Jump to content
YuriIsLoveYuriIsLife

Classic AK-47 and Type 56.

Recommended Posts

Ak-47's and Type 56's are used extensively by insurgent forces in the Middle East and some armies. If this weapon is implemented, I think it should replace the AK-74M for the Middle Eastern insurgents. I'm really surprised this isn't anywhere on the list of confirmed weapons/vehicles for squad: 

 

Here's a pic of an AK-47 and Type 56: The difference between this and the other AK rifles is that the muzzle is flat and the stock is angled downwards. On the AK, the receiver is angled. On the Chinese version, the wood stock has been angled, it has a folding bayonet, the muzzle is smoother, and the front sight is fully hooded.

 

AK-47:Replica_AK47.jpg

Type 56:

Norinco_type_56.jpg

 

Insurgents with AK-47's/Type-56's:

041118_insurgent_hmed_330a.grid-6x2.jpgAK

 

mideast_syria_iraq1-11.jpg?quality=90&stType 56.

 

alalam_635857960983506184_25f_4x3.jpgAK

 

ISISManWithCheckeredMask.jpgAK(S)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it would replace the AK 74. The 74 is much closer to a 5.56 round... The in-game non 74's are larger more powerful round. Better for cqb as opposed to the 74's medium/long rang ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, YuriIsLoveYuriIsLife said:

 I'm really surprised this isn't anywhere on the list of confirmed weapons/vehicles for squad

 

If you are *really* surprised by the fact that these aren't confirmed weapons, I think you need to adjust your expectations of how much redundant content a small indie team can produce :)

 

Making 2 neigh identical looking and performing rifles, with similar layout, barrel lengths, cartridge, ammo capacity ect is a sure fire way to waste development time. 

We already have more AK variants than most games will ever have, and the reason we have those is because they can share the same recievers or various other components. This would require a full remodel + bake + texture + export of almost everything so we can have AK's that has worse sights (Type 56) and maybe one day a working bayonet, and a classic AK-47 without a muzzle device, which is probably also the least common of the AK-47, AKM and Type-56's around those parts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to OP.

Classic AK is very rare.Production was very limited... they was mixed with SKS.

In fact - this is relict now.Not many of them left,none of then been copied(because it was expencive).

 

9 hours ago, IWI-GALIL5.56FA said:

I doubt it would replace the AK 74. The 74 is much closer to a 5.56 round... The in-game non 74's are larger more powerful round. Better for cqb as opposed to the 74's medium/long rang ability.

 

74s is very rare in middle east.

 

9 hours ago, Z-trooper said:

We already have more AK variants than most games will ever have, and the reason we have those is because they can share the same recievers or various other components. This would require a full remodel + bake + texture + export of almost everything so we can have AK's that has worse sights (Type 56) and maybe one day a working bayonet, and a classic AK-47 without a muzzle device, which is probably also the least common of the AK-47, AKM and Type-56's around those parts.

 

as guy,who have 3d modelling experience - I understand you.

But instead of creating fictional weapon(yes,Im talking about KS-23) you probably should listen,what community want.

Im still not sure,what purpose of this game - casual community will never play it,while milsim community already draw a negative feedback of it.

Edited by samogon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you are right about your assessment of the feedback and the people who play it. 

 

We hear all of the complaints, and most of them are from a very small number of people out of like 200.000+ people who chose to buy our game.

And it is the same arguments in every single thread we see them, by mostly the same few people.

 

The game "Squad" isn't a military simulator, it is in fact a game. It tries to find the middle ground between arcade and simulation, that has been the mission statement from day 1.

 

You won't get 100% accuracy or realism cause... this is a computer game. A computer game where you can re-spawn, where the sun is in the wrong spot in the sky and where people without military training are fighting along side you disguised as military people. Not realistic at all :) 

 

Our job is to provide people with an entertaining and/or memorable experience not be historians, weapon smiths, armorers and lecturers. 

 

You guys need to realize that at some point and not keep going in circles with how X is not right or how Y does not do what it does in real life.

Digitization of anything will come with compromises, either due to technology, balance or to enhance the experience for all of our customers not just the few.

