Jump to content
TygaTheKing

Do You Think Suppressive Fire Is Effective In Squad?

Do You Think Suppressive Fire Is Effective In Squad?  

213 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Do You Think Suppressive Fire Is Effective In Squad?

    • Yes
      103
    • No
      100


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, elerik said:

Suppression effect doesn't work most of time when you play regularly fun pub game. Everyone's are heroes. 

When you play event and game is "hardcore serious" suppression effect work excellent. Nobody want waste ticket. 

I'd say it's kinda opposite. People in this game aren't playing as rambos aka BF/CoD style. They usually play this game as they imagine themselves a real life battle(instead of playing it as it was suppose to: as a video game): they play it very slow and way too careful. Very often I see a lot of people on publics just sitting behind covers or laying on the ground in the grass because they're afraid of suppression fire and they aren't playing serious, just a group of randoms.

 

At the same time a lot of clan players will even use your suppression fire against you(on events and on publics): they will peek during your bursts or in-between your suppression bursts, or wait for you to reload and then they will peek and kill you when you can't return fire.

 

I personally don't really use suppression fire, I respect mobility and surprise factor a lot more than suppression fire. I try to disclose my position to the enemy only when I'm guaranteed to kill at least 1 enemy soldier and once I achieved a task I try to change my position so enemy can't use that knowledge against me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, KulaGGin said:

I'd say it's kinda opposite. People in this game aren't playing as rambos aka BF/CoD style. They usually play this game as they imagine themselves a real life battle(instead of playing it as it was suppose to: as a video game): they play it very slow and way too careful.

I don't even know what to say... nor do I think there would be a point.

Mind. Blown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2016 at 11:04 PM, Mumble said:

I agree, I would love to see the way gameplay changes if the respawn timer is made longer. The thought of players actually slowing down because they don't want to wait to spawn is great!

 

I know it's alpha, so everything is subject to change, but I think the spawn times could go from what they are now (30 seconds average on FOBs?) to two, three times their current value (60-90 seconds for FOB spawn). It would also increase the incentive to wait for a medic and play closer with your squad so your medic has a better chance to get to you. As it is now, you can run willy nilly around and get a few fun kills, die, and respawn in 20 seconds.

 

(sorry if I've repeated any points, I didn't read the six pages of comments)

Do you want to kill game play?  Because honestly 60 sec is much too long.  All your doing with a long timer is keeping people from either playing because they got shot or in the background building a mega FOB because they're scared to fight and die.  

 

On 4/27/2016 at 11:48 PM, Lethargo said:

Long story short: Coming from Arma, I think supp. fire in SQUAD is a joke. It needs a big buff so it actually works.

All too often I see people returning fire accurately while being suppressed. And that hurts game play immensely in a game that is about small unit tactics/fire and maneuver.

Have you never played Squad?  The suppression in the game is perfect and if you don't think so you're not in fire fights.  

 

To even think there's two more pages to read in this thread is mind numbing.  Can you get this locked?  I'm pretty sure the devs have said they aren't changing it.  If they change their minds then reopen it.  Ugh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey KulaGGin before the update 7.0 you were arguing that the slowed down movement is going to ruin the game because of some counter-strike game that is not even close comparable game, guess what it didn't ruin it.The only thing that perhaps I would agree is that it compromised the standard riflemen even further and thus optics are even more overpowered on the battlefield against the riflemen then before, this needs to be balanced out.

 

One thing you don't understand is not so much about the monitor size and seeing the target, but it's the imbalance of winning engagements rifleman vs scope that are already facing each other and I'm not talking about kills by riflemen done by sneaking up behind an enemy that uses an optic, but face-to-face engagements. And btw I have a large monitor size, so it's not the case of not being able to see the target but more a case of sway impact that optics have zero and thus easier to pin-point and hit effectively than the rifleman can.

 

I don't know why you keep comparing the suppression system to that rubbish mainstream AAA title like BF3 when it has nothing to do with it. Personally I don't know BF3, but I checked some BF3 video on YT and it's nothing like the suppression system I'm talking about that is in DH mod.

