Jump to content
wavefunction

Should there be separate "hardcore" modes (ie: hardcore AAS, hardcore Insurgency, hardcore Invasion etc)?

Recommended Posts

I've been pretty vocal on reddit (and Discord) about this for the past month or so, and for a lesser extent throughout the course of the game's development. I get that it isn't PR, but I want it to be on the same spectrum of PR which it is currently not. I've seen a lot of people here and on reddit agree that: 

 

  • HABs shouldn't be spawnable at all if enemies are near to avoid the dreaded "meat grinder" gameplay
  • Rallies need to be nerfed somehow
  • Vehicles shouldn't be disposable 
  • Dying should be something you really want to avoid 
  • Resource scarcity needs to be felt on an individual level

 

PR did all of these things and it made the gameplay feel a lot heavier. Squad whips PR's ass when it comes to moving and shooting, not to mention visuals, yet still ends up feeling a lot lighter and faster paced because it doesn't do the above. I should have 2000 hours in Squad by now because of how "up my alley" it is, yet I only have a tenth of that because I can't stand the flow. 

 

Anyway, it feels like 20-30% of the Squad community strongly agrees with me, 20-30% strongly disagrees and wants it to remain more or less the same, and the rest seem to be in the middle (yes, those are guesstimates). I read somewhere that the devs try to walk the line between both extremes and try to please both groups simultaneously, but if the current state of the game is the product of that, you're going to have to count me out. I want to love Squad, I just can't get into it for extended periods of times because it's too fast paced and not coordinated enough. It actually seems like Post Scriptum (currently in closed alpha) is closer to what I wanted Squad to be, based on some people's early impressions. 

 

People say that adding a hardcore mode with different rules for HABs, rallies and so forth will "split the community", but I'd wager that it'd do the opposite and retain people who would otherwise leave. A lot of RO1 vets didn't want to play RO2 because of all the (often strange) compromises, and RS2 is even worse (it appeals to an entirely different niche now). I've seen this happen time and time again when modders/indies try to make their visions appeal to a wider audience.

 

Lastly, Squad is a fantastic base and most of us are A-okay with everything that would be difficult to change (like the maps, movement/shooting mechanics.) All I'm asking for are for "hardcore" variants to be considered for those of us that want that. Alternatively, a limited spawn asymmetrical "Operations" mode would be phenomenal.

Edited by wavefunction

Share this post


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

 

  • HABs shouldn't be spawnable at all if enemies are near to avoid the dreaded "meat grinder" gameplay
  • Rallies need to be nerfed somehow
  • Vehicles shouldn't be disposable 
  • Dying should be something you really want to avoid 
  • Resource scarcity needs to be felt on an individual level

Please, YES. All of that.

 

Left a game the other day, defending the fob became the dreaded meat grinder. I spawned 3 or 4 times, only to be killed exiting the hab. Told to myself "I don't wanna play this, thank you". It sucks bad.

 

What exactly do you mean with resource scarcity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardcore mode = just make a "PR" mod of squad. If it's good, people will play that instead of the base game ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with all those suggestions. Avoiding the meat grinder gameplay you find in things like battlefield and Rising Storm is one the the reasons I play PR and Squad. I absolutely HATE the body throwing contest that happens around spawn points. 

 

But Id take it one step further. Instead of a mode, lets just make this stuff only way to play. 

9 hours ago, wavefunction said:

I've been pretty vocal on reddit (and Discord) about this for the past month or so, and for a lesser extent throughout the course of the game's development. I get that it isn't PR, but I want it to be on the same spectrum of PR which it is currently not. I've seen a lot of people here and on reddit agree that: 

 

  • HABs shouldn't be spawnable at all if enemies are near to avoid the dreaded "meat grinder" gameplay
  • Rallies need to be nerfed somehow
  • Vehicles shouldn't be disposable 
  • Dying should be something you really want to avoid 
  • Resource scarcity needs to be felt on an individual level

 

PR did all of these things and it made the gameplay feel a lot heavier. Squad whips PR's ass when it comes to moving and shooting, not to mention visuals, yet still ends up feeling a lot lighter and faster paced because it doesn't do the above. I should have 2000 hours in Squad by now because of how "up my alley" it is, yet I only have a tenth of that because I can't stand the flow. 

