Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Merlin

      Forum Rules   07/06/2016

      Introduction   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 'suggestion'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • OWI Official
    • Announcements
    • Progress Updates
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
    • The Official Squad User Manual
    • Development Tutorials
  • International
    • Supported Languages
  • Game
    • General Discussion
    • Questions
    • Feedback & Suggestions
    • Media
    • User Created Guides
  • Support
    • Software Support
    • Hardware Tech Support
    • Website Feedback
    • Bug Report Form
  • The Community
    • Introductions / New Players
    • Teams & Clans
    • Events & Leagues
    • Wiki Development
    • Modding
  • Game Servers
    • Game Server Info & Support
    • Game Server Feedback
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic Discussion

Found 105 results

  1. RooskToday at 23:50 I'm somewhat new to the game and ive noticed that the end of games are kind of underwhelming, even if you're winning or losing. I feel that an indication that the game is almost over would encourage other players to push or not respawn. Even a system that said something like "5 Tickets Remaining" would help. Sometimes the end of a match can feel like a surprise. It's just my personal preference coming from games like battlefield that has an audio que or music, it helps to encourage to give one final push. I don't know if anyone else feels this way, it's just my small suggestion, hopefully it gets considered. -Roosk
  2. My suggestion is to bring gas masks into the game, some class has a gas mask some not. Medic has, Marksman Doesn't etc. I see a lot of smoke grenades be throwing falsely, most people they throw smoke grenade right under them, being inside smoke grenade's smoke you take little bit damage because you are inhaling poisonous smoke, but if you have gas masks then you don't have to worry about taking damage inside smoke. Also other options are too like bringing tear gas, tear smoke mortars, tear smoke artillery to defeat massive enemy's who doesn't have gas mask on their class.
  3. The FOB side needs a big overhaul. Would be much appreciated if that is done BEFORE the official 1.0 release. The FOB Building SHOULD have its own UI, so when holding T key and selecting the FOB building, it should exit the T key main interface and switch to a SPECIAL FOB Menu. There is some render at the end of the post. From the building UI side Holding T to access the building is not great, have a special static menu where you can navigate easily. Circle UI is bad and restrict the number of thing they could offer to built, have a classic "windows explorer" kind of interface but base on shortcuts rather than point & click. Make it smaller, place it on top left/right of the UI so you can see what you are placing and how you are placing it without exiting the building menu Navigate it through number key 1 through 9 to unfold menu or select item to place. 0 and backspace could be the next/previous shortcut when there is more than 9 items available. Right click could be the shortcut to fold the menu layer after layer to get navigate through the building stuff type (fortification, emplacements, etc..). Left click keep the validate action to place the stuff blueprint selected in the UI. Keep the last sub-menu open so if the SL want to place X sandbags he doesn't have to go through all the menu again, he just have to press the same number to get the same blueprint. All the sandbags and fortification that can be pilled up should have a layer system directly accessible when the SL is placing the blueprint. Raising the cost with each new layer by using mousewheel up, lowering the cost with mousewheel down. You just want to make a basic level protection where you can hide behind on prone only or you want 2 layers, 3 layers, 4 layers of sand bags/hesco/woods barrier ? That should just be available on a mousewheel action directly. These changes, give the SL more freedom to build FOB. User interface is easier to read, easier to manipulate, gives the ability to make better fob, easier, faster. From the building side All the sandbags and protections should be autolinked on their own when place along closely enough by the SL. No micro-managing space for the SL anymore. Enforce rounding the edge when placing sandbags, hesco, razorwires close to each other on an "approximate" (!!) 