 

So will you please before you post another comment, do me a favour and check how effective suppression system is in Darkest Hour 44-45 mod? Or at least check at 9:55 how the sniper is unable to pick out the enemy machine gun, see how suppression works well there? The snipers may not be semi-automatic obviously like in the modern warfare that is SQUAD, but still doesn't change the fact, how you're unable to return accurate fire while the bullets are being poured on to you, and how really the suppression system does well in simulating the fear in player's behaviour that soldiers have in real life.

 

(Slight jumping effect at 9:55), bear in mind how the jump effect for each bullet is obviously stronger for the scoped rifles because the zoom is higher. This is where the optics aren't used in an exploitable ways but rather used in cover from hidden positions. You see how the player went for cover rather than what is in SQUAD where players disregard the oncoming fire completely and continue to fire.

 

 

 

I'm showing the true behaviour of optics in this game how suppression system isn't making me go for cover, I'm not bragging about my score kills like you did. I've racked up the kills you have in the past using a grenade launcher or a riflemen but that was running up behind enemies and finding myself behind whole enemy squads where usually the enemy team was doing really badly.

 

But you've mentioned oh Sumari Bala has close range firefights, ok so just to prove you, I've just left from one round on the Sumari Bala playing optic and it shows me winning engagements on less than 10-20m against those without a scope, so how close you have to be to be really advantageous I guess some 5m away or literally behind an enemy which is ridiculous. It shouldn't be that way that you only have advantage on less than 5m away.

 

Here I'm standing on top of the roof without any cover and easily shot a guy that started shooting at me down below

kFRUSjf.jpg

aU5DB2P.jpg

 

Here is literally less than 20m

kubfPEG.jpg

 

Here I'm literally standing on top of a wall not even hiding for cover, brazenly standing despite bullets flying past me and even hitting me, I shot two guys that were firing at me first and hiding behind the wall, only to easily pick them out using the optic

RaXEmmJ.jpg

 

 

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

muffin I would never even play cod or bf, on the contrary I stay away from run'n'gun titles,  Will you read first my post before saying something is not true, I wrote -> Personally I don't know BF3, but I checked some BF3 video on YT and it's nothing like the suppression system I'm talking about that is in DH mod.

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler
4 hours ago, Friesen said:

Hey KulaGGin before the update 7.0 you were arguing that the slowed down movement is going to ruin the game because of some counter-strike game that is not even close comparable game, guess what it didn't ruin it.

You gonna have to provide a direct quote. Otherwise that's just words.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

One thing you don't understand is not so much about the monitor size and seeing the target, but it's the imbalance of winning engagements rifleman vs scope that are already facing each other and I'm not talking about kills by riflemen done by sneaking up behind an enemy that uses an optic, but face-to-face engagements.

You mean face to face engagements like this?

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

And btw I have a large monitor size

How large? 24"? It isn't large. It's average.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

sway impact that optics have zero and thus easier to pin-point and hit effectively than the rifleman can.

Sway in this game is a joke and too easy to control on any weapons. It should be at least doubled on everything if they want to make firefights hard.

In optics vs iron sight the limiting factor is accuracy of the gun at long ranges and optics itself at close/mid ranges because sway is too easy to control at long ranges and you can be as accurate with iron sight as with optics at long ranges. And at close and mid ranges you can't be as effective with optics because you see only about 2 centimeters with that optics while with iron sight/red dot you can see a lot more. And spray control is a lot eaiser with iron sight or red dot because it's just visually smaller than with optics...

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

do me a favour and check how effective suppression system is in Darkest Hour 44-45 mod? Or at least check at 9:55 how the sniper is unable to pick out the enemy machine gun, see how suppression works well there?

 

Game looks pretty good but I wouldn't call that suppression fire system effective just because of that moment, since machine gunner got headshoted few seconds after. Same happens in Squad - machine gunners like that one are getting Gl'd, RPG'd, sniped or just headshoted with usual rifles.

