Jump to content
MyJewLives

Will Squad introduce airstrikes?

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Han said:

Y'all must be new, cause a little while back there was a closed test where they tried out a lot of new stuff that we haven't heard of since. Features that were tested include: A-10 airstrikes called in by SL's (30 mm GAU and bomb), a new gamemode revolving around fob's and an large open map, and MRAP's (before they were in). SquadOps did an Operation with these upgrades, it was really cool. There's lots of footage of the test on YouTube.

 

Back to the A-10, here's some clips of it in Squad:

 

 

 

Overall, I'd really like to see this as something that is implemented with the commander. An example situation would be if the Russian team had taken FOB Papanov and were really dug in, a US SL could mark a target (either with laser designator or by marking on map or passing the grid on to the commander), then the commander approves it.  I think what's important is that there must be a large delay between when the strike is called and when it actually hits, so that it is only really viable against stationary stuff, like big fobs or objectives. I think it would make the US really unique. Unconventional forces could have arty strikes and Russia could have a Frogfoot strike. What do you guys think?

That is exactly what I was trying to say lmao I never knew they tested it and I’ve been around since early alpha stages. A delay in the strike would also add a realistic component to the game... since In a real combat scenario jets would either be scrambling or around the AO waiting for their targets to be confirmed and also how they will approach the area. The insurgents would definitely need a way of fighting back against this... in order to balance the game...but artillery strikes also delayed would definitely be something that could balance it. But I think the uses of these elements should be very limited maybe one or two times per game. I’d prefer one which would really make your team have to choose smart and it wouldn’t be OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MyJewLives said:

I could really care less about player flown aircraft... I was just referring to how PS implemented them. But say if it’s RU vs USA you could balance it like PS did. But if it’s insurgents vs USA ect ect.... I could see a need for balancing the game. 

I think the idea squad is aiming for is to eliminate off-map assets and instead rely on actual players filling up the proper roles to fly the aircraft. I like playing as Insurgents and Militia due to their speedy vehicles and it would suck big time having to worry about a magic airstrike I can't do nothing about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airstikes nope you have mortars instead.Planes yeah maps would need to be a lot biger soo i am more into no there too.

Heli is a must i mean come on ZU-23-2 must have something to shoot down :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CptDirty said:

I think the idea squad is aiming for is to eliminate off-map assets and instead rely on actual players filling up the proper roles to fly the aircraft. I like playing as Insurgents and Militia due to their speedy vehicles and it would suck big time having to worry about a magic airstrike I can't do nothing about. 

Well if they're trying to be realistic, that's kind how it is. Most Insurgents don't have any way to retaliate against them. That new AA gun would be really hard to use effectively against a jet (also nobody would want to sit on it waiting for the strike to come). 

 

If its only something the US could use x amount per game, with a long cool down(~10-15 minutes), do you still think it would be unfair? I personally have had lots of games on Al Basrah where the Ins fob up gas station and mosque, and I think the US having some ability to punish them for digging it would be good.

 

Also I think this is a good substitute until we get fixed wings, which is a loooong way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Then need Gary so the Insurgents would have some ability to punish US for FOB digging.

 

IIRC insurgents in Syria used thousands of VBIEDs over the past few years, usually car/truck sized. I think the combined total weight of explosives used in VBIEDs in Syria is at this point several times more than the power of Hiroshima bomb. I get that the devs don't wanna make the game into ISIS simulator, but... well.. I think that bridge was kinda crossed when Insurgents faction was added. Minor gameplay mechanics won't change things one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Han said:

Well if they're trying to be realistic, that's kind how it is. Most Insurgents don't have any way to retaliate against them. That new AA gun would be really hard to use effectively against a jet (also nobody would want to sit on it waiting for the strike to come). 

 

If its only something the US could use x amount per game, with a long cool down(~10-15 minutes), do you still think it would be unfair? I personally have had lots of games on Al Basrah where the Ins fob up gas station and mosque, and I think the US having some ability to punish them for digging it would be good.

 

Even if it was once per round it would be unfair in my opinion. Why punish the insurgents for fobbing up Gas Station or Mosque on Basrah with a magic airstrike? Just for the sake of realism? There's a ton of things this game needs to fix before it can be dubbed a realistic simulator like Arma 3 which is not at all the intention of the developers.

 

It's all about Fair Balance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, CptDirty said:

 

Even if it was once per round it would be unfair in my opinion. Why punish the insurgents for fobbing up Gas Station or Mosque on Basrah with a magic airstrike? Just for the sake of realism? There's a ton of things this game needs to fix before it can be dubbed a realistic simulator like Arma 3 which is not at all the intention of the developers.