45° or 90° angle. All the building with open space should be compatible with bipods. Have you tried using the US open bunker with a MG class soldier ? It doesn't work at all... The ressource should not be used directly when the blueprint has been placed, but slowly consummed when the building is being built by the players ! And that should allow to get the opposite then, ressource cashed back in the FOB ressources when a friendly player (so not a foe !?) is unbuilding stuff. Add a new option to REINFORCE a preset building from the vanilla map. Transforming a map house into a HAB when the radio is inside that building (still cost the same amount of construction The SL just have to be inside the designated building to reinforce it. Taking FOB to a new level where it is not only BUILDING from the ground up. But using map assets as more or less discrete FOB. Option to place static weapons emplacements at windows in the FOB range (with the same per FOB restrictions) Option to reinforce windows with woods protection (hiding what's inside but not blocking high caliber) Hope dev reads player feedback and suggestion here. I've taken a little bit of times to make a quick mockup/in-game menu display. I am not a pro, i just have ideas. I've basicly taken in-game elements, reasses what can improve a lot the interface for FOB building. It's just the basic idea, a professionnal with the tools to design the UI can do much better on the render side of course. Feel FREE to suggest your own ideas to add to the list. Here are some visuals to help understand the UI thing (click to enlarge image) :
  4. Hey there, long time Squad-fan and former Project Reality player. I'm also a former U.S. Marine Corps infantry Squad Leader. I used to give and receive many mission briefings, and as I'm sure the game devs are aware, they are QUITE descriptive. It's necessary to make sure everyone, including supporting assets, know where things are. One thing I'd love for Squad to bring in is the ability to name POI, roads, landing zones, FOBS, etc. There's lots of advantages to giving names to points: 1. Landing areas known on the map to be flat or accommodating to helicopters can be easily told to pilots. "Take squad 3 to LZ Black." as opposed to "Fox 3 5". 2. Ability to quickly communicate contact with other elements. "We took fire 100m north of LZ Black." "Enemy armor spotted moving west on MSR Potato." "Spawn at FOB Bob Ross" 3. Ability to call and adjust mortars on pre-registered targets. Forward-observers that are spotting for mortar teams can get them dialed in more quickly. "Fire 3 rounds at pre registered target A1" (Which could be a cross road or building known to have enemy) "Fire 1 round in adjust 100m north of A1" 4. Ability to coordinate movement of elements. "Squad 3 move north from LZ Black to Blocking Position C, Squad 4 move to Assault Position Xray" "Logi squad take MSR Jenkins to FOB Daniel Tiger" It could help simplify commanders or squad leaders giving direction to their teams, and help with the planning/staging process. Of course, giving internet people the ability to name things has its problems. I expect to see "Nipple" or "Penis" on the screen somewhere. (Maybe only allow alpha-numerics and char limits?) But I'll tell ya, even professional military S1 shops name stuff pretty hilarious things. Thanks! Sgt. A. (USMC ret.) 1st Bn, 1st Marines
  5. This is a list of things that I (a newbie with only 60h of game) think would be a great addition for pilots, including those who want to use their flight sticks. And also problems I noticed since my first flight. SUGGESTIONS 1 – Let players use keyboard for all controls (eg. W&S for pitch, A&D for roll, Q&E for rudder, shift & ctrl for power); 1.1 – The above might cause a loss in precision during landing, it could help if the control scheme would change back to mouse control when using C (landing cam); 2 – Give a separate toggle free look option for helis; 3 – An option to not lock pitch/roll controls when free looking; 4 – Zoom to RMB, don't need to be much, just enough so we don't see vehicles 500m away as small set of pixels; 5 – A dot in the center of the pilot's view, so we can put markers more accurately; THE BIG PROBLEM I conducted some tests on helicopters to understand why the handling is weird at times. From this I got some conclusions that i’m not 100% sure of (based on my barely basic knowledge on coding), so take it with a lot of salt. Experiment 1: Tested different pitch angles while maintaining level flight, by adjusting power. Experiment 2: Same as before, but not trying to hold altitute, with power fixed at 45% and 0%. Experiment 3: Braking from great speed w/ diferent negative pitch angles. Experiment 4: Doing all of above, but flying backwards and sideways. Conclusions: - Power only dictates your vertical speed, along with pitch that apply some cosine losses (making the heli lose altitude as one pitchs too much). - Horizontal speed is totally and only linked to the pitch angle value, power has 0 influence. After gattering data about pitch/speed from the experiments I concluded the helicopter works in 2 modes, lets call them Hover and Cruise. I got to the conclusion there is two modes because as you can see from the graph above, there are 2 sets of pitch angles with almost linear change in the maximum speed. Such maximum speed I will refer now on as “target speed”. Why target speed? Because I believe this is how the devs circumvented the problem of adding a rather complex flight system with a dynamical acceleration vector into a project that is already complex enough. So what I think they did was to set a function of pitch that gives a target speed (for each value of pitch), and then added 2 different constant acceleration vectors (one small for hover mode, and one big for cruise mode) which are tasked of bringing the heli to the target speed. This might seem reasonable, but it ends