 

In the end I suppose we get these complaints because we dare go closer to realism than Battlefield does, cause go take a look at their loadouts and realism. 

I think we can all agree that Squad is a more authentic experience than Battlefield, and that is in line with our mission and goals.

But in the end, we are also making a game, just like Battlefield is a game, yet some people don't see it :)

 

If you want realism and 100% accuracy, then I suggest you do the following:

 

1. Realize that it is a game

2. If you want it to be a simulator, start or support a mod that specializes Squad to your specific requirements and level of satisfaction, cause we have to provide the experience for the larger audience. If it turns out to be popular we all win, if not, well then I am sure lots of friendships and new skills have been learned in the process.

 

I'm sorry for the rant, but I see these kinds of comments all the time, from the same few people, and it gets old. And so many threads gets taken over by these circle arguments that could otherwise have given new insight in to game mechanics or suggestions that would enrich the game.

 

And no, we aren't going to delete a shotgun because the Russian army doesn't use it in real life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I have to disagree with Z. 

 

Ok so the AKM is similar and rare. But the type-56 deserves to be in game, especially with it prevalence in the Middle-East, TBH it has as much of a difference between the AKM as the M4 and the M16. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad can't and never will be a sim, I don't think anyone bough it under that pretense. However, had I known that under a carefully crafted "Squad is an online multiplayer first-person shooter that aims to capture combat realism through communication and teamplay" message lied the actual underwhelming target bar of "more authentic experience than Battlefield" I would not have made that purchase. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,you guys make a game,not a milsim.I understood that.But making game authestic doen't means you shoul go into milsim.

 

Just one example - look at Verdun.They're looks quote authestic,they have qoute interesting gamemode,every piece of content made with love to the game,to this historical event,but... not many people heard about it.

Then look at incoming BF1... in fact it's a game,which popular,because their ancestor was extremely popular.

You,guys,going second way.PR was extremely popular among a lot of people in BF2 community... so,many people simply buy it,just for respect of Project Reality... Including me :x

 

This is just my 2 cents about it.

 

best regards.

Hope you guys finally start listening to community...

 

15 minutes ago, I_hate_usernames said:

The Syrian war had a fair few of them. 

 

Both the 84 and the 74M 

 

84?hmmm....

 

Im aimed much more to Taliban,than FSA.It's really depends.Currently ISIS have a lot of TOP-level equipment,which never been seen before,in A-Stan for example.

Edited by samogon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, samogon said:

84?hmmm....

 

Im aimed much more to Taliban,than FSA.It's really depends.Currently ISIS have a lot of TOP-level equipment,which never been seen before,in A-Stan for example.

 

Is ISIS in Afghanistan? 

 

Honestly, a insurgency biased on the FSA and Taliban would be completely different. Squad Devs has been quoted saying that they are working the insurgents to the FSA model, which have been seen using one or two 74's among their ranks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, samogon said:

Yes,you guys make a game,not a milsim.I understood that.But making game authestic doen't means you shoul go into milsim.

 

Just one example - look at Verdun.They're looks quote authestic,they have qoute interesting gamemode,every piece of content made with love to the game,to this historical event,but... not many people heard about it.

Then look at incoming BF1... in fact it's a game,which popular,because their ancestor was extremely popular.

You,guys,going second way.PR was extremely popular among a lot of people in BF2 community... so,many people simply buy it,just for respect of Project Reality... Including me :x

 

This is just my 2 cents about it.

 

Bro, stop pushing authenticity so hard. If they had a large team and resources like DICE/EA and pushing something more authentic, I would have some expectations from them. But they're not. They're barely a team of 30 guys, some of which aren't even full time, and some who are stretched across multiple disciplines. 

 

I think we all understand that you want your Russian Army to be as authentic as possible, but that's not going to happen, ever. You know why? Because it's not just the Russian Army that exists. That would mean making the US military as authentic as possible as well as the British Army, Insurgents and Militia.. but I doubt you care about the others. This small team hasn't got the numbers of artists to throw JUST AT WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENT. They have environments, vehicles and other stuff to worry about as well and that's just without the technical side of the art.