 

It's all about Fair Balance...

^This 100%.

If only the likes of US/RUS/BRITS have the capacity to call Airstrikes,No one would won't to play on the Insurgency/Malitia side,who wants to be Pooped by an AI strike,hmmmm not me.

If you can't kill it,don't want it!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proper INS gameplay would be this:

1. Every INS player is Scout Class

2. Every building on the map has multiple Civilian NPCs in it, which US forces lose tickets for killing (less political will to send reinforcements)

 

Then we can have airstrikes )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Xx-RAGING-DEATH-xX said:

^This 100%.

If only the likes of US/RUS/BRITS have the capacity to call Airstrikes,No one would won't to play on the Insurgency/Malitia side,who wants to be Pooped by an AI strike,hmmmm not me.

If you can't kill it,don't want it!.

Idk about you but I would love playing as the insurgents and having to duck and cover from an a-10 or frogfoot strike. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just introduce PR style CAS - it was perfect and balanced. Everything had a counter and could be prevented, but was also very powerful if played well. I don't get the argument about map size. PR has 4x4 and 1 8x8 map and it plays GREAT with CAS. Squad can too. 

Share this post


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

Btw this is what I’m referring too. It’s literally made by people who helped develop squad and project reality. 

i know, i've been around here a while ;) and i understand exactly what you ask, even if some in this thread seem clueless,  and this type of CAS has already been implimented/tested in an earlier iteration of the game.

the reasons i do not like it are:

- too CoD(arcadey), even for me.

- it will increase the asymetrical nature of the game too far (as someone else pointed out) because the magical-bullets-from-the-sky factor can never be countered by the recievers of said bullets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, LaughingJack said:

i know, i've been around here a while ;) and i understand exactly what you ask, even if some in this thread seem clueless,  and this type of CAS has already been implimented/tested in an earlier iteration of the game.

the reasons i do not like it are:

- too CoD(arcadey), even for me.

- it will increase the asymetrical nature of the game too far (as someone else pointed out) because the magical-bullets-from-the-sky factor can never be countered by the recievers of said bullets.

 

Thats why im a fan of player controlled jets, CAS, etc. Also 1000x1000km maps ;)

 

Share this post


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

- it will increase the asymetrical nature of the game too far (as someone else pointed out) because the magical-bullets-from-the-sky factor can never be countered by the recievers of said bullets.

At the same time though, there's no reason why they couldn't provide AA that could shoot down the CAS jets before they offloaded their bombs or gun run... so then the only difference to player controlled CAS would be that we get several more players "in the fight" on the ground rather than flying circles around the 16sqkm shoebox. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Psyrus said:

At the same time though, there's no reason why they couldn't provide AA that could shoot down the CAS jets before they offloaded their bombs or gun run...

indeed. we now have the AA-gun to shoot with - we just need to be able to see the aircraft, to shoot it down.

 

i guess that's what i was meaning with the magical-bullets-from-the-sky thing - at the present there is no "aircraft" to shoot at (that i've seen), just stuff hitting the ground and some far-off delayed noise - all-over-red-rover! a target aircraft is needed, weather AI or not, to make a CAS system fair (within the context of Squad's asymetrical nature OC).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, LaughingJack said:

indeed. we now have the AA-gun to shoot with - we just need to be able to see the aircraft, to shoot it down.

 

i guess that's what i was meaning with the magical-bullets-from-the-sky thing - at the present there is no "aircraft" to shoot at (that i've seen), just stuff hitting the ground and some far-off delayed noise - all-over-red-rover! a target aircraft is needed, weather AI or not, to make a CAS system fair (within the context of Squad's asymetrical nature OC).

 

They definitely would need to have a physical aircraft in the air so players could track its position. A counter to it would be AA... if not being able to shoot it down maybe a mechanic like having to call off the airstrike could be implemented by how much fire the plane is taking. Like the AO being to hot to operate. But I wouldn’t want a magic bomb to come out of nowhere. I like to see it and hear the jet actually fly over and carry out its mission just like PS does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll tell you why it's important that we don't get AI airstrikes.

 

With players you have a chance of error by the person's actions. Let's talk in terms of say, dropping an unguided bomb. So this player can take too long to take advantage of a target sitting still, they can miss their target by enough that they don't kill or injure anyone, they can be stopped before getting to where they need to be... Lots of things can go wrong.

