-
Announcements
-
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 'tanks'.
Found 28 results
-
Was watching an interesting video of Syrians using Panzer IV and got to thinking couldn't there be a chance the insurgency getting their hands of this tank. I know the Milita are getting the T62 maybe the ancient armour could be interesting in the hands of Insurgents. Even our brethren in PS might be willing to help their squad brothers with an asset. Could be a laugh
-
So obviously if you've played or at least seen the tanks in squad, the T72B3 for RU side, has reactive armor mainly on it's turret that makes it stupid strong, nearly as strong as the Abrams turret. Since the T72B3 is just an upgraded T72, it shouldn't have as good armor values as it does for the turret, as reactive armor is a one time use. (Yes, there are layers, but the gun from a abrams would either spark up all of them or penetrate them regardless) I would love to see the introduction of animated and non aesthetic reactive armor for tanks that will receive it in the future, along with the T72. With the downsides also come to the benefits as it would allow some tanks to avoid contact with LAT's and HAT's to the turret preventing them from penetrating since they would be blown up before hitting. It would definitely add some much needed realism to the T72's as it makes no sense to how strong the turret is currently. I hope to see the Abrams and Challenger 2 getting a TUSK upgrade depending on the game, which has reactive armor on its sides. I don't think it would hurt gameplay balance too much, obviously some tanks significantly better in certain situations than others and gameplay should reflect that somewhat. I hope
-
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.
-
tanks Tanks are to important for my taste at the moment.
deadstalker posted a topic in Feedback & Suggestions
I already made this post on Reddit but I will make a more complete version. I lately realized how powerful unopposed tanks can be and how important the first tank battle can be for the next 30min of the game. the only good counter against a tank is an other tanks.infantry hold anti-tank weapons don't deal a lot of enough damage to kill a tank they they can only be used to make them less effective by taking out components this gives tankers the ability to get very close with the enemy infantry. This allows them to take down FOB's this makes attacking very difficult if your team has the armor disadvantage. defence will also become a problem if the tanks get the possibility to clear out the objective if you build a good FOB this should not be a problem. ATGM's are the most effective at long ranges and but aren't really useful as a defensive tool since you need more than 1 shot to kill a tank you will probably get killed while reloading at close range. my main problem with this is that 3 people have a very big impact if the fun of the 40 other people on the enemy team. possible solutions are: ATGM vehicles: A lot of vehicles currently in game have variants that can carry ATGM's these vehicles would work like a mobile ATGM FOB and can be used by the tank squad. the Bradly can sort of do the job but at the same time it needs to transport and support infantry and it only has 2 missiles what is very limited. Buffing LAT and HAT: Make portable AT weapons more deadly at the side and rear of a tank they should not do a lot against the front. this will discourage tankers from getting to close to a FOB. make it easier to damage components and add more of them like tracks this will completely immobile the tank so if they get stuck inside the enemy FOB good luck repairing. Attack helicopters: I heard people saying that attack helicopters should fill this role but I think they may be to powerful they can be countered by AA but what is going to stop them from sniping from 3KM away with ATGM's at the same time they will have very good anti infantry capabilities. Lower tank respawn timer: not all the nerfs need to be against tanks, tanks counter tanks so if you can get the counter out quicker the enemy has less time to use its tank against infantry witch is my main problem with tanks at the moment they get used as anti-infantry when they have no vehicles to shoot at. buffing ATGM's: lowering the ammo cost for firing one but still not keep it high enough so it doesn't become a sniper rifle giving bigger FOB's a second TOW can be an option but only after it has spent an X amount of building points so it won't be an option to put to ATGM's on some mountain. I want to see tanks as an tool to kill other vehicles at short to medium ranges not to do WW1 like unsupported tank charges to disable enemy defenses so the cavalry can save the day. There biggest counters will be long range ATGM's and infantry hold AT weapons at close range and urban environments. -
Thank you for watching, feedback always appreciated!
