Peerun

Serious balance problem

71 posts in this topic

With this way BF and CoD will become far more realistic than Squad.

 

Because PR is not less skill dependable. It is just have awkward and clunky random mechanics, which confuse players for sometime, but then the most skillful wins anyway.

 

26 minutes ago, XRobinson said:

I think just give the gun wieght, or mass, to make physics if aiming more real.  No RND aim needed.  But how do you give objects and guns weight in the game world without introducing a random function?  Vehicles have mud, hill, mass, physics right, it has mass....can this be applied to guns?  For real aiming purposes? Can you just have a number function for mass of gun from say zero to ten to give max or no weight to gun, to have certain guns that are bigger have more mass than say a pistol?  Is this a viable way?

 

Won't work:

 

1. Too much for teamplay shooter. Will turn the game into Arma.

 

2. Players will adapt and SUDDENLY skillful players will win again. People here think that all skilled players are dumb rambos from CoD and true tactician should not be able to hit a barn from 5 meters.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The argument isn't against skilled players winning and never was, it's just about the type of skills needed and when they are needed.
As I said in the OP, right now you need more skill to shoot after walking or when out of stamina rather than after sprinting or wounded.
That's the whole of the argument.
I enjoy hard games that reward skill, but only those that make sense in terms of mechanics.
I also like how you completely ignored my post -
 

2 hours ago, ZiGreen said:

Won't work:

1. Too much for teamplay shooter. Will turn the game into Arma.

2. Players will adapt and SUDDENLY skillful players will win again. People here think that all skilled players are dumb rambos from CoD and true tactician should not be able to hit a barn from 5 meters.


Of course it can work, not to mention that devs have already hinted at different weight/handling stats once CoreInventory is finished and implemented.
1. Too much? It'll be exactly how much they decide to do. You make zero sense. I bet if I suggested to add salt in a soup we were making together you'd just say "Too much for soup", without letting me tell you how much salt I wanted to add beforehand.

I can see it working with the random function being player input. For example, the game would track the player's movement for the last 3 seconds, and when you went to aim down your sights it'd take those numbers into the account.
e.g.
Let's say that the rate of movement speed change in the 3 seconds before you aim determines the amount of sight misalignment.
The amount of vertical movement(changing stance, vaulting, jumping, going up or down a slope) would place a modifier on the above,
while the predominant mouse movement direction would determine on which axis the sights get misaligned(for example moving your mouse&barrel to the left would start the misalignment from the left etc) + (The weapon's stats + Stamina / Injury)

Again, just an example. Not saying it should or can be implemented like this.
 

Edited by Peerun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dubs said:

The deviation and other systems in PR were far from perfect and held pro's & cons, but they created long and intense firefights. It opened a wide path of Squad and mechanized tactics due to the pacing it set...just in a really clunky way.

I think a lot of people want more than just point and shoot gun fights that end in 15 seconds. They're after the adrenaline filled 5 minute firefights, being pinned down, having vehicles/squads be a base of fire while other elements pushed flanks. The answer isn't in deviation even if people think it is, I can agree to that. Other systems we have currently, should be refined and expanded on(which they are from the looks of animation system with weapon handling, as well as dev feedback saying suppression changes are coming sometime etc)

Skill should be rewarded, but shouldn't be a huge focus. It influences individual play when focused on too much. The game is called "Squad" after all.

 



And if you prefer PR over how Squad is, why are you not playing that? Last time I checked it's still active. 

Here's a hint for you: Most people are not intrested in hyper realistic or long firefights, they're here to play a game, not simulate a warzone.

That's why it's called a game and that's why PR doesn't have more than 500 active players, because that's INCREDIBLY niche and there are already 2 games exactly like that, ARMA and PR.

 

5 hours ago, Dubs said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Peerun said:

1. Too much? It'll be exactly how much they decide to do. You make zero sense. I bet if I suggested to add salt in a soup we were making together you'd just say "Too much for soup", without letting me tell you how much salt I wanted to add beforehand.

Nice сomparison.

 

56 minutes ago, Nordic said:

And if you prefer PR over how Squad is, why are you not playing that? Last time I checked it's still active. 