up creating problems that require further work arround. The first one that comes into mind is one that probably everyone that tried to fly faced. When you are trying to land, feel the need to make a not so conservative correction, and your heli decides to become a jet plane and zap into the terrain. Then you pull the stick to brake, and end up entering a ballet of moving back and forth. This is caused simply because you are pushing the stick across the “transition” point in which the acceleration vector changes to the much bigger value, and much bigger target speeds. But don’t feel bad, it is a counterintuitive system. This happens similarly to Roll, but it is less noticible as the target speeds, and probably the (lateral) acceleration vectors are smaller. Is there a solution? I believe the easier and short-term solution would be to make the Speed/pitch curve smoother, and/or adding a third mode to give a smoother transition. The harder long-term, is implementing a dynamical acceleration vector to the azimuthal axis of the vehicle whose value depends on power and optimally on angle of attack too. OTHER PROBLEMS: Don’t trust the instruments!!!(said no pilot ever). Values of speed are not faithful in some situations. When you pull back the stick to brake, the display will slowly decrease the indicated speed (initially), while in reality you’re braking much more, using the display as reference will only make the back and forth problem worse. Go visual, go by your instincts. There is a lot of glitches with controls, mainly when using a joystick. Unassigning either mouseX or mouseY will remove roll control from the joystick. Assigning buttons from the joystick or mouse are mostly impossible. I only managed to do it with 3rd party software. Sometimes power will be stuck at 0% and 100% (not talking about using the throttle lever) but simply pressing Esc solves the problem. (it’s a minor inconvenience) I hope I got this right, and hope my feedback is valid. Respectfully, A guy that already got TOWed too many times. PS: I prefer to believe the devs are already working on most of these (if not all). PS: PS: Sorry for bad engrish.
  6. My Personal Ideas and Adjustments for Game Play Mechanics by Doctor Hammer With the current iteration of Squad in the B17 phase I feel like it's a critical moment for game play mechanics before introducing Version 1.0. With this post I hope to create a healthy conversation concerning the game play mechanics and to highlight my own ideas that I strongly believe will be positives to the game. Lets begin! Spawn System Commander The Medic Class Those are all the ideas I have for the game right now that I think could be super beneficial and make the game more fun, some ideas more thought out than others, but that's okay, at the end of the day, I just wanted to put those thoughts out there and create a conversation about those possible changes. keep in mind these are ideas are just ideas, not absolute solutions. I am proposing some of these things in the hopes good adjustments to them would be made, and a conversation could be started. I think we all want the same for squad, a teamwork based game that supports communication and tactics. Thanks for Reading! Doc
  7. Suggestion: Nerf scopes by moving the camera back when aiming down sights, but decrease sway on all weapons Result: Smaller sight picture for weapons with optics(also more blur outside the scope would be needed, maybe a vignette). Less space taken up on screen, by the weapon model, for weapons without magnified optics - thus way better for cqc. Image for illustration(90 FOV M4 Acog with increased camera distance from sight) but*
  8. Hey! I'll go straight to the point, Squad is a really good game, but I think it's missing progression. Beside me "getting better" at the game and seeing it, there is pretty much no other progression between the countless matches I have played. My suggestion would be to add a very little and basic leveling system like in so many other games. This addition could simply be made by taking a percentage of your score at the end of matches and turning it into XP that will increase your personal level. That's it. I would love to see an addition like this one in Squad because, in my opinion, one of the most important aspects of a game is progression; the player's feeling of getting better and further into the game. For the moment, in Squad, like I said, a player's evolution is simply represented by the matches he has played and how he has learned new strategies and ways to play the game. But many other games, even the hardcore ones (such as Escape From Tarkov), have decided to introduce a leveling system to let people see a certain progression between matches, presented in the form of a number, every time they go back to the main menu. Also, just to clarify, I don't wish this leveling system to let players unlock new things like Call of Duty does, I just want a number to let us see some sort of progression between matches. Thank you so much for reading all the way to this sentence and I am open to you guys' opinion on this small suggestion! PS.: Sorry if there are English mistakes, I blame it on the fact that this is my second language.
