Jump to content

Recommended Posts

tatzhit   
16 minutes ago, TonkTonk said:

 

:D yeah sure

 

Well, his numbers do sound wildly inflated, but the main point is accurate: mortars are supposed to be one of the main killers on the battlefield.

Currently, they seem to account for about 1% of casualties. Mainly because they have about the effectiveness of hand grenades, whereas IRL mortars are at least 10 times more lethal (about 10x the explosive load + about 10x more fragment number/mass + better orientation to spread fragments parallel to ground). Pediwikia says 81mm mortar should have a frag radius of 60m!

 

Obviously there are considerations of game balance, but I would be happy if mortars were more scarce and harder to use (say, 600 build points + double the current ammo costs + more spread between rounds) but had 3-4 times more kill radius.

Share this post


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


That's what this guy said aswel 
 

//video removed, beginna

This video has nothing to do with the mortar, but with the ammo. Sabotaged or fault (spiked) ammo was popular and common especially in invasion of Iraq, still is today in middle east.

From wikipedia:
Rate of fire for M252 81mm mortar:

Rate of fire 8–16 rpm sustained
20–30 rpm in exceptional circumstances and for short periods
Edited by beginna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-MG   
6 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

This video has nothing to do with the mortar, but with the ammo. Sabotaged or fault (spiked) ammo was popular and common especially in invasion of Iraq, still is today in middle east.

From wikipedia:
Rate of fire for M252 81mm mortar:

Rate of fire 8–16 rpm sustained
20–30 rpm in exceptional circumstances and for short periods


Regardless, excessive use wil lead to failure at some point. Therefor i stated a cooldown as a suggestion to prevent excessive spam. I personally don't find it to be too much as of now. People just need to get the f*cc out of dodge when it starts raining. 

Edited by -MG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SgtRoss   
On 5/17/2017 at 10:20 AM, Hooves said:

One possible solution to at least slightly slowing the SPAM but still being fun to use is as follows:

 

Treat the interaction with the mortar more like planting ieds.  That is to say.  Be "mounted" in the mortar sight long enough to set distance and direction,  then have to get out and "grab" a mortar round.  It would be in your hands as if you had the ied.  But the ONLY place it would turn green (to place) is at the tip of the mortar tube as if you were "hanging" the round.  When you clicked to "place", the mortarman does the "duck" animation,  the mortar round slides down the tube and fires.  At which point the mortarman can either get back in the sight to correct the next shot, or go "grab" another mortar from a crate that is auto built as part of the mortar tube.

 

This accomplishes two things.  

1. It increases the immersion for the mortar team as if single crewed, it would take longer.  And if crewed would improve teamplay.

 

2.  Slow down mortar spam unless the mortar is multicrewed.  

 

It would also provide the currently missing mortar animation.  (Hanging the round, then ducking,  which is a cool extra bit that very few if any other games have).

 

Basically just like the video above.  But slowed slightly due to "picking up" the rounds.  

 

 

This is actually not too far from the actual final design of the mortars, in terms of crew and speed. However, there has been debate internally about overcomplicating the system by removing more players off the front lines.

 

However, our intent is to not force multi-crew, but reward it, so there is still a determination that can be made by the players. Do I one man the mortar and it is slower (yes, this is partially due to the animation taking longer to load rounds as a single person), or do you two man the mortar and lob rounds at a faster rate.

 

Anyways, curious as to everyone's thoughts relating to this.

Share this post


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

 

This is actually not too far from the actual final design of the mortars, in terms of crew and speed. However, there has been debate internally about overcomplicating the system by removing more players off the front lines.

 

However, our intent is to not force multi-crew, but reward it, so there is still a determination that can be made by the players. Do I one man the mortar and it is slower (yes, this is partially due to the animation taking longer to load rounds as a single person), or do you two man the mortar and lob rounds at a faster rate.

 

Anyways, curious as to everyone's thoughts relating to this.

 

As I have stated on page 2 here, I think mortars are unrealistically underpowered ATM, and people are mostly using them because of novelty value.
Also, mortars are already by far the most "multi-crewed" aspect of the game (need 3 people in long-term cooperation - spotter, gunner, logi runner, whereas everything else can be done solo with exception of building stuff and dropping rallies - which requires 2 people cooperating for a few seconds). And requiring, say, a "loader" running back and forth to ammo crate dropping rounds for the "gunner" would just be an exercise in frustration for pub matches, where you frequently can't get anyone from the squad to even construct a damn HAB.

