Chuc

Announcement: Alpha 9 Features & Changelog

341 posts in this topic
18 hours ago, Gorzu said:

 

We are getting tons of new transport vehicles this patch as well, all it would take is 1 or 2 of those per team dedicated to transport and you wouldnt ever have to walk. Sadly though it still dosent look like APC squads will be possible (yet hopefully).

 

This would be nice to see, as of now you see very few people as dedicated drivers in public matches. Seeing that they addressed the point issue for Logi drivers, maybe they've done the same for transport drivers. Players need to see they're contribution to the team. I ran logi runs for an entire game and no points. We won the game, maybe we new players get to grips with the need for dedicated transportation and logi runs we'll see more balance and less running simulation. In, addition players should be recognized end of match contribution for taking on these roles.

Share this post


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

 

This would be nice to see, as of now you see very few people as dedicated drivers in public matches. Seeing that they addressed the point issue for Logi drivers, maybe they've done the same for transport drivers. Players need to see they're contribution to the team. I ran logi runs for an entire game and no points. We won the game, maybe we new players get to grips with the need for dedicated transportation and logi runs we'll see more balance and less running simulation. In, addition players should be recognized end of match contribution for taking on these roles.


That's not because people don't want to do it. It's just that people want all the vehicles. If most SLs could they would just take 3 BTRs, a logi a transport and still have 9 infantry. People are scared of relying on other squads for things, especially transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Peerun said:


That's not because people don't want to do it. It's just that people want all the vehicles. If most SLs could they would just take 3 BTRs, a logi a transport and still have 9 infantry. People are scared of relying on other squads for things, especially transport.

 

Maybe that a can be solved with a dedicated role, that opens up respectively based on # of players in squad and on team.Otherwise, you can't drive (period}. It may also solve the problem you see now with undamaged abandoned vehicles all over the map, essentially wasted resources helping no one. So, in these cases/examples  people clearly show 1. they don't understand the importance, and 2. don't care to drive or protect them since there's no broader accountability. This may also be where a commander is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMGERRRD finally this looks great and optimization is always welcome! I wonder how long we have too wait for V10 D:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, SgtRoss said:

This is not and will not be PR. As much as PR players would love to see PR 2, the reality is Squad was always designed with the intent to make a PR-like game more accessible to a larger audience as a commercial product. Sorry, some of you will always be dissatisfied and we understand that.

 

The extent of Squad being a PR-like game can be pretty vague sometimes, but honestly it looks like it's going in the right direction.

When I say a more PR-like direction I think we're talking about the same thing. I'm not saying I want an exact PR copy in every possible way, but something with the same kind of focus on finding the perfect balance between gameplay and realism with a good amount of depth to it, to keep it interesting in the long run.

 

Surely things like needing to have a crewman kit / role to operate certain vehicles, needing to have both a driver and a gunner to operate certain vehicles (instead of being able to insta switch and use the gunner position as it is now) and changes to the RP system as discussed here for example, will make their way into Squad eventually right?

 

 

17 hours ago, SgtRoss said:

Outside of that, sometimes the trickle is intended, sometimes it is just a resource issue. Vehicle inventory is planned and should be part of the CoreInventory system we have mentioned several times now. For example, being able to pull ammunition off a vehicle and not just a crate, but actually walk up, access a window that has grenades, magazines, etc. that you can customize your loadout within the confines of your role and weight requirements kind of like a Survival game. Similar functionality we plan to give to ammo crates from FOBs.

 

Alright, very nice to hear. Thanks for the response!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello

Dev thank you for this work but sorry to say you are very slow! What I see the final version of this games will take about 3 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 minutes ago, O_o_klyk_o_O said:

hello

Dev thank you for this work but sorry to say you are very slow! What I see the final version of this games will take about 3 years.

They just worked on a major vehicle system that is now finished that takes a long time. Now they're making a new animation system and core inventory system that is sorely needed. Once these key features are done, they'll be spitting content like weeds. Plus, were getting a ton of vehicles in A9! ;)

Edited by WarEagle751

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

30 minutes ago, DonDOOM said:

Surely things like needing to have a crewman kit / role to operate certain vehicles, needing to have both a driver and a gunner to operate certain vehicles (instead of being able to insta switch and use the gunner position as it is now) and changes to the RP system as discussed here for example, will make their way into Squad eventually right?

I second this. Its fine if you are making the game more accessible and not a PR clone but certain level of team organization and balance would be nice

Edited by Thenis

Share this post


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


That's not because people don't want to do it. It's just that people want all the vehicles. If most SLs could they would just take 3 BTRs, a logi a transport and still have 9 infantry. People are scared of relying on other squads for things, especially transport.