 

Anyway, it feels like 20-30% of the Squad community strongly agrees with me, 20-30% strongly disagrees and wants it to remain more or less the same, and the rest seem to be in the middle (yes, those are guesstimates). I read somewhere that the devs try to walk the line between both extremes and try to please both groups simultaneously, but if the current state of the game is the product of that, you're going to have to count me out. I want to love Squad, I just can't get into it for extended periods of times because it's too fast paced and not coordinated enough. It actually seems like Post Scriptum (currently in closed alpha) is closer to what I wanted Squad to be, based on some people's early impressions. 

 

People say that adding a hardcore mode with different rules for HABs, rallies and so forth will "split the community", but I'd wager that it'd do the opposite and retain people who would otherwise leave. A lot of RO1 vets didn't want to play RO2 because of all the (often strange) compromises, and RS2 is even worse (it appeals to an entirely different niche now). I've seen this happen time and time again when modders/indies try to make their visions appeal to a wider audience.

 

Lastly, Squad is a fantastic base and most of us are A-okay with everything that would be difficult to change (like the maps, movement/shooting mechanics.) All I'm asking for are for "hardcore" variants to be considered for those of us that want that. Alternatively, a limited spawn asymmetrical "Operations" mode would be phenomenal.

As I said I love all these ides, just wanted to add one more idea ot the mix. 

 

larger cap circles. Make the cap circles much much bigger so that you dont have to try to piles bodies in a 30m area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A hardcore mode will be interesting indeed. It will also give the devs some feedback as to which implementation is better suited for regular mode VS hardcore.

 

Additionally it will create a contrast between players who just want to have fun and not necessarily role play to a T (regular mode) vs those who might want to step it up a notch and play the game to it's full tactical and competitive potential (hardcore). This suggestion might also help alleviate some of the stress new players are subjugated to by the more experienced players sometimes...

Share this post


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

 

What exactly do you mean with resource scarcity?

1
1

By 'resource scarcity' I basically meant tickets and the desire not to waste them. There's no sense of that at all in Squad. 

1 hour ago, suds said:

No, never.

Less is more.

 

I'd say that if I felt the player base wasn't so diverse. The current state of things greatly pleases one group of people who prefer more casual/skill based/coordination-lite gameplay and it alienates people like me. If it were changed to please those of us that wanted something more hardcore, it'd alienate the former group. There's simply not enough commonality between both sides because we're looking for entirely different things. 
 

Edited by wavefunction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditch HABs and RPs completely, so players respawn at Main and have to be transported by land or air and I'd definitely play a hardcore mode over what SQUAD has now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Verdin said:

Ditch HABs and RPs completely, so players respawn at Main and have to be transported by land or air and I'd definitely play a hardcore mode over what SQUAD has now.

I really hope they add an "Operations" mode or something. 

Share this post


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

I really hope they add an "Operations" mode or something. 

The developers won't mate, they're perfectly content with SQUAD being an arcade game. Nothing wrong with that, it's their vision. I'm just not overly impressed with it, different strokes for different folks.

 

So such things would have to come from the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with the guys advocating for this being the only way to play. Specially because I'm from a part of the world with a smaller community, so the possibility of splitting it isn't something that appeals to me.

 

I don't even understand casuals wanting to play this. Even in its current form, this isn't a casual friendly game. They can have their battlefields and cods. There's no game quite like Squad right now, that's the only reason I keep playing it despite its many shortcomings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Vegetal said:

.... There's no game quite like Squad right now, that's the only reason I keep playing it despite its many shortcomings.

Project Reality mate, it has over a decade worth of features and content that SQUAD may or may not eventually be able to match.

Edited by Verdin

Share this post


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

Project Reality mate, it has over a decade worth of features and content that SQUAD may or may not eventually be able to match.

I played it a little. Unfortunately the gunplay is horrible. Aaaaand helicopters suck. Being a pilot makes me very critical of them.

Share this post


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

I don't even understand casuals wanting to play this. Even in its current form, this isn't a casual friendly game. They can have their battlefields and cods. There's no game quite like Squad right now, that's the only reason I keep playing it despite its many shortcomings.

Well because generally speaking, for a good product or service to work you want to make it in such way that it is inclusive and appeals to a broader audience. At it's current form (V10) it is more tactical-centric than other games but not quite as difficult of a learning curve as ARMA III. It is sitting right in between exactly how the devs want it. 