  9. TL;DR: Tried to introduce a friend to Squad so we can play together (this is a team-based shooter after all) but they began losing patience when they: a) Accidentally queued up to a different server to me, so joined the queue 2 positions after me. b) Once they entered the server, they were placed on the opposite team. We had to both sit on the deployment screen and wait until someone left before we could switch over. c) When they finally got onto my team, there was no space in my squad, and no space for two people in any other squads. d) The round ended and the teams were jumbled and we found ourselves on opposite teams again. e) They lost patience, quit after their second match and will be looking to refund the game. All in all, an unforgiving experience when introducing new players to the game. Players these days are used to the convenience of matchmaking in many other games, which almost always allows for pregame lobbies to which you can invite your friends. While in the past dedicated servers has reduced the need for lobbies, Squad has so many 'filters' you need to get through before you can physically play alongside your friend. So the ask would be: As a duo/trio of friends playing Squad... We would like to be able to join a pregame lobby or party together (inviting via Steam). This would then manage the process of: Adding us to the same dedicated server queue at the same time. Ensuring we are on the same team when we join the game The mechanic will only allow us to join the game when there is a 1+/- difference in teams (e.g. 36 USA / 35 RUSS ---we join Russian together---> 36 USA / 37 RUSS) If the teams are even in players, then a player queuing up as a solo can go ahead of the duos until there is a 1+/- difference. Ensuring we are on the same team when a round finishes and the teams are scrambled. In order to simplify the process of playing with a friend(s) and increase new player adoption to the game (via recommendations from your loyal player-base). While wait times may increase slightly, this will significantly reduce the aggravation of trying to swap teams etc. Players can always opt not to party-up and do things the old fashioned way. I understand these dedicated servers are normally managed by individuals/clans, so this may need to be built in as a customisable option when defining server config settings. Just before anyone yells 'your friend is a filthy casual!' , the friend in question has played a lot of hours on milsim games in the past (America's Army, ARMA 2 etc.) so he would have matched the target audience for Squad, however recently he has been playing PUBG and Apex Legends (matchmaking).
  10. I am new the the forum, but I have about 650 hours in squad. I was extremely excited to see the commander role finally enter squad. I was a faithful Red Orchestra player for many years, and the timely role that commanders played in providing support dramatically aided momentum swings, and improved the experience. I am also a big RTS guy, and have many hours in the Company of Heroes, Total War Series, and more recently Steel Division II. Since Squad is essentially an interesting fusion of FPS with a healthy does of RTS, the commander adds a huge layer of tactical coordination. Steel Division II gives its players the ability to pre-build decks of vehicles that can be deployed based on a capped amount of units and a steady flow of resources. While I don't know if squad needs resources per se, allowing the commander to either "build a deck of vehicle cards" to be deployed at his leisure throughout the game, or simply decide which ones will be deployed at which times, would add a whole new meta to the game, and allow for counters and reactions. Each vehicle could be valued differently, perhaps using the current ticket costs, and instead of losing points at the point of the vehicles destruction, you'd lose it at the point the commander delpoys it at main. You could economize when things are low, or you could spend a bunch of resources up front for an armored rush. Alternatively, you could have a separate fix vehicle resource counter for each map. Either way, the commander could choose what vehicles to deploy based on his current needs, and really restrict the current issue of vehicle over-saturation on some maps, because the set amount of vehicle points could be spent at any point. This would open up a variety of tactics in the game. Steel Division paces the vehicles, by making only certain vehicles deployable in various phases of the game, with the heavier ones often coming later. I just feel like the commander could really take control of the whole game's meta this way, and really improve the strategic focus moving forward.