-
[LA] Lancer Arms 24/7 Tallil & Yehorivka SQUAD Server Now Up
SlothHunter posted a topic in Game Server Feedback
Our SQUAD server is now up and running, it can be found under the "Server Browser" tab in game. The name of the server is [LA] Lancer Arms | 24/7 Heavy Armor | New York | Public #, on it you can find maps where heavy armor (like tanks) do best. For more information on our rules or map queue join our discord at https://discord.gg/9ETsDaK -
Are the extremely slow vehicle turrets and weird movement intentional? (v12?)
RipGroove posted a topic in Questions
I use a low mouse sensitivity as a lot of gamers do to improve accuracy, so my hipfire mouse 360°/cm in Squad is a bout 45cm which means even with "Vehicle Sensitivity Multipliers" set to "2x" the turrets are extremely slow to rotate, to the point where I wouldn't be effective at all in a turret at any fast moving targets or switching between targets quickly. My mouse DPI is 1000 and my in game sensitivity is 0.15 so I tried setting a DPI of 8200 on my mouse DPI switch buttons for use just in turrets but even then the movement seems faster but there seems to be some sort of mouse acceleration/slowdown feature that just makes it all feel weird, is this intention for realism to stop people just quickly snapping to targets and owning everyone? If so I totally get that as it'll balance out vehicles and pretty much force them to sit back somewhere and take time to aim on targets, just wondering if I'm missing something? I don't want to be the only person sat there with slow turrets. Admittedly I've been on a break from Squad for a while but I'm sure turrets didn't behave like this on v11. -
Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to play the v12 test when it was out, but I have been following it closely and I'm super impressed with all they've added! The only concern I have is with the optics on the MBTs. I notice how you have a laser range finder, but you then have to elevate the gun manually to the proper elevation before you can shoot your target. This is not how its done in reality, on both the M1 Abrams and the T72B3 (as well as virtually all modern AFVs), the gunner presses a button to fire the laser rangefinder at the target, and the gun will automatically elevate to the proper elevation for that range. The center point-blank reticle then becomes your impact point, after lasing the target, you just simply point and shoot. The gunner never uses the range scales provided on the sights, they are there for emergency use only. I guess my question is, if this is intentionally left out or planned to be implemented in the future (perhaps when thermal/ night vision is introduced in-game)? I understand how some may have concerns about this ability making tanks OP, but this is how its actually done. Regardless, I'm very impressed with what I've seen with V12 and I can already tell its going to revolutionize the way we play squad for the better! Keep up the great work!
-
[Vehicle Periscopes] things that should be brought over.
Snaxxi posted a topic in Feedback & Suggestions
In the title. It’s a bit confusing to me that the more modern vehicles in game do not have the driver periscope that Project reality did ( and even most older vehicles had a no-zoom 360 periscope that allowed the driver to act as a commander/drive better) This gives much more situational awareness to the crew and allows an experienced driver to call out targets for his gunner. Maybe that’s what the devs are going for; making it easier to sneak up on heavy armor. However it kinda just leads to new guys getting spanked and losing tickets much faster. Even if it had to be a third position for a commander, that would be fine. And potentially no thermal sights, that is understandable. however in the current state, the heavy armor feel a bit too blind, and make driving the “bitch job.” Not a lot of new players are going to want to use armor if they can’t gun, especially if you don’t have any expirience, the better players will just say “okay, you drive then.” At least with the Periscopes you’re could call targets and feel like you were in charge of survival, this was further made better by the third position machine gun on tanks. You could swap to that position and still lay down fire. tl:dr — to make heavy armor feel better and not have a “bitch job” (driving) add the 360 traverse periscope back to the driver for situational awareness/calling targets. please feel free to add stipulations to make it balanced. Aka no thermals, limited viewing angle (can’t look directly behind), can’t zoom far, ect. -
DEVELOPERS PLEASE HUMBLY READ MY SUGGESTION FOR TANKS!