 

By adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore you're opening the door for a larger demographic that could pick up the game ($$$) to play in what is now regular mode V10 and could shape their mind to try out the hardcore mode that everyone here is apparently a fan of without even knowing what it entails, just theories and suggestions. Once players are properly introduced and acclimated in regular mode they may choose to step it up in the hardcore mode where all the tacticool pew pew top dogs will be mostly playing on. 

 

 

Regular mode + Hardcore mode: More people coming in (+$$$).

Only Hardcore mode: Less people coming in (-$$$).

 

I highly doubt players will purposefully not play hardcore if it's optional and not mandatory....anyone that throws a tantrum at the devs for adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game hardcore is honestly childish. I'm sorry...

Share this post


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

I'd say that if I felt the player base wasn't so diverse. The current state of things greatly pleases one group of people who prefer more casual/skill based/coordination-lite gameplay and it alienates people like me. If it were changed to please those of us that wanted something more hardcore, it'd alienate the former group. There's simply not enough commonality between both sides because we're looking for entirely different things. 
 

I agree and I definitely agree splitting up players would be a big mistake. There's room for improvement that both types of players would appreciate. For example, take the current issue of HAB meatgrinders (for example two habs built close to each other). Plenty of action, but it gets repetitive and boring quick and there's not much SLs can do in that situation other than just let squaddies play deathmatch to the best of their abilities until they get close enough to spawncamp the enemy. It's fast paced gameplay, but it's not good gameplay.

 

On the other end, on the slower strategic level, there's a real lack of momentum or back-and-forth in AAS. Capturing the majority of points will gain you ticket bleed that will win you the game. As long as you don't lose the center point (or the next point if the flag count is even), you're essentially fighting over flags that don't matter, with no gameplay advantage in doing so, and basically just biding time before the tickets bleed out. AAS is a boring slog at the moment that could benefit from some real stakes. Maps with two different 'flag lanes' (Sumari) seem to work a lot better than maps with one clear flag path (First Light is the worst)

Edited by Good-Try Greg

Share this post


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

Regular mode + Hardcore mode: More people coming in (+$$$).

Only Hardcore mode: Less people coming in (-$$$).

 

I highly doubt players will purposefully not play hardcore if it's optional and not mandatory....anyone that throws a tantrum at the devs for adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game hardcore is honestly childish. I'm sorry...

I take it that you are part of the dev team? You are earning some cash from the game's development, right?

 

You also ignored my community consideration above, what separating it would entail for smaller groups.

 

This is a niche game. Niche games have to appeal to their specific, who would guess, niche. If the devs wanted loads of money, they would have made a casual game, like BF.

 

But anyway, even considering that they want to tone down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals, it's absolutely natural that we will complain right? And I will keep complaining, just like a lot of other people here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do this. Anytime someone on here suggests something serious there's a lot of people who bitch saying that they're making everything too slow or making it un-fun. I think adding a small split like this in versions would allow players to try out both systems and find out what feels good to them. Maybe after awhile the dev's could look at what most people played and make that the default version. If they are both equally played than both modes could stay in.

Share this post


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

I take it that you are part of the dev team? You are earning some cash from the game's development, right?

 

You also ignored my community consideration above, what separating it would entail for smaller groups.

 

This is a niche game. Niche games have to appeal to their specific, who would guess, niche. If the devs wanted loads of money, they would have made a casual game, like BF.

 

But anyway, even considering that they want to tone down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals, it's absolutely natural that we will complain right? And I will keep complaining, just like a lot of other people here.

1. We are all earning from the game's success. It seems logical that the devs are paid money to work full time on the on-going development of the game. If there's no more support due to lack of funds then we all lose. No one will be paid to listen to our cries.

 

2. Just because you're from a part of the world with a smaller community (you didn't specify) doesn't seem fair to completely disregard the majority of players, by a large margin, who are from north america and UK/Europe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here...

 

3. I'm not going to respond to that. lol smh...

 

4. Who said anything about "toning down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals"? You misread what I wrote. By adding a hardcore mode, as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore, you're giving options to players as opposed to taking options away. Would it bother you that much seeing regular mode servers listed on the browser next to your favorite hardcore ones? Just don't play on regular mode server lol it's that simple...