  11. Suggestion Enemy vehicles can be captured without destruction, much like capture points, with a ticket gain to the team and a ticket loss to the enemy. Purpose Reduce the tendency for players to abandon vehicles, damaged or not. Conditions To capture an enemy vehicle, there must be... two infantry on the ground within a very small radius for X amount of time (X indicates a number to be determined) no enemy within a slight larger radius (to ensure a vehicle is not capture mid-firefight) Once captured, vehicles de-spawn and eventually respawn at enemy main, like a destroyed vehicle. Reasons for Consideration adds another element for infantry to contribute towards ticket gain for the team rewards observant players working together while punishing players who are not small enough to not distract an entire team away from match objectives Summary vehicles capture without the need for explosives makes players think twice about leaving vehicles unmanned high risk but with greater gain than destruction creates additional points of interest for firefights on the map adds a new dimension to ticket gain for a losing side, increasing the asymmetric complexity of the overall match for both sides
  12. The British Army needs helicopter support... me thinks the Puma HC2 would be most suitable ^^ Puma HC2: https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/puma-hc2/
  13. So the idea is that when a squad leader makes a squad, he chooses one of a few type squad compositions. You can only have one per team of the specialized squads, and can have up to 3 normal mismatch squads (current style). The advantage for the specialized squads is that they can pick extras of a few different roles. Examples: Assault: Can have: Standard SL kit. 1-2 Medics 2-4 Riflemen 1-3 Grenadiers 1 Light AT 1-3 Automatic Riflemen Fire Support: Standard SL Kit. 1 Medic 1-2 Riflemen 1 Marksmen 1-3 Machine Gunner 1-2 Light AT OR Heavy AT 1-2 Combat Engineer OR Sapper That's the basic idea. These squads would be more focused on specific things, and be unable to fully switch gears to deal with different scenarios, IE the assault squad wouldn't be able to deal very well with armor, but they end up being better at assaulting a point with all the smoke from the grenadiers. These are all still just barely thrown together scraps of ideas, and I have others as well but this covers my point. (Edit: also another point, it would mean less games would have people randomly take crewman vehicles and do nothing with them, since if squads had these they wouldn't be able to pick crewman at all)
  14. I was thinking, why don't we have Multi Faction Layers now that we have them in the game. For example British and American Verse Irregular and Russian Forces on Layers that would usually be Russian and American normally. From a balance/gameplay perspective, it adds a larger variety of weapons available to both sides which can be a very positive thing, When talking emplacements and vehicles It should really be limited to one type per side, ie American British forces only use American Emplacements, defences, Habs, vehicles and same for Russia Irregular using only Russian equipment. People with note that newer players will have trouble with uniforms and Target identification, but I argue that having 2 different opposing forces to identify it will make it easier in the long run, instead of playing one game and getting used to one enemy then switching enemies the next game and getting used to them, as a new player, it would be easier to get used to both of them being the enemy at the same time, in the end I would argue the uniform identification question would be a NET neutral in terms of good verse bad. From a realistic perspective it would add on it immensely, for example, American forces weren't the only ones in the middle east, it was a coalition of different military forces, British, Canadian etc. It was a NATO thing not an American thing, although it was largely American for a while there. Russia also backed Militia forces and Militia Forces worked with Terrorist Forces in the middle east pretty frequently, sometimes even training one another. Almost everything in the game is ready to support something like this being implemented, Factions, Maps, Equipment. Everything is ready for this to happen. It could be as easy as when someone creates a squad, they tick an American flag or British Flag and the same for the other team I'd love to see something like this implemented officially even if it was in some limited fashion. IE Insurgent verse NATO layers.
  15. Suggestion: 1) Reduce "fire support " role limit to 2 per squad. 2) Give "direct combat" RPK-74/RPK roles an ammo bag. 1) With the separation of fire support and specialist role limits, squads have access to more non-medic/rifleman roles, which often results in there being only one rifleman. Convincing people in pub games that you need riflemen for their versatility/ammo is a chore, but it also makes other roles less special, limiting how powerful they can be, and the choice of what to bring less interesting. It also reduces the value of the limited direct combat roles (non-scope AR, L86LSW) since you can just take the FS version instead (or an actual second rifleman). While ammo bags are currently not as important as they probably should be (different topic), they're one of the few mechanics that require squad members to work together on their own. Making 1LAT the default and 2LAT a bigger commitment would also allow slight buffs, that could result in vehicles having an easier time by default, while giving infantry a stronger fallback when vehicles on their team have failed (and making an individual LAT feel more impactful). 2) The RPK(-74) has always been weaker than the M249 and that's kind of okay, but with the NATO HATs and the US AT4 the infantry balance between the two groups has become a bit disappointing. Giving the average RUS squad an additional ammo bag would be a nice asymmetrical compensation for their weaker AT and make that role more rewarding to play.