 

I'm not opposed to reducing spam by making mortars harder to use effectively, but they do need to be more powerful or else people will stop bothering with them.
At the same time, mortars shouldn't be so powerful as to shut down infantry movement on map and turn the game into sitzkrieg (although that's precisely what happens IRL when infantry tries to advance without suppressing enemy arty first).

 

I don't have specific suggestions on how to achieve this balance, except say doubling damage radius (not necessarily kill, but "bleed" radius), while also doubling the cost of each tube and cost of ammo. Oh, and vehicle damage shouldn't change, hurting vehicles is one aspect of mortars that works pretty realistically now.

Share this post


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

 

This is actually not too far from the actual final design of the mortars, in terms of crew and speed. However, there has been debate internally about overcomplicating the system by removing more players off the front lines.

 

However, our intent is to not force multi-crew, but reward it, so there is still a determination that can be made by the players. Do I one man the mortar and it is slower (yes, this is partially due to the animation taking longer to load rounds as a single person), or do you two man the mortar and lob rounds at a faster rate.

 

Anyways, curious as to everyone's thoughts relating to this.

Im glad to hear that some more improvements to the experience are coming, as the current experience is lacking in a few ways.  Even more stoked to hear i was close to the mark on further developments ;p

 

The time between rounds with my method can be directly influenced by the process it takes to grab a mortar round from the crate of rounds.  And the distance a player must travel (2 steps or 5 steps)  that way the artificial (and unrealistic) reload timer can be more organically bypassed.  

Share this post


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

Im glad to hear that some more improvements to the experience are coming, as the current experience is lacking in a few ways.  Even more stoked to hear i was close to the mark on further developments ;p

 

The time between rounds with my method can be directly influenced by the process it takes to grab a mortar round from the crate of rounds.  And the distance a player must travel (2 steps or 5 steps)  that way the artificial (and unrealistic) reload timer can be more organically bypassed.  

 

Mortars don't stay zeroed tho. When you hop off, they go to the orientation they were built in. Meaning that you would have to re-aim after each shot.

And in general, mindless repetitive tasks don't sound fun, although of course they're a large part of military experience everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2017 at 2:03 PM, FeatherSton3 said:

Loving the update except for the mortar spam. Playing on Sumari Bala, my team was holding down a mid-point flag the whole game. Whilst doing so, we came under heavy mortar fire. Spamming mortar fire. We would be getting shelled almost every minute or so. Would really love if you guys could please limit the use of mortar ammo resupply in back-cap flags/spawn areas

My observations are the mortars are pretty much just backround noise. Numerous times I've watched a particular squad spam them pretty much non stop for an entire match and they averaged around 6 kills. Did them myself many times with a spotter in the 9 story calling them in and only got 1 kill. Complete waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PROTOCOL   

Had a SL use the mortar calculator someone developed, with one guy receiving coordinates... he went 28-0 all mortar kills.  One option may be reduce to one mortar vs two per HAB (if mortar spam is an issue).

Share this post


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

 

Mortars don't stay zeroed tho. When you hop off, they go to the orientation they were built in. Meaning that you would have to re-aim after each shot.

And in general, mindless repetitive tasks don't sound fun, although of course they're a large part of military experience everywhere.

Well yes, they would have to address that,  but I'm sure its not beyond their skillset to do so if they were to incorporate an idea like mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
plissken   
On 5/18/2017 at 11:38 PM, SgtRoss said:

 

This is actually not too far from the actual final design of the mortars, in terms of crew and speed. However, there has been debate internally about overcomplicating the system by removing more players off the front lines.

 

However, our intent is to not force multi-crew, but reward it, so there is still a determination that can be made by the players. Do I one man the mortar and it is slower (yes, this is partially due to the animation taking longer to load rounds as a single person), or do you two man the mortar and lob rounds at a faster rate.

 

Anyways, curious as to everyone's thoughts relating to this.

I glad to hear the part about not "forcing" multi-crewing, I think there are other ways to reward teamwork which are more enjoyable and interesting (sometimes at expense of realism, other times to its benefit). Multi-crewing in this case would mean that one (or more) person would be running back and forth to supply rounds for the mortars, it just doesnt sound like much fun or being gratifying in any sense. Who wants to run back and forth between the mortars and an ammo crate for a whole game? Or even for 5 minutes? But if the game significantly rewarded you for multi-crewing the mortars like that, then you would effectively be "forced" to do it, just to stay competitive with the enemy. So now we would have another of those situations similar to trying to get someone to do a logi-run.. Its usually painful (only that it would be worse, since doing logi-runs isnt that bad, actually).

