heborn

Tanks and bomb cars

58 posts in this topic

Who cares about politics, its a poor idea that would rarely be effective in-game.

 

You need a list of variables to all work in your favor in order to be able to drive up close to a target, whereas AT just needs a visual. If this game had a strong focus on asymmetrical warfare and guerilla tactics from insurgent and militia forces, sure. But the reason insurgents would use a manned VBIED on an active battlefield isn't because its a more desirable or effective route than using an effective ATGM or RPG, its because its a lot easier to get your hands on or produce miscellaneous explosive material and load a ton of it into a truck than it is to get your hands on or produce sophisticated anti-armor weapons.

 

When we have a debate raging over whether players can even be trusted to use a sniper kit in the best interests of their own team, I find it a bit funny that so many are willing to believe that these things would be anything more than a hole to throw tickets into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not add IED's that can be placed on objects, then it's not the developers making intentional suicide weapons but the players choice to place it on the back of the logi and drive it while someone watches and detonates...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2016 at 0:50 AM, Shovely Joe said:

im pretty sure suicide vests is a definite no, i think bomb cars too.

Basically what i think is that - politically it sends a bad signal, though i agree (only on bomb cars) that it would be good for the irregular warfare and balance to the insurgents.

- gameplay wise i see that it is kind of problematic to encourage suicides, as it is not really a fun way to play - so you could use it as a static bomb then (but obviously the IED's that are confirmed will fill out that role)

Im kind of glad they wont make bombcars and suicide vests... Tbh i dont really know much about this stuff. however i dont think its that common to use suicide tactics in warfare, more to hit civilian targets and so on. (i see the gif on your post, but i dont know if its all that common anyway)

Why would it send a bad signal when in gta there is everything like running pedestrians and killing whoever even cops, i think car bombs is a must its a game if people are sensitive there not going to play the game anyway, we need more people intrested in the next level game plays not the majority of people that bitch about things like this

Edited by jscaff
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying it's political is absolutely stupid.

Why have a faction which is essentially just men from a third world desert country in an unofficial military being picked on in the desert by the US army or Russian army?

 

Bomb cars were an essential part of the insurgent's kit in PR and they would be just as valuable in Squad. What did you worry about most in PR when using an APC or tank?

It wasn't RPGs

It wasn't mines.

It was the red cars. It was Gary. It was Big Red.

 

There is nothing political about suicide bombers. Only what you attach to it in context. Why does someone in PR use a bomb car to destroy an APC? It's not because of political motivation, it's a tool that fighting force uses.

 

Anything can be made offensive if you try to attach something to it. VBIEDs are a very real threat to armored assets. I remember seeing this thread forever ago and we had a fantastic discussion about it before it was locked.

 

How about this for political sensitivity, how DARE you guys have a video game which shows AMERICAN soldiers being killed? I have friends in the American military and I demand you remove this thoughtless and offensive material from your game.

Spoiler

Of course that last part is satirical but that actually stopped some guys from making Six Days in Fallujah because someone complained so much.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically you boys said enough. I think in the future every soldier on the frontline will have his own personal lawyer so he can ask him if he can return fire on the enemy. Its the same for a game developer. He needs to make sure that he can put an RPG-7 or a Bomb Car in the game because that thing once fired on/engaged US armed forces. But M4A1 and AK74 is completely fine.

 

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thumbs up for Car Bombs and Suicide Vests

 

 

Edited by Lio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Car bombs would be sweet... but I have to agree that car bombs are very "political sensitive" for today standard (political correctness dictatorship)

 

Could you imagine if Command & Conquer: Generals (car bombs, angry mobs, suicide vests) would be launched nowdays? The PC police would do everything they have for censor that awesome game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sergeant.Roland. said:

Car bombs would be sweet... but I have to agree that car bombs are very "political sensitive" for today standard (political correctness dictatorship)

 

Could you imagine if Command & Conquer: Generals (car bombs, angry mobs, suicide vests) would be launched nowdays? The PC police would do everything they have for censor that awesome game...

its called more free publicity for the game, more profit, free advertising, more players. see a bigger picture bre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem I see with VBIEDs is the fact that there are no other civilian vehicles in the game, meaning every time I see any vehicle even remotely civilian I will unload on it before it can get too close. 

 

Without other civilian vehicles, I just don't see how VBIEDs can work. Granted, we will probably be able to attach an IED to any vehicle, but that doesn't seem to be a well rounded solution if people really want true  VBIEDs like seen in the field or PR. 

Edited by DoctorKamikaze

Share this post


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

Without other civilian vehicles, I just don't see how VBIEDs can work.

It was all about surprise. A small car can zip around hills and roads and all it has to do is get close.

An alternate way of doing it would be how VBIEDs have become in Syria and Iraq is simply taking a truck and mounting enough sheets of steel all over it to be resistant to small arms. With that method, there is no subtlety and is A to B in being direct. I don't think that vehicle would suit Squad very well or it would put a gigantic amount of responsibility on LAT riflemen when facing insurgents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/11/2016 at 2:10 PM, jscaff said:

Why would it send a bad signal when in gta there is everything like running pedestrians and killing whoever even cops, i think car bombs is a must its a game if people are sensitive there not going to play the game anyway, we need more people intrested in the next level game plays not the majority of people that bitch about things like this

 

OMG! GTA is probably the ultimate in atrociously narcissistic and anti-social/sociopathic games that glorifies Gangsta Culture and wonton lawless mayhem.