 

But that supression fire system is kinda fine, IMHO. I think I just might like to see something like that in Squad.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

The snipers may not be semi-automatic obviously like in the modern warfare that is SQUAD, but still doesn't change the fact, how you're unable to return accurate fire

You're wishful thinking. If that guy didn't return fire it doesn't mean he was unable to do that or it was impossible because of suppression fire system. He obviously have problems with his aim(I bet it is just a bad mouse for $2) and it more looked like he couldn't return fire more because of his mouse and not suppression fire system. I watched whole 10 minutes of his gameplay and he was using way too many time to aim even when enemies wasn't looking at him.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

I'm showing the true behaviour of optics in this game how suppression system isn't making me go for cover, I'm not bragging about my score kills like you did.

I am not so sure about that one:

On 8/27/2016 at 7:23 PM, Friesen said:

vwjHjO4.jpg

And don't tell me that it isn't you on that screenshot or you showed it for some other reasons etc.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

But you've mentioned oh Sumari Bala has close range firefights, ok so just to prove you, I've just left from one round on the Sumari Bala playing optic and it shows me winning engagements on less than 10-20m against those without a scope, so how close you have to be to be really advantageous I guess some 5m away or literally behind an enemy which is ridiculous.

I wish you could record a video with that optics on Sumari Bala biggrin.gif. I know it isn't going to happen because a lot of people getting 20 FPS, anyway... We would then sit and laugh on that optics video together. It would be ridiculous.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

Here I'm standing on top of the roof without any cover and easily shot a guy that started shooting at me down below

Means had just a a very bad unlucky day if he started shooting at you first and didn't kill you at that distance and in that situation.

 

4 hours ago, Friesen said:

Here I'm literally standing on top of a wall not even hiding for cover, brazenly standing despite bullets flying past me and even hitting me, I shot two guys that were firing at me first and hiding behind the wall, only to easily pick them out using the optic

RaXEmmJ.jpg

Doesn't really mean much without a video. I don't know, you might be just a good player. And a good player would kill them even with a pistol...

The thing is that when some thing in the game is overpowered any kid can take it and be very effective with it(like AWP in CS 1.6 and CS:GO until 2015, for example, or Carl Gustav in BC2) against other people who don't have that thing.

 

Provide some video where you drop some ridiculous scoreboard like 45-3(not to show off but to show other people that overpowered thing you're talking about) on Sumari Bala and then we would only be able to start a proper discussion about overpowerness of optics against iron sights/red dots. Because that's what overpowered means: you just win all the time because of the overpowered tool in your hands even when you lack a lot of skill on your part.

 

And no, you can't prove your point with some screenshots and dead bodies on your screen. Again, here's how overpowered thing looks like:

 

Because all you had to do is shoot at estimate position of the enemies, you'd get kills, anyway. And you can clearly see that on a video if you played that game.

 

And it isn't the case in Squad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoiler
7 hours ago, Lethargo said:
7 hours ago, KulaGGin said:

I'd say it's kinda opposite. People in this game aren't playing as rambos aka BF/CoD style. They usually play this game as they imagine themselves a real life battle(instead of playing it as it was suppose to: as a video game): they play it very slow and way too careful.

I don't even know what to say... nor do I think there would be a point.

Mind. Blown.

What's wrong with what I said in that quote? @elerik said that he saw a lot of people play as Rambos in this game. I said that I saw that a lot of people play way too slow and careful in this game. What's mind blown about that?

We just have different experience in this game, me and Elerik. Elerik is a medic who's trying to revive a lot of guys who die in opened places(like poppy fields) and I play a lot more agressive as a rifleman or grenadier and I see way too many squads lying down on the ground under random trees together(inside 1 GL 'nade range) waiting god knows what(usually they're just waiting to get GL'd):

bIfKC30.jpg

Again, not to show-off, just to make a point.

Edited by KulaGGin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I mean engagements like this below -> That riflemen are a useless cannon fodder, not your video which you've shown so many times on this forum and we all said how that what is everything is wrong with Squad atm that this behaviour as going instant prone and turn 180 is possible.

7ERS2c2.jpg

But as you can see in that screenshot above, next second looked like this ->

ajgIQ7d.jpg

As 90% of other engagements riflemen vs optics (that are already facing each other, not sneaking up behind is irreleveant).