And why do you thnik he is not playing "that". Most of PR players, who plays Squad, play PR as well. Becase it better! :D 

 

And "that"my friend is a game which one you should be thankfull. Because if there was no PR, there never will be any Squad at all.

So you would have to continue play Call of Duty. 90% of Squad mechanics was taken from PR, so next time when you decide to call PR "that", hold this in your mind and show some respect.

 

56 minutes ago, Nordic said:

Here's a hint for you: Most people are not intrested in hyper realistic or long firefights, they're here to play a game, not simulate a warzone.

Yeah thats why EA, Ubisoft and Activision have studios to make games for you :)

 

Also Squad has the same online as PR, and if you remove PR players it will be less.

Edited by FishMan

Share this post


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

Nice сomparison.

 

And why do you thnik he is not playing "that". Most of PR players, who plays Squad, play PR as well. Becase it better! :D 

 

And "that"my friend is a game which one you should be thankfull. Because if there was no PR, there never will be any Squad at all.

So you would have to continue play Call of Duty. 90% of Squad mechanics was taken from PR, so next time when you decide to call PR "that", hold this in your mind and show some respect.

 

Yeah thats why EA, Ubisoft and Activision have studios to make games for you :)

 

Also Squad has the same online as PR, and if you remove PR players it will be less.




Cool, if PR is better - stay there then! :)

Share this post


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

Cool, if PR is better - stay there then! :)

 

You do realise that many people supported Squad because they wanted a new PR like fps? Telling us to go back to PR isn't really valid. Read over the KS if you need a refresher. We have so many games out there with plain shooting mechanics that are unrewarding and boring, why should Squad be another one... You see, we'd actually like more challenging and intelligent gameplay because that would actually make it rewarding.

 

Our goal for Squad is to take 10 years worth of experience, testing and research with the original Project Reality formula and apply it to a modern stand-alone engine. We want nothing less than to reclaim the genre of tactical shooters for the creators, modders and players who have waited a generation to get back to intelligent, satisfying gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, banOkay said:

 

You do realise that many people supported Squad because they wanted a new PR like fps? Telling us to go back to PR isn't really valid. Read over the KS if you need a refresher. We have so many games out there with plain shooting mechanics that are unrewarding and boring, why should Squad be another one... You see, we'd actually like more challenging and intelligent gameplay because that would actually make it rewarding.

 

 

 




Squad is exactly that, smart players will win over non smart players every game. I don't see the issue, at all.


You're mad because someone is aiming better than you? Hold an angle. Use smoke. Use your teammates. Use a vehicle. Flank him.

Share this post


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

Squad is exactly that, smart players will win over non smart players every game. I don't see the issue, at all.

You're mad because someone is aiming better than you? Hold an angle. Use smoke. Use your teammates. Use a vehicle. Flank him.

 

No, Squad is so not that, sorry. And I'm not mad about aim in an almost hit-scan pixel hunting lol. I'd simply like a game where intelligence, teamwork and coordination wins over who can move their mouse better. I have other games for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad already has a shitton of mechanics, forcing you to use something beside simple running and shooting, though other shooters are allowing both ways. There is no single thing in BF or Cod which prevents you from using tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you people keep bringing PR and Arma into this. I don't understand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Peerun said:

Why do you people keep bringing PR and Arma into this. I don't understand...



Because people like you are asking for PR mechanics? :)

Share this post


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

I will ban you WHENEVER it is possible.

If you would ban over someone making a suggestion that you don't like, then I'm glad you have no power here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Nordic said:



Because people like you are asking for PR mechanics? :)


I would like to see you quote me on that. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm liking Fish's idea. 

 

Close range it will have next to no effect, and CQC will still be fast as it should. 

 

My main issue right now is that it is stupidly easy to consistently make medium to long range shots within 0.5 seconds of popping out of cover or coming out of a sprint. I'd like to see long range engagements slow down and be more calculated. 

 

Having some minor iron sway while moving and for 1 or 2 seconds would make the player wait to make sure that their shot will be on target. 

 

With PR's system, deviation was random and you could never tell where your shot would land before you were settled. With this, you would still be able make shots by timing up with the iron's sway, although it would not be nearly as reliable as waiting the second or so to steady.