Caliell posted a topic in Feedback & Suggestions
Maybe you guys already have it in works, but I humbly want to suggest for you an idea how to make "4 crew Abrams M1A1" work. I believe having 4 crew Abrams is not only possible but should be in the game. How and why? Simply due to the fact that Loader's hatch on M1A1 by default comes with its own machine gun mount of 240B and gun shield. Game wise this means triple of independent firepower. So the loader in M1A1 will not be useless player, sitting in the buttoned up turret, but act as independent extra force multiplier besides Tank Commander's CROWS and the gunner. Imagine the amount of firepower this can lay. And perhaps having that "Extra M240B gunner" i.e. loader this will provide "Passive haste Bonus" for M1A1 like "20% reduction in loading time" for the main cannon. T72B3 should obviously already come with such bonus due to autoloader, but because it does not have the hatch for extra "Light version of gunner" it will not have 3 independent weapon hardpoints on it. So looking at it game wise, you have two different player doctrines closely following to real life ones. - T72B3 trying to put out superior Main Cannon/Coax firepower, while M1A1 trying to put out superior independent firepower. Just add another perhaps unpopular opinion. Rebel factions should be getting subpar but less costly in tickets versions of their own (Rebels factory stock T72 with no upgrades) and Insurgents T-54/55 and in larger numbers. Likely being half the ticket loss when combat destroyed in comparison to T72B3 and M1A1 tanks. This way, Insurgents and Rebels will have realistically access to worse technology as they are supposed to, but also in the way better because they can field more of those tanks without fearing huge ticket drains. Think about it. - Two T54/55s or two Cold War Era T72s for the cost of One M1A1. That's the whopping crew of 2 tanks vs 1 and should be interesting like WWII era tank duels of Shermans vs Tiger or Panther. One superior tank but can be overcame with good planning or outgunned based on player's skill. This will be game level of the recent tank movie with Brad Pitt "Fury" levels.- 40 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- m1a1 t72b3
- tanks
- (and 1 more)
-
Hi readers and hopefully Devs. I have a suggestion for tanks in the distant future that would really make the realism pop. Here is a video of a t-72 tank hit by an ATGM top of the motor, and shortly after cooks off with amazing effects.(crewmen escaped safely) I would love to see this kind of visual content in the game and i'm sure all of the soon to be tank hunters will also get a peak of satisfaction from placing such an accurate shot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzPiuYcZeOU thanks for reading.
-
I'm pretty hyped about the fact that tanks are going to be part of Squad. The level of detail showcased in the photogrammetry previews is tantalizing, and I trust that the final product will still be spectacular. I very much enjoy the level of realism in War Thunder's simulator mode, or something serious like Steel Beasts - that is to say, tank shells' effect on target depends entirely on the localized armor values and the components sitting in the line of fire, rather than a traditional HP pool. I'd love to see this type of realistic damage system implemented in Squad. It would provide so many new tactical opportunities besides "show up with tank, fire first". Use hull-down defilade as a defense against weaker AT rounds by covering your thinner hull armor Flank a tank as a HAT soldier knowing that the dual-warhead missile you carry will cut through the side/rear armor like butter and ignite the ammo Rely on top or bottom attacks as insurgent forces when an armored vehicle is impenetrable from the front/sides with the traditional warheads available Use autocannons to mobility-kill an enemy MBT or damage its optics, then rush the flank for the kill The system itself wouldn't have to be all that complex under the hood, either, in order to get a realistic feel. I've developed something like this myself, and all you really need are: Clean "collision model" for actual armor Components/tags/textures (whatever works best in Unreal Engine) designating armor thicknesses in RHAe for both kinetic and chemical attacks for each section of armor RHAe penetration values for each ammo type, along with kinetic or chemical flag Surface normal sampling on round impact, with pen/no-pen calculation on the spot based on calculated LOS thickness Collision zones on the locations of major systems or components inside the tank (they can even be primitives - no one's going to know the ammo rack is a couple of box colliders) A handful of vehicle status effects for component damage, e.g. ammo rack = fire/cookoff; optics = gunner zoom disabled; gun breech = longer reload; tracks = immobilized; etc. Ability for crew to repair damage over time Simple spalling model using generated "bullets" with a random spread from point where a penetrating shell enters the crew compartment Direct wounding/killing of crew members in line of fire when a shot penetrates These are just my ideas, though, and of course there may be something entirely different in mind for the way armor will work in Squad. Is there any word yet on how tank armor/ammo will be modeled?