I am presonally against pushing casualised violence-porn like this, as a Normalised Thing.

People that say they need , or actively defend, these sorts of things in a game that is overtly not about blood-lust, need to take a serious look at themselves.

 

How does strapping explosives to yourself or planting roadside IEDs (that will prolly never be set off properly anyway), make people more interested in the next level game play ? In fact, what is  your version of "next level game play"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LaughingJack said:

 

OMG! GTA is probably the ultimate in atrociously narcissistic and anti-social/sociopathic games that glorifies Gangsta Culture and wonton lawless mayhem.

I am presonally against pushing casualised violence-porn like this, as a Normalised Thing.

People that say they need , or actively defend, these sorts of things in a game that is overtly not about blood-lust, need to take a serious look at themselves.

 

How does strapping explosives to yourself or planting roadside IEDs (that will prolly never be set off properly anyway), make people more interested in the next level game play ? In fact, what is  your version of "next level game play"?

 

You play game where you shoot people in the face. You should uninstall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2016 at 10:52 PM, DoctorKamikaze said:

The only problem I see with VBIEDs is the fact that there are no other civilian vehicles in the game, meaning every time I see any vehicle even remotely civilian I will unload on it before it can get too close. 

 

Without other civilian vehicles, I just don't see how VBIEDs can work. Granted, we will probably be able to attach an IED to any vehicle, but that doesn't seem to be a well rounded solution if people really want true  VBIEDs like seen in the field or PR. 

xgb8k9.jpg

 

won't be hard thing to spot and hit cuz it ain't that fast

Share this post


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

xgb8k9.jpg

 

won't be hard thing to spot and hit cuz it ain't that fast

 

This illustrates the problem. A VBIED is a surprise weapon. This has no element of surprise, and will be shot at on sight, hence why a lot of VBIEDs are in civillian vehicles. 

 

This doesn't solve the problem I brought up, doesn't stop me from shooting at it the moment it's seen/heard.

Edited by DoctorKamikaze

Share this post


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

 

This illustrates the problem. A VBIED is a surprise weapon. This has no element of surprise, and will be shot at on sight, hence why a lot of VBIEDs are in civillian vehicles. 

 

This doesn't solve the problem I brought up, doesn't stop me from shooting at it the moment it's seen/heard.

a suprise weapon that has no elements of surprise, ok, got ya

def' won't work in the city combat on a tank that's ain't lookin, o fo sho. there's a thing called team work and flanking and stuff, ya know?

Edited by Marijuanoz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bomb Car was a great balancing tool in PR. It was the most effective anti-armour weapon insurgents had, and it was quite fun and interesting to use and play against. I really hope they return, especially when you consider that they're used regularly in ongoing conflicts in a similar to manner to what is in PR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** being politically sensitive. That line was crossed as soon as you had one of the factions be a bunch of Arab dudes in civi clothing fighting the U.S. with homemade attack vehicles. I say go all the way. I don't care too much for suicide vests, but VBIEDs should be a must as the first-world militaries get more and more powerful vehicles. 

Edited by Flat896

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2016 at 0:04 AM, Rybec said:

Bomb cars were an essential part of the insurgent's kit in PR and they would be just as valuable in Squad. What did you worry about most in PR when using an APC or tank?

It wasn't RPGs

It wasn't mines.

It was the red cars. It was Gary. It was Big Red.

 

There is nothing political about suicide bombers. Only what you attach to it in context. Why does someone in PR use a bomb car to destroy an APC? It's not because of political motivation, it's a tool that fighting force uses.

 

Anything can be made offensive if you try to attach something to it. VBIEDs are a very real threat to armored assets. I remember seeing this thread forever ago and we had a fantastic discussion about it before it was locked.

 

 

I agree with this. Suicide bombers take the place of artillery, heavy AT, and air assets. It's an effective counter to enemy armor or large concentrations of troops. Personally I'd like to see the introduction of a civilian bomb car alongside of regular civilian transports that look similar. This car would be fast, agile, and have a relatively small payload. In addition and in contrast, I'd also like to see an up-armored truck/apc that would be slower, less maneuverable, have a larger explosion, but would also have a much longer respawn timer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2016 at 1:41 PM, Catindabox said:

 

It's not called bullshit, it's called real world politics and policies. Even though you don't like it you have to be able to see the situation from a growing game development studio's perspective. I mean, if you want to uninstall the game because they won't officially add bomb cars, go ahead, but that won't change the routes developers have to take.

 

P.S. I'm for bomb cars and historically accurate free speech/expression in video games.

 

As I said before, I hope the modding communities add them- but what you said seems really ignorant and unfair to game developers.