  16. So I've already begun to notice a lot of suggestions that overlap or are duplicates of earlier threads here on the forums and decided to make this post based off a similar post on the old Project Reality Suggestion forum to give first-timers and veterans alike a guide on the thought process you should be using when making a suggestion here on the Squad Forums. Try asking yourself these questions before you post. I. Has your suggestion already been made? The game is young yet, but there have already been many suggestions including at least 4 separate threads on A.I. Sicilians and character/weapon customization! Use the Search Function to check whether or not your suggestion has been covered in the Discussion or Suggestion Forums. Here's an easy link for you: http://forums.joinsquad.com/index.php?app=core&module=search II. Is your suggestion worth the effort to make it a reality? The developers are working full time to make this a great game and in some cases it would be cool to have a certain feature, but that feature may not really add that much to the game on the whole. Try to really think your suggestion through, get over the "cool factor" and ask yourself whether it is really worth the time and money of the developers to add this feature in. III. Is your suggestion already in-game or confirmed to be added to the game in future? Your suggestion might pass the first two questions and be a great idea for the game. So great, in fact, that the developers have already instituted it as a feature. The developers have listened to lots of great community feedback over the years as well as brainstorming for their own unique ideas. Keep an eye on the news updates on the front page for development updates and articles on the latest progress. When in doubt, use the Search Function linked above! IV. Does your suggestion fit with the goals that Squad is trying to achieve? Remember that squad is a unique game seeking to fill a unique genre, bridging the gap between games like Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Insurgency with more mil-sim games like the Arma series, landing somewhere near the Project Reality mod that inspired it. At the forefront, this means that Squad is looking to promote teamwork and communication on a large, combined-arms scale with a basis of realism and without room for the run n' gun tactics so prevalent in many modern shooters. Squad is also not based on Special Forces units but instead on the infantry and armoured units commonly seen on the frontlines. Keep this in mind when making your suggestion! If your suggestion has passed all four of these stages then you're likely good to go, suggest away! If you can, try and make your post well-reasoned, well-explained and with a title that makes it clear what you're suggesting. A one-sentence or poorly-titled post might not get your full point across and undeservedly affect how popular your suggestion is. You should also try to keep the tone of your post suggestive and not demanding, it'll go a long way to getting your voice heard. Please also note that this section is not for bug reports, unless specified. Thank you for reading this guide and spending the time trying to make a worthy contribution to Squad's development. Quick Links: Search Function: http://forums.joinsquad.com/index.php?app=core&module=search Suggesting a faction? Post here: http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/123-factions-you-would-like-to-play-as-or-against/ Suggesting a weapon? Post here: http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/1661-the-weapons-thread/
  17. TLDR: When pressing movement keys while crouched, the character gets a litle bit higher to walk. I sugest that when both left and right movement key is held, the character gets a little bit higher, just like when you crouch-walk, but doesn't actually move. Video example FURTHER ELABORATION: EXPANDED METHOD: OK let me hear your thoughts.
  18. Could Offworld confirm, or make sure, that players that are wearing the unarmed/surrender kit/uniform not affect/contribute flags/capture-points. This to ensure that captives can be held anywhere on the map without any negatives for the captors, and etc... Will there be a way of dropping/lose weapons in the field so you can surrender without needing to change at an ammo box? Even though I never really played on Altis life servers... there's a market...: Could consider a timer on being able to use the 'respawn' command, and for the give-up command... or atleast allow servers to edit respawn/give-up/suicide rules... or introduce a new game mode^^ Not single life... possibly cost more tickets lost for suicide/giving-up, as a server option... ... ... etc etc P.s. I do read the updates, but don't recall seeing the above covered anywhere... woopsie if a I missed...
  19. In here https://joinsquad.com/alpha-13-test-gameplay-changes/ There's this part- Any of you played Arma 3 with ACE mod? If not, then they already solved your problem. Make the ping area based. Like you're pointing out something to someone on a physical map. Make it so only poeople in 2 (or 3, or whatever) meter radius from you can see what you're pointing at on the map. And now there's no guys pinging stuff from 2 clicks, but you also don't need to give someone full grids when standing right next to them. Problem? Solution. Also, if You're interested, They also have a simmiliar system with in game pointing. According to ACE Team- Its better to simply show it. (WARNING, LOUD in 0:37. I couldn't find a better video) If you dont want giant floating circles in your UI, there's an even simpler idea. Make an animation that points a finger in the dirrection of your invisible crosshair and make it a hold action (so you dont have to constantly repeat it) And thats it. Of course, you can do the same by just saying "its where i'm aiming at" "or direction 230", sure. But its a neat little immersion thing for guiding fire and creating memes.