 

Glad that the movement has been slowed down now but the riflemen vs optics are now even furthermore compromised because of that and more imbalanced. Not saying that slowed down movement is bad.

 

One thing we agree is that you'd like to have that kind of suppression in Squad that is in DH where as seen in the video, the sniper still picked off the MG gunner (which shows that the suppression isn't some kind of overpowering thing that you can never kill the guy), but he still had to TAKE FOR COVER when the MG kept pinning down. AND THAT IS THE BEAUTY OF IT. No one, not a single person ever complained in DH, on STEAM forum, or on DH forum that they're unhappy with that suppression, or that is too strong etc.

 

And trust me, put it in SQUAD, not a single complain would ever emerge about that the suppression now is too strong or something. On the opposite, more and more firefights would be happening where both squads assist each other in giving suppressive fire WHERE IT IS ACTUALLY EFFECTIVE. Rather than constantly trying to sneak up behind the enemy being just a rifleman because without an optic you might as well not shoot at all because you'd just only expose yourself and get shot within next second.

 

And obviously the sway is another thing we agree on, once the resting weapons over objects in SQUAD is implemented, we all hope for the sway to be at least doubled when standing up. So no more running ahead at the enemy, and picking everyone off humans hiding behind sandbags like I did shoot three here while me running in the open.... ->

eAvbOpF.jpg

You'd never be able to do aim and pick off 3 guys behind sandbags so precisely with the iron sight/red dot that you can with the optic because of no sway penalty and no suppression.

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suppression is effective in the hands of the right players and that's all there is to it. It's only more effective for clans simply because they understand how to work together as a team. As opposed to randos who, unfortunately, rarely get the best possible experience because they are less likely to coordinate effectively. Now before someone tries to flame me, I said less likely. 

 

Personally, when I think of suppression, I think of machine gunners and not someone taking shots at you with their AK or M4. The idea behind suppression is to keep you on the ground or behind cover while teammates can maneuver on you. You can't be stealthy about suppression so when that occurs you should be prepared for returning fire. If you fire your m249 at full-tilt into a group of enemies without your teammates there to pick them off as they are going for cover, you're not doing it right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In real life the suppression would cause your hands shaking so the "jumping effect" that is in DH is an instinctive reaction to a bullet snap/swish. You would automatically 'flinch' away from it. But the game does not represent that as no mere swish sound or blur is ever stopping me from continuing accurate fire on the enemy even if it's an m249.

 

RickDoodBrah please see the video above at 9:55 how well it works at making the player take for cover.

 

NOW, does it look like that suppression is too strong or overpowering? NO! The sniper still managed to pick off that MG gunner. But it is enough to stop returning ACCURATE fire back at the enemy and that is what would make SQUAD really really great if it had this also.

 

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, Suppressive fire doesnt work well because squad doesnt run well. The game looks bland, run all day, hardly ever seen Suppressive fire

 

plus the ****ing forum doesnt work either and the stupid spelling correction doesnt make sense even though i copied and pasta the " Suppressive " squad forums doesnt know how to spell !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i also like pasta. (your mind, your hands--> your browser does the spell checking...a pattern is evident)

 

suppression should only be an indication that you are being fired upon and a feeling of the accuracy. In addition there can be shock type effects simulating sensory effects of explosions etc nearby.

 

The suppression "effect" should only be: "crap someone is shooting at me and I might die if I don't stay in cover". This is partially functional already, suppressive fire is effective.

 

To include this fear in the game is impossible without biological intervention. They can create the "fear" of having to respawn and walk. Or of losing ground or some asset. They can make it hard for you to fire accurately without steadying your weapon -already implemented and tweakable. This can prevent a player from quickly reacting to being fired at, if this is too strong it harms enjoyment. 

 

So they have accuracy penalties, shock effects and respawn times.

 

I think it will be best to focus on "fear", the concern over the life of the soldier, they can do this using benefits to staying alive longer or penalties for dying. This way (a serial run and gun player and all round hero with invincibility shorts) will take more care with my life, if being shot at (suppressed) I might keep my head down.

