Jump to content
Touka01

Animation for the reloading + an idea

Recommended Posts

Touka01   

Hi!  I have the idea of adding a animation to reloading in certaint areas such as fallujah since it has alot of dirty wind vibe u could add the animation of the player blowing on the magazine while reloading due to the dirt in it.  It adds some sort of realism and vibe to it i know its a small detail but it has a huge impact on reloading-time which can make a huge difference in a firefight. 

I also had a idea of commanders from US(as a example) and a commander from taliban can communicate if they are in close range incase of one squad surrendering or so which leads to maybe adding a surrendering animation?  Its looks cool and is strategic (example: the captive can be held for interrogations for information about fobs or attacks... Or a prisoner tries to escape from a fob gathering information about them to get back to his faction and inform them) those were my ideas for now feel free to add to them if you like any also keep doing what you're doing the game is great!  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Touka01 Welcome to the Forums!

Suggested Reload Animation:

Not a bad idea but i am guess the US places their mags upside down in their pouches to prevent sand from getting in? Dont know why they wouldnt? Dont think this animations should happen all the time, in real life u probably wouldnt have to do that every time?

 

The Suggestion of Commanders Being Able to Talk with Eachother in close Proximety:

Not realistic. And probably an option literally no one else wants. If you could do it short range you could do it long range. Just having it in close proximity does not make any sense. 

1) I dont want to have to filter out local, squad, command, chat and over the top of the enemy commander. Way to much.

2) The enemy commander will probably just trash talk the whole game. If the server wont ban you for it why not?

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

------------------==:CAPTURING PLAYERS:==------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Introduction

What are the consequences and gains in respect to capturing players that you had in mind? What would the person need to do to capture an enemy? The idea can cover a lot. I dont think anyone has really attempted to think it through completely on here. Other people have suggested it and wanted to implement it one way or another, no one responded to my previous comment on it and just kept wanting to implement it the way they suggested. Maybe they didnt read it. But because you didnt nail anything down specifically on the subject i give you the wall of text below. I hope it kills this topic dead and a clear conclusion is reached. Ok, it would be cool to be able to just randomly detain people or capture them in some way or another but, The Question is: CAN CAPTURING PLAYERS BE DONE IN THIS GAME IN SOME WAY? IF SO, AND THAT IDEA WERE TO BE IMPLEMENTED IS THAT STILL WHAT IS BEST OVER ALL FOR THE GAME?

Lets work through it.

 

Means of Capturing:

1) Capturing a weaponless enemy at gun point. ANSWER: Everyone holds on to their guns (even if u cant see them). Should this or could this change? Dropping weapon due to nearby explosion or something? It would be considered "random chance" which the devs are strongly opposed to on the individual level but really open to it on the overall game match level (which annoys me, further evidence in the quoted post below, but slightly off topic). This most likely will not happen.

2) Capturing a weapon bearing enemy. ANSWER: Requires surrendering. Which is not a viable option in nearly all possible ways for it to be implemented (that i can think of) *Listed Below*

3) Captor uses rope or zip to incapacitate the enemy in close proximity. Like "knifing", maybe easier. The captor being able to jump on the enemy from a further distance. potentially with a follow through animation for tying up.

 

Option 3 i think is the only real option. I dont think the US millitary has regular soldiers carrying net launchers or ?tasers?? But if they did have tasers: 

If Tasers were implemented. The benefits of capturing would have to be reduced in any game mode it was an option inside of. Because it would occur more frequently. In most every case, shooting people is just better because the goal is still the cap zone or cashe.

 

Surrendering:

If you are suggesting that by being captured:

1) You lose the same amount of tickets as dying and then the players respawn. ANSWER: No one would surrender

2)If you lose the same amount of tickets as dying and then the players are trapped somewhere. ANSWER: No one would surrender

3)If you lose no tickets for being captured and the enemy was forced to take you prisoner. ANSWER: No one would surrender. Unless the game was nearly over. (ticket bleed over time > any number of friendly players being taken from the fight to prevent that potential critical ticket bleed.)

4)If you lose more tickets by being captured than you would dying. ANSWER: No one would surrender.