 

They're not going the second way and there's a handful of PR players here compared to the full player base. I don't know about you, but I pledged and bought into the game for what they showed and had in store and not out of respect for Project Reality.

 

Also, to add on to your edit: stop saying that you hope they'll listen to the community. Clearly, they're listening to us all. Just because they don't grant you your personal wishes about having the Russian military being accurate down to a tee doesn't mean they aren't listening to the community.

 

You said you have previous 3D experience. Put it to use, "fix" what you deem necessary and create the authentic experience you're so desperate for. After all, the devs have given us the opportunity to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

Bro

 

You're not my bro,bro.

 

19 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

 

Bro, stop pushing authenticity so hard. If they had a large team and resources like DICE/EA and pushing something more authentic, I would have some expectations from them. But they're not. They're barely a team of 30 guys, some of which aren't even full time, and some who are stretched across multiple disciplines. 

 

Damn,CD Project Red create Game Of The Year 2015,with a way much less resources Human/Money,than any candidate there.I understood that.Critics are useful,BTW.It able to make game better.

 

19 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

I think we all understand that you want your Russian Army to be as authentic as possible, but that's not going to happen, ever. You know why? Because it's not just the Russian Army that exists.

 

I'd rather like to see at least one BLUEFOR and one OPFOR faction,no matter which one.But detailed,goddamn.They should be unique,not a copy/paste of eachother.

Edited by samogon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, samogon said:

 

You're not my bro,bro.

 

 

Damn,CD Project Red create Game Of The Year 2015,with a way much less resources Human/Money,than any candidate there.I understood that.Critics are useful,BTW.It able to make game better.

 

 

I'd rather like to see at least one BLUEFOR and one OPFOR faction,no matter which one.But detailed,goddamn.They should be unique,not a copy/paste of eachother.

 

You're not criticising though, you're just demanding detail and full authenticity for equipment and weapons used by the forces. Have you put forward ideas that could help them achieve the level of detail you want to see without the art team having to spend months and months in addition to the current time on ONE military? Have you suggested any different workflows or pipelines they could use to speed up production?

 

No, you're just telling them what's wrong in terms of accuracy as if that helps at all. They're fully aware of that shit, any good artist does his research and has plenty of reference. They also have restrictions / limits and deadlines as well room for iteration.

 

They're capable guys who know what they're doing. It doesn't take a genius to spend a night on Google and acquire the knowledge many of these people demanding "correct" equipment and weapons or fixing inaccuracies on vehicles have. It does however take a silly amount of time to produce.

 

So stop demanding or saying what you would like to see and start suggesting ways they could implement or have a chance of adding things.

 

PS, you should probs do some research on CD Projekt Red's team and resources as well as how many industry vets they have compared to OWI who are previously mostly talented modders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

 

 This small team hasn't got the numbers of artists to throw JUST AT WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENT. They have environments, vehicles and other stuff to worry about as well and that's just without the technical side of the art.

The issue isn't the amount of equipment, but how the existing equipment is done.  Your argument of "they don't have the numbers" sort of falls apart when the issues in the existing assets are pointed out. These are mistakes in models, textures, whatever, which could have been avoided of fixed while in development simply by asking the community, or people who actually know how they are in reality. This wasn't done, and when the mistakes are pointed out, the devs get all pissed about it. Biggest offenders so far being the BTR and MTLB.

 

Edited by Avtomat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Avtomat said:

The issue isn't the amount of equipment, but how the existing equipment is done.  Your argument of "they don't have the numbers" sort of falls apart when the issues in the existing assets are pointed out. These are mistakes in models, textures, whatever, which could have been avoided of fixed while in development simply by asking the community, or people who actually know how they are in reality. This wasn't done, and when the mistakes are pointed out, the devs get all uppity about it. Biggest offenders so far being the BTR and MTLB.

 

 

Have you ever heard of iteration?

 

Asking the community? Yeah, like that wouldn't slow down the production cycle at all. Not every community member's feedback is going to be valid, cited or cross referenced. Again, limitations and deadlines. In development you push out what you have, especially art wise, because you can come back to it later.

 

Minor model, texture and material mistakes? You can fix that later once all the systems are in place and ironed out and you don't have to worry about building the core game.