That's because in the vast majority of games only 1 squad is really doing the work, while another squad sits somewhere super fobbing and yet another is just useless. Of course nobody wants to rely on each other unless there are some reputable names squad leading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent Patch notes Devs. Looks like this game is really coming along. Core Dev + Optimatzion = even better patches in the future.

 

Keep up the good work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really liking the concept of the HAB with the FOB. I also can't wait to read the tears from the antiFOB people though. To which I'll reply:

5bd1390024.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still no changes to medic system? :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Cossack said:

Still no changes to medic system? :/


Needs CoreInventory = V10-11

Share this post


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


Needs CoreInventory = V10-11

 

What changes are the medics gonna get? Dragging, epipens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, NanoAgeWarrior said:

 

What changes are the medics gonna get? Dragging, epipens?

Those would be mentioned if they were in the update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I AM AMAZED. Fantastic work by the Devs on this release. It looks so freaaakin cool!

 

This is the update I feel we needed at this point.

 

Anticipation. Intensifies....:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should change the turret on the MT-LMB's map icon to a triangle so it doesn't look so much like an MBT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they add a confirmation message on the "Make Squad Leader" button for v9. It's so easy to make someone you want to kick the squad leader right now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2017 at 1:51 PM, Tartantyco said:

 

Well, the way it's currently set up is just bad. First of all, emplacements shouldn't disappear because you take down the FOB. But the big thing is simply this: As long as emplacements are tied to a ticket loss, you're not going to have any utility out of emplacements.

 

The only reason why you'd want to separate the spawn from the FOB is so that you can build other things without placing a spawn point. But if me placing an AT emplacement somewhere to protect a flank only signals the enemy that they can get some tickets by taking this position, that's just not going to happen. They can stop by 10-30 minutes later when that position is no longer relevant and just pick up some free tickets.

 

Ideally, no emplacements, be it FOBs or HABs, or anything, should cost any tickets. They should cost resources in construction and operation, but that's it.

 

Fully agree. Once things are built, they should stay, excluding ammo. 

 

I'm happy to see the introduction of HAB's, we'll have to see what the placement radius is for them out from the radio and if the build radius from the radio has increased. That would help disconnect to some degree, the "I see sandbags, we know where the radio is now"

 

I'd like to see changes to the spawn system that would discourage the intial rush that I see in every match. Sure, having to shovel up a HAB will take a bit more time, but that's it. It's still effectively, logi = insta team spawn on a backcap. 

 

Great update though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Well analysed.

I also think, FOBs should not cost any tickets at a loss. However, there must be some sort of penalty. Maybe a timer, that prevents placing a new FOB soon, when a FOB has been destroyed recently? Even 5 minutes could help the other team gain a momentum.

I can imagine a scenario, where a team has just lost a flag but took down a FOB --> they would have time and resources to reorganize for an attack, while the team that took the flag would need to survive for some time in order to be able to make a holdfast of their new gain.

Edited by Skymo

Share this post


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

Well analysed.

I also think, FOBs should not cost any tickets at a loss. However, there must be some sort of penalty.

 

The penalty comes from losing all the resources and manpower you've expended building and maintaining those fortifications and emplacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, R3dundantC said:

Really liking the concept of the HAB with the FOB. I also can't wait to read the tears from the antiFOB people though. To which I'll reply:

5bd1390024.jpg

I love you so much right now lol. I have been saying this for a very long time that fobs are meant to be used as a building for def and an attack point just like a real fob would be used in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of what I see is great, but I can't help but actually dislike the addition of new vehicles on the PACT side. While it's nice to see fire support vehicles, it sucks to see that the US is getting nothing more than the Stryker with a CROWS M2 when Russia is getting vehicles with autocannons. Sure, they're not as armored, but the US still has nothing more than the M72 LAW, which is highly ineffective at taking out even light skinned vehicles.

 

It would've been nice to see at least some way to counter these new auto-cannon vehicles, but to me it seems like they're going to dominate the battlefield until the US gets heavy anti-tank kits or a similar vehicle with an autocannon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2017 at 4:03 PM, Catindabox said:

Do you really think it would be that casual? I'm getting worried now, even the dev who decides how realistic things should be isn't satisfied :( Are you still planning on details such as humvee gunners being able to switch to primary weapon/throw smokes from within the gunner seat?

 

 

Nature of creating a project with a desired intent that involves an entire team of people with varying skills, creativity, desires, etc. There are many compromises and decisions made on a regular basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, SgtRoss said:

 

Nature of creating a project with a desired intent that involves an entire team of people with varying skills, creativity, desires, etc. There are many compromises and decisions made on a regular basis.

 

Will armoured vehicles in the future require a crewman kit to operate and will we be able to solo them (switching between driver and gunner)?

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