5)If you lose no tickets but are captured and lose information. ANSWER: Depending on the system in place, the enemy would never want to capture anyone, and they shouldnt be forced because only the US follows "rules of war". Or the other team would never want to be captured because it would hurt their game.

 

CONCLUSION: In nearly every case of actually surrendering yourself to be captured it would not be worth it. No one would choose it and it does not make any sense for it to be even an option in the game. Surrendering will not be worthwhile especially any case where the player is forced to stay in a location outside of the fight for any given time. Choosing to be afk will always hurt the team more than any tickets equal to or less than the absolute amount the player could have died while being detained, in the case of AAS. And in pretty much every other game mode as well, but probably slightly less for INS. It is not being in jail during the later rounds of monopoly. It costs your team. Surrendering is not a sane option in this game, or (to my knowledge) in any real life conflict which the game is based around.

 

COUNTER SUGGESTION- RAISING TICKET COST OF DEATH: The only option to keep your suggestion viable would (in AAS) be to raise the ticket price of death to such a level to nearly require individuals to surrender if the option is presented. I dont want to do the math and I am guessing you dont need to either. For this idea to have that much potential of an impact, the game would, at that point, be about kills and deaths overall to determine the final outcome of the match. No longer being centered around the objective. You would have to add or take away additional mechanics to give players insentive to assault any objective(s). This idea of surrender would not be an option at the game's current state. And still, again, not that realistic of a choice in irl. 

 

No Option of Surrender, but Captor Team Obtains Some Advantage:

1)if it impacted the game enough, people would focus on capturing and no one would defend or attack objectives (very much).

2)If it was not that much of an impact no one would even try.

3) If it was balanced just right. It would still be such a low boost to the team that they would still be encouraged to push the objective.

 

Why Capturing a Player Resulting in Detainment from the Rest of the Game WILL NOT WORK:

See post below.When I am refering to capturing below i am mostly refering to in the context of leading to the detainment of an actual player away from the rest of the game.

 

On 7/26/2017 at 4:53 PM, madcat768 said:

What i was saying: Risk and reward. There isnt much on any level in this game in terms of player consequence, not enough to warrant being taken out of the game for minutes at a time. it would not work in the game, being able to capture people. They are going to leave, or they could leave and rejoin. And if you set up some system to help with that i dont really care the concept does not fit anyways. In mechanics and inside the world of squad.

in the world of squad

1)death has little consequence

2) pain has very little consequence

3) you want capturing to have high consequences 

 

I personally would stop playing the game immediately. 

It wont work @[email protected]

It does not fit within its own world. Tell me how it does. That concept only would work in a game with higher risks to players.

(Suggestion) Being captured is worse in the game than dying.So keep throwing those bodies at objectives but when u are captured its all over.

 

-(IF) When there is a one life only game mode officially this could work. With no ticket system. Other wise death is way preferable.

(Common Sense) DEATH should always be greater than being captured in consequence. In this game it means very little. That is why it wont work. It would make it even less realistic and does not go with the game world. If u can explain how it would other than "it just would" i would be surprised. Death should always punish players more first than anything else on the individual level. Prove me wrong why death in a military shooter should be less of a consequence than being captured.

(Torture?)And dont say torture because virtual pain means nothing in this game world. That does not deter anyone. You bandage yourself and take very little penalty it is not represented as something of consequence. No risk attached. No pain killers required. 

 

In mechanics and logically inside of this game world the idea of capturing or detaining people does not make sense.

 

This concept will ruin the game.  "....." Because that is all it would be just annoying. You are missing the genre of this game TACTICAL MILITARY SHOOTER. If it was one life only then people would have reason to be captured and detained or something. But if u were playing a 45min game of COD and suddenly ur screen went black and u were just sitting in a room the entire game how is that help u want to play the game? Everywhere else in the game of COD there is no risk to dying. Just keep dying and re-spawn and suddenly u just are stuck in a room? ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT FIT. Its an idea meant for another game. I would actually perfer it to be the kind of game that capturing people and hacking communications would be a good fit but right now squad is not. They need to nerf rallies first if anything.