 

They're not getting uppity about it, I see exactly where they're coming from. You, and a shit load more finger pointers who assume this is the end of the world and how everything is going to stay, need to read into game development and how the industry works. Honestly, a lot of the stuff on these forums similar to this wouldn't exist if players put in a little bit of effort to see how things go.

 

I forget who it was, but someone said that once you put out a title in Early Access you suddenly gain thousands of veteran game designers who know best for the game. At the end of the day, this is THEIR game and they make the decision. Now I'm sorry if you feel entitled because you put money into a game currently in development and feel that your word holds more value than a developers because you provided funds for them, but... *Zara Larsson singing* "that's how it is, that's how it goes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

 

You're not criticising though, you're just demanding detail and full authenticity for equipment and weapons used by the forces. Have you put forward ideas that could help them achieve the level of detail you want to see without the art team having to spend months and months in addition to the current time on ONE military? Have you suggested any different workflows or pipelines they could use to speed up production?

 

As I said... CD Project Red.They created splendid game,which deserves GOTY 2015,with a very limited resources.But they make it with love.They read original books and extend the universe.Meanwhile others didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hexer_(TV_series)

 

Attention to details makes the game.When I imagine PR based game - I expect that.

 

Edited by samogon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, samogon said:

 

As I said... CD Project Red.They created splendid game,which deserves GOTY 2015,with a very limited resources.But they make it with love.They read original books and extend the universe.Meanwhile others didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hexer_(TV_series)

 

Attention to details makes the game.When I imagine PR based game - I expect that.

 

 

Yeah............ and you know that attention to detail is very LOW on the priority list for a game so early in development, right..?

 

Again with your wants and expectations and no actual feedback or insight, lol.

 

Aw, nah. I'm done, have fun with constantly demanding and not being a contributing factor to anything useful. Some people actually come up with great ideas and constructive feedback. Others just want want want. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, samogon said:

 

As I said... CD Project Red.They created splendid game,which deserves GOTY 2015,with a very limited resources.But they make it with love.They read original books and extend the universe.Meanwhile others didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hexer_(TV_series)

 

Attention to details makes the game.When I imagine PR based game - I expect that.

 

And again you force me to to reply to your wrongful arguments. Witcher 3 had a budget of ~80 million dollars. Witcher 2 success has a lot to do with the budget of W3. They are just being honest and respectful to the customers ( no crappy DLC's, skins and season passes to milk out your wallet)

The Hexer you quoted there was a low budget tv series from 2001.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

Again with your wants and expectations and no actual feedback or insight, lol.

 

Aw, nah. I'm done, have fun with constantly demanding and not being a contributing factor to anything useful. Some people actually come up with great ideas and constructive feedback. Other just want want want. :)

I wonder what qualifies to you as "insight". I'm pretty sure there have been posts on this forum pointing out exactly what was wrong with models and textures. But I guess that doesn't count as insight.
 
Though, with an attitude like "And no, we aren't going to delete an XYZ because the XYZ army doesn't use it in real life." I can't expect much more.

I guess in some people's eyes, developers can never be wrong, and anyone who dares to say otherwise is an asshole.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Promoting and showing people the game while carefully selecting what words you choose to describe different aspects of the game, so later you can change on the go, and so on to please the crowd, and say "Oh we never claimed that or this" for the guys who were expecting more. Its business though. They got to earn and eat... I understand that.

And to add something, to have an authenthic equipment modeled in the game does not mean the game is a milsim automatically, it just means you got authenthic equipment. It should be like that anyway. It will bring the game and the name Squad high above competition, and people will have high regard for it. Because ordinary dodo's who buy the game to play it for 150 hours and then ditch it will never notice authenthic weapons for example, but core people who were here from beginning will play the game for 2000+ hours will stay and make the game grow in players and direction of development possibly, because - clans, events, websites, matches, forum discussions, live streams, youtube videos... etc. etc.

Anyway, the game is arcade now, I will explain bellow:
Map tells you everything and kills tactical idea of the battlefield and/or realistic fights.
Theres no body momentum, and you can sprint and zig zag very fast and dodge bullets.
You can prone in an instant, and while at it immediatly turn 180 (ridiculous).