-
Just saw the latest news from the devs on what they are doing with the inclusion of tanks into the game, and I gotta say I am completely taken back by how detailed the tanks look!!! Now that we know more about the tank development, what can we expect on counters to tanks in the game? It seems that the tanks are going to mainly be on the insurgent, militia, Russian, and British forces. I'm sure they won't leave the American forces naked on the battlefield without a tank so I assume they will add one for them as well. What kind of heavy anti-tank weapons do you think we will see coming in addition to the new tanks? My guess would be a Javelin for the American forces and maybe even a TOW system for FOBS, The MBT LAW for the British forces along with the TOW system as the US and Brits sometimes share weaponry, and of course the RPG-7 Tandem for insurgent and militia forces, and an RPG-30 for the Russian forces that's their modern Tandem round. Those are only ideas I have on which ones I would like to see on the battlefield, let's hear what you guys think should be implemented in the future!
-
Heyho Squadies! I really like the infantry game-play. While it is easy to learn it is pretty hard to master. It feels intuitiv but at the same time it has a realistic feeling without being overly complex. This is, as I hope, will follow into the vehicle gameplay. In this topic I would like to discuss my ideas/ hopes especially for tanks, without knowing how they played out in PR. I draw my experience out of SteelBeasts Pro PE, which is a full fleched tank simulator. Despite being a simulator, it did a lot of things correct and simple. Crew-System While I would like to see a 3-men crew-system, meaning driver, gunner and commander being playable, I would understand when it would only be a two-men-system: Gunner + Commander. In the two-men-system the commander would be the guy who controls the movement of the tank and this solution seems to be the best IMO. Commander: He "drives" the tank, can look outside the hatch, controls maybe a remote-weapon-station (if available) and gets his own optics. When he uses the optics-mode, he can bring the gun on his sight with a simple left-click on his mouse. With a right-click he can bring his vision on the current sight of the gunner. This would implement a hunter-killer-ability of modern tanks and enhances inner-tank-teamplay. Of course in this case to fire the RWS would need to be on another key, but this shouldn't be a big deal. With a press on the "prone"-key, he would get the smoke-screen up. Gunner: He shoots the gun over his optics, without the ability to look out on his own. There should be two optics available to him: The "normal" main-optics with thermal-imaging and different zoom-level and a optical-solution with a fixed zoom, no Laser-Range-Finder or Dynamic-Lead as a kind of emergency-optic. Should the tank be only be crewed by a single person, an instant switch between both position should be possible, while driving should also be possible from the gunners-position in such an instance. How to fire the gun As you have seen, I haven't written much about the gunner in the part above. Shooting a tank-gun should be more complex, than shooting a rifle. I imagine it the following way, without getting too complex: 1. The player identifies a moving target over his optics 2. With the "Lean"-keys he zoomes onto the target and brings the optic on target. (e.g. with the left-lean-key you change the zoom, with the right-lean-key you turn on/off / change the Thermal-Imager) 3. Middle-Mouse-Click: Lasering the target, when "hit" then he gets a correct echo (he gets a solid red range number into his optics), when he misses (or the laser is blocked) he gets a wrong echo (blinking red number with the measured distance). 4. Right-Mouse-Hold: Because he needs to follow the target with his optics, this way the dynamic lead is "programmed" into the FCS. 5. Left-Mouse-Click: He fires the gun... when he got everything right, he hits the target... if not, he misses. What he needs to learn is to program in the dynamic-lead correctly (when he follows the target too fast during the "hold" period, he shoots in front of it, if he follows it too slow, he shoots behind it). When he got a wrong laser-echo, he needs to either lase again or shoot with a wrong echo by adjusting the distance manually (aiming above the target). Lasering isn't constantly possible. If you would laser too fast (around lasering every second), the laser might overheat and