 

THE CONCEPT OF DETAINING OF PLAYERS DOES NOT FIT WITH THE CURRENT QUICK UNREALISTIC PACE OF THE GAME. IF THE GAME GAVE MORE POWER TO PLAYER ACTION AND DEATH, SUCH MECHANICS WOULD FIT. I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO SEE RALLIES NERFED AND PLAYER LIFE MATTER MORE BUT SO FAR ITS NOT HAPPENING. A game where player action affects the game world more is a game world more worth while playing inside of. 

 

Having to Bring Captured Enemy Physically To A Certain Location:

They could detain the player indefinitely, one at a time, and bring them to the middle of no where or keep them inside a vehicle until it gets found. Well, what about adding a timer? ANSWER: It is unimmersive and unrealistic. Why would there be a timer requiring you to bring the player to a certain point before he disappears? Not worth it.

Well, what about replacing the player with an AI soldier? ANSWER: It could work?

 

INS and INV: Defenders Can Capture Players Just For Tickets

Surrendering wont happen. Detainment wont happen in the game's current state either. Increasing or decreasing ticket value of capturing would either be worthless or give less reason for being on the objective.Except in the cases of INS or INV, where one side does not have to worry about ticket loss. The defenders would be able to chunk the attacker's tickets to some degree by captruing enemy players, because the game modes still would focus on the objectives regardless. Would it be possible for the attackers to capture defenders for tickets chunking in INS/INV. ANSWER: They could but the defenders dont rely on tickets in those game modes.

 

Teams in AAS and other Game Modes Capturing Players For Ticket Chunks

Again why cant both sides just chunk each other's tickets through capturing in AAS, and other game modes with both sides needing tickets? Lets say a locked squad is specialized for this purpose. They go behind enemy lines in order to catch enemies off guard. They rake up a bunch of captures but overall their team loses. Its because ticket bleed will and should always be the determining factor most games.

One team has most of the objectives during the match, most likely that team will win. Being able to try and even guess whether captruing people would help is impossible over another small squad actually pushing the objective. 

Isnt it the same as mortar squads? ANSWER: No because mortars can destroy FOBs and fortifcations. Also Suppress and kill bunched up infantry and stationary vehicles. 

Alot of players go after vehicles and get alot of points, isnt this the same? ANSWER: No. Because vehicles are useful (if used correctly) for aiding the push or defense on active objectives. You destroy an enemy BTR in the area your team is now able to push the objective without having to worry about it.

It adds nothing new to the game in terms of results and it would possibly be left to chance, like a tank rolling over a mine at the very end of the game. It doesnt help the game in any clear cut ways other than tickets, which is and always should be tied to the objectives and used to determine ties (in a way). For the best possible way capturing can be implemented it would have to actually work with the game and not a ticket pool. Everything else that costs tickets has jobs in the game. Why cant this feature be different? ANSWER: Why would you want it to not effect the game world? And just the ticket pool which is really mostly for determining who has the majority of Objectives the longest? It should and always should, be more beneficial for ticket control to go after to objectives on the map.

 

Capturing Resulting in Mainly Loss of Information:

Surrendering wont happen. Detainment wont happen in the game's current state either. Increasing or decreasing ticket value of capturing would either be worthless or give less reason for being on the objective in every other game mode besides the defenders of INS or INV. What if captured player's team lost information primarily? 

1)SLs could only be captured, slightly more tickets lost than if they died or equal. 

2) You can capture anyone but you get more info from an SL and potentially slightly more tickets subtracted to the enemy if u do capture an SL? And raise the difficult in the actual act of capturing an individual? 

 

-Information Gained:

1)Enemy Map Info. Nothing else is really of any value information wise.

2)Being able to listen to enemy comms for a short duration. 

 

What is best then? Information dealing with the map is what is best because, enemy SLs might not be talking at that time. Still why not then just take a chance on the comms? Because not enough worth will be gained to capturing someone. The enemy team will probably know that an SL or player has been captured and would then start to limit their communicating of specific sensitive info. And just say "North FOB", instead of FOB e4. Its hard enough being able to go up and "knife" someone. Enemy map info is a solid reward in general.

So to what extent of the enemy map should be showed? 