 

ps, I suppress a lot, particularly if I cant see an enemy but know there is someone in the area or when I want some time to change position.

 

pps, I am a hero.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting AR to one-side, there's a big difference between a single player laying down suppression and a fire team.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Friesen said:

In real life the suppression would cause your hands shaking so the "jumping effect" that is in DH is an instinctive reaction to a bullet snap/swish. You would automatically 'flinch' away from it. But the game does not represent that as no mere swish sound or blur is ever stopping me from continuing accurate fire on the enemy even if it's an m249.

 

RickDoodBrah please see the video above at 9:55 how well it works at making the player take for cover.

 

NOW, does it look like that suppression is too strong or overpowering? NO! The sniper still managed to pick off that MG gunner. But it is enough to stop returning ACCURATE fire back at the enemy and that is what would make SQUAD really really great if it had this also.

 

 

Just because someone doesn't go for cover when they are being fired upon doesn't mean that they aren't being suppressed. It just means they are probably foolish and are about to be dead. The suppression mechanic shouldn't -make- you take cover, it should make you -want- to take cover. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RickDoodBrah said:

 

Just because someone doesn't go for cover when they are being fired upon doesn't mean that they aren't being suppressed. It just means they are probably foolish and are about to be dead. The suppression mechanic shouldn't -make- you take cover, it should make you -want- to take cover. 

 

I don't know what are you ascribing that to, but the video I've shown you particularly at 9:55 does exactly that, it doesn't literally make you take cover, it is up to the player if he wants to risk it or not. The good thing is that it is only effective while it lasts and that it has sufficient intensity. Suppression in SQUAD however does not have a sufficient intensity nowhere near enough. On multiple times I'm able to run in the open and shoot enemies that are firing at me from entrenched positions only for me to easy pick them out while standing up in the open.

FlTJgzB.jpg

 

Without the sight jumping from bullet cracks, suppression is worthless. No blur is gonna stop me from returning accurate fire on an enemy. So without the sights jumping, might as well just not have any other suppression effects.

 

Rather than directly trying to kill enemy soldiers, it makes the enemy soldiers feel unable to safely perform any actions other than seeking cover. Colloquially, this goal is expressed as "it makes them keep their heads down". But in SQUAD that is on the opposite as currently it's a highly precision pin-point aiming based gunplay where optics severly dominate the battlefield.

 

As a soldier you're not a robot.There have to be "physical" components to this as well in order to mimic the autonomic psychological responses to being in danger and under fire. Relying on visual or audio effects alone is not going to achieve the intended purpose. The suppression effect in DH of jumping sight for each bullet crack is highly proficient and very successful in achieving these real life ends.

 

I guarantee you the gunplay in SQUAD would be a lot way improved if it had a tiny flinch of sights. The optics having a higher zoom obviously would be affected by this more than the iron sights/red dot, with the higher zoom you're bound to have a higher flinch from bullet cracks than viewing down the iron sight.

 

And it is not like you're not able to return fire at all, it is kinda it's repercussive where soldiers on both sides can mutually suppress each other and it is still easy to hit the target as shown in that video at 9:55.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the point you're making about the psychological effects of firefights. Truly, I do. I'm an active duty E6 with 5 deployments (3 Iraq, 2 Afghanistan) and I've experienced more than a fair share of this. The problem though is that you're stereotyping the human condition and taking away the player's ability to choose. Yes, loud noises can make you jump but for those of us who have been through the real-life experience, I can tell you that the jumpy and on-edge sensations are only temporary. After one or two firefights many of us become numb to it and the general reaction thereafter is just being plain pissed off that someone is shooting at you. 