 

As a noted FYI: I will happily play on regular mode with "casuals". At least I won't have to listen to a know-it-all (not you @Vegetal I'm referring to a type of squad player we often see) tacticool top dog super competitive 2000 hours in game 5-star general screaming at me and other SL's because we're trying to play the game TO HAVE FUN and win our way instead of his.....Let those people play in hardcore server away from me and the casuals. I have little time to play nowadays and being able to hop into a game or two shouldn't be a chore and I shouldn't sacrifice my time playing this game for the sake of others who only want to be professional E-sport competitive hardcore mode......

 

We should all be able to enjoy squad.....you have your side of the court and I'll be on mine....

Share this post


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

 

 

4. Who said anything about "toning down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals"? You misread what I wrote. By adding a hardcore mode, as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore, you're giving options to players as opposed to taking options away. Would it bother you that much seeing regular mode servers listed on the browser next to your favorite hardcore ones? Just don't play on regular mode server lol it's that simple...

 

As a noted FYI: I will happily play on regular mode with "casuals". At least I won't have to listen to a know-it-all (not you @Vegetal I'm referring to a type of squad player we often see) tacticool top dog super competitive 2000 hours in game 5-star general screaming at me and other SL's because we're trying to play the game TO HAVE FUN and win our way instead of his.....Let those people play in hardcore server away from me and the casuals. I have little time to play nowadays and being able to hop into a game or two shouldn't be a chore and I shouldn't sacrifice my time playing this game for the sake of others who only want to be professional E-sport competitive hardcore mode......

 

We should all be able to enjoy squad.....you have your side of the court and I'll be on mine....

Ok , the reason why think this is because

1. U seem to have little time to play Squad

2. Probably never liked or played PR( which is the reason why u are playing this game )

 

 i kinda disagree with you man. Look , this game got a lot publicity and attracted people that liked kinda tactical but still action packed. Probably that was u. The game was never meant to appeal wide audiences since the start of the develpment back a couple years ago. This game clearly stated  that it was gonna capture the PR feel in everything but name. Idk if adding a "hardcore " mode which would be original PR gameplay would be

a good idea since the community would kinda split. Wide audience on one side and PR players on the other ? Idk if that 's good.

 

Btw PR matches last normally 1 hour and the community is super friendly . It's not like u described it that we are all competetive super hardcore tacticool but we like a slower paced and more tactical game than what Squad is currently.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, maze2 said:

Ok , the reason why think this is because

1. U seem to have little time to play Squad

2. Probably never liked or played PR( which is the reason why u are playing this game )

 

 i kinda disagree with you man. Look , this game got a lot publicity and attracted people that liked kinda tactical but still action packed. Probably that was u. The game was never meant to appeal wide audiences since the start of the develpment back a couple years ago. This game clearly stated  that it was gonna capture the PR feel in everything but name. Idk if adding a "hardcore " mode which would be original PR gameplay would be

a good idea since the community would kinda split. Wide audience on one side and PR players on the other ? Idk if that 's good.

 

Btw PR matches last normally 1 hour and the community is super friendly . It's not like u described it that we are all competetive super hardcore tacticool but we like a slower paced and more tactical game than what Squad is currently.

 

 

 

That's fine, everyone has their own opinion and I respect that. I still think adding a HC mode would not split the community. There seems to be this "veteran" status given to PR players and rightfully so but just looking at some of the threads opened on the forums it looks like some PR players currently on squad are doing just that (splitting the community):

 

 

Share this post


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

1. We are all earning from the game's success. It seems logical that the devs are paid money to work full time on the on-going development of the game. If there's no more support due to lack of funds then we all lose. No one will be paid to listen to our cries.

 

2. Just because you're from a part of the world with a smaller community (you didn't specify) doesn't seem fair to completely disregard the majority of players, by a large margin, who are from north america and UK/Europe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here...

 

3. I'm not going to respond to that. lol smh...

 

4. Who said anything about "toning down the gaming experience to appeal to casuals"? You misread what I wrote. By adding a hardcore mode, as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore, you're giving options to players as opposed to taking options away. Would it bother you that much seeing regular mode servers listed on the browser next to your favorite hardcore ones? Just don't play on regular mode server lol it's that simple...