Another case is with armored vehicles. Currently, the game allows for both 2-manning and 1-manning vehicles such as the Stryker and BTRs. When an APC takes the role of transporting troops, dynamically supporting a squad by changing its position often, or when its fighting on relatively flat terrain with little cover (Yehorivka, for example), it usually make sense to 2-man the vehicle to stay effective/competitive. In these cases, its usually interesting and fun both for the gunner and the driver. On other maps, such as Kohat, many players opt to 1-man these vehicles instead, playing relatively stationary from hills far away (with easy access to cover). This can be a very powerful and effective usage of these vehicles, that have long effective-ranges. Sometimes an APC will hang out around the same spot for 10 minutes straight, supporting its team from a far. If someone suddenly opens fire on him, he can quickly switch to driver seat and get into cover (provided he positioned himself well in the first place). Because he can get into cover in-time, it possible to 1-man these vehicles with good effectiveness (and you have one extra guy supporting the team as infantry on the battlefield, instead).
Now, there are people saying that 1-manning vehicles in Squad is stupid and should be dis-incentivized and "removed from the game". I dont agree with these people. Lets say that you guys actually did attempt to eliminate 1-manning vehicles, say, by increasing tenfold the time it takes to switch from gunner-seat to driver-seat. If this was done, you would have to 2-man your APC to use it in any meaningful sense (it would no longer make sense to 1-man it, even from far away, since you wouldnt be able to drive to cover in time if you got shot at suddenly). But here is the issue with this: even though 2-manning the vehicle becomes a requirement, it would still make sense to play relatively stationary, long-distance, on a map like Kohat. And what would the driver be doing? Very little, except sitting in the driver seat and just wait... He would drive the APC to some position, and then just be sitting around for 10 minutes straight, until he drives to some other hill, and sits around for another 10 minutes. He would have to stay on guard the whole time in case someone shoots at the vehicle (in which case he would have to drive the vehicle behind some cover, and then possibly drive back to main/repair station). Some would suggest that the driver could perhaps leave the vehicle and support the gunner with a pair of binoculars, which could make the role a bit more interesting. But wouldnt the time to get in/out of the vehicle have to be extended as well, so that the gunner is not able to quickly get into the driver seat by just dismounting/remounting the vehicle? If so, then the driver must never be allowed to leave the driver seat, since he wouldnt be able to get back into it in time, if the vehicle was suddenly shot at. I think most would agree it it wouldnt be much fun to be a dedicated driver in this scenario.. Might as well let it these vehicles stay effective when 1-manned (in certain situations, such as on hills on Kohat, as described)
My point with all of this is this: on certain maps, it doesnt make sense to reward/force 2-manning vehicles, from a gameplay perspective. Currently the game allows for both 1-manning and 2-manning vehicles, and I appreciate that (I would perhaps agree with slightly longer time for switching between gunner/driver seat, just to encourage 2-manning a little bit more than we see now).

Here is a few other cases of "forcing teamwork" (or otherwise "artificially" introducing gameplay restrictions, and with it sometimes uninteresting gameplay):