 

The player needs to be able to manually react to taking fire. Whether that be seeking cover or not which also includes the shock or surprise of the first few shots to fly by. If you force the player to go through physical reactions based on psychological responses you are then just adding an unwanted mechanic to the game. If you want players to feel more attached to their 'life' in the game than you need stricter penalties for being taken down or shot. Adding a mechanic that makes players virtually nervous sounds silly to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevertheless in real life you're bound to have way your ability to fire accurately affected when being pinned down way more compared to when not being suppressed at all and shooting from a safe position. And in game there's nowhere near the fear factor you have in real life. Even if there is no fear you'll always have some automatic reaction to the bullet snaps where your hands start shaking. It is possible to train yourself not to be affected, but the truth is the average soldier wouldn't be. And the game should portray the common soldier. Even top special forces would always to some percentage be affected by it. Humans are not a robot. And saying that, if you try to play Darkest Hour 44-45, players continue to exchange fire between each other even though they're suppressed. So saying that slight jump of the iron sight is overpowering is absurd. What's overpowering is the behaviour of running in the open while looking down the optic and picking everyone off while standing upright without the affection of being suppressed since blurry screen is useless at making the player wanting to take cover. In the end it is a fair mix of physical and psychological pressure you put on a enemy.

 

Another thing that should be in SQUAD is that duration should be taken into account. If you are suppressed with enough intensity and duration you become disoriented. Basically shaky (harder to aim), heavy breathing, and inconsistent mouse look. That would give incentive to actually call out my machine gun to lay down some suppressive fire on enemy positions rather than me just going off by myself and start sniping everyone off with my scope like I did below.

 

ankkAGp.jpg

GCz6JoX.jpg

 

I wish I had a video but that is just to prove, not boast, but prove that with an optic I'm just capable in unrealistic and exploitable ways of clearing out a whole airfield objective all by myself going about and picking every enemy off while me running across the open despite incoming fire and shoot them on spot while me in a standing up position totally disaffected by suppression.

 

I'd be sad if the tiny jump of the sight for each bullet crack won't be implemented as that means the only choice for me to play this game is to play only optic/scopes as it has shown that as long as the enemy using an optic has got eyes on you and is further than 50m you have absolutely no chance of moving forward or let alone engaging him, might as well respawn as a scope rifleman/sniper.

 

The only chance to kill enemy that uses a scope is to run up behind him or get extremely close even still he has a chance of killing you, I've posted screenshot when I'm killing enemies from less than 10m away.

Now if the resting weapons over objects feature is implemented in SQUAD, then we can increase the sway when standing up and also affected by stamina, then perhaps we can have better chances and a more balanced gunplay.

 

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Friesen said:

 

Now if the resting weapons over objects feature is implemented in SQUAD, then we can increase the sway when standing up and also affected by stamina, then perhaps we can have better chances and a more balanced gunplay.

 

 

This ^

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/30/2016 at 11:53 PM, RickDoodBrah said:

After one or two firefights many of us become numb to it and the general reaction thereafter is just being plain pissed off that someone is shooting at you. 

 

Yes, but did you or any other soldier (as the fire was incoming) stand perfectly still, aimed towards the gunfire and calmly shot back? That is the thing that just looks off in games. I dont know, but i cant believe that any person in real life doesnt care if bullets start passing bye and just stands still and shoots back. Please tell me different. I dont talk about people who are close to a wall or anything, i think about people in the open. I always thought they would run to cover whenever bullets come close, even if you are pissed of that they are shooting at you, but standing still and trying to fire back to a guy already aiming at you is silly, and that is what i think people want to achieve in this game, a reaction that is not completely insane and successful at the same time.

 

I hope my english makes any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2016 at 8:26 PM, gunbattle said:

it works, but fire support weapons like the m249, rpk really need bipod deployment and [even more] decreased recoil when prone because yea, like you said, the cost of suppressive fire is that it can give away your position

 

Needs bipods as well as the ability to rest on window sills, walls, etc. Amount of times I've had a ledge or something in front of me preventing me from going prone or crouching (that I could have leaned on for even more support), so I've had to try and lay down suppressing fire while standing up is too many to count.

 

At the moment suppressive fire is only effective in the fraction of times you run into the enemy in an open field with no obstacles to get in your way from going prone, and then no foliage or grass to stop you from seeing the target whilst your prone.

 

Edited by Kerri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the Devs listen to most of the "Take control away from the player during X moments" all that it will do is make the game feel sluggish, unresponsive, restricted, and detach...more than what it is right now.