 

The current system where there is only one degree of sway is too easy to bypass, because you can compensate for the sway very easily. As long as the red dot is over the target, that's where it is going, no matter the conditions. Point and shoot, it's a counterstrike players wet dream. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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



And if you prefer PR over how Squad is, why are you not playing that? Last time I checked it's still active. 

We're here because PR's engine it at its limits, and we have an opportunity here make a successor that takes the good and drops the bad. We're using our feedback and suggestions to help shape our dream game, just like I'm sure you try to do.

4 hours ago, Nordic said:

Here's a hint for you: Most people are not intrested in hyper realistic or long firefights, they're here to play a game, not simulate a warzone.

Yeah, you're right. "Most people" couldn't care for that stuff, but "most people" and "most Squad players" are not the same people. The majority of the players I've seen that regularly play Squad or discuss it ARE looking for an authentic, intense, but fun experience. The Squad regulars who actually want the game to be simplified beyond what it is now are in the minority. See here: 

4 hours ago, Nordic said:

That's why it's called a game and that's why PR doesn't have more than 500 active players, because that's INCREDIBLY niche and there are already 2 games exactly like that, ARMA and PR.

It's natural that any game loses players over time as people move on to new things, it's just that most will also gain new players. Gaining new players is PR's main issue for 3 main reasons:

1: Being 10 years old means that the game is visually unappealing in comparison with what players are used to, and the game engine is hitting its limits meaning compromises must be made (random deviation, fog, etc.)

2: No tutorial. PR has a ton of mechanics, and the lack of an in-game tutorial (new players don't want to read and constantly refer back to a 45 pg. manual) makes the game completely overwhelming at first. People don't know what's going on or what to do, and quit before the round is over.

3: No Steam release. With a torrent being the only way to download the game, and no advertising, barely anyone gets to the installer in the first place.

 

All things that are being fixed in Squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 hours ago, Nordic said:



And if you prefer PR over how Squad is, why are you not playing that? Last time I checked it's still active. 

Here's a hint for you: Most people are not intrested in hyper realistic or long firefights, they're here to play a game, not simulate a warzone.

That's why it's called a game and that's why PR doesn't have more than 500 active players, because that's INCREDIBLY niche and there are already 2 games exactly like that, ARMA and PR.

 

 

You've misread and misinterpreted everything I've said lol

Squads Devs themselves have said Squad will be moved towards slower game-play between each patch(Which it has been doing -- v9 alone on Yeho & Goro with expansions and stam nerf has made gameplay very mechanized on those maps at a slower pace), slowly introducing players to the playstyle they want to influence, so they adapt over time and not just lay it all down on them straight away. There was a discussion on reddit not too long about it. Will it be exactly like PR? No, and I'm happy it won't be. Squad needs to differentiate itself to be a different product but still hold true to the spiritual successor title.

No one is asking for hyper realistic firefights, they're asking for more slower placed gameplay to give more variation in engagements, so it opens more opportunity for more intense play and tactics overall. Right now, meta is Rush and have everyone scattered across a map, no front lines, limited Squad tactics, point and shoot fights.

PR has 500 players because its been 10 years. It's old and outdated, but still holds a playerbase after 10 years - which is impressive. In its prime it had a few thousand players. It's niche-ness prolonged its life cycle due to a dedicated playerbase.

You can tell me to go and play PR(Still do), but I could say; If you're after 15 second fight MLG epeen repetitive rinse and repeat tactics - Play CSGO.

 

Edited by Dubs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

Cool, if PR is better - stay there then!

Only in your dreams, kid :)

 

 

Edited by FishMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey that would be a cool new title for a FPS game......Warzone!   :). For those guys who want the hardcore military virtual experience.  I trademarked the name, you cant have it!  There needs to be gravity in the game, bullets should go up and down with distance, same with shooting bodies out of a cannon, it should go in a arc up and then down, and the heavier it is the more bigger the crater.  :). I can imagine it happening anyway.  Give the guns mass physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm actually going to elaborate on this even though this is the 2949294th thread about the EXACT SAME THING.

I have 2000 hours + in this game so I fairly know what I'm talking about.

