too. Fuzzhead would limit crouched movement and movement while leaning would be slow. This is a preference, not an edict. Fine-tuning is an on-going process, especially looking forward to vehicles. Community: Leaning could limit stamina regen. Fuzzhead would like to see less restrictions on logistic trucks. May not happen, because of the obvious issues, but the benefits may outweigh it. Additional admin tools could help with this. Because Squad’s audience is bigger, we have to be aware that new or toxic players can impact things like this. Making sure small squads are still viable is important, especially for specialization. Occasionally mirrors real life too. FOBs and Spawns Q: FOB changes? What’s the ideal version? Are you happy with spawning now? Fuzzhead: Oh no, it’s going to change. The drasticness of the changes is up for debate. Definitely, it’s not in its final form. Rally points definitely need a pass. A hard overhaul to how they work and their relationship to the pacing of the game. There’s a fine balance; you want a game that is accessible and squad leaders have this ability to keep their squads together, having fun, in the action. Too much reliance on rally points creates a game more about placing spawn points. The overrun mechanic on the FOB is subtle, but it changed the pacing a lot. We have to be careful when changing spawn mechanics, even small changes. We have lots of feedback coming in for spawning. We have our own takes. And there’s a lot of ways to go; Fuzzhead would like to trial a couple of them. the PR system (rally expires in x seconds, can’t place again until y.) might not work for Squad. A wave spawning system for RP’s, e.g. every 90-second rolling wave, the whole squad can spawn on RP, keeping them together. However, it doesn’t impact pacing, it would change squad movement. Incentives could be introduced to reduce spawn time, for example. (Community: Remember, nobody likes waiting.) Fuzzhead understands the limitations of rally points may have been implemented as temporary measures to adjust the pacing of rallies. Needs to be re-examined, as it feels outdated. Fuzzhead would really like to try some changes in testing, especially to see how it impacts pacing. It could add some depth, opens up more roles for people, and increases the importance of logistics. Game Mode Intent First flag is always neutral on Invasion. We know… it’s not ideal, may change. If you’re seeing back caps lost in other ways, it may be a bug -- tell us. =) Some Invasion flags had issues in the v9 -> v10 merge. Many issues (e.g., loss of flag lock) were caught, but some did get through, especially on older maps with more layers. They will get looked at though; we’ve learned from our mistakes there. Respawn resources have been tossed around as an idea, but generally seems pretty “gamey” and silly. It could have merit if it worked, though. (e.g., If a rally had no reloading capabilities, you’d need a supply truck with ammo, or more respawn, etc.) AAS isn’t necessarily the right mode for irregular forces, and we'd like to showcase them more/make them more fun. Q: What’s the motivation for game modes? We need more content! Is AAS supposed to be the primary, one-trick pony? Random AAS will likely be a topic for the next roundtable. AAS was the primary mode for PR, because it was easy to modify. It was a good start for Squad, but isn’t necessarily the “flagship.” Like Fortnite experimented with modes, one game mode may rise organically. The problem right now is the other game modes haven’t gotten as much polish, but that will be changing. Smaller, shorter seeding game modes to get people into servers might be an example. You might not want a two hour AAS session mid-week, so offering other options is important. Additionally, we've previewed the territory control mode, and briefly discussed the potential for Fog of War mechanics, especially in Random AAS. Crewman Kit Beef up the driver capabilities a bit, give them a periscope. Every APC, IFV, tank, and helicopter will have a Crewman kit requirement. As a squad leader, you may need to have a crewman, or it may be allowed to drive as a SL, work as “vehicle commander” setting points, etc. The first iteration of the Crewman Kit may not have any special toys, other than meeting the requirements for driving some vehicles. More abilities are still up for discussion. We’d really love to see more combined arms, especially when 50v50 platoon-scale combat is an option. Closing Thoughts A big thank you to everyone that took time to join us for the roundtable. We look forward to seeing you again after the next Recap! Your feedback is invaluable to us and we're looking forward to building a better Squad with your help! And yeah, we're working on improving the roundtable format too.