 

the focus should be getting one to one movement, remove that Wind up on pressing WASD, and get all this "Delay" out of simple basic action first not add more to it.

but hey lets ask for more blindness and more sluggish, unresponsive, restricted, a detach gameplay instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RaulO4 said:

if the Devs listen to most of the "Take control away from the player during X moments" all that it will do is make the game feel sluggish, unresponsive, restricted, and detach...more than what it is right now.

 

the focus should be getting one to one movement, remove that Wind up on pressing WASD, and get all this "Delay" out of simple basic action first not add more to it.

but hey lets ask for more blindness and more sluggish, unresponsive, restricted, a detach gameplay instead. 

 

This statement couldn't be more fallacious. I implore you to test Darkest Hour:44-45 suppression system before you post such statement. There is not a single complaint about DH suppression system on any forum whether steam or official. All this kind of fear-mongering that it's gonna ruin the game... was exactly the same before 7.0 talking how slowed down movement is going to ruin the game which is completely not true.

 

The truth is that if SQUAD had tiny jump for each bullet passing by (which would see tiny affection by the iron sight, only the optic would be greatly affected, obviously because of the higher zoom they have), then the SQUAD gunplay and overall firefights would improve 200%. Not what is now, go about with an optic rifleman and dominate over all those that do not have an optic.

 

The blurry screen actually makes less realistic sense than the flinch which is the natural part of a soldier's instinct. If we are talking close to real life, then you'd probably get closer with the implementation of a slight jump for each bullet passing by than blur since YOU HAVE NO BLUR IN REAL LIFE WHEN THE BULLETS WHIZZ BY. However You're bound to have inaccurate fire while bullets are poured onto you therefore the slight jump of the iron sight makes actually more realistic sense than the blur. The blur only makes sense when the debris is flying in the air and hitting in the face, not bullets.

 

So it's ok for you to say flinching this and that when you haven't even tried it how it works so well in Darkest Hour 44-45 or at least take a look at 9:55 in this video???

 

But the blurry screen which does nothing and does not represent real life suppression since there is no blur in real life for passing bullets either. You must remember one thing this is a game. And the tiny jump of the sights makes way more sense from a realistic point of view than the blur. The fact is that blurry screen is absolutely useless and might as well not have any other suppression at all if you just have a blur because NO BLURRY SCREEN IS EVER GONNA STOP ME RETURNING ACCURATE FIRE. The "jumping" however is an instinctive reaction to a bullet snap/swish.

 

And I've shown countless of examples with screenshots how I'm easily picking off guys from either extremely close or long distance, showing how useless the suppression is. And I've shown screenshots how useless cannon fodder I'm unable to hit anything with just a iron-sighted rifleman.

So screenshots are apparently not enough to prove anything. So I've recorded some gunplay to prove how totally unaffected I am by the suppression and am able to pick off guys, while me as a standard rifleman getting easily picked off every time I engage enemies even though having an optic in those situation would've been completely opposite. And those are just few examples only bear in mind there are hundreds of situations like this everytime I play.

 

 

 

Don't tell me you'd hit the guy using the iron sight in those situations cause you wouldn't. With an optic however yes because of how overpowered due to no flinching and almost no sway it makes it almost an optic oriented gameplay, Don't spawn as a rifleman just wait for the scoped rifle/sniper class or just be an useless cannon fodder who dies everytime that comes out of spawn point. Yes once in a while you get behind the enemy sneaky-style and you shoot in the back, great.

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the blurry screen is actually the way to go. You can't make people fear death, that simply will not happen, not unless you completely revamp the spawn system to some ridiculous time like 10-20 mins for respawn or stuff like that. Until then, people will always just try to go rambo instead of taking cover.

 

Now, if you add the blurry screen (and I'm not talking about "Oh no, a slight mist has fallen", I'm talking about "I CAN'T SEE SH*T PAST 1M, BLOODY HELL" kind of blur) when you're getting suppressed, you essentially force the player to react in a more realistic way - that is to take cover instead of shooting back as his first instinct. Problem solved.

