Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guys how much would it be cool having to worry about food and water, and how much would give an important boost to planned attacks and slow down gameplay? imagine if we could have something like water and food indication, that you need to have full combat ability: when you have nomore water or food your visual is disturbed (like pr s suppression but very lighter effect?)...it really would give an awsome feeling when you or another squad is sieged into a village or fortified outpost and you have to fight to bring them food and water saving and defendding the logistic trucks??i would damn love it:D what do you think about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing I think anyone wants is for Squad to turn into some odd blend of a tactical survival game. I'm assuming the in-game world is going to be running in real-time, so with that in mind it's a similar situation as to why fuel isn't likely to be implemented, that reason being because the matches will last for a few hours at the most and no soldier would really be hungry in that time. 

 

It's a nice idea, but I can't see it sitting well. Slow gameplay is good, but as it stands it's already pretty slow in comparison to other, more popular titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to refer you to para infantry and their views on food and water.

 

 

‘Watch out Terry, we’re hunting you down. There’s nowhere to hide in Sangin town. You shit yourself when the .50s are fired. No point in running, you’ll only get tired.

‘Got A-10s on call for brassing you up. No food or water, we don’t give a fuck. So do one Terry, you’ve plenty to fear. We run this town now, the Paras are here…’

 

 

:D kek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want the field ration so I can hurl it at an enemy. If it hits him in the head, he gets knocked out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing I think anyone wants is for Squad to turn into some odd blend of a tactical survival game. I'm assuming the in-game world is going to be running in real-time, so with that in mind it's a similar situation as to why fuel isn't likely to be implemented, that reason being because the matches will last for a few hours at the most and no soldier would really be hungry in that time. 

 

It's a nice idea, but I can't see it sitting well. Slow gameplay is good, but as it stands it's already pretty slow in comparison to other, more popular titles.

ok...BUT dont try to tell me that is slow because its solwer than bf and cod...everything is slower than those game,also a bugatti veyron or i dont know also a typhoon f2000 would be slower the those. I think your opinion is ok but when you mentioned the fuel stuff i would have something to tell about it: IF there will be airplanes i would like to give them the fuel because in that way the game would be more balanced at least for infantry but i disagree on fuel on ground vehicles because it doesnt have any utility. Food or water have a big impact on gameplay, changing priorities and adding automatically secondary targets ("protect the supply convoy")...at least in my opinion...and i would like to eat a pizza during a firefight so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A PR game doesn't last more than 5 hours, so food is never a realistic concern in that game. I think SQUAD will be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allow me to refer you to para infantry and their views on food and water.

just lol at that ahahahahah

‘Watch out Terry, we’re hunting you down. There’s nowhere to hide in Sangin town. You shit yourself when the .50s are fired. No point in running, you’ll only get tired.

‘Got A-10s on call for brassing you up. No food or water, we don’t give a fuck. So do one Terry, you’ve plenty to fear. We run this town now, the Paras are here…’

:D kek

nightingale this doesnt mean anything...a battle isn't long 40 minutes so swuad is not reality?:/ its nonsense...its a game but foods would add something new and relevant in therms of gameplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think adding hunger, thirst or indeed fuel would add anything to the gameplay, given that Squad is supposed to be tactical, team-oriented shooter. Not a simulator. If you expect to last long enough as an infantry man in squad that food is an issue then it follows that you aren't going to be killed by enemy action for several hours. Playing a shooter where there could potentially be several hours before killing and being killed sounds pretty boring IMO.

 

Your best bet is to avoid food for about 6 hours before booting up your PC. Very realistic hunger feedback system right there. Nothing can beat the thrill of hiding in a bush when you leave your desk to take a combat-shit, hoping to come back finding your soldier still alive :P

 

Cheers, Murkey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to remember that each round is taken in isolation, and the estimated round-time is similar to that of PR, about 30 minutes if you're steam-rolling the enemy, up to about 2 hours at an extremely close shave. It's safe to assume that all the soldiers have eaten before going on a major offensive (i.e., playing the round), and to be needing hunger/thirst replenishing within that foreseen round-time removes from the realism, in the same way that people are asking for a day/night cycle within a round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think this fits well within Squad's world. It's supposed to be accessible to more casual players...forcing them to eat would just complicated an already steeper learning curve (compared to whats out there).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to remember that each round is taken in isolation, and the estimated round-time is similar to that of PR, about 30 minutes if you're steam-rolling the enemy, up to about 2 hours at an extremely close shave. It's safe to assume that all the soldiers have eaten before going on a major offensive (i.e., playing the round), and to be needing hunger/thirst replenishing within that foreseen round-time removes from the realism, in the same way that people are asking for a day/night cycle within a round.

ok lot of peoples said it's not a good idea but that makes no sense ok? it's obvious that its a game and you don't need food but its nosense comment. In Arma there is food system but matches dont run for 3 days...wtf does that mean??...your opinion is ok but dont justify it like that...it doesnt make sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall seeing an interview where they said that 1.5 hours would be the ideal game length. Hardly time to build a super fob let alone sit down for some chow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys how much would it be cool having to worry about food and water, and how much would give an important boost to planned attacks and slow down gameplay? imagine if we could have something like water and food indication, that you need to have full combat ability: when you have nomore water or food your visual is disturbed (like pr s suppression but very lighter effect?)...it really would give an awsome feeling when you or another squad is sieged into a village or fortified outpost and you have to fight to bring them food and water saving and defendding the logistic trucks??i would damn love it:D what do you think about that?

I'm going to try to respond differently. It's not a bad idea at all, however, does it fit with the intent of the game. Squad, or PR for that matter, never was intended to be a real life military simulator. It has simulated aspects but it's not a true simulator. It seeks to strike a balance between simulation and action. Your idea would take Squad more towards the direction of ARMA and survival games such as Rust/DayZ.

Again, not a bad idea just not sure it fits with the intent of the game.

Share this post


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

×