My favorite game devs are those that don't pull punches, like Destructive Creations (game devs of Hatred), and also a shoutout to the devs of Rust for allowing complete nudity and more importantly, completely free-form sign creation so that players can make signs as offensive as they wish. And then of course there are games like GTA which glorify crime. My point is that I am not being unfair to game devs I just prefer the game devs that aren't afraid of negative press and hate game devs that go out of their way to avoid offending. And if by "routes game developers have to take" you mean "have to take to prevent the game getting banned in certain countries", I say let the game get banned in those countries.

 

Not putting in bomb cars for "sensitivity" reasons wouldn't be all that bad but it would definitely make me think twice about how much I support the game devs of Squad, which currently I regard rather highly aside from their stance on putting gore in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a friendly reminder to keep the discussions civil guys - not everyone shares the same opinion and not everyone is from the same part of the world.

 

Not to mention the fact that this topic has been discussed to death in the past, so you might find a developer answer out there somewhere if you bother to look hard enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its like having sex but you can't go balls deep for some reason. 

 

Its quite ridiculous when you think about it.

 

I would say go all the way. Stay true to the damn thing and do it with a full heart. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/12/2016 at 11:44 AM, LaughingJack said:

 

OMG! GTA is probably the ultimate in atrociously narcissistic and anti-social/sociopathic games that glorifies Gangsta Culture and wonton lawless mayhem.

I am presonally against pushing casualised violence-porn like this, as a Normalised Thing.

People that say they need , or actively defend, these sorts of things in a game that is overtly not about blood-lust, need to take a serious look at themselves.

 

How does strapping explosives to yourself or planting roadside IEDs (that will prolly never be set off properly anyway), make people more interested in the next level game play ? In fact, what is  your version of "next level game play"?

 

I used gta as an example my point is for gtas audience they did great in sales and the people that are sensitive to things didnt matter with game sales alot of people still play it and love it, in regards to squad if we are in iraq killing insurgents then adding a car bomb to kill a squad that left the vehicle unattended could be realistic game play and add more fun to it but just an example, games dont need sensitive people it needs realism and make combat as intense as possible

 

And FYI i cant stand real blood and killing in real life i couldnt even kill an animal just to survive but when it comes to games i love the realism blood doesnt really need a massive effect only when getting shot is really cool but car bombs and not showing body parts is ok its a stratergy play from the insurgents 

Edited by jscaff
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/12/2016 at 8:14 PM, Marijuanoz said:

You play game where you shoot people in the face. You should uninstall.

 

. . . aaand you have totally missed my point.

 

 

On 03/12/2016 at 11:34 AM, jscaff said:

I used gta as an example my point is for gtas audience they did great in sales and the people that are sensitive to things didnt matter with game sales alot of people still play it and love it, in regards to squad if we are in iraq killing insurgents then adding a car bomb to kill a squad that left the vehicle unattended could be realistic game play and add more fun to it but just an example, games dont need sensitive people it needs realism and make combat as intense as possible

 

And FYI i cant stand real blood and killing in real life i couldnt even kill an animal just to survive but when it comes to games i love the realism blood doesnt really need a massive effect only when getting shot is really cool, but car bombs and not showing body parts is ok its a stratergy play from the insurgents 

 

from my recollection GTA primarily sold huge because it was(is) sooo contraversial, but also, widely, sold to kids(and young adults) whose parents didn't give a crap if they might grow up as disfunctionals with anger management issues - some perents don't even check what their kids play(or look at online).

i'm hardly sensitive and have no issue with shooting peeps and seeing blood and bodies flying . . .i mostly agree with your second bit^ . . . i'm just against the unneccisarily debaurcherous splatter-porn that is usually labelled "Added Gore" - we don't need  to go quite that far, i think. It's OTT and distracting.

 

Also, i did state(somewhere . . ) that "Satchel'ing" a vehicle should be good enough - without the need to add uneccissary complication to the game.

 

As to what some have stated above regarding Suicide Bombers being "political", they are dead right, it's not Political, it's Moral. So i guess it really comes down to how far off balance you're prepared to let your moral compass dive so you can justify their use in you own mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2016 at 10:23 AM, LaughingJack said:

 

. . . aaand you have totally missed my point.

 

 

 

from my recollection GTA primarily sold huge because it was(is) sooo contraversial, but also, widely, sold to kids(and young adults) whose parents didn't give a crap if they might grow up as disfunctionals with anger management issues - some perents don't even check what their kids play(or look at online).

i'm hardly sensitive and have no issue with shooting peeps and seeing blood and bodies flying . . .i mostly agree with your second bit^ . . . i'm just against the unneccisarily debaurcherous splatter-porn that is usually labelled "Added Gore" - we don't need  to go quite that far, i think. It's OTT and distracting.

 

Also, i did state(somewhere . . ) that "Satchel'ing" a vehicle should be good enough - without the need to add uneccissary complication to the game.

 

As to what some have stated above regarding Suicide Bombers being "political", they are dead right, it's not Political, it's Moral. So i guess it really comes down to how far off balance you're prepared to let your moral compass dive so you can justify their use in you own mind.

what is particularly immoral about suicide bombing compared to any other form of killing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now