Generally there's 4 categories of players when it comes to skirmishes:

Type A: The top 1% shooters, the CSGO global elite or whatever the frekk it's called. Players like myself whose spent a lot of time in FPS over the years. These are the ones with 20+ kills every game. Not unusual to go 30+ or even 40+ in games.

Type B: The good shooters, your overall good FPS player. These are the ones that goes 12-18 kills per match.

Type C: The average one, players who come by but doesn't do anything cool in particular. Misses a lot of shots but gets the job done. They are the ones that land 5-10 and get hyped about 12 kills.

Type D: The very poor shooters, doesn't really care about FPS at all and isn't playing Squad because of it.


Be advised, this post completely ignores insta proning (A.k.a dolphin diving) because it's already going to be tweaked / changed / removed and thus no need to discuss it whatsoever. It's a problem, everyone knows it. In due time it won't be.

What you're asking for already exists. You're arguing that the player who sits stationary should have the advantage over someone running far away / doesn't have their gun up etc.

It already is so. There needs to be an INCREDIBLE skill differences for someone to actually take you out (Add to that scope vs no scope).

In a B vs A situation where player B is shooter a running A from the side they will in 99% cases win that engagement (or A will hide).

Now a big problem is that after A hides, he can insta prone > stand up and shoot and dive in seconds. Something that wouldn't be the same if you had to crouch. But as I said, IGNORE all that because it's going away.

In a situation were C shoots at A, A might very well win simply by turning towards C and shooting back.
C is missing his / her shots and A has the confidence and skill to turn back and shoot, should A have done that versus B he would've died in 99% of the cases.


And so on so fourth, you get the idea.

That's how it's going to be. This is infantry combat and this is what makes Squad such a fantastic game. The individual soldier can make an impact in the game due to his shooting skill. It is COMPLETE bullshit to add in mechanics to punish a better player so a worse player gets a chance, the worse player should improve instead. 

Because otherwise you're going to end up with PR, were infantry squads disvolve quickly, rarely enjoys themselves or just does random shit. Essentially infantry in PR is just waiting for the next game hoping to get an asset that game.


In Squad you can get AMAZING close combat fights when one team drops in with a helo or an APC etc etc.

And out of 50 players, at least 35 will in the future be running just that - infantry. That's 70/100 on each server. You want to make their game shit with shitty mechanics so they can't trust their rifle? Yeah that's a fantastic idea to ruin the game.


"But Nordic, what about type C/D whose not a good shooter, they'll get murdered by A/B?!"


Yupp, in most cases they will. C will need to improve his / her game if they want to play infantry, that's what it comes to. And D will mostly likely be your tank/Apc/IFC/Helo operators. And that's fine, we absolutely need those people. That's the reason why Squad is such a fantastic game, people from all qualities will get their spot.

Myself, I will very rarely do that. I'm a fighter from top to toe and I love being on the ground fighting (I SL 99% of the games I play).
Once every 20 games I'll drive a BTR to relax, but other than that I'll be on the boots on the ground. That's what I love.

And when player D comes with his BTR or MBT I can be as good of a shooter as I want, I'll still run the **** away.
Or when I sit on a rooftop covering papanov approach and suddenly a 30 MM starts shooting at me, I can have my ACOG all I want, I'll still not be able to pop my head up and russian infantry WILL be able to push in.



"They're asking for slower gameplay yada yada".


Well the fact is, that's your own fault. You're the people who rush, in most games I start out VERY slowly, either capping the back objectives or taking it cool. But people keep rushing, the only reason rushing the first flag is because people are stupid and greedy enough to cap it with 1 person.

Meanwhile I never get rushed because I in 99% cases send a full squad towards the defense flag, on Kohat I set up ambush for the rushing BTR on the northen bridge (Leading to malak abad) etc etc.


Squad IS slow if you play it properly and patiently. And anyone doing that will DEFINITELY win over the rushing / fast type (We're accounting for the same skilled players here, if one team is vastly better than the other obviously the gameplay isn't the issue.) because the fast type will lose a hell of a lot more tickets than the squad sitting patiently and letting the opponents run into their stationary positions.


I move A LOT when I play, nearly constantly, but most of my kills are coming from people running into my scope. I may be relocation CONSTANTLY but the fact remains that at least 60-80% of people are running into me when they die.