 

Promoting Further Team Work:

If anyone doesnt agree with promoting further need for coordination and team work realistically I dont think you are playing the right game. In this case so far what would be the best way to aim to further build up teamwork inside the game? BEST ANSWER I CAN THINK OF: If possible only an enemy SL can be captured. It is reasonably difficult to do, and must be done with a small group of players to be effective. The enemy squad will in turn will now have a reason to protect their SL in game. But all this depends on how exactly  people are able to capture each other. Probably will require testing to really dive into it.

 

Enemy Map Reveal

1)random area of the map. THOUGHTS: some maps are small. It could reveal too much, where on larger maps it would reveal too little. Even if balanced the information could end up revealing too much or too little. Not a very solid reward for being able to "knife" an SL or capture a regular soldier in some difficult way. 

2)Possible enemy FOB question marks or accurate FOB mark added. One of them being real. THOUGHTS: seems like the number one choice. Either accurate FOB mark or maybe 3 FOB question marks dependent on how difficult the act of capturing actually is.

3)Showing an area of random enemy activity on the map.THOUGHTS: Too much information could be revealed or very little still. 

 

Snapshot vs Realtime footage of the map? ANSWER: Accurate or potentially accurate FOB marks are enough. Real time wont work with fake FOB Question Marks anyways.

 

Why FOB Question Marks or Accurate FOB marks Are Best:

There are very few places you actually would care about on the map. First: Areas around active cap zones. Second: FOBs. Any snap footage of random or other places on the maps is nearly pointless in comparison to finding a FOB or seeing activity near an active cap. In INS random snap footage would be the only way to find anything. You would most likely know where the defender's FOB would be at that point. Because that is pretty much where all the SLs stay around. With the exception of maybe one SL or two at the most. Caught doing a logi run or leading a small fireteam. Chances would be slim. And the Defenders do not have a ton of reason to know exactly where the enemy FOB except for mortars. Game wide FOBs are something that your team will want to know about. Snap shots of an active cap provides very little information under these circumstances anyways:

1)You are under constant assalut.

2)You are making good progress pushing into the cap.

Both of which, if either team is doing what it is supposed to, these things should be happening at least on one of the 2 (at least) possible active cap points. You will know where the enemies are. Either right on top of you or shooting at you. Its like the SL putting 5 mg markers right on the cap, right next to each other. They might be accurate but who cares. They are shooting at everyone already. Everyone knows where they are. Stop looking at the map and start killing people. The other friendly SLs most likely will have alot of those enemy occupied buildings already marked on the cap. Getting just a picture of that would do very little. Sure it could still work but in many circumstances it may lead to finding absoltuely no new information. FOBs are more constant. Fixed positions of importance on the map. A much more solid reward for something difficult.

Early Game:

1)Very little enemy contact potentially, or full on rushes. Both of which are difficult to capture anyone. But why would u want to? Not much has happened yet.

2) One team knows where the enemies one FOB is early game: No reason to capture. It keeps focus on the objectives. 

Capturing would be a tactic reserved for later in the game, if you wanted some kind of intel on their FOB locations. Helping out a potentially losing team from having to really look hard for an enemy FOB. 

 

Accumulation of Intel Points Through Dead Enemies and Captured Enemies:

Intel points is another suggestion suggested by someone else in another thread. Accumlated points through capturing enemies and being in proximity to enemy dead bodies. Accumulation would work for FOB question marks or FOB Accurate Marks if the points reached a certain fixed number and then you would "buy" the info. ANSWER: No.

1) If it nearly took one enemy to capture then why not just forgo the whole Intel Point system altogether. How many times in the game are you actually going to be able to "knife" someone? Giving the team a solid straight forward reward for such a task is whats best.  There would be no need for the additional Intel points being required other than one straight forward capture. Making the idea of intel points useless altogether. 

2) If no capturing was required and the cost of the enemy FOB mark could be purchased by accumulating points found from dead enemies, no one would ever attempt capturing as it would be too difficult. Leaving our entire topic of capturing useless.