You can sprint trough water and sprint up the 70 degree hill slopes.
The stamina is ridiculously high, the soldier you are controling never gets tired while sprinting like Ferrari 10 meters per 1 second under the load of combat equipment. All this, DEFEATS the purpose of teamplay and kit selection the game or Developer is trying to promote. 

(Before you go and tell me the game is Alpha, I will tell you, thats why I am posting this, because its the right time to direct it into the right direction.)

Cheers boys, see you on the server,
Rain

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Avtomat said:

I wonder what qualifies to you as "insight". I'm pretty sure there have been posts on this forum pointing out exactly what was wrong with models and textures. But I guess that doesn't count as insight.
 
Though, with an attitude like "And no, we aren't going to delete an XYZ because the XYZ army doesn't use it in real life." I can't expect much more.

I guess in some people's eyes, developers can never be wrong, and anyone who dares to say otherwise is an asshole.
 

 

First of all, nobody called anyone an asshole, so get that shit straight and don't start acting like a typical child would. It's not needed here.

 

Second, that post was clearly addressed to samogon. Constantly pointing your finger and saying "I want this" and "I'd like XYZ" isn't insight. Anyone can just point out flaws and inaccuracies, the point is.. the developers are aware of most of this stuff and have even commented on it. People repeating themselves isn't helping anyone and there's no substance or anything at all to those posts. "this is wrong, fix (not even a please)".. great feedback guys.

 

Also, especially the textures part... people aren't aware that materials and textures behave differently under different light conditions. BTR looking like "plastic" (when it really doesn't) in an OUT OF GAME render that doesn't even have the same light sources and post processes applied etc... that's something that can be fixed in a later pass if it looks the same in-game, again. ITERATION.

 

Oh no, one developer has a more stern way of replying to people's constantly re-occurring posts and threads that they've already previously replied to and cleared up.. lets cry and say they all get uppity and pissed about it.. lol, I can't really expect much more from that attitude either.

 

In-fact, the most constructive thread (with insight) I've seen about these flaws and inaccuracies was where the user actually drew up comparisons and made it visually more in depth than a few lines of whiny text demanding something. Now if only everyone could do that once and then STOP REPEATING THEMSELVES ALL THE TIME, that would be something nice.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mastah4 said:

And again you force me to to reply to your wrongful arguments. Witcher 3 had a budget of ~80 million dollars. Witcher 2 success has a lot to do with the budget of W3. They are just being honest and respectful to the customers ( no crappy DLC's, skins and season passes to milk out your wallet)

The Hexer you quoted there was a low budget tv series from 2001.

 

Well,half of this true,but... this games was way much detailed,than most of the games these days.

As for Hexer - that was not even low budget tv series,that was just a crap,not even close to books.Pan Andrzej was angry about that.

 

 

40 minutes ago, Assifuah said:

First of all, nobody called anyone an asshole, so get that shit straight and don't start acting like a typical child would. It's not needed here.

 

Yeah,yeah.Western character.You able to feed someone shit,but with a smile.Smile is a keypoint.

 

Maybe for you developer means same as god,but not for me.Keep pray for your gods,instead of provide real ideas.Sooner or later probably turn into soulless BF-clone with diffirent rule set,nothing more.PR,at least had soul,this... yet not.

Will see,what gonna be like ArmA3:PR...

Edited by samogon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Hunter_Sh0tz said:

I think the Type 56 should replace the AKM if implemented. 

 

2 hours ago, I_hate_usernames said:

To be honest I have to disagree with Z. 

 

Ok so the AKM is similar and rare. But the type-56 deserves to be in game, especially with it prevalence in the Middle-East, TBH it has as much of a difference between the AKM as the M4 and the M16. 

 

The AKM is not at all rare in the Middle East, or not nearly as rare as the 74. Armies and Insurgents love the AKM.

156128039__715097c.jpg

 

Young-members-of-the-Free-005.jpg

 

afghanistanvillagers_5.jpg

 

0,,15683679_401,00.jpg

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

afp_libya_army_graduates_first_tripolitr

 

Share this post


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

×