Now will it slow down further? Probably, especially with people learning how to play.

The issue are that people are playing, to be 100% honest, stupidly.


People pick shitty kits, they pick the marksman and go on their solo missions even when you're facing russia and have no or only 1 AT (OP in the thread a perfect example as he got kicked from my squad for doing that very thing not long ago.)
People waste vehicles like crazy and does not push up under cover, never use smokes to cover their push and so on so fourth.


The reason that works in PR is because you can't trust your rifle, you can have the perfect aim on someone and your bullet deviation decides to **** you over.

That's not smart gameplay, that's horrible gameplay.

Start improving YOUR play instead, start taking it slow and don't panic and play methodically.

And I see so many people whining about supression, yet you never use it? So many times people are just shooting at me while I'm visible or while they can take a shot, yet I barely see anyone shooting while someone is flanking for example.


Here's an excellent showcase of what I'm talking about:



Small things like this is the problem, sure the game has some smaller issues. But all in all, shooting is VERY solid in rewarding good players as it should.

The solution for players whose not as skilled losing to  higher skilled players is not punishing the good player, it's giving the worse player an ability to improve OR use the tools he have (The game is called Squad, USE THEM).


So Dubs, you can tell me to go back to CSGO all you want, but the fact is, when was the last time you played mechanized infantry, used your BTR with fashion or dependend on your squad mates?

I play 4-6 hours EVERYDAY and I rely on my squad mates EVERYDAY. If your players are scattered across the map, find a server that plays objectives.

Sounds to me like your issue is that you're playing with very shitty players who doesn't adapt.


I don't know where you're from, but if you're able to play on EU servers I'll be happy to play with you in a session with me and my clan mates and we'll see if you still have that opinion when you're finished, I'll buy you a beer if you do (provided you have paypal!).


Now if you're thinking about arguing with me, make sure you've read this post in the fullest because I'll know if you havn't and I won't spend my time arguing if you don't.

Have a nice day!

// Nordic

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nordic makes some solid points, and he is a very good player.

Watching the video made me think, why the stationary Squad did not have more space between them and no man checking their 6?

It's stuff like that, real basic Fire Team tactics that most Squads do not use that cause mass death more often than not.

Don't get me wrong, very good players will still out gun you in many situations (I like this fact) but the basics of Squad tactics are rarely used by the player base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

Ok, I'm actually going to elaborate on this even though this is the 2949294th thread about the EXACT SAME THING.

I have 2000 hours + in this game so I fairly know what I'm talking about.

Generally there's 4 categories of players when it comes to skirmishes:

Type A: The top 1% shooters, the CSGO global elite or whatever the frekk it's called. Players like myself whose spent a lot of time in FPS over the years. These are the ones with 20+ kills every game. Not unusual to go 30+ or even 40+ in games.

Type B: The good shooters, your overall good FPS player. These are the ones that goes 12-18 kills per match.

Type C: The average one, players who come by but doesn't do anything cool in particular. Misses a lot of shots but gets the job done. They are the ones that land 5-10 and get hyped about 12 kills.

Type D: The very poor shooters, doesn't really care about FPS at all and isn't playing Squad because of it.
 

 I wouldn't call anyone a "top 1%" unless you are playing Pro E-Sports earning the big bucks. You categorizing players just goes to show you see SQ as a competitive shooter. Which makes sense, since you prefer a more fast paced combat with emphasis on individual ability. I prefer tactics / strategy on the Squad level over individual ability.
 

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

That's how it's going to be. This is infantry combat and this is what makes Squad such a fantastic game. The individual soldier can make an impact in the game due to his shooting skill. It is COMPLETE bullshit to add in mechanics to punish a better player so a worse player gets a chance, the worse player should improve instead. 

Because otherwise you're going to end up with PR, were infantry squads disvolve quickly, rarely enjoys themselves or just does random shit. Essentially infantry in PR is just waiting for the next game hoping to get an asset that game.


I'm not asking to completely punish good shooters. I'm asking for mechanics to be refined more and expanded upon to create longer engagements that opens multiple paths of Squad based tactics and strategy. Right now,  Squad level tactics in Squad is
> Take contact
> First 10 seconds - both sides in the engagement lose a few people instantly to gun fire - or one side loses everyone in first 10 seconds
> 5 seconds after that grenades, RPG, M203 more people die instantly
> Medics if not dead try get people up
> 5 seconds after that - A good shooter does a 20 meter flank, kills rest of enemy - or a good grenadier sends an explosive present that kills the rest.