 

As a noted FYI: I will happily play on regular mode with "casuals". At least I won't have to listen to a know-it-all (not you @Vegetal I'm referring to a type of squad player we often see) tacticool top dog super competitive 2000 hours in game 5-star general screaming at me and other SL's because we're trying to play the game TO HAVE FUN and win our way instead of his.....Let those people play in hardcore server away from me and the casuals. I have little time to play nowadays and being able to hop into a game or two shouldn't be a chore and I shouldn't sacrifice my time playing this game for the sake of others who only want to be professional E-sport competitive hardcore mode......

 

We should all be able to enjoy squad.....you have your side of the court and I'll be on mine....

1 - Of course we are all earning. But when a developer decides to make a game for a specific audience, instead of the maximum number of players possible, I guess you can say there's another motivation besides just financial success.

 

2 - Am I the one disregarding? I know pretty well that the decision process puts a lot more weight on the NA and EU players, that's EXACTLY why I'm here saying this to bring this point to the table, in case no one noticed this could be a side effect.

 

3 - I was talking about that motivation thingy, see #1.

 

4 - Right, I think I didn't get the message properly. I see your point, because I know the type of player you are talking about. I also see now that you don't have too much time to play, which, for a deep game the likes of Squad, is a serious problem. But my point stays, even because I can see the full list of servers, right? And there aren't many of them to be honest, even counting the whole world. A split like this could be an issue.

Share this post


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

Well because generally speaking, for a good product or service to work you want to make it in such way that it is inclusive and appeals to a broader audience. At it's current form (V10) it is more tactical-centric than other games but not quite as difficult of a learning curve as ARMA III. It is sitting right in between exactly how the devs want it. 

 

By adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game more hardcore you're opening the door for a larger demographic that could pick up the game ($$$) to play in what is now regular mode V10 and could shape their mind to try out the hardcore mode that everyone here is apparently a fan of without even knowing what it entails, just theories and suggestions. Once players are properly introduced and acclimated in regular mode they may choose to step it up in the hardcore mode where all the tacticool pew pew top dogs will be mostly playing on. 

 

Regular mode + Hardcore mode: More people coming in (+$$$).

Only Hardcore mode: Less people coming in (-$$$).

 

I highly doubt players will purposefully not play hardcore if it's optional and not mandatory....anyone that throws a tantrum at the devs for adding a hardcore mode as opposed to making the entire game hardcore is honestly childish. I'm sorry...

The problem with the "broader audience" approach is that it can easily devolve into 'trying to please everyone and instead pleasing no one'. This was a common mistake in the early 2010s with games like RO2 and Insurgency, which tried to compromise realism to appeal to more casuals. There was this conflating of console and PC audiences which lead to an assumption that there were tons of COD and vanilla Battlefield players on Steam who were willing to move to some niche indie shooter, when in reality COD and BF were never among the most popular games on Steam and their audience was mostly exclusive to AAA games on console.

 

I can't tell you how many times I saw devs, community leaders, and apologists make the argument of "we don't want to be too hardcore like Arma and end up with a tiny audience. In reality RO2 and Insurgency would have been lucky to get even half the audience of Arma 2 or Arma 3. Both Arma titles regularly had more concurrent players than COD or BF and stayed in the top 25 most played games on Steam, while RO2 and Insurgency struggled to stay in the Steam Top 100.

 

After all, look at RO2's action mode. There was this assumption that tons of new players would come in from COD and BF and want to stick with Action mode, but it never really happened except during free weekends where the action mode newbies neglected to buy the game and disappeared at the end of the weekend. So at the end of the day, did action mode really result in "+$$$"? I don't think so.

 

It's always nice to have more options for players and server admins, but I think devs still need to be conscious of staying within scope and maintaining an unified audience, rather than one which is completely splintered between two bad compromises. For example between RO2's Realism and Classic mode, I don't think either really satisfied its intended audience. Realism wasn't actually very realistic and felt like a slightly improved Action Mode, while Classic failed to faithfully reproduce RO1 gameplay and wasn't as realistic as it could have been either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gnalvl I'm under the impression you must be comparing Regular mode & HC mode to that of past games like BF or RO2 or whatever else have you. 

 

Don't.

 

Squad devs are capable of providing an equally challenging Regular mode to what squad is right now (V10) by not changing anything. So to put it in even simpler terms -> The regular mode would be what Squad is right now right now....right now....go into the game and that's your "regular mode"....V10....get it?

 

HC mode on the other hand would cater to those who wants disabled RP's, even slower pace, removal of HUD, tweaks to respawning mechanics....etc...

 

 

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

×