will need a short cool-down period. After the gun is fired, the crew hears some loading sounds and then a generic voice of the loader with something along the lines "Sabot in", "Sabot loaded", "HEAT in", "HEAT loaded", I don't now the correct terms of our English friends, they might help you out here. When such a system is implemented, using a tank-gun gets far more interesting and realistic. It would even be possible to put in the different mechanics of the nations, when wished, but I think the above system would be fine as a generalization. Is the enemy dead? This is an important point for me: Everybody knows that an enemy tank is destroyed, when his ammunition cookes off (while we are at it: can we have this please) or he draws the head (his turret flies away)... but when you hit an enemy tank with an APFSDS-round, the only thing you see might be a flash, dust and a standing enemy tank... you don't know if the crew inside is completely dead, if they are only wounded, if the gunner might be even alive and shoot back... you need to wait and see... or sent a 2nd round downrange until you are sure. Thus the damage-mechanic is important: Optics, Crew, Ammunition, Tracks, Engine, Turret-Rotation, Stabilizer, LRF, ... should be destroyable if possible and cause different problems to a crew of a tank... while at the same time you could still work with a invisible "health-bar" that renders the tank completely destroyed. When a tank is destroyed it should just stay there without doing anything most of the time and only with a small chance of a cook-off or explosion (which is of course higher, when the ammunition compartment was hit). Armor and Ammunition It seems the developer are on a good way here from what I found in the forums... but please, can we have working ERA? sincerly, Thonar
-
Are squad planing to add main battletanks like the t 72.I think it wuld fit in the game. In a tank you also have to have a complete crew. U have to have a gunner reloader comander driver and so on. It wuld be fun to have to have a hole crew working all together in a veacle. This wuld be a good addition both to gameplay and to the reralisem of the game. And plz dont judge me spelling, I have dyselexia and im swedish plus im only 14.
-
Okay, so it's still early in the game, and Tanks, and IFV's are not in the picture yet. However I thought it would be a reasonable idea to get ahead of the curve before the tanks come out, and shoot out this idea to process a "school/boot camp", or classroom time training along with the release of armored vehicles in the future. I loved the aspect Americas Army brought with training, and I hope maybe the devs here could look into that. In America's Army 2 you had to get training to operate the HWMMV, which was awesome, because then everybody knew its characteristics, and what it was capable of. It consisted of some classroom learning, and actually going through a course with an instructor in your ear telling you what to do like boot camp. I believe this would be a great help to others to get a "boot camp" essentially to be able to operate Armored Vehicles, and essentially get "certified" like in America's Army 2. I loved the training aspect and certification aspect of America's Army, hopefully the devs can shed some light on this idea?
-
Is there any pictures going around what it looks like inside the tanks and Humvee.... I'm interested if it's accurate and pristine..... Thanks!!!!
-
For When Tanks Come Out: Cars Shouldn't Stop Tanks
YuriIsLoveYuriIsLife posted a topic in Feedback & Suggestions
So I was driving around a Merkava in PR co-op, trying to get a feel for the game a little more (I'm a noob) and I was driving on this bridge, right? And then the side of my tank hits an old, burnt car. This car stops my 65-ton tank dead in it's tracks instead of doing this: I don't know if it was a physics engine limitation or whatever, but you get the idea. I'm not saying there exactly be car crushing animation, but a car shouldn't be able to stop a tank. The least that can be done is that car can be pushed out of the way. -
Just interested to see what the community has in ideas, not saying it should be in but just spewing some ideas out. Such as odd Soviet era tanks. Or anything in general... Examples.... IDF MAR-290 Soviet Scud Soviet BTR... Again just brainstorming odd vehicals, plus as a history geek I learn something new when someone post something interesting. Please post with pictures
-
A friendly reminder to VFX artists when tanks come out.