  • Being forced to have 3 people to setup a FOB. This essentially forces any type of recon/vehicle squad to bring at least 3 players, not because its the best usage of that squad to be 3 players, but just because they need 3 people to setup that FOB should the team need them to (since they will be in a unique position to do so). Maybe instead, placing the FOB can take longer when you got fewer squad members around you. Actually, since you already brought along 3 players, you should just bring a 4th player aswell, otherwise you'd lose out on that valuable LAT-kit. So now you are 4 people, but you cant really just do recon anymore, you have to engage enemies far more actively, to justify that you have 4 people in your squad. Im putting a bit extremely, but my point is that certain restrictions like this can limit gameplay options and push too heavily towards a "standarized/routine" way of playing, and thereby limiting possibilites.
  • Which kits are available to your squad, is directly linked to how many players you have in your squad. I find that this also limits gameplay options. Instead of picking your squad size based what makes sense for the situations you expect to get into, your choice of squad size is heavily shaped by the concern for maximizing the amount of the "best kits" for your team (medics, LATS, scopes). I wish it was designed another way, which would open up more options regarding squad size and organisation.
  • The 400 meters rule to FOB placements feels quite arbitrary and "off". It feels strange and unintuitive to have to run far away from where your team is fighting to set up another FOB. Also, having emplacements linked up to FOBs makes emplacements less effective than they couldve been. Why cant I place a HMG where I want (if I got supplies for it), without risking losing a FOB and tickets over it? So often I dont place any emplacements whatsoever, because it just gives away to the enemy where our FOB is.
  • The "cut-off" distance for emplacements seems a bit arbitrary. Perhaps instead shovel time could be increased the further away you get? So there is never a real "cut-off" distance for placing emplacements, but at some point the shovel times become so long that you might reconsider if its worth attempting it.
  • On a somewhat seperate note: SLs have the unfair role of being forced to stay alive much more than that of his squad mates, since he is the only one who can place rally points. But at the same time, it often makes sense for the SL to lead from the front, because he can then in a hands-on way lead his unit. So often in pubs I HAVE to lead from the front for anything to happen, and for my squad to get the information it needs. If Im gonna lead inexperienced players, the importance of leading from the front only increases. Being "forced" to stay behind is both boring and also puts you in a constant dilemma when playing the SL role. Could it be helpful to introduce a "V.I.P"-role (perhaps as a kit, or by other means) for one of the squad mates? Whoever has the V.I.P-role, is the rally-point carrier. He can place rallies with SLs approval. Naturally keeping this person alive becomes important for the squad, similarly to keeping the radio-man alive. I think this could take some pressure of the Squad Leaders shoulders, and it could add a new and interesting aspect to the game. Another benefit would be that squad members could switch between being the rally-point carrier, so its not just one person who needs to stay alive and playing passively all the time.
  • Similarly medics are somewhat overburdened in this game, in theory having to do a (what is usually a dull and repetitive) job everytime someone dies, or even gets shot. Sure, it encourages/forces interaction between teammates, but its not all that great from a gameplay point of view. Probably the game could do with less of a burden on the medics, maybe not every person should be revivable, etc.
     

I completely understand the attempt to reward teamplay and for people to play together in squads, I do. But I feel like certain restrictions like this goes in the category of "forcing it". We all want to see these things being effective and being rewarded: teamplay, comraderie, squads sticking together, real-life tactics working (such as bounding, keeping overwatch, having machine-gun teams supporting you, suppression, clearing compounds together, etc). All of this we want to see more of, but lets try to avoid limiting a bunch of other things in the game while we try to achieve this. Currently its low risk, high reward to roam around on your own (what some pejoratively call "lone-wolfing"), as you might potentially take out an enemy squad if you get lucky. Also, being dead for 1 min and losing a ticket, is worth it if it means you know where an enemy squad is). I think if we wanna see squads playing more together and employing more real-life tactics, the game will need to reward this in an even deeper way than it does currently.

One of the deepest types of teamwork, is micro-teamwork that emerges between (as few as two) players that together are able to get that edge on the enemy, "real-time". Many people in this forum bash on a game like CS:GO, but something you see a lot there is this type of micro-teamwork (relying on your teammates in a deep sense). Having a crossfire which lasts even for 1 second can mean winning a crucial engagement. If one player isnt covering the right angle at the right time, it could spell disaster for that round. And most of all: if one of your teammates dies, you feel it. Your team really suffers the consequences of fighting one man down, all else things being equals.. So you do everything you can to keep each other alive, and to play together (in CS:GO, a dead player is eliminated for the rest of the round. Each round lasts roughly 2 minutes. During this time the dead players can spectate their teammates). In Squad, I rarely have that sense. On the contrary, I ask multiple squad mate to just walk about quite far away from the squad, just scouting. I dont really care if they die, they will be able to respawn long before the enemy squad will reach us (and I know might know the enemies whereabouts, based on where the scouts died and what they told me). Also, I dont really care if some of my squad mates bait themselves and die while we hunt down enemies in a compound, they can easily just be revived back to life. Its clear that something will need to change if we wanna see the game rewarding and incentivize this type of micro-teamwork, the "moment-to-moment" need to stay aware of what your teammates are doing and to play off of them, like musicians playing together in a band. I already have these experiences in Squad, but I wish I could get even more, and that it would be the rule, not just occasional.
Clearly some game mechanics will need to change for this to be more prominent (and some are already attempting it, such as SquadOps who do 1-life events). Probably something between vanilla Squad and 1-life events could do the job. Here is a quarter-baked idea for what could be attempted:


Sorry about this long post, I just let it rip, hopefully it will be interesting to some. As a final addendum to all of this: I really understand and am sympathetic to the devs attempts to make a truly teamwork-oriented game. I respect that, and truly I have never played a shooter with the depth and the amount of interaction between players, like in Squad&PR. Its not like I wanna see a bunch of 1-man squads recon teams and 1-man vehicles all over the map, just because the meta might reward it if we didnt have some restrictions to it like we do now (as an example of the restrictions Im talking about here: needing 4 people in a squad to get LAT-kit). I just hope the game can avoid as many of these types of "artificial" game restrictions as possible, and instead opt for ways of designing the game that leaves the gameplay as "open-ended" as possible, so that we might see new and creative gameplay continually emerging and invented by players, throughout the lifetime of Squad. Let Squad be its own universe, albeit a realistic and interesting one from a gameplay point of view!