My problem with this is, the freedom of movement and pace of it all, and the lack of tactics involved with the mix of how easy it is to just 'point & shoot'

My PR experience was different, Maybe it's due to being from Oceania where the player base is small and everyone who played had played PR for years. Infantry engagements were fun and thrilling. Nothing like being stuck in some shitty compound for 3+ minutes unable to move and having to ask another Squad or vehicle asset to come and assist or if none available, having a good shooter maybe try kill the enemy AR or get AT to take the IFV/Tank out to enable some movement and sending 3 or so guys to a flank to force the enemy into a position you were just in. Having the ability to hold whole elements up to stop them reinforcing caps for long period felt rewarding.

Like I said, we don't need deviation in Squad. We just need other systems currently in Squad refined and expanded upon. Like with the animation system coming; I saw weapon handling differences that will make point and shooting harder to accomplish. Which I like.

 

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

"They're asking for slower gameplay yada yada".


Well the fact is, that's your own fault. You're the people who rush, in most games I start out VERY slowly, either capping the back objectives or taking it cool. But people keep rushing, the only reason rushing the first flag is because people are stupid and greedy enough to cap it with 1 person.

Meanwhile I never get rushed because I in 99% cases send a full squad towards the defense flag, on Kohat I set up ambush for the rushing BTR on the northen bridge (Leading to malak abad) etc etc.


Squad IS slow if you play it properly and patiently. And anyone doing that will DEFINITELY win over the rushing / fast type (We're accounting for the same skilled players here, if one team is vastly better than the other obviously the gameplay isn't the issue.) because the fast type will lose a hell of a lot more tickets than the squad sitting patiently and letting the opponents run into their stationary positions.


I move A LOT when I play, nearly constantly, but most of my kills are coming from people running into my scope. I may be relocation CONSTANTLY but the fact remains that at least 60-80% of people are running into me when they die.


Now will it slow down further? Probably, especially with people learning how to play.

The issue are that people are playing, to be 100% honest, stupidly
 


Like I said in my other post, The devs themselves have said each patch has been slowing game play down further. They're doing it in increments to get people to adapt slowly. I like that a lot, I can feel the changes too. I even said to my buddies that the gameplay on Yeho and Goro gave me 'PR Vibes'  with the pacing of the game, The mix of larger maps, stamina regen nerf, small arms penetration and more vehicles kind of forces different elements to support each other. Until you get mid match and everyone cluster****s on one or two caps and its back to the normal.

People are playing fast paced, because the game allows them too. The meta is created based on design and mechanics. If you can win a match by simply out killing the enemy,  being able to just stand up from cover and one tap an MG shooting your position. Basically doing cheese things the game design currently allows - then people will do it, and a vast majority of players do.

Like for instance this, I stand and strafe fire and knock down a target 50m out. I shouldn't be able to do that easily. Stand strafing while rapid firing in single fire at 50m accurately, shouldn't happen. There's a lot of small things like that, we shouldn't be able to do(Example - drop shotting/dolphin diving, which is changing soon)

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

People pick shitty kits, they pick the marksman and go on their solo missions even when you're facing russia and have no or only 1 AT (OP in the thread a perfect example as he got kicked from my squad for doing that very thing not long ago.)
People waste vehicles like crazy and does not push up under cover, never use smokes to cover their push and so on so fourth.


The reason that works in PR is because you can't trust your rifle, you can have the perfect aim on someone and your bullet deviation decides to **** you over.

That's not smart gameplay, that's horrible gameplay.

Start improving YOUR play instead, start taking it slow and don't panic and play methodically.

And I see so many people whining about supression, yet you never use it? So many times people are just shooting at me while I'm visible or while they can take a shot, yet I barely see anyone shooting while someone is flanking for example.


Here's an excellent showcase of what I'm talking about:

So Dubs, you can tell me to go back to CSGO all you want, but the fact is, when was the last time you played mechanized infantry, used your BTR with fashion or dependend on your squad mates?