  20. Body Armor

    They need to add body armor and helmets for the armies in this game, i personally own both of these things as a freaking civilian, and i payed about 1k usd. to put that into perspective, the cost of a single tank shell in this game is the same or greater than that. no modern military would EVER send troops into a region without at least an IOTV rig and an ACH. it really ruins the balance of the game and the immersion of bleeding out from a guy shooting you in the chest with a pistol actually completely turns me away from this game(i have 425 hours too...) this is something i have been saying since i started playing the game and i have never once heard devs talk about it, which really bothers me
  21. Couldn't help but notice that the damage radius on frag grenades and mortars is incredibly close. After trying to kill myself with mortars and grenades, it seemed like I was within 30 meters without taking any damage what so ever.
  22. Too many suggestions and some feedback for the two MBTs currently implemented as of Squad v12.2: T-72B3 1) The time between reloading rounds from a loaded chamber in game is identical to that of reloading the gun from an empty chamber. This should not be the case. Contrary to popular belief, it is indeed possible to unload shells from a T-72, though the process of doing this should add considerable time to the entire reloading process. (This assumes one does it the proper way in game, not using an exploit to mitigate any time between changing shells.) Here is the real life process: the commander must cycle the auto loader to an empty munition cassette and manually eject the propellant from from the chamber via the breach operating handle. The T-72's ammunition comes in two separate parts, propellant and shell, and so the shell is still in the chamber; this must be removed from the open breach by hand and placed back into the cassette. (Just a note. While it is possible to switch between rounds, I do not believe this is a common practice. Such a system is in place for clearing malfunctioning rounds from breach; it would be much more simple to fire the loaded round down range and then load normally.) 2) The arming distance of the 9M119M guided missile appears to be around 150-200m in game (as measured with the in game LRF). The effective range of the missile should start at 100m. 3) The PKT co-axial machine gun is fed via 250 round belts via 8 boxes in total, not a continuous 2000 round belt. 4) The way the commander utilises the NSVT heavy machine gun is incorrectly modelled, and it appears that the commander's cupola resembles no T-72 design. The commander must turn out to use the machine gun. (Perhaps a placeholder, balance, something else?) The NSVT should be fed from 60 round belts, of which there are 5 boxes in total. 5) Traversing from a standstill by setting the vehicle in first gear (just hold 'W' until you're in first and then release), and putting all power to either track (to traverse left or right) causes the transmission to rapidly switch between the first and neutral gear. (Which can be sort of solved just by holding 'SHIFT' to hold the current gear, but the jittering of gears sometimes accidentally makes me hold the neutral gear.) M1A2 1) Same problem as number one from the above section, with less explanation. Should be longer, as extracting a shell from breach, stowing it into the rack, and placing a new one in takes much more time than reloading from an empty chamber. 2) The GPS (gunner's primary sight), a periscopic sight mounted above the turret, known as the 'dog house' is the preferred sight to use rather than the GAS (gunner's auxiliary sight), a telescopic sight, and which is the only sight used and implemented. (The GAS has a fixed zoom of x8, while the GPS has multiple zoom levels of x3 and x15. There are other zoom levels, though those can only be used with thermals ON, which has yet to be implemented.) 3) Neutral steering is a bit finicky, and is actually done from the first gear. ______________ Thanks for reading through the entire span of this overtly verbose and lengthy post.
  23. SOF Mod suggestion thing

    Hey there Squaddies. For the first post on the forums (intro coming next but I already had this typed out so) I wanted to throw in a suggestion for any modders that like the idea and feel up to the task. I'm not sure how plausible this would be, but it would be awesome if it's possible. My idea was for a sort of Insurgency (or even AAS) gamemode in any of the already present Middle East maps, but with a twist. ANA (or any other such local armed force) + SOF VS. Insurgents. The way I had envisioned this was for the SOF part to work sort of how armor or APC squads work, a couple specific roles you can spawn in or pick up which have a different model, gear, and weapons. They could be modeled after any SOF force, either local (for example ANA Commandos) or US based (Army SF, Rangers, etc.). The Local Armed Force part could work much the same as all the other factions, but having some lower quality gear than the US Army, the UK or Russia would provide a familiar yet distinct flavour to the game. Any of the two parts of this suggestion could work seperatly, SOF could be put in any other conventional/regular faction, and the Local Army could be included seperatly in its own faction, fighting either Insurgents, or even the other factions like the US in an alternate history type deal. I think this is an interesting idea because of how it sort of breaks up the Squad gameplay just enough to feel fresh while not losing it's identity, being a good fit for a mod. Maybe this is a dumb idea and all this sounds like the ramblings of a mad man, but I'd like to hear the community's opinions on this.