Edited by plissken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
desen   
My observations are the mortars are pretty much just backround noise. Numerous times I've watched a particular squad spam them pretty much non stop for an entire match and they averaged around 6 kills. Did them myself many times with a spotter in the 9 story calling them in and only got 1 kill. Complete waste of time.


I Had Seen Both, mortar Squads with Zero kills and mortar Squads with many.

Done Last with a Squad with some Rip dudes on two Radios with 4 mortars. Each mortar gunner Had more than 24 kills and much more wounded. But the Rest of the Squad was on the frontline scouting and call Targets Out.
Maybe that is the Key.

Gesendet von meinem Moto G (4) mit Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I finally got around to uploading the recording of the round when Update 9.4 was first released. 

Here it is. 

 

 

not sure why the quality is so bad. I apologize 

Edited by FeatherSton3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kerri   

Whole point of mortars is to punish a team that becomes too static.

 

I've not had any issue with mortar spam, if anything I'd agree with anti-mortar measures being put in place because of how useless they are the majority of the time.

 

Eating up 2 players at every FOB (if they're placed everywhere), then you normally have at least a third guy per battery doing the spotting and adjustments. I've seen games where half the team was either mortaring or supporting the mortars somehow, and they always lost. I was chatting to some guys in-game the other day while en route to a cap point and we were talking about how the game's meta has evolved to the point where the first team to place mortars is the one which loses, because they just lose so much manpower and initiative. 

 

And then you have the situation where there's no ability to lock squads, and so the '3 man mortar' squads end up having 9 people in them who can't maneuvre using rally points because their squad leader is sat on the mortar, and so you can end up down to just a single fully functioning squad at the end of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voice   

Think i wrote it else where but on public servers people been really respectful of the "MORTAR 3 people max", but i agree that they are shooting too fast, so fast it feels weird. But at the same time i would love bigger explosions to make up for the burst fire mode they have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooves   

I have had both fantastic and mediocre results with running a mortar squad.  It is wholly reliant on the team.  Even a squad with an FO is only effective on the one portion of the map within view of your FO.  Whilst i can be incredibly effective on his targets, the rest of the enemies are left un harrased.   However, in the rounds where other squad leaders are utilysing the mortar squad by way of accurate timely calls for fire.  My mortar squad has had upwards of 40-50 kills.  

 

Lets not also forget that a mortar team need not have 50 kills to be amazingly effective for the team.  Suppressing fire can be used to aid an advance or hold an enemy at bay long enough for the inf squads to regroup.  

 

I think the inclusion of helicopters will really add to the gameplay as well.  As once RPs and FOs are placed, the burden of quick resupply will fall to the heli squads.  One of those resupplies will be the mortar squads, thus freeing up that dedicated logi runner.

 

As to your point of "who would want to run back and forth to grab mortar rounds".  I can say.  Me,  id love to do that. In turn, Id like to have my mortars do a little more damage than they currently divie out.

 

Its all about what floats your boat.  In mine (and many others) case, the supporting role of mortars or even resupply, far out gratifies the rush of close infantry or vehicular combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SgtRoss   

I would wait to see how the effectiveness of the mortars is affected by the ability to go thru certain "materials."

 

They may or may not need their radius adjusted at all if they start nailing people thru wooden fences and certain buildings, etc.

 

Large balance passes are yet to come, especially once we hit Beta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RaginSam   

Last night while playing the enemy team was spamming mortars. Yes spamming, I had to listen to it the entire round. It wasn't the most effective thing, but I don't want to hear a mortar literally every two seconds. There should be a limit on how many people and how quickly mortars can be fired.

 

I don't mind them for the most part and it can be fun running through a field trying to time the explosions. It's just that constant unrelenting spam that in my opinion becomes a problem because its so off-putting especially for new players.

 

Edit: I forgot to realize if there are custom server settings for this? I was playing on an unofficial server when the spam occurred. Until last night I've never seen that much mortaring.

Edited by RaginSam

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

×