 

Computers are good at getting things done how they're told to. It's going to hit the mark every time you want  it to. How do you counter this? Computer has some deviation to where its payload hits? Do you make it go off target once in a while? You didn't kill the enemy squad with that airstrike because the game decided the numbers say miss this time :^)

 

There's no fun way to make the AI way work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, LaughingJack said:

indeed. we now have the AA-gun to shoot with - we just need to be able to see the aircraft, to shoot it down.

...

 

Lolnope. ZU-23 without a sight or any sort of early warning system, hitting a jet? One in a million chance.

And US air would probably operate above its reach, anyway.

Share this post


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

Lolnope. ZU-23 without a sight or any sort of early warning system, hitting a jet? One in a million chance.

And US air would probably operate above its reach, anyway.

ZU series would be anti-helicopter anyway. There would need to be shoulder-mounted AA (MANPADS ) and AA emplacements for FOBS:) 

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Psyrus said:

ZU series would be anti-helicopter anyway. There would need to be shoulder-mounted AA (MANPADS ) and AA emplacements for FOBS:) 

MANPADs only reach to 9000 feet or so, jets almost never fly that low (especially if they expect any AA).

Yeah we could build Buk and S-300 emplacements at FOBs, but come on. It's more realistic to have a full insurgent tank regiment ingame than one of those. After all, Nusra and ISIS employed dozens of tanks, but AFAIK no working heavy AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/02/2018 at 2:23 AM, Metalmonkey47 said:

Honestly, I hope not. 

I like Squad because it literally relies on the individual members teamwork and tactics on the ground. I feel like if they were to add too much more in the way of fire support the game is going to become much more like Battlefield or Call of Duty, and attract the wrong crowds. Seems like so far, everyone I've encountered is on the same page and understands the importance of teamwork. 

play PR and you will see!

On 10/02/2018 at 2:53 PM, Clown_Tactical said:

They aren't gonna add no jets? That's a shame. The laser guided missles from jets in combination with a squad leader lasing tge targets on the ground made some really epic gameplay in PR.

thats the point! We need laser (ranger finder) because the squad leader wanna call CAS with laser target! We need this system!

Share this post


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

At the same time though, there's no reason why they couldn't provide AA that could shoot down the CAS jets before they offloaded their bombs or gun run... so then the only difference to player controlled CAS would be that we get several more players "in the fight" on the ground rather than flying circles around the 16sqkm shoebox. 

How would that work? Fire an AA - always kill the jet, some random shit deciding if it's a kill or not, AA can do damage and makes it hard to fly - random AI function says what he does... I just don't see it working well at all, we need player controlled CAS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, danielritual said:

 hell yeah! We need this all! Crewman-pilot- breatcher- etc etc

Keep in mind that was posted like years ago. Since then I think the devs said there won't be a long range sniper class so I'm sure there's going to be a few changes here and there in comparison but that was the initial thought for roles I believe.

 

Either way yeah cool things are coming :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the videos posted here. What is so interesting about them? It was just what I expected, magic bombs from above. What does that bring to gameplay?

 

I really don't see the point beyond "YEAH, BOMBS, AWESOME", or "BRRRRT". I really don't care for both and I am sure they would be detrimental to gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MyJewLives said:

...  able to shoot it down maybe a mechanic like having to call off the airstrike could be implemented by how much fire the plane is taking. Like the AO being to hot to operate. But I wouldn’t want a magic bomb to come out of nowhere. I like to see it and hear the jet actually fly over and carry out its mission just like PS does. 

agreed.

18 hours ago, Rybec said:

With players you have a chance of error by the person's actions. Let's talk in terms of say, dropping an unguided bomb. So this player can take too long to take advantage of a target sitting still, they can miss their target by enough that they don't kill or injure anyone, they can be stopped before getting to where they need to be... Lots of things can go wrong.

agreed +1

18 hours ago, tatzhit said:

Lolnope. ZU-23 without a sight or any sort of early warning system, hitting a jet? One in a million chance.

And US air would probably operate above its reach, anyway.

dude, seriously? within the confines of UE4 and Squad maps and the fact that this is a game, none of this is relevant.

17 hours ago, Psyrus said:

ZU series would be anti-helicopter anyway. There would need to be shoulder-mounted AA (MANPADS ) and AA emplacements for FOBS:) 

indeed and agreed, but it could be used (and prolly would be) regardless of it's absolute effectiveness. TOW or similar would be the best, obviously, for non-chopper aircraft.

1 hour ago, Vegetal said:

I saw the videos posted here. What is so interesting about them? It was just what I expected, magic bombs from above. What does that bring to gameplay?

I really don't see the point beyond "YEAH, BOMBS, AWESOME", or "BRRRRT". I really don't care for both and I am sure they would be detrimental to gameplay.

pretty much.

 

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

×