YuriIsLoveYuriIsLife posted a topic in Feedback & Suggestions
In videos, I see a modern tank (About 1960's on onwards) fire it's cannon and then a small puff of contrasting white smoke pours out the barrel a moment after firing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's excess gas being pushed out by the bore evacuator. Anyway, it's a feature some games seem to miss. I have faith in the devs because they have provided some stunning visual effects and overall realism but this is just a friendly reminder. The amount of gas and time it takes for it to exit differs from tank-to-tank. The Abrams pushes out a little bit of gas very shortly after firing. https://youtu.be/kBwBsaA8VdI?t=2m https://youtu.be/pCjHFbcVHQA?t=1m36s Where as the T-90 dispenses a thicker cloud and seemingly takes a fraction of a second longer for the gasses to come out. -
Vehicle Collsion The maps are obviously made with an eye for the fact vehicles will be featured down the road. I just worry that we wont get the right "feel" of driving a tank, if you forexample can't drive an Abrams through those low clay fences featured on most maps. Or break down a gate to a compound by driving a Humwee or APC into it. At they very least I think the developers should allow for tanks/vehicles of some caliber to drive through(-without destroying) a variation of obstacles, like the clay walls, small trees and so on. I just seems silly to be stuck behind a small tree in a main battle tank, like you would in battlefield games. I played forgotten hope 2 (bf2 mod) a lot, and they made tanks able to pass through fences and so on... of course it seems weird that a tank drives through and the infantry following has to go around, but tanks lose a bit of their purpose if they have to use roads, and cant offroad through a forest with small trees. Destruction I think it doesn't really suit the game how rocket launchers get stopped by a clay wall and if you're directly behind it won't be hurt by the explosion... So I was wondering, when vehicles... Tanks, helicopters with hellfiremissiles, IEDs and such are added. Will one then be able to just hide out in a compound while a main battle tank is shelling your clay hut without having to worry about it? About the destruction, i really do get how complex and time taking it is to implement.. however the cheap solution would be for explosions of some size to not be totally blocked by walls and such, so standing directly behind a wall getting hit my a tank gun, would give you something to think about. How do you think this will be in the final version of the game?
-
As someone avid for Tanks/APCs I asked a dev on a live stream about inteirors... What do you think? Should Interiors for tanks be added or? What about front seat APCs?? Please discuss :D
-
I don't know if you like tanks, but I certainly do. So much infact that I made a tank quiz on quizup. If anyone would like to play against each other, me or someone random on quizup here is a direct link to it. https://www.quizup.com/topics/_a47a88e8-fc6f-45cf-a4b2-fdc17f540415 If you don't know quizup, it's basically a quiz with 7 questions between 2 people where each person has to answer as quickly as possible between 4 choices, the longer it takes you to answer the less points you get with a minimum of 10 points for a correct answer and a max of 20. What exactly is in the quiz? Questions about tanks, tank related things, tank history and IDing pictures of tanks. What isn't in this quiz? Questions like "why was tiger tanks unstoppable killers?" "which is better?" So come play and tell me why you like or hate the quiz about tanks maybe?
-
Maybe like most people, I'm extremely hyped for mainly tanks. I believe they will play a major role and a crap ton of fun... However, I haven't found anyone really too picky on the actual tank game play. I think for it to actually work it should follow the fundamentals of Red Orchestra 2. It was highly addicting as a tank player and highly rewarding disabling/destroying a tank. In that sense interiors are a must need. So far the MTLBM is a confirmed tank, and already worked however I'm hoping enough people get this to the Devs and maybe give us something to gaze at in awe.. Such as the interiors.... Since it seems confirmed by the lead artist.... http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/3716-interesting-t80bv-interior-panorama-reference/?hl=interiors#entry67256..........
-
Im writing this now because I will probably forget it later haha, and its good solution actualy. Some players are against tanks in the game because they would become over powered. I ve been thinking about this for some time. Gunner: Ussualy in games you control gun turret with the mouse, but in reallity, you dont, you have stick, like in airplanes, and it works like AWSD. What I wanted to say is that gunner should control turret this way because it would become realistic, and it would be much harder to aim. He can pres shift for faster turret movement. Gun stabilization should be implemented too. Driver: Nothing special, you should only implement fuel in the game. Comander: Ability to use binoculars from the cupola, or however you call that place from where he can peek from inside the tank. I 100% understand that tanks are not priority for next 6 months or more, but you should really consider this. What you think about that? Sorry for bad English.