  24. Why have we not had anti-personnel mines in game? it's quite easy to create this asset, but that would change the gameplay for the better. For example, letting for a raider class have 2 such mines, this would not lead to a meat grinder, but would help protect the FOBs. Is there ethical reason as with VBIED trucks or what?
  25. Partial credit to mr. AllezVites from Reddit for coming up with the 6 man squad idea. I just reworked it a bit and am shamelessly stealing parts of his post. Here's the orginal. https://www.reddit.com/r/joinsquad/comments/aiy51k/insurgents_new_specialist_squad/ im transfering it here in hope that someone will consider this, or at least it will make him think. Here's what Allez Vites wrote We've all discussed faction balance in terms of vehicles, emplacements, and fortifications. This comes up when discussing Insurgents as well, but, when it comes to them, I think we're better off addressing team structure and squad roles. Cap squads to 6 players: Capping squads to 6 players increases the total number of squads. Currently, a faction is capped at 4 full squads and 1 auxiliary squad. If this cap is introduced, the total number of full squads is increased to 6 + 1 auxiliary squad. With 6 squads, you now have more rallies that can be placed which leads to more agile movement strategies - I think this should keep traditional factions on their toes - leveraging asymmetrical combat and guerrilla tactics... Im snipping the rest in which he talks about specialist squads becouse i believe it would require too much meddling in the game and too much complication to a very little gain and as such, would make the whole concept unappealing and would sink it.Here's My own idea of additional changes to insurgents to improve His idea. reduce the number of specialist slots from 3 to 2(Or not, this one can be forgotten to buff insurgents up a bit) do a max number of all specialist slots (Not counting leadership and crewpeople) per side like with HATs and MG's . Example (might be higher for any particular one, might be lower) 4 LATs, 4 ARs, 4 GLs, etc. Thats there to counter every squad just getting AT and AR while completely neglecting other slots which would result in over saturation of the battlefield with few particular kits. That way you get some more variety/you simulate the lesser logistics and having to fight with what you have while still having those things on the team level in a similar number that you would have while operating in 9 man squads. Nerf max medics per squad to 1. Why? to simulate worse medical support and personal protection (Helmets, Vests and stuff). To simply put it- rebels are more likely to die when being fired at than soldiers. This is reduced a bit by the fact of having more squads and and everyone with a bandage being able to revive. Having the ability to field 2 medics in a single squad and thus higher survivability in a firefight would be one of the regular military's perks. So far all im doing is taking things away from insurgents that will screw the balance too much, right? right. But to counter that i propose to give them this one major advantage 4.Raise the number of rallies per squad from 1 to 2. That paired with having more smaller squads means that they can basically come from anywhere all the time. Hunting down one rally basically just closes off one venue of attack for 6 men instead of pushing 9 people all the way to main base/some fob few clicks away. It means sustained pressure and the need for regular army to do proper sweeps and maintaining perimeter if they want to secure an area for good. It comes at a price though- play too aggressively and you'll burn through your tickets like HMMWV burns through fuel. If you feel its too OP you might increase the overrun radius to go along with the "more agile but more fragile" theme. Do all of that and voila- more squishable, lesser equiped but more agile and hard to completely get rid off like cockroaches faction versus a robust modern military. Going in hard but encumbered by its might. You get asymmetrical warfare for the lowest work to gain ratio possible. Main idea behind those changes- insurgents/militia are not regular army. Right now they're structured like one with having worse equipment (and some toys like IEDs) It just makes them a worse regular army. What im proposing is an entirely different way of fighting that makes it its own unique faction with their own set of advantages and disadgantages. What im proposing is playing guerilla like guerilla- outmaneuver, strike where it hurts and **** off before the entire might of western civilization blows you to kingdom come.