3)Just finding enemy bodies will more likely be done by random chance or actually killing enemies in close quarters. Even if you actively looked for dead enemies: If a zone is too hot, going out looking just for dead enemies is stupid. And if enemy presence has decreased in the area. Most likely they will start to give up soon and respawn. Leaving less opportunity to actually try and find them. Still being possible, but the concept as a whole is awkward. Something more straight forward and that promotes straightforward capturing of players is what is best for the topic.

4) If the intel points nearly require multiple enemies to be captured in order to "buy" accurate FOB mark(s), i think the price would be too high and still, overall there would be no reason to continue to use intel points if find dead enemies still did not give any real additional benefit.

 

----------------------===FINAL CONCLUSION===----------------------------------

 

Capturing Resulting in Mainly Loss of Information:

IF ENEMY SL IS REASONABLY DIFFICULT TO BE CAPTURED BY A SMALL GROUP OF CAPTORS:

1)GRANTING ACCURATE FOB MARK(S) DEPENDING UPON DIFFICULT OF ACTUALLY CAPTURING SOMEONE. TESTING PROBABLY REQUIRED. ADDITIONALLY TO GRANTING FOB INFO, TICKET LOSS TO ENEMY TEAM SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN IF THE PRISONER WERE TO DIE. IF CAPTURING IS DIFFICULT AND OCCURS NOT THAT OFTEN INCREASE ENEMY TICKET LOSS TO REASONABLE VALUE AS NECESSARY.

2)NO DETAINMENT OF PLAYERS, IMMEDIATE PRISONER RESPAWN AS IF DEATH OCCURRED. 

3)NO OPTION FOR SURRENDER. USELESS.

4) ONLY DONE BY BEING CLOSE ENOUGH TO AN ENEMY WHO IS UNAWARE YOU ARE THERE. NO TASERS.

--- THIS IDEA IS SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT FORWARD. IT REWARDS THE TEAM ENOUGH FOR HAVING SUCCESSFULLY CAPTURED SOMEONE. IT OFFERS SOMETHING NEW TO THE GAME AND INCREASES TEAM WORK, BOTH IN A GROUP TO CAPTURE REASONABLY AND THE ENEMY SQUAD TO PROTECT THE SL IN-GAME.

 

(WITH TESTING) IF THERE IS NO SIMPLE REASONABLE WAY FOR A SMALL GROUP OF PLAYERS TO CAPTURE AN ENEMY SL:

1)SWITCH TO ANY ENEMY BEING CAPTURED, DEPENDING ON DIFFICULTY. USE RANDOM FOB MARKS

 

 

INS and INV ONLY

IF THE DEFENDERS COULD "CAPTURE" PLAYERS IN THE GAME MODE OF INS AND INVASION.

1)GRANTING A SMALL BENEFIT TO TO THEIR TEAM OR EXTRA TICKETS LOST FOR THE ENEMY TEAM.

2)NO DETAINMENT OF PLAYERS, IMMEDIATE PRISONER RESPAWN AS IF DEATH OCCURRED.

3) NO OPTION FOR SURRENDER. AS ITS COMPLETELY USELESS. AND UNREALISTIC.

4)ONLY DONE BY BEING CLOSE ENOUGH TO AN ENEMY ATTACKER WHO IS UNAWARE YOU ARE THERE.

---HOWEVER,  THE OBJECTIVES SHOULD STILL ALWAYS BE THE FOCUS, AND IF IT ALWAYS IS. THE OPTION TO ACTIVELY SEEK THE "CAPTURING" OF OTHER PLAYERS WILL ALWAYS BE LESS BENEFICIAL IN MOST ALL SITUATIONS TO THE DEFENDING TEAM. ONLY VIABLE IF ATTEMPTED WITH A SMALL GROUP OF CONSERVATIVE DEFENDERS WHEN THE GAME IS IN THE DEFENDING TEAM'S FAVOR. IT COULD BE AN INTEGRATED MECHANIC BUT AT BEST, NOT A GOOD ONE. 