I play 4-6 hours EVERYDAY and I rely on my squad mates EVERYDAY. If your players are scattered across the map, find a server that plays objectives.

Sounds to me like your issue is that you're playing with very shitty players who doesn't adapt.


I don't know where you're from, but if you're able to play on EU servers I'll be happy to play with you in a session with me and my clan mates and we'll see if you still have that opinion when you're finished, I'll buy you a beer if you do (provided you have paypal!).


Now if you're thinking about arguing with me, make sure you've read this post in the fullest because I'll know if you havn't and I won't spend my time arguing if you don't.

Have a nice day!

// Nordic


People run like headless chickens spread out, rush BTR's and do stupid things etc because it can result in a lot of kills with the cost of just dying and being able to respawn and start again. People pick M4/AK with optics because they can solo man it and get 30 kills easily. 

The game mechanics/design allow them to move freely & easily shoot a target. The recent stamina nerf in conjunction with weapon sway at low stamina had slowed this down a bit - again I'm happy in the direction that is going. The change in stam regen alone has had positive affects on gameplay. And that's what I'm talking about. Current mechanics and systems refined and expanded upon to get similar results with out adding old clunky systems into the mix, for example - Deviation.

I play all servers, If its early where I am and no OCE players are active, I play US or EU servers despite the 180 - 300 ping. All have the same general meta and gameplay. The Only time I get that itch scratched is single life events hosted by BigD, as people actually put thought into gameplay and play in methodical fashion. 

Hey I only told you to go play CSGO because you told me to go back to PR ;) Just banter(LEM on CSGO BTW). Overall I'm an average shooter on Squad, and I even find the game just too pointy shooty.

I just want firefights to have more substance.

Edited by Dubs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

I have 2000 hours + in this game so I fairly know what I'm talking about.

 

LOL

And how much experience do you have in developing games?

 

6 hours ago, XRobinson said:

Warzone

Hey really cool name for a mod :)

 

But let's hope we wouldn't need to do everything ourselves.

Edited by FishMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

Generally there's 4 categories of players when it comes to skirmishes:
~
That's how it's going to be. This is infantry combat and this is what makes Squad such a fantastic game. The individual soldier can make an impact in the game due to his shooting skill. It is COMPLETE bullshit to add in mechanics to punish a better player so a worse player gets a chance, the worse player should improve instead. 

 

This is already an indication of the game going wrong and promoting the wrong things. When individuals have an important impact on the game based on their shooting skills the game has failed in what it promised to achieve.

 

3 hours ago, Nordic said:

Because otherwise you're going to end up with PR, were infantry squads disvolve quickly, rarely enjoys themselves or just does random shit. Essentially infantry in PR is just waiting for the next game hoping to get an asset that game.
~
People pick shitty kits, they pick the marksman and go on their solo missions even when you're facing russia and have no or only 1 AT (OP in the thread a perfect example as he got kicked from my squad for doing that very thing not long ago.)
People waste vehicles like crazy and does not push up under cover, never use smokes to cover their push and so on so fourth.

The reason that works in PR is because you can't trust your rifle, you can have the perfect aim on someone and your bullet deviation decides to **** you over.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about here. Either you haven't played much PR or you don't really understand the mechanics at all. Lonewolfing with scoped kits rarely, if ever works in PR because it takes a lot more and a lot longer to kill someone. In Squad though it can easily work since as you said yourself a good shooter can have an impact on the game. Plus a scope is a big hindrance at short ranges in PR, while people often prefer it in Squad even for that.

 

The point: people arguing with you would like to see the skill not being in the shooting itself but rather in the events leading up to that. Moving from cover to cover, looking over your squad mates, managing stamina properly, keeping up the squad cohesion, supressing, overwhelming the enemies, coordination with vehicles etc... What we have now is boring, unrewarding and shit.

Edited by banOkay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dubs


Aight, your forum-fu clearly outranks me so I'm not gonna do fancy quoting like you, but more in a overall response, bear with me! (Also on a mobile device atm).
 

Quote

 I wouldn't call anyone a "top 1%" unless you are playing Pro E-Sports earning the big bucks. You categorizing players just goes to show you see SQ as a competitive shooter. Which makes sense, since you prefer a more fast paced combat with emphasis on individual ability. I prefer tactics / strategy on the Squad level over individual ability.