 

As soon as players become utterly combat ineffective when they walk into suppressive fire, they'll have to adapt and start moving carefully, placing much more emphasis on concealment, because not being seen until you spot the enemy will be the difference between suppresing them instead of getting suppressed. And that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned, right now too many people just sprint around everywhere, knowing full well that even if they come under fire, they can usually just prone it and shoot back. We already have way too many sprint-to-prone games on the market, no thank you.

Edited by MultiSquid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh how bad would it be if SQUAD's firefights lasted longer and were more interesting with suppression system putting emphasis over the current tap-tap you're dead gunplay. Really bad. SERIOUSLY? Instead of trying how well the flinching works in DH, better to stay ignorant about your conviction that the blur is the best when really is completely useless and even not realistic. Not saying that the blur should go though.

 

You can't say something when you haven't even tried it. Then try in DH mod and you'll change your mind. OK put it in SQUAD even for a week and you'll change your mind completely about this whole blurry screen which does absolutely nothing at making you wanting to take cover and it does overpower optics. You'll change your mind of how effective it is at making firefights more interesting and be more dependent on your squad mutual suppressing fire and teamwork rather than lone-wolfing with your scoped rifle.

 

The real reason for people going rambo right now is actually because of blurry screen which not only doesn't happen in real life but it's never going to stop me returning accurate fire. How difficult to understand is this?

 

Not saying that the blurry screen should go however, but because in real life most shots were not fired at a human target (as mostly happens in games) but at where those humans might be. Get enough bullets in that area and those humans won't want to expose themselves to shoot back, thus enabling some of your own side to move without getting shot at. Obvious, I know, but the point is that in games we can't make people keep their heads down by making them scared, in real life you would be. Therefore if suppressing fire is to work, some other mechanic has to be used. If the game destroys the player's ability to shoot accurately when under fire, then suppressing fire has some value.

 

That encourages players to lay enough fire on enemy positions to make the target(s) jerk so much that they can't shoot back. The "jumping" is an instinctive reaction to a bullet snap/swish. So without the sights jumping, might as well just not have any other suppression effects. Without the sight jumping from bullet cracks, suppression is worthless.

Edited by Friesen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Friesen said:

Oh how bad would it be if SQUAD's firefights lasted longer and were more interesting with suppression system putting emphasis over the current tap-tap you're dead gunplay. Really bad. SERIOUSLY? Instead of trying how well the flinching works in DH, better to stay ignorant and stay in stalemate.

I want the firefights to take much longer than they currently do, no arguing from me there.

 

26 minutes ago, Friesen said:

The real reason for people going rambo right now is actually because of blurry screen which not only doesn't happen in real life but it's never going to stop me returning accurate fire. How difficult to understand is this?

You just keep repeating this as if the blur couldn't be much stronger. The blur currently in game is basically non-existent. I'm talking about your whole screen becoming blurred in such a fashion that returning accurate fire is borderline impossible as long as you're getting consistently suppressed, and that gamplay mechanic if implemented, would make a huge difference.

Spoiler

The blur effect is applied to the entire screen, on top of that your vision is doubled. I dare you to shoot through that.

 

26 minutes ago, Friesen said:

Not saying that the blurry screen should go however, but because in real life...

Honestly, I'm getting really tired of people using real life in arguments about gameplay mechanics. The Squad is not a combat simulator, and it never will be. It's supposed to be more realistic than any main-stream shooter, that much is true, but it isn't and won't be anywhere close to an actual real combat, end of story. Reality is fairly irrelevant as far as gameplay mechanics are concerned. Sure, you can take inspiration from reality, but you should always keep in mind that it's secondary when considering design of the game itself.

 

26 minutes ago, Friesen said:

Therefore if suppressing fire is to work, some other mechanic has to be used. If the game destroys the player's ability to shoot accurately when under fire, then suppressing fire has some value.

Hell, why not? The suppression could be even more hardcore, a combination of blurred screen and jumpy aim, I'm all up for it, bring it on. People should be afraid to die. If they won't be cautious on their own, force them, make them. I'm totally fine with that. Taking control away from the player is a part of simulating the actual fear in instances where you can't make players feel fear naturally.

Edited by MultiSquid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×