 

MY OPINION:

"Capturing Resulting in Mainly Loss of Information" could work game wide. I am guessing it would be difficult and should grant the captor's team at least one accurate FOB mark and the ticket chunk of less than 20 to the enemy team. Even though this might not happen every game I believe this option could add something to Squad as a whole. If it were to work in a way that would make capturing not too difficult for while capturing enemies in general, I would suggest that an enemy SL would be the only enemy able to captured. Giving the rest of his squad actual reason to protect him. INS and INV ONLY really doesnt seem worth it. But really if UAVs ever came to Squad or Insurgents could use AI civilians to scout certain areas. Capturing anyone would seem completely pointless.

Edited by madcat768

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Touka01   

Reply to @madcat768

On the reloading animation:

The animation won't always happen it has a chance of happening which could be determined by the dev's

And yeah they do put magazines upside down in their pouches but sometimes in combat they will forget about that and have to clean their magazines to keep shooting which is a rare thing since the US army/RU army are well trained so id recon it will be rare. These little détails really make our game expérience unforgattable. 

On the surrendering idea:

I fully agree on your reply and i understand that its a game breaking idea which could lead to alot of problems and alot of unnececary work so maybe it shouldn't be included in the game.

(Also am new to the forum so i dont think i tagged u in the right way i did my best haha) 

Edited by Touka01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Touka01 cool, yeah would be neat to have sligthly different animations for things sometimes. I would find it cool if surrendering and actual detaining would work but unfortunately they would have to make one life only game modes maybe for that to happen. =\ 

 

haha the tagging system is a little annoying. Need to delete and make sure its highlighted yellow for any name you put down. Must find them through the inteli-sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Touka01   

Ahahah i wont even try to do it man

Also when is squad gonna get a small sale or something?  Iv been following the game for a long time but never bought due to the price (not saying its not worth it. It is totally worth it)  even when summer sale came i had some issues which led to me not buying it then. You have any ideas when a sale is gonna happen maybe?  Or any event? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Touka01 only time i really ever remember it being on sale (without a big steam sale event) have been during the game having free weekend events. Which i dont know if they are going to continue to do? Dont know if they still will have sales anyway. I think the last free weekends were over 3 months apart? It could be a while, id guess at least after the summer. 

Edited by madcat768

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Project Reality (Which, if you're not familiar, was the spiritual predecessor to Squad that was born from the early days of Battlefield 2) used to let you go into a surrender stance is you right clicked whilst playing as a soldier without a kit, a pilot, or a insurgent collaborator.

 

It was really goofy though and players only really used to use it to high 10 each other or worship landing helicopters by moving the mouse up and down when they got tired of standing around waiting for things to spawn in. I fear the same would probably happen on Squad if it ever got implemented!

 

Also, on PR's insurgency, if you managed to cable tie an insurgent (surrendered or just caught off guard), the cache hunting team got a number of intelligence points which went towards revealing the location of the caches. The trouble was, no-one surrendered (why would they when they were essentially giving away the location of their caches) and getting close enough to tie anyone up was a complete nightmare.

 

What it did do was introduce a penalty system. So if you shot a collaborator (who were basically civilians with medpacks and stones) who wasn't close to the enemy or helping a fighter up, your team lost tickets and intelligence points to punish you for essentially breaking the Geneva Convention.

 

A similar system might work on Squad's insurgency mode, but again, as mentioned by madcat, surrendering simply wouldn't do it because why on earth would any insurgent want to that when it basically grants the opposing team to rain down mortars and gunfire on your beloved secret stash of weapons and dangerous explosives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mangoman65 Thank you for reading (or at least some of it) my post guys! Mango and @Touka01! It has brought more meaning to my life lol, no, i know it is really long....

thank you for replying!  As you guessed mango i have yet to play PR. Worshiping landing helicopters haha absolutely friggen hilarious!

 

What is your opinion though mango of capturing players with no option to surrender? Too awkward and not worth it? I am curious now how intel points worked in PR exactly. Might look that up later.

Edited by madcat768

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Touka01   

Yeah mango PR was fun and still is i played it a week ago but due to alot of servers removing the feature of worshiping heli's haha @madcat768 u bearly see it anymore but surely if, squad gets a sale am gonna jump. On it

( also @madcat768 your reply on post was very detailed which surprised me and i had fun reading it ur surely a intresting dude;)  )

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

×