Sure, well, there are no esports in Squad yet. But we're in the final of the second tournament ever ran (The first one was Squad Lead and we (Mumblerines) didn't exist back then and we're starting the 3rd ever tournament soon!

ANYWAY, I think Squad offer the tactics, I mean that's why we win, we use the things I showcased in the video, smokes, fire teams, push together etc.

I can't count the times we've won engagements simply by outplaying people tactically. 95% of the clan players even in CCFN and other "semi serious" events push 1-3 together and die one by one were as me and my guys wait for each other and swoop in together, we're half famous for the "wall of mumbles" because we organize firing lines were everyone is spread out and such naturally.

Stuff like that is SUPER rare to see, which is what the biggest issue is.

All of that will make engagements longer while still being fairly fast paced!


Regarding the video made, yeah I know about that and personally I think it should be in, it's a part about the infantry combat that makes the lone soldier able to perform and make a difference, hell I've won a game in a scrim based only on the fact that a solo medic killed 5 people alone in close combat and then reviving us, stuff like that is why I love squad. That would never be possible in PR, if your squad got wiped the lone soldier could be as good as he wanted but never make a difference, that's what I like with squad. Teamwork and individual performance so nicely tied together!


We obviously have different thoughts about this, and that's fine! I am 100% there will be MUCH better when dolphin diving and insta unprone is gone.
 

Quote


People pick M4/AK with optics because they can solo man it and get 30 kills easily. 


This isn't true and you know it, VERY few players can achieve that even with a scope. Most scoped people land on 10-12 kills except the really good players.

And yes, people do run around like headless chickens and THAT'S what needs to be fixed. Because those who don't will win versus the chickens anyday of the week, that's the whole idea with my post - players needs to change, not the game.


And if you like 1 game lives you're the type I described who'd like more simulation, hardcore realism stuff, and that's absolutely fine!

But you're very niché and I'm sure there will be mods (and possibly servers?) running this in the future, but for the overall game most players are not intrested in that.

Fire fights have more substance / action / last longer if you play them right, right now it's mostly fire team usage and stuff like that. That's my whole point, players are hindering themselves by playing - quite frankly - ****ing idiotic.
 


 

54 minutes ago, FishMan said:

 

LOL

And how much experience do you have in developing games?

 

 



Absolutely nothing except being QA for Squad.  How about you?


Oh and, I don't see how that's relevant to the thread so please elaborate on that.
 

24 minutes ago, banOkay said:

 

 

The point: people arguing with you would like to see the skill not being in the shooting itself but rather in the events leading up to that. Moving from cover to cover, looking over your squad mates, managing stamina properly, keeping up the squad cohesion, supressing, overwhelming the enemies, coordination with vehicles etc... What we have now is boring, unrewarding and shit.



Me and my clan mates play like that on a daily basis, which is why we go 2:1, 3:1 K/D every game and outperform others in every community event.

I don't know why you don't, but you should start!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the idea of Squad sold as the spiritual successor of PR a mod made to make BF2 more tactical, teamwork focused and appealing to players that wanted more than run and gun like CS, BF etc were being selfish feeds the ego.

 

Quote

Squad was originally envisioned as a way to carry on the legacy of the popular “Project Reality” mod for battlefield 2. Founded by Will “Merlin” Stahl in early 2014, the project has grown to approx 22 developers the vast majority of who have contributed to the original MOD at some point in its long life.

Our goal for Squad is to take 10 years worth of experience, testing and research with the original Project Reality formula and apply it to a modern stand-alone engine. We want nothing less than to reclaim the genre of tactical shooters for the creators, modders and players who have waited a generation to get back to intelligent, satisfying gameplay.

 

When players want more PR style they mean more "intelligent, satisfying gameplay" not more twitchy shooting games.

 

The infantry style of play, I thought, was just while we wait for the game to grow-up into a modern standalone Battlefield type game that used the PR formula that was very successful in its day. PR was and  will always be a legend of an experience not to be mocked. It has had its day and PR players look to the future and Squad is the obvious choice based on its motives.

 

a bit confused/worried.

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